Lack of excitement in metal...

[no country for old wainds]

the impression i get is that some people around here go straight for the new stuff without having heard half the classics, and i suspect if they spent more time concentrating on the classics they'd end up less easily impressed by some of the new stuff. that's not to say there isn't quality new stuff around or that classics are automatically better than new stuff btw

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Metal is dead

 

[no country for old wainds]

metal won't be dead until every goddamned copy of 'angel witch' has been vanquished into the void. true story.

 

[Addo_Of_Nex]

the impression i get is that some people around here go straight for the new stuff without having heard half the classics, and i suspect if they spent more time concentrating on the classics they'd end up less easily impressed by some of the new stuff. that's not to say there isn't quality new stuff around or that classics are automatically better than new stuff btw

I started with trendy new bullshit that obviously blew my mind, seeing as it was more superficially dazzling than Rush on the surface, and I really had no clue how to evaluate the quality of music to my own standards. I found the classics and subsequently started to understand concepts like atmosphere and aesthetic value, which made me revamp my somewhat "new" taste in music into something similar to what it is today.

And yeah, I don't give a shit about the "status" of metal, as I know there are still bands with significant artistic merit making music that will please my ears. The fact that there are an infinite number of metal albums from the past as well as an abundance of other genres of music to explore only adds to my apathy towards the current day "metal" situation.

 

[no country for old wainds]

I started with trendy new bullshit that obviously blew my mind, seeing as it was more superficially dazzling than Rush on the surface, and I really had no clue how to evaluate the quality of music to my own standards. I found the classics and subsequently started to understand concepts like atmosphere and aesthetic value, which made me revamp my somewhat "new" taste in music into something similar to what it is today.

i for one don't think there's been any substantial change in my musical tastes per sé, not even since i was 5 years old. the only difference is that experience has deepened my sense of nuance. i'm not entirely happy with this explanation but it's not really relevant to what i was originally saying.

either way i'm not even talking about revamping taste - i think just sticking with the tastes people already have on this board, they'd all love a much higher ratio of classics than they would new stuff. they're classics, as in unanimously(ish) acclaimed by those who know them, for a reason. i understand there's a kind of appeal in getting new stuff and passing judgment on it while it's the hot topic, and i also understand that people often struggle with getting past the 'dated' sound, but the former is kind of gay and the latter is exactly akin to getting past growls or whatever else. of all people, metallers should be good at such things.

And yeah, I don't give a shit about the "status" of metal, as I know there are still bands with significant artistic merit making music that will please my ears. The fact that there are an infinite number of metal albums from the past as well as an abundance of other genres of music to explore only adds to my apathy towards the current day "metal" situation.

indeed

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I believe classics are important, but I believe the bands simultaneously looking to the past AND to the present (AND FUTURE!) are really fucking good bands. Case in point: Necrovation. They sound like Carnage having sex with Beherit while God Macabre and Demilich sort of look on in horror of the spawn. And that RULES...this is what RULES about the metal scene.

 

[no country for old wainds]

haha that's an awesome description. i need to hear that band.

it's a description you couldn't have made without knowledge of the classics however i actually think it just makes the experience of great new bands richer, understanding the way they're playing upon works of the past. it gives you a greater sense of what new albums are really special. i'm really not trying to put a downer on today's scene, i'd just like people to keep the classics in mind as well.

anyway i don't disagree with you at all. i mean, what classic couldn't at the time be described as 'simultaneously looking to the past present and future'?

 

[Alteredmindeath]

I can agree its been a weak year for metal, weak priest album, ok Metallica record, most releases though are mediocre. This is the year of moderate 7/10 releases.

 

[SkiesAtOurFeet]

There have been a significant amount of good releases this year, i'm not sure whether you're making your judgement based on the discussion of classic band releases in 2008 or just 2008 releases in general.

 

[MasterOLightning]

Anyone who is new to metal is always going to find more excitement in what is current than someone who has been around for five or more years. If you find someone who genuinely is going to be interested in metal, you can put whatever you want in front of them and they'll like it, mostly. More things sound fresh when you haven't heard that many albums, the more you hear, the less this is the case. Thus, people become crusty and whiny when they've heard several hundred albums and things start to sound samey. They blame metal bands sucking, when they are really just bored with metal. The problem is on the listener's end. The things that resonate with these people are then the albums that they first liked, albums that resemble those in an authentic way, or the rare thing that's genuinely new (sometimes).

