Why does the media ignore power metal in the States?

[nomisofsiman]

getting into this a little late, but the exact same thing can be said about power metal. to the average music consumer they too could not differentiate between Kamelot, Rhapsody, Hammerfall, etc etc ad naseum.

if you love a genre you will be able to tell a difference between bands for the obvious reason that YOU pay attention to.

not defending anything, but slagging a genre of music as a whole because it "sounds the same" is kind of silly.

it's a genre of music BECAUSE it sounds alike in some fashion. hence the pretty goofy things like differences between "power metal" and "symphonic power metal" how lame can we be as metal heads and expect to be taken seriously at some point??!

i say we just all go back to loving the M E T A L, regardless of what genre it is. metal is metal, period. we are a minority, why segment ourselves into even smaller groups?

we will never make the impact we hope to make doing it the way we have.

I agree and don't agree. I really do find that the grunge bands were SO different in their sound except for maybe a couple of the vocalists. AIC I still don't really consider a grunge band to be honest.

I definitely agree with the genre thing. I think by metal being in so many different subgenres hurts it, but unfortunately there is no way around this. Some people like myself like all types of metal but some people just like the classic stuff, i.e. that actually sing whereas the other half like their metal as heavy and brutal as possible. This is why I think it's so segmented and why our genre will probably never get popular.

The thing is a lot of people who don't "like metal", don't like it because they think everything is nu metal and metalcore, but that's what's shoved down our throats nowadays so you can't really blame them. Well, not nu metal anymore but metalcore is.

 

[Dead Winter]

Ozzy once said he didn't understand all the different types of metal.To him it's all rock.

That's because Ozzy's a slobbering retard. Subgenres exist because they are necessary. Eccentric labels are stupid, but there's a huge difference between Amorphis and Korpiiklaaniwoei2qo308i9oshdjg. They're both Finnish folk metal acts but there's an abyss between them.

 

[Dead Winter]

I agree and don't agree. I really do find that the grunge bands were SO different in their sound except for maybe a couple of the vocalists. AIC I still don't really consider a grunge band to be honest.

I definitely agree with the genre thing. I think by metal being in so many different subgenres hurts it, but unfortunately there is no way around this. Some people like myself like all types of metal but some people just like the classic stuff, i.e. that actually sing whereas the other half like their metal as heavy and brutal as possible. This is why I think it's so segmented and why our genre will probably never get popular.

I don't think it hurts it at all, actually. There's a ton of different types of metal out there and you can't just lump everything in with the "metal" moniker. For instance, does Morbid Angel sound anything like Dimmu Borgir? Does Iced Earth sound like Cannibal Corpse? Does Akercocke sound anything like Amorphis? Subgenres are necessary.

The only people who think they are unnecessary are people who listen to only one style of metal. Maybe they listen to one or two other bands outside their favorite genre, but that's it.

That said, going overboard with the genre descriptions is just as retarded. Negura Bunget plays black folk metal. Leave it at that. Nile plays death metal. Leave it at that. Rhapsody plays...well...some would say symphonic power metal, while I would just say hideous weedle weedle wankery. There's no need for descriptions like, "Yeah, check this band out. They're an epicfolkblackprogressivetruepowerindustrial metal band who play in the vein of old celtic traditions using only straw, a cup of water, and an old shoe for instruments!!! They're really original!!!"

 

[Dead Winter]

getting into this a little late, but the exact same thing can be said about power metal. to the average music consumer they too could not differentiate between Kamelot, Rhapsody, Hammerfall, etc etc ad naseum.

Yes, but those bands are horrible, and there really is very little difference between them. Hammerfall may be a little thrashier sounding, but that's about it. The difference between Kamelot and Hammerfall isn't even in the same league as the comparison between a band like Alice in Chains and The Melvins. There's only so far you can go with power metal before you start repeating yourself, whereas grunge transcended genres and is influencing a completely different genre 15 years later. What has power metal transcended? What great strides has it made in the last 20 years? It's a stale genre, and that's why it will never be huge (just trying to answer the original topic question). It will always have its hardcore followers, but it will never achieve the heights of the big bands. It was doomed from the start. Power Metal is the product of 80's speed metal and classic heavy metal like Iron Maiden/Judas Priest. It's a mule, not a horse. Helloween used to be considered speed metal because power metal didn't exist back then.

it's a genre of music BECAUSE it sounds alike in some fashion. hence the pretty goofy things like differences between "power metal" and "symphonic power metal" how lame can we be as metal heads and expect to be taken seriously at some point??!

