Roadrunner and the beginnings of metal...

[Jim LotFP]

"http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/newreleases/

... in their sales pitch for Cradle of Filth's new album...

"Just as the gravel-lined, turd-stained streets of urban England gave heavy metal to the world back in the late 70's..."

Not the usual interpretation of metal history, is it?

 

[Cheiron]

Eh. That's retarded. Its ignoring that Iron Butterfly and Blue Oyster Cult ever existed (both US based bands). And I really don't think that Lord Baltimore's Kingdom Come spawned in turd-stained streets. And King Crimson?

I don't know if Roadrunner thinks that the false NWOBHM was the origination of metal or what. Its like those idiots who think that Black Sabbath released the first metal album.

Of course you have those who point to Helter Skelter as the first metal song (also first punk song).

 

[Some Bastard]

The 'usual' interpretation of metal history keeps changing every decade or so. In my youth I learned that Cream and Jimi Hendrix basically started it all. In recent years it has become the popular opinion that Black Sabbath were the big inventors. Iron Butterfly are the wrong example I think. Their one big hit may have had a big heavy riff but other than that they weren't any heavier than The Doors or Jefferson Airplane. King Crimson? They were never considered part of Heavy Metal history until the late 90's, and even then they're still a borderline case.

And yeah, of course you have those who point to Helter Skelter as the first metal song. And those who point to The Who, The Kinks or (like Lemmy) The Yardbirds. And those who point to The Velvet Underground or The Stooges or MC5. There's even people who point to Link Wray as the inventor of Heavy Riffs. None of 'em are right and none of 'em are exactly wrong either.

And I'm not even taking into consideration the young Black Metal folks who deny every blues or rock'n'roll-influence and claim to take their influences straight from the Classical composers.

As in CoF's case, personally I don't think their influences go back to anything before the NWOBHM. I just can't imagine Iron Butterfly or Blue Oyster Cult made any kind of impression on them. And all Roadrunner does is just a little dumb promo talk.

 

[My Man Mahmoud]

I think it's fair to say that heavy metal emerged as a self-conscious artform in late 70's England, regardless of where you place the emergence of the music itself.

 

[Jim LotFP]

I think it's fair to say that heavy metal emerged as a self-conscious artform in late 70's England, regardless of where you place the emergence of the music itself.

I'm gravitating towards self-consciousness being "the beginning" myself... but it's usually Black Sabbath being thrown around as THE BEGINNING. Just surprised Roadrunner would avoid that easy mark in their promotional material.

 

[Some Bastard]

Just as I'm surprised that you're apparently unaware of the fact that Black Sabbath wasn't always considered that important in Heavy Metal history. In the 80's they were 'just' the smallest of the Big Three (with Purple and Zeppelin). Now in the 00's they are THE big inventors.

Makes me wonder what the 'usual' history of Heavy Metal will look like in 2016

 

[DBB]

I have made my opinions on this matter quite clear elsewhere, so there is no need to repeat myself.

But I want to briefly address this lazy and superficial contention that has been aired over and over again:

Just as I'm surprised that you're apparently unaware of the fact that Black Sabbath wasn't always considered that important in Heavy Metal history. In the 80's they were 'just' the smallest of the Big Three (with Purple and Zeppelin). Now in the 00's they are THE big inventors.

I could say that you have no conception of how the past and the present interact and shape one another, but will content myself with proving that you have no grasp on history period to make matters less complex.

As with much else that you have to say, this is just wrongheaded and ignorant. You are constantly harping on the fact that it is only in the past few years that Black Sabbath have come into prominence as the founders of heavy metal. Unsurprisingly, you are mistaken and just making assumptions based on a framework you have made up in your own head without consulting or presenting any evidence to back up your half-baked claims. As you know, I do not deal in that kind of harebrained analysis.

Characterizing Black Sabbath as the "smallest" of some mythological "big three" is also revealing.

In the course of the research for the articles, one thing that became crystal clear to me is that Black Sabbath over the course of the seventies was largely ignored in the mainstream press, while Led Zeppelin was covered somewhat more extensively because they were viewed as a legitimate band creating “art” while Black Sabbath were a bunch of miscreants to be forgotten about. Hell…back in August 1977 the Chicago Tribune provided a free Led Zeppelin iron on logo for a shirt with the standard edition of the newspaper. Black Sabbath did not benefit from such coverage (Deep Purple was not frozen out, but nothing near the scale of Zeppelin), and was rarely mentioned.

