Death metal and technicality

[Henrik Main]

I'm not a newcomer to death metal by any means, but lately I've been listening a lot to this genre, for instance Suffocation, Cryptopsy, Decapitated and Blood Red Throne. I find this genre very interesting, but there is a thing that bothers me to some extent. When listening to later Cryptopsy and Decapitated, for instance, I feel that some of the "flow" of the music has been replaced with rather pointless technical riffs. Of course, technical musicianship is not necessarily a bad thing, but I feel that some of these über-technical riffs tend to be quite boring, and these riffs give me absolutely nothing.

Is death metal becoming more and more stagnant? I find that there were less "pointless" riffs in older death metal. A lot of the bands went for simplicity instead of too much technicality (is that even a word?). Cryptopsy's "Blasphemy Made Flesh" and "None So Vile" are favourites of mine, mainly because they manage to combine technical musicianship without losing intensity and without ruining the song's structures. Of course, there are interesting, creative bands in today's scene, like Decapitated (even though they are a bit over-the-top sometimes), Vital Remains, Vehemence and Nile. What do you think about the future face of death metal - is the genre becoming more stagnant, and do the bands throw in pointless guitar-masturbating to fill a record?

 

[SculptedCold]

I think death metal has pretty much developed as far as it can develop....I don't think there's space for true innovation anymore... as for technicality, i'm not really decided on it yet. I think i'm starting to lean towards technical death metal.....it seems the aesthetic of hearing something complex being played, even if its quite tuneless, is quite attractive to me at the moment. Melody can get boring after a while...hehe. But urm, nah I don't know.

 

[Henrik Main]

Melody can get boring after a while...hehe.

Sure, I agree. But of course, you don't have to be either melodic or technical, I guess. My all-time favourite death metal song, Cryptopsy's "Benedictine Convulsions", isn't that melodic, but it's got incredible flow and agressive, fantastic riffs. The important thing is that the technicality doesn't ruin the song structure and flow, though

 

[NAD]

This year is a WONDERFUL year for death metal! If you think it is stagnant with pointless technical riffing, check out:

Ion Dissonance
Leng Tch'e
Aborted

Those are three I can think of off the top of my head that are technical without the boring aspects, which yes, has been prevalent lately, until this year really.

Oh yeah, there's some reviews for each at Royal Carnage, click my signature if you're curious.

 

[J.]

When I hear "technical death metal" I think of Cynic, Theory in Practice, etc. I find those bands to be quite craptacular. The pointless meandering and "experimentation" (SEE: Lack of song-writing skill) just go no where.

To me, death metal was always about that killer riff and exploiting it for all it's worth in song. Then all these 8481849264895 Swedish bands decided to add melody and make everything sound "happy".

 

[Post_Scriptum]

screw sweden

 

[Narg]

As far as having flow to the music I always thought Death metal strived to be a bit different by being more disjointed and having more 'technical' riffs rather than just letting it flow out perhaps in a less structured way

 

[Avgrund]

When I hear "technical death metal" I think of Cynic, Theory in Practice, etc. I find those bands to be quite craptacular. The pointless meandering and "experimentation" (SEE: Lack of song-writing skill) just go no where.

To me, death metal was always about that killer riff and exploiting it for all it's worth in song. Then all these 8481849264895 Swedish bands decided to add melody and make everything sound "happy".

You said not long ago that Cynic was one of the most overated metal bands idiot.

 

[anonymousnick2001]

screw sweden

That was unnecessary.

I personally prefer music with melody. I really have trouble understanding the purpose of a rhythm-based song without even ample melody to hold it together. Then again, I listen to Cryptopsy...but they do have lots of melody, it just has to be dug out.

 

[Stormwatch]

Although I do like Death's later albums, I think Chuck went a bit too far with the time changes and experimental stuff. I preferred it when he just wrote simpler songs like on Leprosy and Human. They were great TUNES whereas it's hard to pick out a tune on TSOP.

 

[J.]

You said not long ago that Cynic was one of the most overated metal bands idiot.

