Pick one band and say what you think they're OVERRATED

The guy wearing the Nasty Savage shirt in that photo is Rick Rozz, not Kam Lee. It can be seen in many other photos of him from that era as well, because Mantas and Nasty Savage were from the same area at the same time and both bands knew each other. Wearing someone's shirt doesn't mean that another member of your band is ripping them off or is even influenced by them, especially not another band that you know . Maybe you should get the dick out of your eyes since you can't tell the difference between two famous underground metal musicians who don't even look alike.

You keep trying to use diversions to argue rather than accepting reality. Going through songs sung by both Kam and Chuck would be pointless for me because you're clearly very desperate to win this argument based on what you've been posting as "evidence" so far, that being a song from years later and an accusation based on a t-shirt worn by a different person.
 
Every photo of Kam Lee I've seen is of him being a pudgy roundfaced fuck so I thought it was him, but fair enough. I'm borderline faceblind anyways so I'll admit that I went out of my area of expertise on that one.

The fact that you can't point to even a single moment, let alone a full song recording, where Kam Lee demonstrates full death metal vocals is proof enough that you that you were just WELL ACKCHYUALLY-ing your way into the discussion by using your expert autistic ability to point out that 1st comes before 2nd and expecting me to bow to your almighty knowledge.
 
Why don't you explain to me the difference in technique between Chuck's performance on the album version of "Evil Dead" and Kam's performance on this demo version? Their voices and the recording quality are obviously different, but the technique is essentially the same. For the record, I think Chuck was a better vocalist for the band despite the fact that his vocal style was similar to his predecessor.



If you feel so strongly that there is a substantial difference in the actual technique, feel free to explain why without using comparisons to other bands to do so. You should be able to just discuss the technical aspect of their voices without making unqualified comparisons like saying people ripped off other people.
 
Last edited:
Spreading the Disease is a solid trad metal album but half their discography is total crap, including a lot of their "classic" stuff.

Why don't you explain to me the difference in technique between Chuck's performance on the album version of "Evil Dead" and Kam's performance on this demo version? Their voices and the recording quality are obviously different, but the technique is essentially the same. For the record, I think Chuck was a better vocalist for the band despite the fact that his vocal style was similar to his predecessor.



If you feel so strongly that there is a substantial difference in the actual technique, feel free to explain why without using comparisons to other bands to do so. You should be able to just discuss the technical aspect of their voices without making unqualified comparisons like saying people ripped off other people.


I already did but I'll repeat myself without mentioning non-Death vocalists to avoid inducing your regular selective blindness. In that particular song, Kam Lee uses a higher-pitched bark. It's not guttural and he hardly even sustains any notes outside of the chorus. The closest thing would be in the equivalent part to the "Spirits within" line (at 1:15, pretty sure the lyrics are different), where he sounds like he's making some kind of animal growl but not an actual death growl. When Chuck does it he's in a proper death metal range.
 
HamburgerBoy said:
I already did but I'll repeat myself without mentioning non-Death vocalists to avoid inducing your regular selective blindness. In that particular song, Kam Lee uses a higher-pitched bark. It's not guttural and he hardly even sustains any notes outside of the chorus. The closest thing would be in the equivalent part to the "Spirits within" line (at 1:15, pretty sure the lyrics are different), where he sounds like he's making some kind of animal growl but not an actual death growl. When Chuck does it he's in a proper death metal range.

Thanks for giving substantially more detail about why you feel that way. I'm going to have to disagree with you that Kam Lee isn't in the proper range for death metal vocals, as many vocalists in death metal opt for a higher pitched sort of growling and it would be grossly inaccurate to portray that as an improper vocal approach. The overall technique used by both is fairly similar, although Chuck benefits from much better recording quality and his growling is also lower in range. I prefer Chuck personally.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. Still, it was fun to watch you accuse him of ripping off Nasty Ronnie for no reason.
 
Watain is an insanely overrated band.

On the band Death: Totally agree that they’re boring a lot of the time, but there’s magic and gems to be found within the filler. Of course, I often listen to all bands by fast forwarding to the song parts that I want to hear.....kinda like porn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PrincessHades
Haha HAAA !!!! Picked Death just to break the ice and the thread goes on two pages about that topic specifically. Love it. And, ooh, appreciate all the validation about them being overrated. It's always been this, like...totally obvious thing to me. I know some ppl around (real or internet ppl) who'd go apeshit at the very notion Death is overrated.

Anthrax. Another obvious pick, yes. Not as badly overrated as Death for death metal, but a pretty similar case for thrash indeed. Really not very good music if you're not particularly into thrash, which couldn't be said about, say, Metallica, Slayer, Sepultura, or later Lamb of God.