Well, when you make videos like this, how can you even expect to be taken seriously in the first place? Let's not even get to the music. Stale riffs, stale melodies, and the very same drumming tempo and style in every single song. Not only that, but many other bands follow the same formula.

You're asking, "Why doesn't anyone take us seriously?" when THIS is what a lot of power metal bands are like. Sure, Turilli is a fantastic guitarist but scales don't make a song.



Here's another power metal/true metal (take your pick, I don't care either way) band: Primal Fear.



Great band, great singer, great riffs, but COME ON. SERIOUSLY? After watching this video it should be clear why no one takes power metal seriously. That doesn't mean it's bad or good, but power metal is about posing, posturing, shredding, and acting out mythical fantasies through music. I like it just as much as the next guy but just because it's your favorite genre of music doesn't exclude us from being a little dorky for liking it. It's a childish genre. It's about fantasy, showing off, and posing. Take it for what it is and be happy, but don't try to make it something it's not.

Subgenres are necessary because frankly, I don't want my Emperor and Akercocke anywhere NEAR Manowar or Rhapsody. Not everyone wears being a metalhead as a badge like power metal does. In fact, It's downright silly unless you're a kid. On the flip-side, would you want power metal to be associated with Varg Vikernes and Burzum? Would you rather have people think you're a satanic murderer or a sad dork who lives with his parents? (sometimes they're one in the same)

Power metal can't think outside the box and that's why no one cares except its precious few. It doesn't evolve, it just gets faster and heavier.

 

[nomisofsiman]

Yes, but those bands are horrible, and there really is very little difference between them. Hammerfall may be a little thrashier sounding, but that's about it. The difference between Kamelot and Hammerfall isn't even in the same league as the comparison between a band like Alice in Chains and The Melvins. There's only so far you can go with power metal before you start repeating yourself, whereas grunge transcended genres and is influencing a completely different genre 15 years later. What has power metal transcended? What great strides has it made in the last 20 years? It's a stale genre, and that's why it will never be huge (just trying to answer the original topic question). It will always have its hardcore followers, but it will never achieve the heights of the big bands. It was doomed from the start. Power Metal is the product of 80's speed metal and classic heavy metal like Iron Maiden/Judas Priest. It's a mule, not a horse. Helloween used to be considered speed metal because power metal didn't exist back then.



Well, when you make videos like this, how can you even expect to be taken seriously in the first place? Let's not even get to the music. Stale riffs, stale melodies, and the very same drumming tempo and style in every single song. Not only that, but many other bands follow the same formula.

You're asking, "Why doesn't anyone take us seriously?" when THIS is what a lot of power metal bands are like. Sure, Turilli is a fantastic guitarist but scales don't make a song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1E-aYJpo44

Here's another power metal/true metal (take your pick, I don't care either way) band: Primal Fear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbQczCg54r8

Great band, great singer, great riffs, but COME ON. SERIOUSLY? After watching this video it should be clear why no one takes power metal seriously. That doesn't mean it's bad or good, but power metal is about posing, posturing, shredding, and acting out mythical fantasies through music. I like it just as much as the next guy but just because it's your favorite genre of music doesn't exclude us from being a little dorky for liking it. It's a childish genre. It's about fantasy, showing off, and posing. Take it for what it is and be happy, but don't try to make it something it's not.

Don't take this the wrong way dude, but you just went paragraphs upon paragraphs dissing power metal and then you say you like it as much as the next guy? I like power metal, but I wouldn't agree it's ALL about posing, posturing and shredding. I find power metal bands actually to have a lot more actual talent then other genres, i.e. metalcore which is completely about the aforementioned things.

