Metal Reviews

Artists - Those choosing "artists" in this poll typically have an appreciation for musicians, with the entirety (or near entirety) of their respective catalogs offering a distinct appeal.

Albums/EPs/Compilations - Those choosing this option are more inclined to appreciate full-length releases individually, with less concern for the artist responsible. This person is more likely to have divergent opinions within a single artist's catalog.

Songs/Singles - Those choosing "songs" are less concerned with artists or releases, and more inclined to appreciate the specific elements of musical pleasure found in single tracks.

I stole this poll from rateyourmusic because I thought it was interesting.


For me it's artists. The quality of music of a band never changes much. If I love a band, I love all their albums; if I kinda like a band, I kinda like all their albums; if I don't like a band, I don't like any of their albums. Usually, the only exceptions to this if a key band member leaves or something of the like. I thought it was interesting because most people seem to focus on albums: they'll see some of a band's albums as better or worse. I almost never do this! Like lots of people were let down by Opeth's Heritage, but my reaction on listening to it is "fuck yeah, sounds like Opeth." Sometimes I feel like my ratings on RYM are kinda silly because bands like Neurosis, Protest the Hero or Nomeansno basically get 5 stars across the board.

Totally, an artist kinda guy. Bad albums kinda turn me off of entire bands as odd as that sounds. Can't think of any examples but I just don't love many artists who have a single bad release if not more.

Artists artists artists...always baffles me when people use anything else to find music on their iPod lol

All three for much different situations.

Sometimes a loose group of people that always work together or tour together becomes a type of symbol for the music, too. Pantera, Skid Row, Alice In Chains, Prong and Danzig seem like they don't have much in common but all those bands toured together at some point so they know each other very well. That's maybe a bit beyond the musical aspect of it. We all know the massive machine that puts out Italian Power Metal with about 10 people in 5 bands. Some bands are the same band as before with a different name. Could you imagine a major band slowly migrating to another one in the US? I hope they are doing what Yngwie does and just plays anything they want.

Great songs make great albums, and great albums make great bands. A band that is not on TV or anything else can only be known by their albums, but a heavily touring band without much of a catalogue would be known more for their songs.

Genres are useless unless you have a very narrow interest in music and everything is pretty specific to it's three deep subgenre.

Bands like Ulver kind of break the artist mold for me, but 99% of the time it's by artist. Even bands that once created metal but no longer do, their music still retains some essence that would allow it to be compatible with a metal mood.

Has to be by artist for me. As much as some of us like to micro-analyze the differences between albums from a particular band, that artist should retain a fundamental essence through all their recordings which makes everything at least good, if not excellent. Very rarely will a band with a proven track record just suddenly release a trash recording, unless, of course, they make a dramatic stylistic change like Morbid Angel did.

I'm with the Emperor. It's definitely the artist for me, too.

Artist.

'Individual Thought Patterns' was my first Death album and my favorite. The Chuck-Andy-Gene-Steve collaboration is definitely an all time best imo.