Nico
Onward!
Well I've been listening to nothing but Priest for the past three days...
But normaly, I'd say extreme.
But normaly, I'd say extreme.
Extreme metal or traditional metal?
- Thread starter Life Sucks
- Start date
Henrik Main
Hello
MFJ
Active Member
no country for old wainds
Active Member
- Nov 23, 2002
- 26,680
- 9,655
- 113
Oceanic Motion
Member
I like both equally and like someone said depends on my mood.... as for Thrash being extreme or traditional.. since i grew up in those days as a teenager and it was considered extreme back then that's what I consider it still to this day because it was the original extreme that all sub-genre's of extreme came about from... who knows maybe in 10 or 20 years what you consider extreme today might be considered traditional to the next generation of metal brats elitists etc.. lol jkk...
Tool
The Crimson King
In terms of thrash being extreme, I would consider the more aggressive bands (Kreator, Destruction, Dark Angel, Slayer, Sodom, Necrodeath, etc.) to be extreme, but not softer thrash bands such as Megadeth, Metallica, Forbidden, Testament, Laaz Rockit, etc. Predictably, I prefer the more aggressive thrash bands.
I've been listening at classic metal for so long that it has a certain place in my heart, but I still consider extreme metal to be a superior kind of music.
Erik
New Metal Member
Also, some of the stuff on the very outskirts of doom metal like Esoteric, Until Death Overtakes Me and Sunn O))) (to a lesser extent the more musical stuff like Skepticism and Thergothon) are some of the most extreme stuff I can think of.Life Sucks said:
Arcane Sun is doom? HM. Oh, and Cathedral's first album and EP were pretty fucking extreme for being doom, and for the time. But I generally agree.
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
Cathedral are extreme at times, but they're also rooted in classic metal, and therefore belong in that genre, I think.
Funeral/drone doom is extreme as hell.
Funeral/drone doom is extreme as hell.
True, Forest of Equilibrium is quite heavy, despite the clean vocals. But Cathedral's other CDs are very Sabbath influenced pure doom.V.V.V.V.V. said:
anonymousnick2001
World's Greatest Vocalist
crimsonfloyd
Active Member
Extreeme by far. Traditional generaly doesn't have as interesting of song structures, vocals, lyrical themes and one too many guitar solos for my liking. I think a lot of it is that the ideals of black, doom, maybe even some death reflect elements of my own outlook on life so well that it is rather hard to surpass...
anonymousnick2001
World's Greatest Vocalist
I don't know, I'm kind of a positive guy, so traditional expresses that the best for me. The only merit I can find in extreme metal is that attention to compositional detail, atmosphere, and redefinition of existing musical standards is a first, and I can't argue with that.
It's also nice to hear the sophistication of something like Beethoven or Stravinsky in an aggressive headbang-friendly format. When extreme metal is brutality for brutality's sake or a message with no music, it's at its worst, IMO. Practically noise.
It's also nice to hear the sophistication of something like Beethoven or Stravinsky in an aggressive headbang-friendly format. When extreme metal is brutality for brutality's sake or a message with no music, it's at its worst, IMO. Practically noise.
sikth
...discombobulated
St. Vitus
River of Understanding
V.V.V.V.V. said:
Nothing ignorant about that at all. It makes perfect sense that the more extreme music you listen to, which is happening now, means more to you than the music from a time you weren't around to experience.
I balance my listening time between traditional and extreme, with a little more emphasis on the traditional. Nobody's saying you have to like traditional metal, but if everyone had your attitude about simply appreciating what traditional metal did to lay the groundwork for extreme metal, the world would be a better place. Well, not really, but you get the idea.
Similar threads
