What is Technicallity?

swizzlenuts

i'm sciencing as fast as i can
Apr 21, 2003
9,187
97
48
38
Arkham
What is the definition of technicallity in a band.

I always thought it was the number off riffs a band put together into their songs, and the absence of repetitive riffs...


Or is it the difficulty of thier riffs....

What do you guys think technicallity is?
 
Demonstrating technique. Doesn't mean good, but a display of ability.

Iced Earth, Dream Theater, Blind Guardian, Megedeth=technical band

Napalm Death, Three Dog Night, Beatles= not very techincal. Doesn't mean bad, but not like incredibly difficult to play.
 
Servio_Abbas_Bellum said:
Demonstrating technique. Doesn't mean good, but a display of ability.

Iced Earth, Dream Theater, Blind Guardian, Megedeth=technical band

Napalm Death, Three Dog Night, Beatles= not very techincal. Doesn't mean bad, but not like incredibly difficult to play.

Iced Earth isn't technical by any means.
 
Donnie Darko said:
Its how musically talented or "musically literate" the band is, demonstrating a higher knowledge of music theory.

Exactly.

Just because a band throws a bunch of riffs into one song that make no melodic/harmonic sense as well as throwing all sorts of rythmic changes doesn't mean they are necessarily technical. Anyone who knows how to play an instrument well enough can just throw different shit from their scrapbooks together and call it a song.
 
ThePhilosopher said:
Iced Earth isn't technical by any means.

Tell that to Jon Schaffer's solo on the Prophecy. WTF DO YOU MEAN ICED EARTH ISN'T A TECHNICAL BAND!? THE GUY SOLO'S ON VIRTUALLY EVERY SONG AND THROWS A STRANGE TIMING ON 1 OUT OF EVERY THREE SONGS!!!
 
Intoxicator said:
Compare Iced Earth to Gorguts, Theory In Practice, Cryptopsy, and a number of other technical death metal bands and you will realize they are not technical.

Just because you're comparing them to bands who are ridiculously technical doesn't mean Iced Earth isn't technical in any way.
 
True, but you don't usually refer to a standardly technical band such as Iced Earth as technical. All music is technical to a degree, but in comparison to bands that are labelled as technical, Iced Earth certainly are not.
 
Intoxicator said:
True, but you don't usually refer to a standardly technical band such as Iced Earth as technical. All music is technical to a degree, but in comparison to bands that are labelled as technical, Iced Earth certainly are not.

Yup.
 
If I were to explain Technicality, I would give writing as an example; a novel or a short story. Technicality is not necessary if you are writing, let's say, a childrens book. Simple plots, simple words. Technicality is, on the other hand, necessary if you are writing a book on Quantum Physics.

The same analogy could be described to explain music. If you are Green Day, you don't need to play very technical to communicate your message. If you are Beethoven, you need to play a lot more technical to communicate what it is you wish to say.

The more technical a song is, the more intricate the message is that you wish to explain.
 
Listen to Spastic Ink and if you still don't understand come back and ask again.
 
This is about as technical as I know. And being able to reproduce that recorded sound live with a minimum of gimmicks and backing tapes. With Rush, what you heard was what you got. And these were only three guys.

In his own way Neil Peart is tops...sure his style is different...but look at all that he does...a very technical drummer who does awesome fills and solos...plays so much more percussion than just the kit and cymbals...timbales...chimes....beautiful sounds.

Geddy Lee....bass...and when he learned MOOG programming...he made a 3 man band sound like a 4 or five man band...

Alex Lifeson......On stage he makes hellacious noise....and moving sounds all during the same performance...and he is the only guitar present...whereas many other bands have 2.

If you think they are overrated....try again...check out more of their catalog...other than Signals our Moving Pictures...which are still good.....My personal favorites are 2112, A Farewell to Kings, Signals, and Moving Pictures.

If you still dont like em fine..

B000001ESF.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
 
The Winnipeg Warrior said:
This is about as technical as I know. And being able to reproduce that recorded sound live with a minimum of gimmicks and backing tapes. With Rush, what you heard was what you got. And these were only three guys.

In his own way Neil Peart is tops...sure his style is different...but look at all that he does...a very technical drummer who does awesome fills and solos...plays so much more percussion than just the kit and cymbals...timbales...chimes....beautiful sounds.

Geddy Lee....bass...and when he learned MOOG programming...he made a 3 man band sound like a 4 or five man band...

Alex Lifeson......On stage he makes hellacious noise....and moving sounds all during the same performance...and he is the only guitar present...whereas many other bands have 2.

If you think they are overrated....try again...check out more of their catalog...other than Signals our Moving Pictures...which are still good.....My personal favorites are 2112, A Farewell to Kings, Signals, and Moving Pictures.

If you still dont like em fine..

B000001ESF.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Actually, that's just talent. Technical is really just another way of saying complex. The more complex, the more technical. Think of it on an evolutionary-type scale:

Carnivore>Slayer>Athiest

I love technical metal, but not every band that has 80 riffs per song and strings together 6000 chords together into a riff is awesome. I mean, really, Dream Theater isn't THAT great, and they're one of the most technical bands out there.