ohiogrinder
New Metal Member
- Mar 15, 2006
- 5,392
- 13
- 0
why do black metallers hate modern Black metal?
- Thread starter Hell Awaits Us All
- Start date
How so? Anthems... significantly postdated the movement toward more accessible, keyboard/rock oriented black metal.
Vitor
Unconventional [Listener]
You still haven't managed to explain how an album that postdates the appearance of the innovations (and the bands) it supposedly influenced could have managed that time denying feat...
Zephyrus
Tyrants and Slaves
I said it was the "premier" meaning most notable of a series of innovations that precipitated further innovations in black metal.
It didn't innovate ANYTHING. It was Emperor jumping on an already existing bandwagon. In fact, the whole scene it supposedly spawned was, if anything, a regression of the genre away from innovation and back toward the comfortably well-known.
Vitor
Unconventional [Listener]
yeah, look at Pantera... many people consider them the 1st nu metal band, but everybody knows that it's not true... They just influenced some bands, but they aren't... Emperor is on the same case, cuz They've inspired many modern BM bands, but we cannot call Emperor modern BM
Dazed and Brutal
Yall About to Witness
Because of modern production and that a lot of bands today are fjust copies of the older bands. And the pre-95 stuff is the best stuff anytway..
Hubster
...
There is an element of truth to this, but more so in the context of Black Metal being more accessible. Prior to Anthems, the majority of bands were sticking to a ideology-driven creation as opposed to musical.
MasterOLightning
Optimator
'Anthems' is hardly a black metal release in many regards - and if anything that is certainly a compliment, it is a fantastic album by an excellent band.
I agree with the post by Zephyrus but to say it was inspiration to branch out of genre restrictions is still ironic because there are many bands that do exactly that but aren't considered black metal for those very reasons which is just hypocritical among those narrowminded.
I agree with the post by Zephyrus but to say it was inspiration to branch out of genre restrictions is still ironic because there are many bands that do exactly that but aren't considered black metal for those very reasons which is just hypocritical among those narrowminded.
Zephyrus
Tyrants and Slaves
Anthems sparked a challenge to how one defines black metal. From that point on, one had to decide what was black metal and what was no longer black metal, and they did so by broadening or restricting their definitions. Before this point, black metal was much easier to define and recognize as a metal genre, sound-wise. But by this point, the sound started evolving in so many directions that many had to expand their definitions in order to call it black metal.
In fact, I use Anthems as a kind of litmus test to determine who has either a narrow or broad definition of black metal as a musical genre. Personally, I call Anthems a black metal album, absolutely. Consequently, my definition of black metal is very comprehensive. Then I see some people refute Anthems' black metal label; I view these people as having a more restricted view of what dfines the sound, which I have no problem with, but now you realize the root of so many arguments pertaining to the genre on this board and beyond.
In fact, I use Anthems as a kind of litmus test to determine who has either a narrow or broad definition of black metal as a musical genre. Personally, I call Anthems a black metal album, absolutely. Consequently, my definition of black metal is very comprehensive. Then I see some people refute Anthems' black metal label; I view these people as having a more restricted view of what dfines the sound, which I have no problem with, but now you realize the root of so many arguments pertaining to the genre on this board and beyond.
Anthems is a black metal release, to me anyways, I really couldn't call it any other subgenre, it sounds just like black metal to me even if it has clean production(which doesn't matter) and a more complex song structure(Nightside was pretty complex song structure wise too) and it represented the evolution of Emperor, the guitar playing wasn't so minimalistic but showed of the band's talents. I also consider black n roll black metal, like Satyricon's newest one, so I tend to have a more broader definition of black metal.
Where are you getting this stuff from? Any possible perceived 'challenge' which Anthems... might be said to have made to 'black metal' had already been made by other bands BEFORE ITS RELEASE. You're ascribing significance where there is none.
The alterations from a more 'traditional' black metal approach that Emperor undertook with Anthems... - more rocklike song structures, more conventional production values and pushing the keyboards to the front of the mix - were all elements that had previously appeared in the work of others, chiefly Cradle of Filth, Dimmu Borgir and Gehenna. Far from being pioneers of the style, the were relative latecomers to the party
July of 1997...
Vitor
Unconventional [Listener]
Skepticism
Member
- Feb 14, 2006
- 2,177
- 4
- 38
How can you call CoF black metal. Sure they had keyboards, but they are no where near black metal. Sure their earlier albums had elements of black metal, but they were nowhere near as influential or impacting as Emperor's sound.
Vitor
Unconventional [Listener]
AchrisK
Weakling
Regarding Bal-Sagoth:
Yeah, sorry but for me this is also true...other than their mile long song/album names. I really disliked their clinical, pompus approach.
uke:
Yeah, sorry but for me this is also true...other than their mile long song/album names. I really disliked their clinical, pompus approach.
uke:Similar threads
