To you, what defines "Metal"

[NFU]

That's the problem, there was no 'metal' in the 70's. Therefore you can't technically call Sabbath metal because the genre didn't exist. That would be like calling Robert Johnson a pioneer of hard rock. Black Sabbath were a major influence on metal. That is a fact. Any other statement would be misinformed as well as misconjuntivicated.

look metal wrath...lets get something cleared up. youve liked metal for about 45 minutes in comparison to some of the people youre arguing with here. on top of that, the metal you have claimed to like typically is pretty horrendous. there WAS "heavy metal" in the 70s, whether you beleive it or not. I really recommend you get your facts straight and your head out of your ass. i could set my watch to you making an absolute clown out of yourself on here daily, i urge you to stop. for everyones sake

 

[Rocky Raccoon]

Listen to Killers and get back to me.

I have, get a clue and get back to me

 

[metal_wrath]

look metal wrath...lets get something cleared up. youve liked metal for about 45 minutes in comparison to some of the people youre arguing with here. on top of that, the metal you have claimed to like typically is pretty horrendous. there WAS "heavy metal" in the 70s, whether you beleive it or not. I really recommend you get your facts straight and your head out of your ass. i could set my watch to you making an absolute clown out of yourself on here daily, i urge you to stop. for everyones sake

You are on here daily, that is true. I don't remember you 'liking' alot of metal bands though. Your input here is "trolling".

As to the statement you quoted, was mostly a general statement, also making up the word misconjuntivicated, which you probably thought was real.

 

[Rocky Raccoon]

o and btw Killers was released in 1981 anyway

 

[i aint play this]

lol yeah Iron Maiden is very Ramones/Sex Pistols infuenced...wtf!!!

 

[arzachel]

rofl @ priest having punk influences in their early days.

 

[i aint play this]

...and oh my fucking god Metal_Wrath, STAINED CLASS by Priest isn't metal? or you gonna tell me it is glam rock? at least honour just a BIT of your stupid screen name...you are the worst failure of this forum's whole history.

 

[worldwide_suicide]

Black Sabbath were the first metal band...

as for hard rock, Led Zeppelin takes it.

I also, believe RUSH is one of the important bands from where metal emerged... or at least had a great influence on what metal would later become

 

[i aint play this]

^^Agreed

 

[i aint play this]

rofl @ priest having punk influences in their early days.

Yeah!! it sounded NOTHING like punk...

 

[Rocky Raccoon]

Black Sabbath were the first metal band...

as for hard rock, Led Zeppelin takes it.

I also, believe RUSH is one of the important bands from where metal emerged... or at least had a great influence on what metal would later become

Agreed

 

[Rocky Raccoon]

...and oh my fucking god Metal_Wrath, STAINED CLASS by Priest isn't metal? or you gonna tell me it is glam rock? at least honour just a BIT of your stupid screen name...you are the worst failure of this forum's whole history.

and agreed

 

[Opethian666]

Like omgzz don't you n00bs know that Linkin Park invented teh Metulzzz?

 

[soundave]

IM were often lumped in with pnks in the early days, largely for the way they dressed. And mostly because Paul DiAnno had short hair, wore leather and studs, and had an affinty for carrying switchblades. Often, I hear them being described as bringing a punk attitude to metal. Again, this invariably refers to DiAnno. They certainly lost any link to punk rock with the addition of Bruce Dickinson.

BTW, why tell someone to listen to Killers when their debut, Iron Maiden, is way more raw?

Incidentally, if you read "Run to the Hills", you'll see IM started out as a cover band, playing tons of, if you can believe it, Van Halen. I always thought of them as being contemporaries, or at least pretty close. But Van Halen 1 came out in 1978 whereas IM's debut was 1980. Playing VH is certainly more hard rock than metal.

Regardless. They were NWOBHM. They were labeled metal at the time. Whether anyone thinks they still sound metal is really irrelevant.

 

[Powers]

The only "metal" band which did have a big influence on metal in the 70's and can been attributed as having punk influence is Motorhead.

Iron Maiden punk? Weird.

 

[CAIRATH]

The irony of someone naming themselves metal_wrath and then denying the fact that Black Sabbath was a metal band (infact THE metal band) is so painful it hurts. For fucks sake, stop trying to pretend you know what you're talking about.

That's the problem, there was no 'metal' in the 70's. Therefore you can't technically call Sabbath metal because the genre didn't exist. That would be like calling Robert Johnson a pioneer of hard rock. Black Sabbath were a major influence on metal. That is a fact. Any other statement would be misinformed as well as misconjuntivicated.

"That is a fact."

Heheh. How about backing up this "fact" with some evidence? I think you'll find the term heavy metal has been around since the early 70's (it is claimed to be inspired by Steppenwolf's phrase "heavy metal thunder" in their song Born To Be Wild which was released in 1968 but I have no idea if that is true). Either way, metal existed since the early 70's. That is a fact. Any other statement would be misinformed.

By the way, I don't know what you think 'misconjuntivicated' means, but it's not actually a word.