Yeah, so....idiot.

 

[DiscipleOfPlato]

Although I do like Death's later albums, I think Chuck went a bit too far with the time changes and experimental stuff. I preferred it when he just wrote simpler songs like on Leprosy and Human. They were great TUNES whereas it's hard to pick out a tune on TSOP.

Although I don't fully agree, I sort-of see where your coming from on the subject of TSOP. That was actually the first album I picked up from Death, and it floored me, but when I picked up a lot of their earlier albums I did notice a big difference in the way the songs flowed, primarily in song-structure. I don't think it was a bad thing what they did on TSOP, nor did I find it redundant or anything, but I guess it just depends on the sort of music you're used to listening to. Personally, I'm not a fan of much death metal, and I usually prefer black metal and prog, which is why I not only didn't mind the weird time-changes, but I enjoyed them. I guess it has a lot to do with the fact that I enjoy complex music, and although simplicity can be great sometimes(especially when it's meant to be catchy), that too can be overdone. Also, I know I'm about to go off on a tangent here, but I really hate Cryptopsy...I really do. I don't care how technical they THINK they are or how good their older stuff sounded, the truth is they sound like shit.

 

[no country for old wainds]

Technical death metal that's technical for the sake of being technical, sucks.

 

[Avgrund]

Yeah, so....idiot.

So they are the most technical death metal band you heard and still overated?And they are not a well known band at all either.

 

[MURAI]

I like some technical death metal and some other technical metal bands but it could get terribly boring. I just want my death metal primal and aggressive like good old Obituary then concentrating on just being technical. But, when it boils down to it I think its about how much the music honestly moves me instead of how technical it is.

 

[speed]

Musically death metal has played its hand, but vocally it hasnt tried a thing.


I think it would be great or interesting at least- to have different death metal vocals- enough with the growl, and the bark. Some death metal band needs to try something new vocally- if its spoken word, actual singing , a chorus( you know I have often thought that Nile could add some kick ass deep epytian chanting style choruses all over there songs)- I dont care.

I think a Mike Patton style character is needed- someone that can make interesting vocal noises. Lord Worm was an innovator, but I really dont know of any other death metal singer that has really tried anything new.

 

[genocide roach]

its a taste thing. personally, i love the ultra technical stuff. what you may find boring, really amps me up. people always say that death metal lacks emotion. well isnt that up to the listener? when i listen to cryptopsy it makes me wanna bust out the air guitar and headbang like a muther fucker. and that goes for alot of technical bands.

as for DM growing. i think there is still room for it to grow. just look at bands like cephalic carnage. they are still pushing the envelope. extol is another example of a band thats progressing the sound. there is still progression happening

 

[J.]

So they are the most technical death metal band you heard and still overated?And they are not a well known band at all either.

I never said they are the most technical death metal band I've heard. I merely said they, and bands like them, come to mind when I hear "technical death metal".

The "overrated" part comes from the fact that Focus is held in very high regard, and it is really not that good.

 

[VEHEMENCE]

Thanks henrikmain from Norway, yes I check all threads with our band name in them to keep tabs of interest. I have heard the new Decapitated, their bass player and I shared some of our new material over yahoo. Both will be equally insane in different perspectives.

 

[Gory Elephant]

Musically death metal has played its hand, but vocally it hasnt tried a thing.


I think it would be great or interesting at least- to have different death metal vocals- enough with the growl, and the bark. Some death metal band needs to try something new vocally- if its spoken word, actual singing , a chorus( you know I have often thought that Nile could add some kick ass deep epytian chanting style choruses all over there songs)- I dont care.

I think a Mike Patton style character is needed- someone that can make interesting vocal noises. Lord Worm was an innovator, but I really dont know of any other death metal singer that has really tried anything new.

I don't think you can have "different death metal vocals", can you? I mean, that "growl and the bark" are part of what makes death metal death metal, no?

Also, how was Lord Worm an innovator? Sure, he had a great voice, but at the end of the day, IMHO, he was just another death metal singer.