Ok, Get in Here

SonOfNun

Bill Ward's Red Pants
Oct 21, 2003
3,759
1,651
113
The Southland
sonofnun7.wordpress.com
Enough disturbing the other threads.

Let me start over and just state my actual position here without any of the things that have started a flame war. We've both just misrepresented this debate too much all around.

To begin with, I REALLY have no quarrel with any of the innovating bands in this tournament. Some of them I even like. Metallica made some excellent music, Black Sabbath is a band I'll occasionally enjoy and even Maiden is fun at times. None of these band are acts that I hate or even dislike. I've made a lot of sarcastic comments trying to make a point and they've been taken way too literally, so let's just stop that.

Now, like I said, I only put bands on a level according to how much their music means to me PERSONALLY. Not only in this tournament, but in real life. I don't have a tendency to give any more respect or credit to a band because of time/age, influence or overall importance, only on what they mean to me. The entire point of these long drawn out discussions has been myself trying to decipher if anyone else feels this way, and if not, how do they put a value to the music they listen to?

Why this question was brought up was because X legendary band has steamrolled everyone else they've faced, leading me to think that either a) people here enjoy this band's music THAT MUCH or b) there is a nostalgia factor at play or people value and rank their music on a much different system than I do. For me to say something like I prefer Blood Red Throne to Metallica, a ridiculous statement to almost everyone here (henke where art thou:p ) you have to know that Blood Red Throne's music simply does more for me. It just seems like to me, that whenever I make a statement like that, it is roundly attacked by everyone and the only conclusion I can draw from that is that everyone is stuck on these bands for one reason or another and all I'd like to know is why. Is it even possible for say JK (sorry to keep using you as an example:p ) to EVER like a band as much as Maiden or Megadeth or what have you, even if he say, listens to their music more often or somehow takes more out of it. Purely hypothetical, and maybe not true, I'm just trying to pick at it here.

I WOULD vote for a band over Opeth, in fact, if it came down to it, maybe even a handful of bands in the right situation. Agalloch for instance, may be able to steal that vote from me even though Opeth may still hold the title of favorite band and despite the fact that they introduced me to metal, simply because I listen to and at many times get more out of Agalloch's music.

Now, if at all possible, I'd like everyone to drop any misconceptions they have, as will I, and start anew. If this post, which doesn't attack anything (even in a tongue in cheek manner) still manages to inflame you, then there isn't anything I can do, it's just an honest question that seems hard to get an answer for.

I've have clearly poked fun at Maiden and other bands in the past and ADMITTED that I was trolling and ADMITTED that it wasn't the way I really feel and that it has misrepresented my argument, now look at it with unbiased eyes and give me a simple answer.

If you really love Maiden's music that much, then just say so. If you really factor in something else, then just say so. I don't hate your bands, I don't prefer music because it's new. Just no. Clean slate, new topic, answer question.
 
I only read the first 3 paragraphs but I somewhat agree with you. I don't really care about those "legendary" bands that did something somewhat good decennies ago that inspired an entire genre to do something even better. These bands that do better, however, now they interest me. I don't care what influenced x band, I just care what they do and if it's great or not. (which is why I would vote for say, Falkenbach over Black Sabbath. I buy Falkenbach albums because I like what they do more than everything Sabbath ever did)

edit: Btw, I didn't vote in your march madness stuff because I knew of the discussions to come and most people's opinions on this matter
 
I voted for some of those legendary bands, that said, I love the music of those legendary bands. I take enjoyment from it moreso than said non-legendary band. And I think most of the bashing about your blood red throne was because not many people around here like BRT and as such you're called a faggot with bad taste. :p
 
lol, I think bashing people over musical tastes is ridiculous and should stay in General Music Discussion. We're more intelligent than that hm?
 
I vote for which band's music means more to me. Honestly, while I may listen to some band a fuckton more than Black Sab, The Sabs music is worth its weight in gold. Those CDs were my faves when I was but a wee lad just finding metal, and they are some of my faves today after having just replaced the stolen CDs.

But some recognition should go into the fact that something like Maiden or Sab was written in the fucking 70's or 80's, when NO ONE sounded like that.

Here's an example: Most everyone here, except yours truly, loves Slayer. Honestly, would any of you really hail Reign in Blood if it had been released in 2002? Most likely not. So of course a nostalgia factor probably takes part.

But that's me. I like hearing the originators of certain genres, because almost 100%, they actually were honest with themselves about what they were doing, as opposed to some copycat who just sounds bored.

Dunno if this answered your question.
 
Conspicuously Absent said:
I first heard reign in blood in 2001. I loved it then, and love it now.

