Technical vs Progressive Metal
- Thread starter Sophii
- Start date
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,848
- 113
hbb and manic fighting over who has the bigger shower helmet.
I don't think Manic wears a shower helmet. He probably has several family members that have him on speed dial in case he's suffering a suicidal episode, however.
CiG
Dimension Hatröss
Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 559
- 113
Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 559
- 113
CiG
Dimension Hatröss
Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 559
- 113
CiG
Dimension Hatröss
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
CiG
Dimension Hatröss
He's ready to beat down your mother pal!
Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 559
- 113
How is it that someone who doesn’t listen to wigger slam knows who Cemetery Rapist is? That’s the guy in the photo. Sheesh.
Fuck...I’m Dead is a completely separate band and straight up ultra fast grindcore.
Fuck...I’m Dead is a completely separate band and straight up ultra fast grindcore.
CiG
Dimension Hatröss
Did you mean to say *does listen to wigger slam?
Yes I know who they are, shit aesthetics. Look at that horrendous logo, looks like a surf/motocross brand company. Awesome band though.
Allfader
Kvelding
I said most tech death don't have complex compositions with harmony/melody logic, but they have complex riffing writing. One of the decisive differences between tech death and progressive stuff is tonality. Progressive music is mostly written within logical chords progressions and tonality, whereas death metal is VERY atonal, where Necrophagist is not an exception.
CC' are bona fide pioneers on tech death. Not just having good musicianship, but being very heavy and fast with complex riffing. Everyone knows that.
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
I'm sorry but saying Necrophagist or most tech death doesnt have complex composition is so incorrect it basically voids anything you have to say on this matter.
CC are nowhere near being pioneers of tech-death, i already mentioned three bands that were playing legitimate technical death metal at the time and were indeed the pioneers of thew subgenre while CC was playing by the books generic/regular death metal. I honestly have no clue where you're coming up with the "everyone knows this part". How about you go to RYM and see when tech death was used as one of their secondary descriptions and then get back to me.
Quick question, would you use "complex composition" to describe this track?
R.i.p. Spawn of Posession.
I think the closest CC got to technical death metal was when Pat O' Brien came into the picture. The Wretched Spawn was pretty technical, but as far as that, CC have just been death metal. However, they may have very well sped up the process of Brutal Death Metal
I think the closest CC got to technical death metal was when Pat O' Brien came into the picture. The Wretched Spawn was pretty technical, but as far as that, CC have just been death metal. However, they may have very well sped up the process of Brutal Death Metal
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
yea, they definitely have some highly technical albums that would fall into the tech-death sub-genre like The Wretched Spawn, Evisceration Plague etc but to say Barnes era Cannibal Corpse were technical death metal is just completely wrong.
And to say Necrophagist didnt have complex compositions when the foundation of their sound was built on classical compositions is just .. i dunno, weird.
And to say Necrophagist didnt have complex compositions when the foundation of their sound was built on classical compositions is just .. i dunno, weird.
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
its aright. The Bleeding and Eaten Back to Life are my favorite Barnes era albums.
Similar threads