But to get back to the original point, on one of the very rare occasions when Black Sabbath was deemed newsworthy in 1972 (the term “heavy metal” was in wide circulation by this year) the Chicago Tribune reviewer referred to them as the “ultimate purveyors of heavy metal.” Close to declaring them THE heavy metal band, but here are some more definite examples to prove that you need to take more care when you are wildly flailing about.

Geoffrey Kula. “Black Sabbath Aims to Keep Metal from Rusting.” Boston Herald July 9, 1995.

Just as the Beatles shaped pop music, so Black Sabbath laid out the blueprints for heavy metal.

The macabre, theatrical music this English quartet made as a fledgling rock group in the '70s had a profound influence on every band to play in a genre that has expanded to include speed metal, death metal, glam metal and other incarnations.

Sabbath set all the rules: The band's innumerable, unashamed solos were the launching pad for the world's Eddie Van Halens and Joe Satrianis; its thick, lumbering bass-guitar lines influenced generations of musicians and attracted followers such as Soundgarden, White Zombie and the Melvins.

Sabbath's onstage theatrics broke ground for such over-the-top acts as KISS, Alice Cooper and Twisted Sister; the occult imagery and potent mysticism of the group's lyrics paved the way for death metal bands Slayer, Metallica and Carcass. And as the first power balladeers, Sabbath opened up radio waves for the Scorpions, Queensryche and Bon Jovi.


There isn't a metal band on the planet that doesn't owe something to Black Sabbath.[/i]

Brenda Hermann. ”It’s Heavy Metal for Your Mind.” Chicago TribuneJanuary 12, 1992.

Progressive metal might sound like an oxymoron to those who think heavy metal hasn't progressed one note since Black Sabbath bashed through War Pigs more than 20 years ago. But progressive metal is a thought-provoking, artistic approach that is pushing the boundaries of hard rock into a format that - gasp - even grown-ups can appreciate.

Jeff Clark Meads ”International Metal: Silver Lining Behind Europe's Metal Gap is Glow of Next-Generation Bands.” Billboard May 25, 1991

The lack of a shiny new metallic talent from the U.K. is causing much despondency and frustration in a nation which believes it invented the genre through the works of Black Sabbath and, later, Judas Priest.

Lenny Stoute. “Deposed Sabbath Still Scrambling for Place in the Heavy-Metal Heap.” Toronto Star June 9, 1989.

Back in the happily headbanging Seventies, Black Sabbath ruled as heavyweight champs of metal.

Of course, there are things here that could send the thread in all kinds of tangents, but the idea that Black Sabbath were the founders and/or pioneers of heavy metal is not something that just appeared out of the blue in the last five years, Mr Bastard. Try to be more careful and put a little more thought into matter in the future.

 

[My Man Mahmoud]

I'm gravitating towards self-consciousness being "the beginning" myself... but it's usually Black Sabbath being thrown around as THE BEGINNING. Just surprised Roadrunner would avoid that easy mark in their promotional material.

It might have something to do with the fact that Cradle of Filth haven't made a living ripping off Sabbath, but have made a living perverting the music of Priest and Maiden.

 

[Some Bastard]

I could say that you have no conception of how the past and the present interact and shape one another, but will content myself with proving that you have no grasp on history period to make matters less complex.

As with much else that you have to say, this is just wrongheaded and ignorant. You are constantly harping on the fact that it is only in the past few years that Black Sabbath have come into prominence as the founders of heavy metal. Unsurprisingly, you are mistaken and just making assumptions based on a framework you have made up in your own head without consulting or presenting any evidence to back up your half-baked claims. As you know, I do not deal in that kind of harebrained analysis.

Characterizing Black Sabbath as the "smallest" of some mythological "big three" is also revealing.

In the course of the research for the articles, one thing that became crystal clear to me is that Black Sabbath over the course of the seventies was largely ignored in the mainstream press, while Led Zeppelin was covered somewhat more extensively because they were viewed as a legitimate band creating “art” while Black Sabbath were a bunch of miscreants to be forgotten about. Hell…back in August 1977 the Chicago Tribune provided a free Led Zeppelin iron on logo for a shirt with the standard edition of the newspaper. Black Sabbath did not benefit from such coverage (Deep Purple was not frozen out, but nothing near the scale of Zeppelin), and was rarely mentioned.

But to get back to the original point, on one of the very rare occasions when Black Sabbath was deemed newsworthy in 1972 (the term “heavy metal” was in wide circulation by this year) the Chicago Tribune reviewer referred to them as the “ultimate purveyors of heavy metal.” Close to declaring them THE heavy metal band, but here are some more definite examples to prove that you need to take more care when you are wildly flailing about.

