Metal Reviews

Newest and Best Metal Reviews!
FAQ :: Search :: Members :: Groups :: Register
Login
It is currently Sat May 24, 2025 12:28 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3   
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 6:46 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6519
Location: USoA
Masshole McDinglenuts wrote:
Thrashtildeth wrote:
Masshole McDinglenuts wrote:
Thrashtildeth wrote:
Masshole McDinglenuts wrote:
emperorblackdoom wrote:
So you are saying thrash is a stagnant genre? I agree.

Oh snap!

Well, I wasn't saying that, but I'd agree with it. =)

:mad:

Also, imagine an emoticon shaking it's fist angrily.

Dude, I love thrash, but it's a completely non-evolving genre.


I have to disagree. It has actually evolved in many different directions, more so than any other metal genre. The only reason people think that it is stagnant, is because the various things it has evolved into have all got different sub-genre names now. We only refer to "old-school" thrash AS thrash these days, but that is really not the case. There is practically no extreme metal currently existing that doesn't owe it's basic framework to Thrash, if you trace it back far enough. Death Metal, obviously. The entire framework is Thrash. Black Metal, to a lesser extent, but it's still there, especially if you trace it back to the late 80s. Thrash is also directly responsible for most the post 2000 genres like Metalcore. Bands like Trivium and Shadows Fall are basically an evolution of Thrash (a shit one, but that's a discussion for another day).

The way I see it, it's at least as much development as what Death and Black metal have been subject to. The only difference is that in naming the offshoots of those genres, in many cases, the word "Black" or "Death" has been retained in the name, like "post black metal" or "ambient black metal" or "brutal death metal" or "Deathgrind" This creates a direct connection to those genres, so you can still call them death or black metal. You could just as easily refer to Death Metal as "Downtuned, Distorted Thrash Metal" or you could refer to Metalcore as "Modern, groovy thrash metal" or some shit. The connection between thrash metal and those genres is just as strong as the connection between Death Metal, Black Metal and their respective offshoots.

Even if you disagree with all of that, which would be fair enough, whatever, bands like Vektor and Exmortus and Hexen are showing that there is still room for growth and evolution within the genre that we still refer to as Thrash.

My point, then, after all that blabbering: it is a genre that has evolved as much as any other sub genre.

I can't disagree with this. From my previous post I had deleted the line "those that have evolved are no longer thrash," so I get it.

But for what is considered thrash today, I really don't find it so different from the thrash of old. "Stagnant" is probably not the correct word to describe the genre, though.


Conservative would probably be a better word, I agree. And I see the larger point of your post, Bar, without agreeing on the idea of thrash's indispensability to black metal.

When I think conservative genres, death metal appears almost as conservative in my mind, but I'm also aware of several bands in the genre that do try new things. Doom metal is probably aided by having a million offshots, while black metal tends to be exceedingly conservative or exceedingly unstable. And power metal I'll leave alone for now.

Thrash is generally in vogue now, and the prevalence of the retro-thrash bands and the seemingly larger number of "sacred cow" type bands in the genre as compared to others, all that produce very similar material, for better or worse, year after year, all probably contributes to the idea of a "stagnant genre".

The glut of thrash now sort of reminds me of the excess in power metal about 10 years ago or the excess of black metal and melodeath in the mid-late 90s. It will pass, and the Vektors and Hexens will remain.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 6:54 am 
Offline
Einherjar
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 1:28 am
Posts: 2419
Location: Oz
emperorblackdoom wrote:
The glut of thrash now sort of reminds me of the excess in power metal about 10 years ago or the excess of black metal and melodeath in the mid-late 90s. It will pass, and the Vektors and Hexens will remain.


I can't really argue too much against your last few points, guys. I especially agree with what I've quoted above.

