Okay, let me know if the following updates sound good:
Judas Priest
* Created a raw guitar tone and aggressive riffing style which came to characterise power metal, speed metal and thrash metal. (
Sad Wings of Destiny, 1976;
Sin After Sin, 1977;
Stained Class, 1978)
Watchtower
* First
progressive metal band. (
Energetic Disassembly, 1985)
Dream Theater
* Created a modern, classic rock influence style of progressive metal which set a new standard for the genre and evolved it beyond the power and thrash dominated styles of previous bands. (
When Dream and Day Unite, 1989;
Images and Words, 1992)
HamburgerBoy, there are a few issues with your nominations that I'd like to discuss:
Legend
* The first epic traditional metal band (From the Fjords, 1979)
What does "epic" mean? What aspect of their style made them "epic"? I could just as easily say that Judas Priest had done "epic" metal before that, though I haven't heard Legend and don't know what sort of epic you're referring to really.
Trouble
* The first band with Christian lyrics. (Demos, 1982; Psalm 9, 1984)
(I'd add something about their crushing thrash-slowed-to-doom tempo riffs and tone as well, but someone else can explain that better than me)
(Maybe something about incorporating stoner/rock into doom as well in 1990 with their S/T)
(This dude's review brings up the point that they were very retro as well)
Firstly, Black Sabbath had "Christian lyrics" on Master of Reality, and secondly that's hardly an innovation in the first place.
Your other points don't seem very solid to me. It doesn't sound as if they created a clear-cut new genre or anything, and I'm not sure we want to be adding bands for such dubious innovations as "thrashier sounding doom" or "doom with stoner elements".
Candlemass
* The first epic doom metal band. (Epicus Doomicus Metallicus, 1986)
Confessor
* The first technical doom metal band, or the first technical groove/thrash band, or both. (Condemned, 1991)
These are understandable enough, though I have to wonder if there's a certain point where creating subgenres, crossover genres, etc. just isn't that innovative. As far as I understand, neither of these bands really broke any ground stylistically - they just made slight adjustments to already well-established styles.
I guess I'd just like to hear a few more people weigh in on whether it's reasonable to include subgenres like these on the list.