Of course, there are things here that could send the thread in all kinds of tangents, but the idea that Black Sabbath were the founders and/or pioneers of heavy metal is not something that just appeared out of the blue in the last five years, Mr Bastard. Try to be more careful and put a little more thought into matter in the future.

Man, that is exactly what I said. I said they were generally considered as the smallest of the big three. I never said that was my personal opinion. The respect they finally get now is pretty recent from a historical perspective.

Just as you can refer to the Chicago Tribune and all those other papers a Euroweenie like me will never read, I could refer to the piles of metal zines and the books on Heavy Metal I collected over the years. For your average young headbanger growing up in the 80's the only Sabbath albums of any significance were the Dio ones. I of course am also talking from my personal experience here. I always liked Sabbath but to a lot of my peers the Ozzy albums were old and boring.

I know you dislike me (for obvious reasons) and therefore probably feel you must disagree with me at all times, but maybe you should read a little more carefully.

 

[My Man Mahmoud]

Of course, there are things here that could send the thread in all kinds of tangents, but the idea that Black Sabbath were the founders and/or pioneers of heavy metal is not something that just appeared out of the blue in the last five years, Mr Bastard. Try to be more careful and put a little more thought into matter in the future.

I'd go one step further. Not only is the history of the Black Sabbath = First Metal hypothesis much older than five years old, it is pretty much the only hypothesis that has ever gained any support outside the American mainstream press.

Why?

Because the American press (working, as they always do in their entertainment reporting, as an adjunct to the marketing departments of the major record labels) was trying to 1.) write American bands into the early history of a genre they had no part in (thus the attempted inclusion of non-entities like Jimi Hendrix, Blue Cheer, Steppenwolf, Aerosmith and KISS, and the attempted conflation of 'heavy metal' with the non-genre 'hard rock') and 2.) the desire to appropriate the very marketable term 'heavy metal' for use in marketing more commercially appealing music.

Personally, I think there's a third reason that the American press has always promoted the cause of Jimi Hendrix and the almost entirely blues derivative Led Zeppelin over that of Sabbath, but I'll try to keep my own political bias out of this.

 

[Cheiron]

There's almost two versions of heavy metal.

Initially it was more of a music/sonic focus.

But here, and in other places, metal was a combination of sonic and attitude.

I also think that there is no definining moment when heavy metal began. As with all cultural developments.

 

[Some Bastard]

There's almost two versions of heavy metal.

Initially it was more of a music/sonic focus.

But here, and in other places, metal was a combination of sonic and attitude.

I also think that there is no definining moment when heavy metal began. As with all cultural developments.

Exactly (where is 'here'?)

Of course there were bands in the 70's that played 'Heavy Metal', but Heavy Metal meant something different then. Montrose, The Dictators or Blue Oyster Cult have nothing to do with the kind of 'Heavy Metal' you're discussing here. I think the kind of Heavy Metal you're discussing here basically started with the NWOBHM. And yes, of course Black Sabbath had a definite musical influence on the bands of that movement, but so had Rainbow, Judas Priest, Thin Lizzy, Rush, Motorhead and UFO.

 

[Cheiron]

Here, as in lotfp.

I think that for 'here', Black Sabbath is proper, along with Rainbow, Motorhead, and Judas Priest. Just read what Dave has wrote, and Scum. But they can say it better than I. But I disagree with you about NWOBHM.

 

[Some Bastard]

Here, as in lotfp.

I think that for 'here', Black Sabbath is proper, along with Rainbow, Motorhead, and Judas Priest. Just read what Dave has wrote, and Scum. But they can say it better than I. But I disagree with you about NWOBHM.

What exactly do you disagree about?

Well, I've read what those guys wrote and although their love for this music is clear I disagree with lots of what they write. Not that it's all a load of BS. It's just that when it comes to Heavy Metal it seems they have created this whole elaborate fantasy world, where Black Sabbath are the big pioneers that materialized out of thin air with this whole new revolutionary previously unheard sound, where any kind of commercialism is taboo and dark forces are gathering to turn our beloved music into lightweight pap, where a band loses all its credibility as soon as they sign to a label, where there is a kind of pure Heavy Metal that has no relations whatsoever with any other kind of music, where there's rules and regulations and all music should be judged and measured by its metal-quotient rather than by its actual quality etcetera....