 

[coolsnow7]

look metal wrath...lets get something cleared up. youve liked metal for about 45 minutes in comparison to some of the people youre arguing with here. on top of that, the metal you have claimed to like typically is pretty horrendous. there WAS "heavy metal" in the 70s, whether you beleive it or not. I really recommend you get your facts straight and your head out of your ass. i could set my watch to you making an absolute clown out of yourself on here daily, i urge you to stop. for everyones sake

SHUT DOWN! I LOVE YOU!

Sidestepping this debate for a moment, I think a unifying theme in all metal, and the emotions in conveys, is that said emotions are, for lack of a better word, experienced objectively. To put it differently, metal music and themes are written and experienced from a third person's standpoint. Unlike, say, punk, where it's about the person singing's whining. Now, I know, it seems ridiculous, considering the many songs written in the first person - but anyone else get what I'm saying? Even songs written in the first person are experienced in the third... anyone?

Anyway, heavy metal music originally started out with Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, etc. That is a fact. However, I think I'll have to agree that it has evolved to the point that it can no longer include its founders in the genre. After all, a genre whose main distinguishing factor is heaviness, something relative to a time period, cannot expect to include founders that existed in an earlier time period. Indeed, nowadays you're more likely to hear Black Sabbath on a classic rock station than anything nowadays, and that's far more true with Led Zeppelin. Thus I agree with the other guy who started all this that said metal retains no blues influences anymore barring solos, and that blues riffs are basically the distinction between hard rock and metal. And thanks again, NFU.

 

[affinityband]

I love the fact Metal_Wrath thinks Metal is actually cool

 

[CAIRATH]

Anyway, heavy metal music originally started out with Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, etc. That is a fact. However, I think I'll have to agree that it has evolved to the point that it can no longer include its founders in the genre. After all, a genre whose main distinguishing factor is heaviness, something relative to a time period, cannot expect to include founders that existed in an earlier time period. Indeed, nowadays you're more likely to hear Black Sabbath on a classic rock station than anything nowadays, and that's far more true with Led Zeppelin.

I think you are confusing the terms "heavy" and "extreme". Black Sabbath are heavy (downtuned guitar, powerchords, distortion). They are not extreme (though they were for their time). But being extreme is not a requirement for being a metal band. I cannot think of any criterion of being a metal band that Black Sabbath doesn't satisfy.

And I do not understand the rationale behind rewriting which genre a band belongs to based on the current state of said genre. If a band was a metal band in the 70's then they are a metal band now. The fact that metal that is produced nowadays sounds very different and has become more extreme does not change that.

For example, look at the genre of R&B (which I never have and never will be a fan of, but that is besides the point). It has existed since what... the mid 50's or so? Obviously the music that is nowadays called R&B (that you might find on say, MTV) sounds *nothing* like R&B music in the 80's or R&B music in the 60's. Does that mean that James Brown suddenly can't be considered an R&B artist anymore because he doesn't sound like Usher or whatever horrible R&B acts exists nowadays?

I think not.

 

[coolsnow7]

I think you are confusing the terms "heavy" and "extreme". Black Sabbath are heavy (downtuned guitar, powerchords, distortion). They are not extreme (though they were for their time). But being extreme is not a requirement for being a metal band. I cannot think of any criterion of being a metal band that Black Sabbath doesn't satisfy.

And I do not understand the rationale behind rewriting which genre a band belongs to based on the current state of said genre. If a band was a metal band in the 70's then they are a metal band now. The fact that metal that is produced nowadays sounds very different and has become more extreme does not change that.

For example, look at the genre of R&B (which I never have and never will be a fan of, but that is besides the point). It has existed since what... the mid 50's or so? Obviously the music that is nowadays called R&B (that you might find on say, MTV) sounds *nothing* like R&B music in the 80's or R&B music in the 60's. Does that mean that James Brown suddenly can't be considered an R&B artist anymore because he doesn't sound like Usher or whatever horrible R&B acts exists nowadays?

I think not.

And that's why classification is not a perfect science. Because while, by all criteria, Black Sabbath is a metal band, the fact is if you asked a random metalhead if they are, without knowing the music previously nor knowing it's them, I'll bet 9/10 say they're not even close. R&B is a bad example, in that it's simply badly classified music - for lack of a better genre, people are calling Usher R&B. But I'll give you a better example - Jazz. Duke Ellington and Marcus Miller's latest album are CERTAINLY very different. However, they retain enough of the same elements to be similar. More importantly, they have the common elements that defined jazz in the first place. With metal, and I said this before, what distinguishes metal from anything else is that it's heavier than anything else. And if you will say "no, that's extreme music," well, extreme metal happens to be a subgenre of metal if you haven't guessed. And what's heavier than metal? And you know what, to make you feel better, I'll change the definition a bit: metal is significantly heavier than most of what is out there. It's heavy enough that when people hear it, they say "that's heavy." In the 70's, that was Sabbath. And for the most part, that was the only criterion they filled. Rock in general is filled with guitar solos, and riff based music, and most of Sabbath had a blues feel to it - certainly not the same with the majority of metal.

And seriously, if you're gonna make a statement, back it up? In response to your other paragraphs, No. The Definition of a genre can change with time. There. Now we're at an impasse.