Why Death metal?

The Devil's Steed said:
Define the genre's "peak period" for me. Their stronger material is from the '80s and DM hit it's peak period in the early to mid 90s.

DM was at its peak from 89 to 93/4 when most of its landmark albums were released.

You still have no idea if I have good taste in DM or bad, although we probably do have differing tastes when it comes to DM, you can't make that claim based off of one fucking band I find over-rated.

I can when that one band spans three very distinct sub-genres of death metal each of which they practically perfected regardless of how ground breaking their sound was. Couple this with your smug proclamations that these albums are 'average' or 'mediocre' without actually making reference to the music at all and I am really not about to reconsider my views regarding your taste in DM.

Heartwork is their second weakest album.

I wasn't even impressed by that album when I was into typical DM before I started getting into better stuff.

Well awesome, good for you. If you expect me to respond with 'no way man they rule' and treat this like you're making a serious point about anything I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken.
 
The Devil's Steed said:
Their most famous album was a mediocre melodic death album.

Prior to that they made average quality grindcore DM stuff, so how important or influential they were is irrelevant to me.

Influential doesn't necessarily mean high quality.

This is the case with Carcass.

1) Yes, their most famous album is a melodic death metal album..probably THE melodic death metal album.

2) No. Reek isn't stellar, but Symphonies really isn't grind...it's quality gory death metal, with riffs that still stand up to todays scrutiny. Necroticism has NOTHING to do with grindcore. It was, and remains, the purest, most amazing example of death metal recorded.

3) Agreed, but in this case it does.
 
The Devil's Steed said:
Their most famous album was a mediocre melodic death album. Prior to that they made average quality grindcore DM stuff, so how important or influential they were is irrelevant to me.

Influential doesn't necessarily mean high quality. This is the case with Carcass.
hm

way to exclude their by far most acclaimed (well by people who know shit about death metal anyway) and important album (i.e. necroticism) from the equation

i can agree that carcass is generally overrated by some but theres just no two ways about how necroticism fucking kicks ass
 
Erik said:
hm

way to exclude their by far most acclaimed (well by people who know shit about death metal anyway) and important album (i.e. necroticism) from the equation

i can agree that carcass is generally overrated by some but theres just no two ways about how necroticism fucking kicks ass

Impossible.:Smug:
 
the red in the sky is ours is about 5000 times better than anything carcass ever did

i mean, seeing as it's the best death metal album of all time and all that
 
Erik said:
the red in the sky is ours is about 5000 times better than anything carcass ever did

i mean, seeing as it's the best death metal album of all time and all that

Erik, much as I hate to say it, you're wrong.

By a factor of at least 36876363678637864378673864783643786437894638
 
I'm sorry but at the gates is horrible.

The Karelian Isthmus on the other hand is better than most albums.
 
One of these days I am going to find more people that think At The Gates awful. I wish someone would come forward backing me.
 
Erik said:
well you're basically a complete fucking drooling idiot for not utterly worshipping both at the gates (pre-1995) and bathory so don't expect anyone with half a semblance of real fucking music taste to agree with you any time soon

maybe you could ask for support amongst your intellectual equals; try fredy_brown, black_core or ender7227

I like Slaughter of the Soul.

So ner.
 
I did not like Slaughter of the Soul. However I haven't heard any other At the Gates so I won't comment.

After listening to Carcass, every Arch Enemy song makes me sad, because once upon a time Micheal Amott was in Carcass and it was so much better. :cry:

Also, let us not forget Carcass is one of the most copied bands around, save the aformentioned At the Gates.
 
Erik said:
well you're basically a complete fucking drooling idiot for not utterly worshipping both at the gates (pre-1995) and bathory so don't expect anyone with half a semblance of real fucking music taste to agree with you any time soon

maybe you could ask for support amongst your intellectual equals; try fredy_brown, black_core or ender7227

I have heard early at the gates. The only people I have come across that think At The Gates are significant is metalcore fans. I am a moron because you think I should like older at the gates ?. Who are you ?

The guitar playing in bathory simply does nothing for me. There was already extreme music before Quorton so saying someone has to like Bathory to have good taste in metal is ridiculous. It's not hard to hear some other artists getting influenced. Quorton heard black sabbath & motorhead making music not as good, now I should give him credit ?.The first bathory was far from groundbreaking for 84 also in an extreme sense. Bathory did not start metal so except that Quorton was just another person influenced which is not a big deal. We both listen to similiar music but i'm not going to agree with you on everything you say. I do not give a shit about hype or fans making huge deals out of people that are not original. I do not even care about originality.... I just don't want to read things blown of purportion.
 
Importance has nothing to do with quality, fagboy. Bathory is just fucking better than pretty much everything else.