Metal Reviews

Uh... I don't know how to answer this in words adequately.

So:

:?

Or, in words: What the hell are you on?

What do bands that influenced a genre have to do with anything? Simple question.

Just because Faith No More came up with the idea of adding rap to metal doesn't make them a crappy band that plays boringly loud guitars and whines about how angry their pleasant life in the suburbs is.

Just because you inspired people to create a crappy genre doesn't make you a member of that genre yourself. I think that's what Eyesore is trying to say, although I won't put words into his mouth. =P

That about does it.

I'd like to take this time to say that not every nu-metal band is crappy......hello?......hello?......anyone listening......hello?

I don't see Chaos A.D. as a nu-metal album. Roots on the other hand is about as nu-metal as it gets.

Name one nu-metal band that sounds like Sepultura did on Roots? And don't say Soulfly because they're not nu-metal either.

A band called Skindred that is basically Soulfly + Limp Bizkit.

Sorry. Try again. Skindred don't sound like Soulfly or Limp Bizkit.

Soulfly.

For one, I like Faith No More.

Chaos AD had nu-metal elements, such as less riffs per song (exceptions abound, like Biotech is Godzilla), a greater focus on groove, and that stupid trick where they drop out the guitars and focus on the drums and vocals was used a lot. The vox were focused on quite a bit in that album.

Helmet invented the nu-metal stylings of hard start-stop riffing, but they mixed in far more real rage than any other nu-metal band did.

Nu-metal bands all took their cues from those four albums, and that makes those four bands at least partly nu-metal, except for Faith No More.

This argument is idiotic. Calling a band nu-metal before "nu-metal" existed in the mainstream is stupid. You're lumping so many different styles of music into the category of nu-metal it's ridiculous! It seems to me that if it isn't a clearly defined style it's nu-metal to you.

That's akin to saying we can't analyze things of the past in the context of the present.

Look at it this way: When Black Sabbath was around, the term 'Doom Metal' did not exist. We have now come to define a lot of Black Sabbath's music as Doom Metal.

Though the term nu-metal did not exist at the time of Chaos AD and what-have-you, we can certainly use it to define music of the past that pioneered the style.

And your last sentence is what people call a straw man, logical fallacy.

I consider songs like Tyrant and Stained Class by Judas Priest to contain thrash elements, yet, thrash wasn't a term used at the point. Can one therefore not say that Tyrant has some thrash elements in it? And DM has basically won this debate. He listed ways in which Chaos A.D. and other albums contain nu metal elements. Instead of refuting his arguement, you basically said "that's stupid" and attacked the person instead of the arguement.

There are endless examples for this.

Like, say, Helter Skelter by The Beatles. I think of that as the first metal song (just me thinking), but 'metal' was a term used only to apply to steel and iron and what-have-you at the time. That doesn't mean I can't call it metal.

You like to argue, huh? You can say certain bands influenced certain styles all you want. I never said you couldn't, I said it has no relevance. You're trying to convince people that the new In Flames belongs lumped alongside bands like Spineshank, Coal Chamber, 40 Below Summer, Lifer, Systematic, Sugarcoma, and so on! That is the original argument and it's flat out wrong.

I kinda liked Candiria, and they're sort of what I would call numetal

Yes, I like to argue.

Okay, congrats on ignoring all my other relevant points. Hey, ho, you don't argue so good, man. Drop in and drop out and ignore what doesn't help you and shit on what would if you understood it better. Makes me feel like yellow. All yellow. If it was all yellow, I'd feel like that.

Flat out wrong, you-say? Hey, guess what: No, you're wrong! That's the kinda playground-cockamamie-sillycrap-nonpoint-yadda-yadda-goddamn-yadda yer trying to pass off here as serious arguement, and it's akin to randomness ridiculousness insipidity maniac-ness (which ain't a word but it's been heard), see what you create here, is nothing.

Breathe in, deep, breathe out deeper, look in the mirror, say to yourself 'I hate black metal, but like Drowning Pool,' then breathe in and breathe out deeper again and think normal like a normal person, like a real child. Can you see just what I want?

You breathin', KenSoreEye? You breathin' like the fear o' Jeeeeeeeesus was in da room right with you? You breeeeeathin' like you are afraid o' to-morrow an' the day right after?

You breeeeeeathin', EyeKenSore?

I ignored your "points" because they have no relevance to anything we're discussing, you're trying to spin the argument in your favor by adding all these "nu" argument points. And I have no interest in arguing music with someone who wants to change history to apply to his/her views. Sorry.

Plus, I swore off arguing on the internet a long time ago. I have no interest in arguing YOUR interpretation of what nu-metal is and isn't. Your knowledge of nu-metal is virtually non-existant, this is clear by your incessant inaccuracies in this thread as a whole. Educate yourself and maybe we can have an intelligent discussion, but I have no interest in arguing with you. If you think you're right, no problem, you're right.

I hope you don't have an aneurysm when you see the reviews for Come Clarity.

Dude, considering that many people agree with DM, you can't just say
"your points were out of context and you don't know anything!" Because they were valid points. If they aren't, then you should have no trouble disproving them right? But really, if all you keep on doing is saying: "NO! YOU'RE WRONG. I KNOW WHAT NU METAL AND EVERYTHING IS. YOU DON'T." Try using arguement, son.