Metal Reviews

I already did. Why should I bother to streamline it and water it down into a few short sentences just so that you might understand it? If you can quote my entire post for your reply, the least you can do is actually read it.



Why? From who?

EDIT: Post removed, I honestly can't be arsed to get bogged down in all this.

No offense Tyrion, but I read your whole post and it doesn't make much sense. I got the impression that you're trying to argue that it doesn't matter if metal lasts or not, but what does all of the other stuff about taking the good with the bad, clone bands, and metal becoming mainstream have to do with that?

I think he's saying that for metal to continue or become mainstream, it can only get watered down; therefore we shouldn't ever want a band to be as big as Metallica was. But I think it kind of fails because for every In Flame or CoF failure of a band, there are just as many awesome acts like Nunslaughter and Akercocke that continue to make good albums.

And a lot of the points he brought up can be answered with the fact that people just like variety and something new to listen to. I could listen to Judas Priest for 168 hours straight and enjoy it but it doesn't mean I necessarily want to.

Is it wrong that more people gets exposed to the genre?

I think his point was that a Metal band becoming big will ruin it for the other bands. Which is silly, as we've been in this situation before in the early nineties, when the underground Metal scene was at its best...

I agree with whoever said metal, and especially extreme metal, is too young to predict. How can modern listeners be more wimpy than in the 80s with all the success of the Dillinger Escape Plan, for instance? They'd not have made it in the 80s...

I had a reply I was working on to your questions (everyone), but I just don't have the time right now to finish it and edit it so that it doesn't wind up just further confusing what I said earlier. To be honest, I think all the questions or rebuttals that have come up since were already addressed in what I said earlier, but they may not seem very clear.

Briefly though, I will try to answer a couple things:

First, it does matter whether metal persists or not, and not only to just those who want it to last. Those who do want metal to last, however, need to, in my opinion, come to understand what that desire fully means. And perhaps most especially, it should be noted that a continuation of metal in no way guarantees a continuation of "good" music.

I asked whether people wanted to see metal continue as a serious question. Additionally, I'm interested in the real reasons why people say "yes" or "no". Saying it's because you want good music is irrelevant and null though. If you want good music or you want more metal, that's okay, but don't imply a necessary connection between the two. There is none.

The desire for variety is a separate argument from the desire for something "new". At this point, there are plenty of metal albums to satisfy a sense for variety (as well as countless non-metal albums). Consider that variety can be little more than a statistic to some, and wanting variety for the sake of variety is arguably just a meaningless trend. ... "Newness" blurs the lines a little bit because you should consider whether something is actually new or just something recycled and re-packaged. The longer a genre persists, the more it gravitates to the latter and the more the pool of the average grows into an ocean. I personally think the occasional gems and moments of innovation would exist regardless of whether or not the genre itself really persists. In fact, an active desire for any genre's persistence may serve only to hinder the art, particularly art that defies a genre's conditions, instead promoting an ever larger sea of averageness. This loosely relates to the suppression of exploration and art in music and media already in place on a much broader level.

You have to step back and look at why, specifically, you want it to persist. Not wanting to listen to Judas Priest for 168 hours at a time really isn't the answer.

I can't address metal_xxx's comment briefly, sorry. It's not really a question of right and wrong per se.

And no, Zad, that wasn't my point. However, I can't settle on a good and proper way to explain it right now. ... It's especially difficult because I don't really think a metal band can make it big right now. But, yes, I do think Metallica may have had a hand in that...

I hope this post kind of helps, but it probably doesn't. Traptunderice is sorta on the right track, but not quite. Mainly, I'm not trying to tell you what you should want, I'm just trying to illustrate some of the deeper motivations and ramifications that come with the position of wanting metal to persist.

I think I got what you're saying from that sentence. :X

Personally I just hope that each year theres at least 1-3 albums I can place among my all time favourites. Since metal (and related genres like punk/hardcore and rock) is my favourite, I guess it means I want people to keep making it. It's more a pesonal thing than anything applicable to a whole scene or genre though.

Dude, I'm not surprised at all. I get it all the time. Maiden is my favourite band and it pisses me off when someone actually asks "Who the hell is Iron Maiden?". What pisses me off even further is that these people are so called metalheads and the only metal they listen to is the nu metal and all the shock/goth bands.

Fortunately the underground scene here is more towards old school material so all the folks I hang out with know who the real legends are.