I also don't think you should lump all the power metal bands as being corny dungeons and dragony stuff. Yeah, some of it is but for example, a lot of the Andi Deris era Helloween stuff isn't. Same thing goes with Iced Earth. Honestly, a lot of power metal isn't any more cheesy than Iron Maiden to be honest and look how popular they are. Yes, Rhapsody I understand not being popular. They're about as corny as you get, but not all these bands are like that.

Out of curiosity though. Do you even like metal? So far all I see is you going on and on about grunge, which I like as well I just find it interesting.

As for some of your previous posts, I'm not completely against the subgenre thing at all. I was pretty much saying what you did in that there are WAY too many of them. Rock as a genre for instance doesn't have nearly as many as metal seems to and there are a vast number of differences between bands in that genre as you said about grunge. Just saying. In my opinion it should be classic/power, death, black, doom, metalcore/modern and thrash. Any band can pretty much be described as one of the above in metal.

 

[Dead Winter]

Don't take this the wrong way dude, but you just went paragraphs upon paragraphs dissing power metal and then you say you like it as much as the next guy? I like power metal, but I wouldn't agree it's ALL about posing, posturing and shredding. I find power metal bands actually to have a lot more actual talent then other genres, i.e. metalcore which is completely about the aforementioned things.

Not taken the wrong way at all. I understand how you may have been confused. I dissed power metal because it's silly, trite, self-absorbed, and full of itself. I mean let's face it...it's pretty stupid. However, it's (usually) REALLY catchy and a lot of fun to listen to and see in concert. The songs usually get your head banging and it's always fun to mimic the falsettos at a party. It's fun music. Just because something is corny, however, doesn't mean it's bad, and just because I may criticize some parts of it doesn't mean I don't like it.

Now, being a silly, trite, and self-absorbed genre has absolutely nothing to do with their technical ability. When you have people like Matos', Turilli, and a whole slew of other great musicians, it's not hard to see that these guys know their stuff. Whether they can write an actual song and not just wail to impress their friends and fans is another thing.

Out of curiosity though. Do you even like metal? So far all I see is you going on and on about grunge, which I like as well I just find it interesting.

I'm 31 and I've been listening to metal since I was 5. My first record was High and Dry by Def Leppard.

I mentioned grunge to begin with because I saw a few people (like most people who long for the 80's) blaming the demise of glam/power/trad/classic metal in the 90's on grunge. My counter to that is that 10 years of butt rock and singing about stupid shit was long enough. Nirvana didn't kill metal in the 90's, it killed itself from overexposure to glam. The last time I checked, Metallica and Megadeth and even Anthrax sold millions of copies of albums in the early 90's when metal was supposedly dead. Anthrax's best album imo was The Sound of White Noise, and that came out in 1992. Metal went underground in the 90's because it needed to shed it's superficial skin and be reborn. Nirvana had nothing to do with it; people needed something they could identify with. People were sick of the superficiality and wanted something real, and grunge was pretty much as real as it got. No frills, no bullshit, just music. I've never been a very big fan of Nirvana or anything, it's just that everyone brings up their name every time they talk about the 90's and how they killed metal when it's not true. I personally think they were the worst of the grunge bands, aside from a few songs.

As for some of your previous posts, I'm not completely against the subgenre thing at all. I was pretty much saying what you did in that there are WAY too many of them. Rock as a genre for instance doesn't have nearly as many as metal seems to and there are a vast number of differences between bands in that genre as you said about grunge. Just saying. In my opinion it should be classic/power, death, black, doom, metalcore/modern and thrash. Any band can pretty much be described as one of the above in metal.

Well you have to ask yourself how many bands you know in each of those genres you listed. Also, what about crossover? How would you describe Akercocke? They're a pretty big band and their style is like Morbid Angel meets black metal meets Rush. For the record, I just call them a progressive death metal band with hints of black. You can't call them a black metal band because they're not, and they're not a pure death metal because some songs and structures are very progressive and harken back to Roll the Bones. It's tricky.