I'm sorry but I just don't believe in that

 

[Occam's Razor]

thus the attempted inclusion of non-entities like Jimi Hendrix, Blue Cheer, Steppenwolf, Aerosmith and KISS, and the attempted conflation of the 'heavy metal' with the non-genre 'hard rock'

 

[DBB]

Because the American press (working, as they always do in their entertainment reporting, as an adjunct to the marketing departments of the major record labels) was trying to 1.) write American bands into the early history of a genre they had no part in (thus the attempted inclusion of non-entities like Jimi Hendrix, Blue Cheer, Steppenwolf, Aerosmith and KISS, and the attempted conflation of 'heavy metal' with the non-genre 'hard rock') and 2.) the desire to appropriate the very marketable term 'heavy metal' for use in marketing more commercially appealing music.

Personally, I think there's a third reason that the American press has always promoted the cause of Jimi Hendrix and the almost entirely blues derivative Led Zeppelin over that of Sabbath, but I'll try to keep my own political bias out of this.

Careful…you’re starting to sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

I don’t think “first” is synonymous with most important, influential or incredible, but it is very important, I think.

I’ll use this as spring board to offer some anecdotal evidence that is personal and cannot be corroborated.

In the mid and late ‘80s, my metal epicenter, no one talked about the Beatles, Steppenwolf, Led Zeppelin, the Kinks, Blue Cheer or Jimi Hendrix as being metal. KISS was a glam rock band and if you know much about the origins of Casablanca Records and KISS and all the bullshit attached to that band becomes a much larger pattern of behavior and their tenuous metal status.

But I digress, I do not think that there is any need for you to bring your political bias into this, even though this would provide you with an opportunity. All of the bands above (excluding KISS and Aerosmith :vomit) were hippie, countercultural bands that the people who read Kerouac, Ginsberg, loved the Grateful Dead and wore sandals listened to. This, of course, is a gross characterization to which there are exceptions, but enough overlap for the claim to have sticking power beyond me dreaming something up. Led Zeppelin was a classic rock band played to death on AOR stations and all the other bands were in the regular rotation in varying degrees depending on the amounts of “hits” they had, but Black Sabbath existed outside these boundaries for the most part and everyone who was into metal (ranging from the Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, W.A.S.P. AC/DC mainstream connoisseur to those into were into thrash, death, black, speed, etc.) was into Sabbath. Blue Cheer, the Beatles, the Kinks, Iron Butterfly, Cream, Steppenwolf, Hendrix etc. were not considered an indispensable part of this universe—but Sabbath was an integral part of it.

But that is my Midwestern days of yore personal take to be consumed with a grain of salt.

Metal Musicians have also had a lot to do with the position of Sabbath as founding fathers as well and you encounter it every time you turn around:

If it weren’t for this record [Master of Reality], I think that metal would be a different place, but I do know this for sure: that Macabre wouldn’t exist without it.

Nefarious

The greatest heavy metal album of all time is Black Sabbath’s self-titled debut. The fact that this album became the initial blueprint for what would become heavy metal is not debatable.

Bruce Franklin

(both from Illinois Entertainer November 2006)

 

[My Man Mahmoud]

But I digress, I do not think that there is any need for you to bring your political bias into this, even though this would provide you with an opportunity. All of the bands above (excluding KISS and Aerosmith :vomit) were hippie, countercultural bands that the people who read Kerouac, Ginsberg, loved the Grateful Dead and wore sandals listened to. This, of course, is a gross characterization to which there are exceptions, but enough overlap for the claim to have sticking power beyond me dreaming something up.

There's a great quote from Deena Weinstein (which, I suppose, proves the adage about blind pigs and acorns) on this:

"Black Sabbath angered the progressive critics because they broke faith with counterculture, inverting its central symbol of love and instead pointing to the pervasiveness of evil in the world."

In any event, that's not really what I was driving at so much as I was hinting at the tendency in the American popular press to work from the assumption that all popular music must somehow be derived from the work of black innovators.

 

[Some Bastard]

In the mid and late ‘80s, my metal epicenter, no one talked about the Beatles, Steppenwolf, Led Zeppelin, the Kinks, Blue Cheer or Jimi Hendrix as being metal. KISS was a glam rock band and if you know much about the origins of Casablanca Records and KISS and all the bullshit attached to that band becomes a much larger pattern of behavior and their tenuous metal status.