I don't really think that all that many of the classics would have that much staying power if they were released today. This is not to say that they aren't important. I think it's just as bad though to ignore the classics than to ignore the current scene. You could swap HLTO for Forgotten Legends and TH for Inquisitors of Satan and not miss out on much. Most classic albums do end up being done just as well, if not better by other bands. But people are herded into the classics from the get go, and in most cases, what people hear first holds a soft spot for them.

 

[tagradh]

The only metal albums to come out this year that I've really spent much time listening to are Spite Extreme Wing - Vltra, Enslaved - Vertebrae, Mgla - Groza and Darkspace - III.

Asides that it's mostly late 80s/early 90s stuff as far as metal goes.

IDM/ambient/classical are stealing my hearts.

 

[DarkBliss]

I agree fully with MasterOLightning. Most classics may be on par
with contemporary releases, people just don't give them time to sink in, because they're led to believe that most bands from a certain year onward are not worth sticking with, and are devoid of depth, so they cling to their old favorites. This is the "glorifiers of yesteryear" bias at its purest, according to which even the cheesiest and most incompetent 80s heavy metal band will be automatically more endearing and worthwhile in the long run than nowadays' acts, no matter how aesthetically similar the former may be to one's favorite pioneers.
I started to sense this upon suddenly falling out of love with most of the formative classics, they simply don't hold my attention as well as they used to.

 

[mutantllama]

only opeth
opeth only

they are the maddest metallic cunts.

 

[George]

I agree with a few people here. Knowledge of the classics, in my opinion, is very important. They give the listener a look on how a genre was developed, and what inspirations helped form this sound. One example being Darkthrone's A Blaze in the Northern Sky: the Celtic Frost influence is very apparent. A solid grasp of the classics allows for a well rounded look at future releases. (I believe this was a point made earlier)

However, on the other hand I do believe that new releases are not given proper time to "age" and allow them to be either praised or jeered. With the over saturation as we have now, it seems that every week we have a new album that gets hyped and spread out for the downloaders to listen to. People rave about how good it is, and then in a week they'll be on to the next album. Dead Congregation's recent release is an example of a great release that has gotten lost in the clutter even though I believe it to be the strongest release of the year. On the opposite end of things is the newest Arckanum release. It received about the same kind of hype as the Dead Congregation album did (maybe more) but in reality the material is far weaker. And soon we'll be onto the next hottest release.

 

[Savern]

only opeth
opeth only

they are the maddest metallic cunts.

I'd agree that Opeth are one of the few bands consistenly making interesting new music (not exclusively metal though)

However talking of classics - I discovered Cynic recently and literally reckon that Traced in Air is gonna be album of the year for me.

 

[cookiecutter]

All the metal genre's I prefer are very productive right now and judging by how many new bands other here post about I would guess that so is the rest of metal. You just have to look.

 

[divine_torture]

the impression i get is that some people around here go straight for the new stuff without having heard half the classics, and i suspect if they spent more time concentrating on the classics they'd end up less easily impressed by some of the new stuff. that's not to say there isn't quality new stuff around or that classics are automatically better than new stuff btw

This is basically where I was going. Of course there are tons of OLDER albums that rule. But nothing new has come out in some time that has been worth much. Except a few things from older bands. And even those aren't too exciting... Every new band I'm recommended sounds like a rehashed (albeit typically better produced) version of some older kick ass album I heard.

Many of you took my words differently than I had intended. Metal is never boring. There are always the classics, and classics I don't know. But that's just it. They're all classics. Nothing new has happened. Of course I'm not looking for a new GENRE of metal, simply some new bands that really rule. Someone mentioned the new Enslaved. Yes, it does rule. But how old is that band? Early 90's. Not new. Even my band is boring to me. Just thrashy chuggy death metal. How many countless bands play that style? And 95% of them are less than sub-par. I just discovered Demolition Hammer a couple weeks ago. Better than half the shit I've bought in the last two years. They don't even play anymore. And the other half that was good was old stuff like a Grave album I didn't own, an old Rotting Christ, Entombed... I've been into metal for years. But there is nothing interesting right now, EXCEPT for classic bands doing new stuff, and classic albums I already own or am just discovering.

 

[Mort Divine]

lolwut?

there are plenty of new bands doing good things

 

[Omni]

You're actually an idiot if you can't find good bands that are new and will seriously argue that they don't exist.

 

[divine_torture]

Not once did I say they don't exist. But I've yet to find one. And keep in mind your idea of a good band more than likely differs from mine. It just seems a lot more difficult lately to find a good new band. When it becomes this difficult I have to believe something's wrong.

If I discover a new band that truly is good, this forum won't matter cuz I'll be rockin out.