 

[guardian26]

I think we actually talked about this issue before (it might have been on another forum though), but the big problem here is the RIGHTS to do it. If a band has assigned the copyrights to different publishers (or even record labels) in different territories, it's going to be hard to re-obtain the rights to put the music on RockBand. There's a lot of politics that goes into re-distribution of musical copyrights, and a band that's signed (to either label or publisher) can not just go out and "upload" their own material at free will for everyone to download/use.

c.

Claus,
Do you think that as this is becoming more popular and more widely recognized as a promotional tool, that future record contracts/upcoming bands may reserve the rights to put their stuff into games....could that be an added clause of the recording contract?

 

[Dead Winter]

Ditto. I think a lot of metal bands are just flat out lazy and feel like someone else should promote for them. This is the problem with even the more successful metal bands. They bitch about not having enough sales or tickets, yet they don't do much promotion themselves and that's where it's all at.

True, but if you're in a fairly big band, that's not your job. Your job is to focus on your music while your management handles your booking and publicity. That's what you pay them for. The problem is when management doesn't do their job and end up just taking your money and you find yourself playing high school proms instead of clubs.

You also have to realize that it's logistically easier to tour in Europe. Now with the advent of the EU, the only thing necessary is a passport to travel all over. Also you can play one show and hop back on the bus and four hours later you're at another show, unlike in the US when you have to drive for days only to find out that they canceled the show. It's quite funny because being an American living in Europe, I see all these people fantasizing about playing the US, like the streets are paved with gold and every show is sold out and every girl's a groupie. They don't believe me when I tell them that it's nothing like that and when they find out for themselves they're always glad to be back. It's hard playing in the US.

Here, unless you're a really giant band whose career is solely playing music, it's not so much about the money as it is in the US. I mean, everyone wants to make good money, but (imo) it seems to me that people here have a bigger appreciation for good organization and hospitality of the bands. A band, like an army, travels on its stomach. My band used to play certain clubs even without being paid because we knew ahead of time that we'd eat like kings and pigs before the show and the beer was free.

I've never been to Progpower, but all my friends in Raintime and my friend in Elvenking said they loved it and loved the organization. Festivals are typically better run than single shows, at least from what I've noticed, and especially in this genre. It's such a niche that there has to be many bands on the bill to garner enough interest.

 

[Dead Winter]

People join bands for certain reasons; to make music, to get rich & famous doing it & to get laid for doing it. Anyone who says otherwise is probably a hobbyist and has no real drive to "make it" which is a long hard road unless you're going to be the 4th revolution of music.

I somehow missed this post, sorry for my tardiness in replying.

Are you saying that if you don't play music to score groupies and get rich, then you're just a hobbyist? Of course everyone would like to be rich, but when I first picked up a guitar, my interest wasn't to be rich and famous and it isn't today either. In fact, I wouldn't want to be some gigantic stadium-selling band like Metallica because, as you can see, over time you change and your music changes as well...usually for the worse. As long as I can live decently within my means and I'm creating the music I love, what more is there?

Not everyone shares in the 80's materialistic and plastic attitude. There's such a thing as personal and musical integrity, and I would never sell myself out if I didn't believe in 100% of what I was doing, no matter how much money you wave in my face. Doing things your own way no matter what the trends are or playing how you want to play even if it means a meager income doesn't make you a hobbyist; it makes you a musician with integrity. I always aspired to be a musician, not a rock star. Rock stardom is quite possibly the dumbest throwback to the 70's and 80's that still exists today.

Plus, I live in Italy so life is always good anyway.

 

[ICEDEARTHFAN]

That's because Ozzy's a slobbering retard. Subgenres exist because they are necessary. Eccentric labels are stupid, but there's a huge difference between Amorphis and Korpiiklaaniwoei2qo308i9oshdjg. They're both Finnish folk metal acts but there's an abyss between them.

Slobbering retard aside........his point is it all came from rock if you follow the pipeline back to the beginning.

 

[Claus / Intromental]

Claus,
Do you think that as this is becoming more popular and more widely recognized as a promotional tool, that future record contracts/upcoming bands may reserve the rights to put their stuff into games....could that be an added clause of the recording contract?