But I digress, I do not think that there is any need for you to bring your political bias into this, even though this would provide you with an opportunity. All of the bands above (excluding KISS and Aerosmith :vomit) were hippie, countercultural bands that the people who read Kerouac, Ginsberg, loved the Grateful Dead and wore sandals listened to. This, of course, is a gross characterization to which there are exceptions, but enough overlap for the claim to have sticking power beyond me dreaming something up. Led Zeppelin was a classic rock band played to death on AOR stations and all the other bands were in the regular rotation in varying degrees depending on the amounts of “hits” they had, but Black Sabbath existed outside these boundaries for the most part and everyone who was into metal (ranging from the Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, W.A.S.P. AC/DC mainstream connoisseur to those into were into thrash, death, black, speed, etc.) was into Sabbath. Blue Cheer, the Beatles, the Kinks, Iron Butterfly, Cream, Steppenwolf, Hendrix etc. were not considered an indispensable part of this universe—but Sabbath was an integral part of it.

Maybe not in your part of the world. Here Cream and Hendrix were considered major forerunners (which is not the same thing as 'being metal' - and I don't think anybody here said they were) (see Brian Harrigan's Heavy Metal A-Z, Malcolm Dome's Encyclopedia Metallica - both from 1981 - and the writings of Dutch Heavy Metal journalist Kees Baars). The sound of NWOBHM bands like Saxon and Raven had very little to do with Sabbath. By the way, that NWOBHM also included commercial hard rock bands like Def Leppard and Praying Mantis. And the sound of a very influential band like Iron Maiden had more in common with Thin Lizzy, Wishbone Ash and Jethro Tull. When more extreme forms of Metal arrived Motorhead were a lot more influential. And they were a rock'n'roll band influenced by Chuck Berry and Little Richard. Lemmy has said in interviews he never cared for Sabbath.

This all doesn't mean I 'don't care' (as you have implied several times). I do care, but I care about facts not fiction. You may 'romanticize' Black Sabbath into inventors of some major new sound by presenting some random quotes as 'proof' but the history of Heavy Metal is much more complicated than that. the fact is that Black Sabbath did not set out to 'invent' Heavy Metal. They were basically an electric blues band with a twist. They would never have sounded the way they did if it wasn't for the influence of a band like Cream. It is also a fact that even in those early days it wasn't just Sabbath that helped to shape the sound we now know as Heavy Metal.

I know you have already decided to disagree with me no matter what I say so don't bother.

 

[DBB]

I know you have already decided to disagree with me no matter what I say so don't bother.

I know. This only about the 29th time you have used this tired tactic. You are gasping for air. It is not just me. I could reproduce countless quotes from numerous bands from all points of the metal compass about the profound influence Black Sabbath had on them and their place in heavy metal history and you would say the same thing and make it sound if I was some kind of fanatic in the wilderness who was blind to your rational take on things. You simply have no grasp on how traditions emerge and are passed from generation to generation as the past and present coalese to form something living and evolving. There is a reason why Sabbath is the central point of this conversation and not Cream, Hendrix or Wishbone Ash--it is because they were the first band to play "what came to be called metal" [false metal] and were/are metal.

 

[Some Bastard]

What did I say?

For clarity’s sake, I am not denying Sabbath’s influence. I’m just saying you (and your colleagues) are ‘romanticizing’ things somewhat.

I am also not saying that Cream, Hendrix and Wishbone Ash are Metal, but they were among the artists that helped shape its sound.

Besides being interested in Metal I am also interested in where it came from, where it originated. The problem seems to be that you and you buddies don’t want to know that it came from something, that it originated somewhere. It seems you prefer to think it just suddenly was there! Hey, it’s perfectly fine with me if you wanna believe in fairytales, but if you put ‘em on the internet chances are people are gonna disagree with you.

Of course you could reproduce countless quotes from numerous bands from all points of the metal compass about the profound influence Black Sabbath had on them and their place in heavy metal history. Like I said, I’m not denying their influence at all. Likewise I could reproduce countless quotes from numerous bands from all points of the metal compass about the profound influence Rainbow, Rush or Deep Purple had on them and their place in heavy metal history. Or countless quotes from numerous bands from all points of the metal compass about the profound influence Pink Floyd, The Beatles, early Genesis or Wagner had on them, even though these are bands and artists that don’t really have a place in heavy metal history.

I could also reproduce quotes from Geezer and Ozzy where they say don’t want nothing to do with Heavy Metal. But I’ve mentioned that before and you chose to ignore that, just like you’re ignoring things now, like my little Motorhead-remark. Tells me you’re just in denial.

Have you actually heard the first Sabbath album? Are you denying that there's a definite blues influence there?

But hey, whatever floats your boat. We’ll just do it your way:

*ahem*

“In the beginning there was NOTHING. And then BLACK SABBATH and BLACK SABBATH alone begat HEAVY METAL”

Happy now?