Entire new RUNNING WILD streaming

[Jasonic]

Sure, BG doesn't wear frilly shirts, but come on man.......
You are telling me that they DON'T choose album art in support of the music they play?

Image is more than JUST how they dress, and album art is a BIG part of it.

Agree to disagree, but almost EVERY band dresses or does artwork that supports their respective genre.

The albums I listed above were trailblazers for their respective genres.

No idea in the world how any metal fan could possibly disagree with this.

Oh wait, it's you, and not YOUR original idea or concept so you immediately hit the DISMISS button!!!!

 

[Diabolik]

this isnt what I am saying....you acted like Port Royal was some important album due to its cover. it wasnt.

 

[Jasonic]

I never even mentioned Port Royal.
i was talking about Under Jolly Roger.

 

[Diabolik]

I never even mentioned Port Royal.
i was talking about Under Jolly Roger.

same thing if you heard the albums.

 

[Justin G]

Haha, watching you two bicker like an old married couple is like watching me and Jeremy go at it about...whatever it is he's currently wrong about (I kid, I kid). Our meet-up next month ought to be fun as hell.

 

[Jasonic]

Here's a picture of Bob and I from Chicago Powerfest from a few years back:

 

[Diabolik]

Haha, watching you two bicker like an old married couple is like watching me and Jeremy go at it about...whatever it is he's currently wrong about (I kid, I kid). Our meet-up next month ought to be fun as hell.

yep cant wait. We will be all beat up from fighting with each other.

 

[DMR]

1) I haven't listened to the new one yet, but I've never thought of Running Wild as a generic band. They're not innovative musically, but there's a lot of space in between innovative and generic. They have their own sound and Rolf has a very distinctive style of riffing. When you hear Running Wild, you know it's Running Wild, and when you hear a band influenced by Running Wild, you know it too.

2) Grave Digger, on the other hand, are somewhat generic. The only distinctive thing about them is a singer that sounds like Grover from Sesame Street. In spite of all that, I don't think they're bad, but they're not even close to as good as Running Wild.

3) Image has a big impact on music, but it's the music/lyrics that make an album genre defining, not the cover. If Venom put a pirate ship on the cover of Welcome To Hell, would they be "pirate metal"?

 

[Jasonic]

3) Image has a big impact on music, but it's the music/lyrics that make an album genre defining, not the cover. If Venom put a pirate ship on the cover of Welcome To Hell, would they be "pirate metal"?

YES!!! My favorite debate on metal right here!!!!
You opened the can of worms my friend.......

I am going to leave it at this................

You say the image / cover doesn't define a genre, yet people claim BATHORY, MERCYFUL FATE, CELTIC FROST, and VENOM to be the "1st Wave of Black Metal"

Sure, it is more skin deep than that when you get into the lyrics, but image and album covers were JUST as important then, if not even more.

For the record, I do not consider ANY of the aforementioned bands "black metal"

As I said, this is about to get interesting!

 

[Diabolik]

I wouldnt call any of those bands black metal either but I can see where people would say they were the first wave.....I would say more of the pre-influencial wave more than anything else just based on image and themes. This is where I would say image is important. Making a theme for a band. Though I would say that there are only a few album covers that really are genre defining. It is all about packaging the band as a whole.

 

[Jasonic]

It is all about packaging the band as a whole.

Thanks Capn Obvious.

 

[Diabolik]

Thanks Capn Obvious.

thanks general admission.

 

[DMR]

I think the real problem is that people don't give any thought to why they say a band is of a certain genre. They just accept it when they're told that Mercyful Fate is black metal, In Flames is melodic death metal, or Jag Panzer is power metal, even though none of those are true. I wonder what their conceptions are of what makes a genre.

 

[Jasonic]

thanks general admission.

HAHAHAHA WTF???????

 

[Justin G]

I think the real problem is that people don't give any thought to why they say a band is of a certain genre. They just accept it when they're told that Mercyful Fate is black metal, In Flames is melodic death metal, or Jag Panzer is power metal, even though none of those are true. I wonder what their conceptions are of what makes a genre.

In Flames WAS a melodic death metal band, and Jag Panzer was a power metal band, at least by pre-Helloween standards and probably afterwards as well.

 

[Jasonic]

This is true...

Before Keepers, many US bands, like Metal Church, Metallica, Armored Saint, Fates Warning, Omen, Savatage, etc were often referred to as power metal.

Yeah, I wasn't going to bring it up because I don't really care to argue it, but how can one say IN FLAMES aren't melodic death metal?
OK, certainly not by today's standards, but everything up to and including CLAYMAN, I would think, at least to some degree.

 

[Diabolik]

This is true...

Before Keepers, many US bands, like Metal Church, Metallica, Armored Saint, Fates Warning, Omen, Savatage, etc were often referred to as power metal.

Yeah, I wasn't going to bring it up because I don't really care to argue it, but how can one say IN FLAMES aren't melodic death metal?
OK, certainly not by today's standards, but everything up to and including CLAYMAN, I would think, at least to some degree.

only purist who live in thier mom's basement would disagree.

 

[DMR]

This is true...

Before Keepers, many US bands, like Metal Church, Metallica, Armored Saint, Fates Warning, Omen, Savatage, etc were often referred to as power metal.

That's my point. They were referred to as power metal (and still are). But all of those bands are just regular heavy metal and I don't see any reason to call them anything else. For the record, I don't consider European power metal to be separate from heavy metal, just a variation of it.

Yeah, I wasn't going to bring it up because I don't really care to argue it, but how can one say IN FLAMES aren't melodic death metal?
OK, certainly not by today's standards, but everything up to and including CLAYMAN, I would think, at least to some degree.

There was never anything death metal about In Flames other than the vocals.

 

[Jasonic]

I will let that go, as I do not even remotely pretend to be an expert when it comes to DM.
In Flames in their earlier works definitely had a lot of classic rock influences in their guitar leads.
Maybe this is part of what you mean.

Though I think overall, when you look at the complete package, most consider them to be DM.

 

[Diabolik]

I will let that go, as I do not even remotely pretend to be an expert when it comes to DM.
In Flames in their earlier works definitely had a lot of classic rock influences in their guitar leads.
Maybe this is part of what you mean.

Though I think overall, when you look at the complete package, most consider them to be DM.

very true on all points. They are what most would call melodic death metal. But to the I.E.A, Internet Expert ASSociation. they would be the offshoot of death metal mixed with post rock with three tenths gothenburg tossed in with a feel of raw power metal.