Metal Reviews

Jesus Christ, I need to make a list of threads to stay away from.

I do kind of regret bringing it up in the first place but what can I say, that was my initial reaction. At least I'm not alone on this.

Even if you didnt bring it up im sure others would have as well. Personally I agree with you about this.

i do listen to other musical genre other than metal, but I come here to read reviews about metal bands...otherwise why call this website metalreviews.com if we will get reviews like this on an almost regular basis?

You guys might have a point if Radiohead was the only band reviewed this week, if nearly all the rest of the reviews weren't metal. But they were! If you come here to read reviews ov metal, then read them, and ignore the odd non-metal that creeps in what, once a month or so at the most? It's amazing watching the shrieking hostility at this, a single review out of ten - we "claim" to be a metal site because that's exactly what we are, and if once in a while we choose to take a look at a non-metal album from a metal viewpoint, what's the harm?

See here lies the problem. If you don't want bands like Radiohead reviewed then we can't have reviews for bands like Rush and Pink Floyd. Their not metal too.

We have to check our hypocrisy at the door.

Radiohead are basically Tool for mainstream hipsters, plenty of metalheads listen to them.

I'd copy-paste that ten times, but I'm not trying to shit up a thread. Anyways, you honestly think one Radiohead review means we have to change the name of the site? Come on!

I love this thread

They were the only band reviewed by that particular reviewer this week, and he could have used his time and energy to review a metal band instead. We don't have to read the non-metal reviews, but the people writing the reviews could instead be making the site more metal rather than less. They could be improving the site by filling in the gaps in your archives, or introducing us to a newer band that IS metal.

I personally only listen to metal, absolutely nothing else. All genres of metal, but metal only. Pink Floyd doesn't belong here either. Some of Rush's music is arguably metallic so there is a case for including them. Basically anything that isn't included in the Encyclopaedia Metallum should be kept out.

Well, speaking as a well-balanced gentleman of proud ancestral stock, I listen to all kinds of stuff, and think that Pink Floyd are more worthy of praise from metalheads than a lot of metal bands. You should check them out!

And come on, the EM is hardly a great yardstick considering that they don't include Killing Joke or Soulfly, to name just two.

C'mon people! What is your proplem with these nonmetal reviews? Are you afraid that they will creep up on you and infect you with an open mind? You don't have to read them if you don't want to. And personaly I think reviewing nonmetal makes this site more metal and 99 % of the reviews are of metal. But mayby it's just me with my open mind and a wide taste in music who finds these reviews refreshing.

This is a good point. However I think that you underestimate how much time goes into making sure that a viewpoint is fair and balanced. I have more metal albums that are lined up to be reviewed, but I haven't listened to them enough to give them a 100% fair review. Considering that Radiohead is not only one of my favorite bands but one that announced the new album only days before, they naturally took up 90% of my listening time.

Now I know, I could have cut down on my own personal enjoyment and replaced it with something metal that I didn't want to listen to, but that wouldn't be fair to me and it wouldn't be fair to the band that I am listening to even though I would rather be listening to the new Radiohead.

At that point, I can either write the Radiohead review, half ass a metal review that I don't want to do, or not do a review at all. I'm sure plenty would rather not see the review at all, but that would not be fair to the minority that do enjoy seeing a wider array of music on the site.

That might sound pretentious and I might sound like a fan boy, but what can I say other than that I sometimes come off like a pretentious fanboy. If Radiohead had announced their album months in advance like most bands do, there would have been more time to prepare and to make sure that I balance this out with a metal review. But they didn't.

Thanks for the kind words, bambou, nice to find like-minded people.

If people are so uppity about it I can do about 12 thrash reviews that'd all consist of one liners, comical pictures and a score range of 20-63.

*cringe* oh god, I can imagine the reaction already. The fat one from Korn criticising John Myung's bass technique would probably go down better with some.

Okay so tell me this: Will you start reviewing Hip-Hop albums? I'm a metalhead but I also love Hip-Hop so according to you that's fair game for this website.

But it's metal right?! Some people need to lighten up a little, I'm amazed my Tenhi and Hellsongs reviews didn't get pounced on either given some of the statements being flung about.



This calls for Body Count .

Me personally? Maybe, it depends on the album - something by Dalek is heavy and experimental enough to appeal to metalheads with open minds. The site as a whole? Doubtful, given the cultural hatred of rap by most metalheads (with good reason in a lot of cases, being fair). I think you're being a little unfair by throwing Radiohead, who are most definitely a progressive band if arguably not prog rock, in with hip-hop, the vast vast majority of which is people talking over loops of other people's music. Clearly reviewing Radiohead and Pink Floyd today does not mean that the same reasons can be used to review, say, Lady Gaga or Wu Tang tomorrow. As amusing as that would be to watch...

edit - haha, forgot I reviewed Body Count. There's your answer, Mets, it's been done already!

Nah, wasn't directed at you Goatster! I agree with you on the rap comments, but for some things like prog stuff I'd have thought that it'd have gone down a tad better. Someone should review The Firebird or something similar that isn't metal and see what sort of discourse follow from it. It'd be interesting to say the least.

I'm just saying there's obviously some kind of line that is drawn when choosing what to review here. I think a band like Radiohead is outside that line. Saying that metalheads listen to them doesn't justify a review here in my opinion unless there is some sort of concrete relationship to metal, which frankly I don't see.

Pink Floyd? I can absolutely see why it would be reviewed here considering the close relationship between prog rock and prog metal. So there's obviously a great deal of influence there. I just don't see that with Radiohead (and have never considered them to be prog but that's another debate).