Sure. After you heard or read everyone jerking off to it.

Let me put it another way: If some unknown band were to release Reign in Blood tomorrow, no one would give a shit. Yes, I'm generalizing by saying "no one", but you get the idea.
 
no. I didn't read/post anywhere at hte time. Martin gave me a list of bands to check out, one of them was slayer. (along with at the gates, dark tranquility, bathory and he told me to go pick up a BWBK) I heard reign in blood and the next day I picked up a BWBK cause I was out of town and could get it and they had a slayer thing.
 
Good discussion, it has a lot to do with what I'm getting at here. I agree with J. in a lot of ways, though there are of course exceptions to the rule.

How many classic albums would stand up today if they were released by a no name band? Did they simply hit at the right time, in the right atmosphere to make them great? Does the fact that they were fresh and new make them more relevant to most listeners?

I have the greatest respect for all the originals, but I tend to have the viewpoint that the bands who later took that style to the next level are more worth my time and simply better. Props for inventing the style and all, but X does it a thousand times better, so I'll listen to them instead. So yeah, I do think that when everything is stripped down and put on an even playing field, nostalgia does influence people, it almost has to.
 
yeah, for a lot of these people,t hese are the bands that got them into metal. ANd they may not neccesarily be giving them nostalgia points, so much as the nostalgia makes their enjoyment of said album THAT MUCH GREATER than anything newer and "better".

For me, i have no nostalgia, I wasn't a metalhead back in the day. So i listen to the old stuff purely on enjoyment.
 
Opeth17 said:
I have the greatest respect for all the originals, but I tend to have the viewpoint that the bands who later took that style to the next level are more worth my time and simply better. Props for inventing the style and all, but X does it a thousand times better, so I'll listen to them instead. So yeah, I do think that when everything is stripped down and put on an even playing field, nostalgia does influence people, it almost has to.
The bands who later "took that style to the next level" would not even exist if the "nostalgia lovers bands" never were. And basically NO the originators of every genre are the best of the genre, Thrash Metal: Slayer, Kreator etc, Heavy Metal: Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Power Metal: Helloween, Helstar, Progressive Metal: Queensryche, Fates Warning, Watchtower, Dream Theater, Death Metal: Morbid Angel, Death, Black Metal: Darkthrone, Mayhem, early Bathory, Doom Metal: Sabbath, Candlemass, Trouble etc. Who does it thousand times better than all the above did? Don't forget that the first who will admit what i say, are the "newer bands that do it a thousand times better" f.e. Amorphis will never possibly think that they might create something better than their teachers' albums (Hawkwind or Pink Floyd) and even the thought of it will make them go crazy..me thinks.
In all cases the best bands were the ones who influenced all the others that followed. I don't know WHY it happens, i don't care, but that's what happens. Case is, their music is not timeless just because of "nostalgia factors" but because it was more original, authentic, inspired and unique than almost every other band after them. As long as the VAST MAJORITY of metal bands creates music that is absolutely based on them (them = nostalgia bands, hey new joke term i love it) then they won't make something that innovative as the old bands did in their times. The old bands broke boundaries, NWOBHM is called that way because it was something NEW, and took metal in another level.
Basically i just think that you have no idea (whatever tha might mean, in all of its aspects), but it's never to late, [Aragorn]there is still hope[/Aragorn] etc.
 
ALSO: 2nd wave of Black Metal, legendary bands that are lumped into "nostalgia" where from the fucking 90's.
 
J. said:
Sure. After you heard or read everyone jerking off to it.

Let me put it another way: If some unknown band were to release Reign in Blood tomorrow, no one would give a shit. Yes, I'm generalizing by saying "no one", but you get the idea.

this is a tough one, as I can't truely relate to anyone just hearing this for the first time now
but I got this when it was just released, I was totally into hell awaits and haunting the chapel as boundary pushing records but when Reign came out it totally wiped the floor with EVERYTHING in terms of aggression and pure scathing violence, (bear in mind that for the most part Slayer were seen as a joke in thier early days)
now a lot of albums from those days have dated badly but I still maintain that reign in blood is timeless, its impossible to say how much nostalgia plays in my standpoint other than there area lot of albums from that era that i just can't bear to listen to now because they do sound lame now. even the early Metallica albums haven't dated as well.

As for the voting, I've voted on how much the bands have meant to me, I vote for kreator on how much terrible certainty, extreme aggression etc moved me at the time and still do, I voted for nuerosis over them because nuerosis have meant more and continue to.

but even if I don't listen to sabbath all that much and they have become a serious fucking embarrasment of late I find it impossible to vote against them
same goes for metallica, I'm pretty sure no-ones voting for them on the basis of recent output