Okay. Here's another. I realize it's a petty topic, but, it's so much fun. I'm going to go with. Iron Mai... ooh, no. Nope. Not brave enough to tackle this one atm. Okay so let's see here...
so, basically the entire Swedish "death metal" scene as a whole, not saying there aren't good or very good bands but globally, fairly overrated. Let me be more specific, and pick: Entombed. "Death n Roll", really ? Who the hell wants to mix rock n roll with death metal, what kind of an idea is that. Shouldn't death metal try to be the LEAST mainstream possible, and explore the fringes and obscure areas of music by definition ? All settings maxed out on the metalzone pedal for a giant but most flat sound, that repeats for an entire album, drone thrashy shredding and the Lombardo beat on drums for 45min. Mediocre riffs at best. Left Hand Path is the highlight, the rest is even more redundant and predictable. Ew.
 
Death 'n' roll is fine. Even if it wasn't, I don't see it getting rated so highly as to warrant a mention in this thread. It's not taken that seriously. Just because some bands go for the fringes, doesn't mean others can't have fun exploring Motörhead influences or whatever the fuck they want.
 
Haha HAAA !!!! Picked Death just to break the ice and the thread goes on two pages about that topic specifically. Love it. And, ooh, appreciate all the validation about them being overrated. It's always been this, like...totally obvious thing to me. I know some ppl around (real or internet ppl) who'd go apeshit at the very notion Death is overrated.

Anthrax. Another obvious pick, yes. Not as badly overrated as Death for death metal, but a pretty similar case for thrash indeed. Really not very good music if you're not particularly into thrash, which couldn't be said about, say, Metallica, Slayer, Sepultura, or later Lamb of God.


Okay. Here's another. I realize it's a petty topic, but, it's so much fun. I'm going to go with. Iron Mai... ooh, no. Nope. Not brave enough to tackle this one atm. Okay so let's see here...
so, basically the entire Swedish "death metal" scene as a whole, not saying there aren't good or very good bands but globally, fairly overrated. Let me be more specific, and pick: Entombed. "Death n Roll", really ? Who the hell wants to mix rock n roll with death metal, what kind of an idea is that. Shouldn't death metal try to be the LEAST mainstream possible, and explore the fringes and obscure areas of music by definition ? All settings maxed out on the metalzone pedal for a giant but most flat sound, that repeats for an entire album, drone thrashy shredding and the Lombardo beat on drums for 45min. Mediocre riffs at best. Left Hand Path is the highlight, the rest is even more redundant and predictable. Ew.
Dismember was always the better of the breakup of Nihilist and Carnage in those days, but Entombed got the most credits. And it’s a Boss HM-2, not a Metal Zone.
 
Death 'n' roll is fine. Even if it wasn't, I don't see it getting rated so highly as to warrant a mention in this thread. It's not taken that seriously. Just because some bands go for the fringes, doesn't mean others can't have fun exploring Motörhead influences or whatever the fuck they want.
No but it is though. BIIIIG time. Entombed are constantly featured in Top 10 death metal lists, whether in the iconic bands, songs, or albums. Left Hand Path gets as much promotion and rep points in death metal as, I dunno, Sepultura for thrash. It's sooooo overblown. And the Swedish "death metal" scene in general. If you actually pay close attention to the songs, as in pick every individual riff apart and analyze the tabs and look into the calibre of the musical ideas, it's probably one of the more simplistic fields in metal I can think of. It's basically a huge wall of sound, and a dark ominous vibe overall, but the actual music is incredibly basic and could never draw the interest of someone outside the metal spectrum. I'm just saying early Swe death metal is very very simple musically, and therefor can be uninteresting to some (who're looking for more than just big sound). Early Hypocrisy, Entombed, At the Gates...

Conversely, american death metal bands of the same era (or even prior in fact) were coming up with incredible stuff musically and as a scene supplied plenty of novelty in song-writing and pushing the envelope artistically. Morbid Angel were achieving things in composition that could draw in the attention of any musician, jazzmen or whomever - not so much Entombed.

I'd make the argument there never was a Swedish "death metal" scene during those days, but that's another topic entirely. Leave the death metal to the Americans, the melodic stuff to the Scandinavians I say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theflyingmachine
Cannibal Corpse-I don't think theyre anywhere near horrible, but they are pretty much the top rated death metal band just because they represent its core aspects the best.

Who the fuck needs 14 albums with the exact same lyrical themes and musical concepts??
 
Oh please. Cannibal Corpse arent overrated. Every younger death metal fan would rather hear wimpy teenagers in cloaks growl on to poorly written Lovecraftian plagiarisms while sipping a single craft beer and contemplating if he wants to let his girlfriend that wouldnt come to the show with him peg him after she jokingly mentioned it. He wants her to do it to the beat of the murky riffs hes listening to, but he's not allowed to listen to metal around her. He wants to shoot himself but doesnt believe in owning a gun so he drowns his sorrows in Starbucks.

CC's albums from Eaten Back to Life, TotM, The Bleeding, The Wretched Spawn, to today are obviously different and pretty much all kick ass.