With that in mind, and considering you guys didn't try to argue against what I've said, I think we now find ourselves all more or less on the same page. Wow, that was a lot quicker and more painless than I thought it would be. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 7:06 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6519
Location: USoA
Thrashtildeth wrote:
emperorblackdoom wrote:
The glut of thrash now sort of reminds me of the excess in power metal about 10 years ago or the excess of black metal and melodeath in the mid-late 90s. It will pass, and the Vektors and Hexens will remain.


I can't really argue too much against your last few points, guys. I especially agree with what I've quoted above.

With that in mind, and considering you guys didn't try to argue against what I've said, I think we now find ourselves all more or less on the same page. Wow, that was a lot quicker and more painless than I thought it would be. :)


Yeah, we suck at starting fights in comparison to the turbulent times of the past, I'm even agreeing with Ken. That Vektor listen just put me in a good mood. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 2:42 pm 
Offline
Metal King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Posts: 893
Location: new jersey
Thrashtildeth wrote:
Masshole McDinglenuts wrote:
Thrashtildeth wrote:
Masshole McDinglenuts wrote:
emperorblackdoom wrote:
So you are saying thrash is a stagnant genre? I agree.

Oh snap!

Well, I wasn't saying that, but I'd agree with it. =)

:mad:

Also, imagine an emoticon shaking it's fist angrily.

Dude, I love thrash, but it's a completely non-evolving genre.


I have to disagree. It has actually evolved in many different directions, more so than any other metal genre. The only reason people think that it is stagnant, is because the various things it has evolved into have all got different sub-genre names now. We only refer to "old-school" thrash AS thrash these days, but that is really not the case. There is practically no extreme metal currently existing that doesn't owe it's basic framework to Thrash, if you trace it back far enough. Death Metal, obviously. The entire framework is Thrash. Black Metal, to a lesser extent, but it's still there, especially if you trace it back to the late 80s. Thrash is also directly responsible for most the post 2000 genres like Metalcore. Bands like Trivium and Shadows Fall are basically an evolution of Thrash (a shit one, but that's a discussion for another day).

The way I see it, it's at least as much development as what Death and Black metal have been subject to. The only difference is that in naming the offshoots of those genres, in many cases, the word "Black" or "Death" has been retained in the name, like "post black metal" or "ambient black metal" or "brutal death metal" or "Deathgrind" This creates a direct connection to those genres, so you can still call them death or black metal. You could just as easily refer to Death Metal as "Downtuned, Distorted Thrash Metal" or you could refer to Metalcore as "Modern, groovy thrash metal" or some shit. The connection between thrash metal and those genres is just as strong as the connection between Death Metal, Black Metal and their respective offshoots.

Even if you disagree with all of that, which would be fair enough, whatever, bands like Vektor and Exmortus and Hexen are showing that there is still room for growth and evolution within the genre that we still refer to as Thrash.

My point, then, after all that blabbering: it is a genre that has evolved as much as any other sub genre.
This was very well said. I would add there are a lot of really good black thrash bands too. That incorporate black and thrash very well. Plus the first wave of BM was largely rooted in thrash as well. Bands like venom. The closest thing to true thrash today unfortunately is trivium and shadowsfall like thrashtildeth said. But all the influence is there.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:05 pm 
Offline
Metal Slave

Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 1:33 am
Posts: 88
Location: 00100111001110
Am I a bad person for not liking this album? I loved formation but this one seems....boring?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:38 pm 
Offline
Metal King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Posts: 893
Location: new jersey
hottaco wrote:
Am I a bad person for not liking this album? I loved formation but this one seems....boring?
Not at all a bad person. Opinions are like a**holes. Everybody got one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:35 pm 
Offline
Ist Krieg
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:15 pm
Posts: 13700
Location: Cincinnati OH
hottaco wrote:
Am I a bad person for not liking this album? I loved formation but this one seems....boring?
Totally agree, my man.