There's this bastard I know who claims to be a metalhead and he impressed me with his collection of CD's, mostly stuff post 2000. I dislike him a lot cos he's more of a poser in my eyes. He dresses up like a hip hop mafucker and clubs at the hottest clubs in town (that isn't a big problem but here in Malaysia, metalheads stay away from clubbing and any club going metalheads are deemed sellouts and exiled for good). What shocked me the most is that he actually said that he can't bear to listen to old school metal especially traditional heavy metal cos the vocals are just too gay and horrible. WTF?!

You shouldn't be surprised though. I've had similar situations. If this guy hasn't heard of Iron Maiden, you can forget about asking him about Sodom.

They should find it on thier own. Responsibility to the responsible. Fuck 'em if they don't have the resources to discover new music on thier own.

No it won't, not any more. not with labels like SPV and Locomotive in operation. I don't think those guys care about selling a million albums. They understand that consistent sales pay the bills, not =releasing 20 bad albums hoping one will have a hit and sell a million. They are smart business men who love metal that understand that having thier label on a record signifies quality.

well... I know how do you feel about him. But picture this. Small provincial town it haves less than 100,000 people. It haves several clubs and in almost all they're playing serbian new componed folk! (exept one or two)aaaargh! So where should I go! Ok sometimes I hang out with other metalheads so we meet in a spaces where bands have reversals and jam, usually this end with a police intervention because were making too much noise. Or when someone calls police because of anything first thing that police does is to arrest few metalheads and then ask questions( I got arrested that way too; actually I hit undercover policeman with a traffic sign, I didn't knew that was a cop.) So becfause of matter of my own security I sometimes go to club(s) (the one that is NOT playing serbian folk) SO what do you have to say about that!

showmaster you are croatian right? I remember croatian police being the worst! They'd fine you for anything stupid especially if you are italian but ive seen that happening to basically everyone...

I'm sorry, I though Dethklok were already bigger than Metallica

I think in regards to the question is it a case of bigger or better than Metallica? There are countless bands who are better than Metallica who haven't had the commercial success, but that's down to either not having the right PR, not coming from the USA (sorry I sound like I'm really bashing the States at the moment, I don't mean to) or the time wasn't right for them. For example if Nevermore had released Dead Heart in a Dead World in 1994, then they could have struck gold because they are so much more of a radio friendly sound than Sepultura, Pantera or the 'Head.

I have no doubt there will be a band bigger than Metallica. Korn, SOAD and Slipknot were bigger than the Metallica of the late 90s/early 00s, but for the most part they've either disbanded or the novelty has worn off their sound. They didn't evolve. Metallica, despite how much you love or hate everything post Master of Puppets, did try to evolve hence why they kept a following. Look at U2 for example, they kept their sound 'up to date' for all of their career and I guess they're arguably the biggest band on the planet today.

Mastodon and Machine Head have the biggest chance of succeeding Metallica as the biggest as long as they don't compromise their sound too much with their next releases. Trivium & Avenged Sevenfold (Notice they're all US bands I mention for the top ) add to the formula because when Metallica were becoming the biggest band in the early 1990s, they had stiff competition from Megadeth, Slayer & Anthrax in the 1980s, so they had to raise their game. That competition was healthy, brought an interest into the scene and everyone had their favourite but still supported the others all the same.

Sure Metal may be fragmented into too many sub-genres and you can debate whether any future mainstream Metal release will or won't be a dilluted version of classic Metal, but I must admit I enjoy a huge amount of modern bands today. I am old enough to remember the influx of thrash in the 80s and it was exciting. I could say it will never get any better than that time, but then I think about the last few releases from, say to give a few examples: Mastodon, Machine Head, Nevermore, Strapping Young Lad and Opeth. They've all produced some of the best Metal albums around and they're all on the cusp of breaking through to that bigger audience (yes even the Lad & Opeth!).

Yes I'm Croatian

Are Trivium & Avenged Sevenfold really that big nowadays? In terms of sales?

Not as huge as prime 'tallica, but they're two of the more commercially-known bands, and it wouldn't take much for either (esp. A7X) to become as big as My Chemical Romance or the like.

Urg...


Maiden is still pretty big or?

I'd say so, but they'll never be as big as they were in the 80s. Interesting that they still get mentioned fairly often in the mainstream media (over here at least) as the quintessential metal band, moreso than Priest.

I think Iced Earth could really do well...