Good question Mike. I honestly think (and am a bit afraid of) that it'll have the contraire effect and would make it even harder for bands to reserve those rights in the future. Labels are watching the added income they are getting from those avenues (rockband, and others like that) and if that's an income they can see growing in the future, they'll definitely want to get part (if not all) of it, so they'll probably put that into the contracts and tell the bands "if you don't give US those right, you can look around for another deal".

c.

 

[Dead Winter]

Slobbering retard aside........his point is it all came from rock if you follow the pipeline back to the beginning.

Well if you're going to use that logic you might as well just label everything under R&B since rock came from that too.

Subgenres exist for a reason: to differentiate between music styles to help the consumer with his or her own preferences. Saying we should all use the same moniker is like saying we should all drive the same car.

 

[ICEDEARTHFAN]

Well if you're going to use that logic you might as well just label everything under R&B since rock came from that too.

Subgenres exist for a reason: to differentiate between music styles to help the consumer with his or her own preferences. Saying we should all use the same moniker is like saying we should all drive the same car.

I think Ozzy is allowed to think whatever he wants to think about Metal and its sub-categories.It's all an opinion anyway,right?
I know plenty of folks that classify Rage Against The Machine as whatever type of metal.......to me,it's just rap with guitar.I don't give a shit about whether a band is classified as this or that.If I like the song,it's good metal to me.
Also,having sub-catergories of metal is fine with me.It's when there's a sub-category of a sub-category of a sub-category etc. that makes me think sometimes people just get way too techincal about naming what type of metal a band is

 

[nomisofsiman]

I mentioned grunge to begin with because I saw a few people (like most people who long for the 80's) blaming the demise of glam/power/trad/classic metal in the 90's on grunge. My counter to that is that 10 years of butt rock and singing about stupid shit was long enough. Nirvana didn't kill metal in the 90's, it killed itself from overexposure to glam. The last time I checked, Metallica and Megadeth and even Anthrax sold millions of copies of albums in the early 90's when metal was supposedly dead. Anthrax's best album imo was The Sound of White Noise, and that came out in 1992. Metal went underground in the 90's because it needed to shed it's superficial skin and be reborn. Nirvana had nothing to do with it; people needed something they could identify with. People were sick of the superficiality and wanted something real, and grunge was pretty much as real as it got. No frills, no bullshit, just music. I've never been a very big fan of Nirvana or anything, it's just that everyone brings up their name every time they talk about the 90's and how they killed metal when it's not true. I personally think they were the worst of the grunge bands, aside from a few songs.

Ditto. I hate when people actually blame Nirvana and the like for this. Personally, I agree with you that glam did more to hurt metal than the likes of Nirvana ever did. That genre, outside of a select few is one of the most vilified genres in music along the likes of disco. The thing is about the music industry is that it is built on trends. From metal to grunge to indie rock. That's just how it is. Metal has a couple of hugely popular bands, but I doubt (at least here in the states) that it makes a resurgence again.

 

[nomisofsiman]

Slobbering retard aside........his point is it all came from rock if you follow the pipeline back to the beginning.

I meant to comment on this quote earlier. Ozzy isn't the only one either and he gets a bad rap. I know Lemmy's been quoted as calling everything rock and roll too. Though in regard to him, he doesn't consider Motorhead metal which I actually tend to agree with for the most part, with the exception of some stuff from this decade.

 

[Dead Winter]

I think Ozzy is allowed to think whatever he wants to think about Metal and its sub-categories.It's all an opinion anyway,right?
I know plenty of folks that classify Rage Against The Machine as whatever type of metal.......to me,it's just rap with guitar.I don't give a shit about whether a band is classified as this or that.If I like the song,it's good metal to me.
Also,having sub-catergories of metal is fine with me.It's when there's a sub-category of a sub-category of a sub-category etc. that makes me think sometimes people just get way too techincal about naming what type of metal a band is

Yeah the subcategory of the subcategory is just stupid.

I can't stand RATM, either.