As for Bar's point, I would agree, but what I would want to hone in on is how death metal is still being pushed by bands like Portal or Ulcerate and black metal by bands like DsO, Dodecahedron but also Krallice or Panopticon. Nobody is doing that in thrash and that's where I find the problem with thrash metal. It's a form of stagnation or conservatism, but to think that the only way to push thrash metal is to play death metal or black metal then I am not interested in it. My initial hypothesis might be how those genres are willing to embrace the dissonant and ugly in a way which thrash metal still has its foot to much in the ol' heavy metal category to really become something new.

_________________
http://www.last.fm/user/traptunderice


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:47 pm 
Offline
Ist Krieg
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:40 am
Posts: 13758
Location: Canada
(Caution: hyperbole) my problem with thrash is that it sounds like the bands are all writing the same song over and over again with different riffs and a different singer.

I listened to a song from this because of all the fuss and it made me sad because I could tell the riffs were cool but I didn't feel any desire to listen to the full album or even the full song. Riffs just ain't what they used to be :-(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 7:36 pm 
Offline
Ist Krieg

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6519
Location: USoA
snake wrote:
Plus the first wave of BM was largely rooted in thrash as well. Bands like venom.


Yeah...but big deal, the first wave is an evolutionary dead end. The second wave has 100 times the influence.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 7:42 pm 
Offline
Metal King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Posts: 893
Location: new jersey
emperorblackdoom wrote:
snake wrote:
Plus the first wave of BM was largely rooted in thrash as well. Bands like venom.


Yeah...but big deal, the first wave is an evolutionary dead end. The second wave has 100 times the influence.
I understand that. But there wouldn't of been a second wave without the first wave.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 7:45 pm 
Offline
Ist Krieg

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6519
Location: USoA
snake wrote:
emperorblackdoom wrote:
snake wrote:
Plus the first wave of BM was largely rooted in thrash as well. Bands like venom.


Yeah...but big deal, the first wave is an evolutionary dead end. The second wave has 100 times the influence.
I understand that. But there wouldn't of been a second wave without the first wave.


Bah, I suppose. You win this round, snake.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 8:07 pm 
Offline
Ist Krieg

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6519
Location: USoA
traptunderice wrote:
hottaco wrote:
Am I a bad person for not liking this album? I loved formation but this one seems....boring?
Totally agree, my man.

As for Bar's point, I would agree, but what I would want to hone in on is how death metal is still being pushed by bands like Portal or Ulcerate and black metal by bands like DsO, Dodecahedron but also Krallice or Panopticon. Nobody is doing that in thrash and that's where I find the problem with thrash metal. It's a form of stagnation or conservatism, but to think that the only way to push thrash metal is to play death metal or black metal then I am not interested in it. My initial hypothesis might be how those genres are willing to embrace the dissonant and ugly in a way which thrash metal still has its foot to much in the ol' heavy metal category to really become something new.


Most of my favorite thrash bands since the sacred cow days have been proggy thrash aka Watchtower, Coroner, Mekong Delta and now Vektor. So to add on to your point, "pushing" thrash metal by playing prog metal.

But does a genre need a Krallice or Dodechedron to push the boundaries? I felt black metal was evolving just fine (or better) at a slower pace in the middle of the last decade with the Negura Bungets in E. Europe and if you are feeling America, WIITR.

I think it is a matter of degree: look at Drudkh in black metal. Seen as a standard bearer for conservatism, but in thrash a band that released "Microcosmos" or "A Handful of Stars" would hardly be seen as conservative. So I don't think Thrash needs Krallices, just more Vektors.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:41 am 
Offline
Einherjar
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 1:28 am
Posts: 2419
Location: Oz
noodles wrote:
(Caution: hyperbole) my problem with thrash is that it sounds like the bands are all writing the same song over and over again with different riffs and a different singer.


Hyperbole aside, I think that to an extent this is caused by a lack of familiarity. For example, I find most Black Metal to sound pretty similar, but I accept that this is because I'm not really drawn to the sound of it, so I don't have the patience required to familiarise myself with the various nuances of each distinct band or album. With that in mind, of course it's all going to sound like bashing drums and shreiking vocals.

When I first started listening to thrash, I thought a lot of it sounded exactly the same as well. But I happened to like that sound so much that I kept listening to more and more albums until I knew many different albums quite intimately. After however many years it's been now, although I can still see the similarities between bands, I have also come to appreciate the many distinctions, and the individual strengths of particular acts.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:15 am 
Offline
Metal King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Posts: 893
Location: new jersey
Thrashtildeth wrote:
noodles wrote:
(Caution: hyperbole) my problem with thrash is that it sounds like the bands are all writing the same song over and over again with different riffs and a different singer.


Hyperbole aside, I think that to an extent this is caused by a lack of familiarity. For example, I find most Black Metal to sound pretty similar, but I accept that this is because I'm not really drawn to the sound of it, so I don't have the patience required to familiarise myself with the various nuances of each distinct band or album. With that in mind, of course it's all going to sound like bashing drums and shreiking vocals.

When I first started listening to thrash, I thought a lot of it sounded exactly the same as well. But I happened to like that sound so much that I kept listening to more and more albums until I knew many different albums quite intimately. After however many years it's been now, although I can still see the similarities between bands, I have also come to appreciate the many distinctions, and the individual strengths of particular acts.
I think this goes for any extreme music style. It takes time to truly "get it". Think about the average non metal listening person trying to sit threw TRVE BM. They would probably kill themselves. I'm so accustomed to BM that it's kind of pretty in its chaoticness. :dio:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:46 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:40 am
Posts: 13758
Location: Canada
That's a good point, thrash.

I still want to say I'm right though :-(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:04 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:15 pm
Posts: 13700
Location: Cincinnati OH
emperorblackdoom wrote:
I think it is a matter of degree: look at Drudkh in black metal. Seen as a standard bearer for conservatism, but in thrash a band that released "Microcosmos" or "A Handful of Stars" would hardly be seen as conservative. So I don't think Thrash needs Krallices, just more Vektors.
Point taken...

And totally agree with Noodles about Testament having that cool riff without leaving any desire to continue listening.

_________________
http://www.last.fm/user/traptunderice


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:01 pm 
Offline
Metal King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 7:16 am
Posts: 1596
Location: Top of the food chain in Calgary, Canada
I've been listening to this quite a bit lately, and while not quite up to their last one, it takes a more melodic approach which I've always loved in thrash when done well. Chuck at times does sound a lot like an old Hetfield. I'd agree with the 80-85 score range.

And hoooooly sheeet Testament brings out the hate in some people.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 5:01 pm 
Offline
The Commish
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 7:46 am
Posts: 14920
Location: CAVEMAN
Here's my pointless comment:

I could play a non-thrasher Exumers Possessed by Fire, Darkness' Death Squad, and Deathrows Raging Steel and they wouldn't be able to to tell the difference. But to an experience thrasher like myself I can instantly tell the difference between each. So yeah, to you guys it all sounds the same to, to me(us) it's all completely different. But then I find most grind or black or power metal bands all sound the same.

And Testament sounds like Metallica, and Metallica sucks.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:25 pm 
Offline
Metal Lord
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:23 am
Posts: 474
I'm surprised so many of you think this is worse than Formation. I found that album to be good but nowhere near as good as the new one. To me, Formation was an album that's good while playing but not an album I reach for when wanting to hear some Testament.

I've spun the new one way more than Formation already.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:43 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:40 am
Posts: 13758
Location: Canada
I wasn't saying that thrash bands all sound the same. (Overkill's singer and riffing style are obviously different from Artillery's or whatever.) More that they're structured in a similar way. Different riffs and lyrics but the same hook, or something. Now that I'm thinking about it more it's basically a feature of all genres of music so I'll shut up.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3   


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group