 

[Dead Winter]

Ditto. I hate when people actually blame Nirvana and the like for this. Personally, I agree with you that glam did more to hurt metal than the likes of Nirvana ever did. That genre, outside of a select few is one of the most vilified genres in music along the likes of disco. The thing is about the music industry is that it is built on trends. From metal to grunge to indie rock. That's just how it is. Metal has a couple of hugely popular bands, but I doubt (at least here in the states) that it makes a resurgence again.

It should be said that while I don't like what the over-saturation of glam did to metal, I love many glam bands. Dokken, Skid Row, Def Leppard, White Lion, Steelheart, etc. were all great bands who wrote great songs. I just think that they started to see their music as a formula rather than an art form and began releasing crap just to fit with their image. However, Skid Row tried to evolve with the times on their Subhuman Race album, which in my opinion is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY underrated. There are some really, really good songs on that album. But you could see their metamorphosis. Slave to the Grind really wasn't glam insofar as it was just ass-kicking metal. I still get excited when I hear Monkey Business, whereas anything on their first album I could take or leave. It was cool when I was 10, but I swear if I have to hear Youth Gone Wild one more time I'm gonna start punching walls.

 

[ICEDEARTHFAN]

It should be said that while I don't like what the over-saturation of glam did to metal, I love many glam bands. Dokken, Skid Row, Def Leppard, White Lion, Steelheart, etc. were all great bands who wrote great songs. I just think that they started to see their music as a formula rather than an art form and began releasing crap just to fit with their image. However, Skid Row tried to evolve with the times on their Subhuman Race album, which in my opinion is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY underrated. There are some really, really good songs on that album. But you could see their metamorphosis. Slave to the Grind really wasn't glam insofar as it was just ass-kicking metal. I still get excited when I hear Monkey Business, whereas anything on their first album I could take or leave. It was cool when I was 10, but I swear if I have to hear Youth Gone Wild one more time I'm gonna start punching walls.

Slave To The Grind is and shall be forever one of my all time faves in terms of an entire album.There isn't one song I don't like on that thing.Steelheart screwed themselves from the get-go because of the first single being a ballad.Good for the chicks,but not if you want the dudes to buy your music.I personally love the guys voice,and the Steel Dragon songs he did for the "Rock Star" soundtrack are very good.I just wish they would have released "Love Ain't Easy" or something like that for their first single.Anything other than a ballad........
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the same thing doom Saigon Kick? I actually bought the album that had the ballad that was popular.It was before it's time,and that ballad was NOTHING like the rest of the album IMO.

 

[Dead Winter]

Saigon Kick was a GREAT band, and you're right...the same thing happened to them. However, they had some ass-kicking tunes as well on The Lizard. Peppermint Tribe is still one heavy as fuck riff.

However, they infused a bit of grunge into their sound on that album due to the timing of its release. Glam had already died and they needed something a little more earthy, hence the drop-tuned guitars and flannel on occasion.

But they played with everyone from Slayer to pop bands. A truly unique band with great potential.

Hostile Youth was like a perfect cross between Skid Row's Slave to the Grind album and Badmotorfinger by Soundgarden.

 

[ICEDEARTHFAN]

Saigon Kick was a GREAT band, and you're right...the same thing happened to them. However, they had some ass-kicking tunes as well on The Lizard. Peppermint Tribe is still one heavy as fuck riff.

However, they infused a bit of grunge into their sound on that album due to the timing of its release. Glam had already died and they needed something a little more earthy, hence the drop-tuned guitars and flannel on occasion.

But they played with everyone from Slayer to pop bands. A truly unique band with great potential.

Hostile Youth was like a perfect cross between Skid Row's Slave to the Grind album and Badmotorfinger by Soundgarden.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQwgvV2SNfQ

Yes,I remember this vid.I also remember they were on one of the VH1 shows like "Where Are They Now?" .The lead singer said the band fought the record label as to what they wanted the first release to be.He said they knew they were doomed if the ballad was released first.They didn't want to be grouped into the Hair Band genre.Looks like he was completely right.