Depending on your ear, modern metal isn't very "heavy"

[Koko Ricky]

2 hours ago, stru said:

Slayer is a prime example of noise that just isn't practical anymore. 

 

I also don't think it's safe to compare Cannibal Corpse and Black Sabbath. They are two WAY different styles of metal.

 

Anyway, newer metal seems to have a wider range of frequencies that are usually mastered really well. With newer technology comes better sound.

The Slayer comment is a little...odd. There's really nothing difficult to distinguish in their recordings. Their straightforward use of distortion and power chords makes it pretty harmonically conventional. I'm not sure if I agree about newer metal having a wider range of frequencies. I find that the bass is still usually buried and even when it's audible, the actual bass frequencies are usually really low in the mix; metal for some reason is really fixated on mids.

 

EDIT: I do agree that Cannibal and Sabbath are different beasts, but the example was showcasing how much the production and timbre of metal has changed, from one extreme to the other.

[kb1]

4 hours ago, stru said:

I may be the odd one out here, but I actually prefer newer metal over the older stuff. Sound quality is a big part of it, but I'm also not a huge fan of the 80s-style metal voices we hear in Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, etc.. Slayer is a prime example of noise that just isn't practical anymore. 

"Practical." "Metal." hmmm.

 

4 hours ago, stru said:

I also don't think it's safe to compare Cannibal Corpse and Black Sabbath. They are two WAY different styles of metal.

 

Anyway, newer metal seems to have a wider range of frequencies that are usually mastered really well.

"Wider range of frequencies..." Yet, you link to songs with singers with a range of about an octave.

"New metal?". Don't blaspheme the sacred name of Heavy Metal like that. Pick a new substance. I'm ok with "Plastic".

 

4 hours ago, stru said:

With newer technology comes better sound.

No technology's going to keep a band from being stinky. Dookies stink no matter how much you scrub 'em, after all.

 

Speaking of dookies, why do the singers sound like they haven't fed the shit sharks in weeks? Do us all a favor, and push one out, already.

 

I choose analog and good over whiney, constipated, entitled children who tune down their instruments to an open chord so they don't have to actually learn how to fret, mixed digitally. They could "tune-up" but that would be out of the singer's range

 

4 hours ago, stru said:

Mind you I haven't pulled either of these tracks into Audacity to compare, but there is a lot of music out there that will have similar waveforms to Black Sabbath. It just may not be what we know as "metal" today because a lot of people just want fucking blast beats, pig squeals, and breakdowns.

No, what people want is Metal.

 

That ain't Metal. This is Metal:

If you don't think so, keep clicking until you do. There is room for opinions, but this is just plain indisputable scientific fact.

 

This is Metal:

Stop getting confused.

 

 

 

 

[UglyStru]

@kb1 dude all I'm saying is that metal has changed, grow up. All music has changed. Hip-hop has changed, pop music has changed, even jazz has changed throughout the years. You can keep clinging to the old stuff as long as you want, that's fine. I can't tell you what you can and can't like. But there are a lot of fantastic metal bands (or subgenres of metal) that still make really fucking good music. Just because it doesn't sound like Black Sabbath doesn't mean they're shitty bands. That's blasphemous. 

[kb1]

7 hours ago, stru said:

@kb1 dude all I'm saying is that metal has changed, grow up. All music has changed. Hip-hop has changed, pop music has changed, even jazz has changed throughout the years. You can keep clinging to the old stuff as long as you want, that's fine. I can't tell you what you can and can't like. But there are a lot of fantastic metal bands (or subgenres of metal) that still make really fucking good music. Just because it doesn't sound like Black Sabbath doesn't mean they're shitty bands. That's blasphemous. 

What I argue is that it's not metal. Just because they have overdriven guitars and fast tempo does not allow them to throw an ugly adjective in front of the word "metal". Maybe some of it is good. But, my ear knows what it's hearing, and it doesn't sound like metal to me. Music hasn't changed. It's just that new stuff is created, and that new stuff should be named something different. Because it is different.

 

Edit: "keep clinging"? wtf is that supposed to mean? If it's good it's good. I could tell you to keep grasping for something to satisfy you, from this pile of really fucking good music - so good that you'll never cling to it. Nah, let's keep changing the music, cause it's really great fucking music.

 

To me, the bulk of stuff being called "new metal" sounds try-hard, as if the goal is not to perfect an art, instead it's like it's a pissing contest: How low can I tune, how many bpm can I shell out, just for the sake of being more edgy, regardless of the results. I miss harmony. And melody, And quiet passages. Dynamic voices. It's a shell of what once was. It's disappointing, and depressing. Metal, as I know it, kinda got passed up, which always pissed me off. And, yet, it thrived, without internet, without airplay.

 

You lost me when you dissed Iron Maiden and Priest. Kinda hard to take you seriously after that.

Edited August 21, 2017 by kb1

[UglyStru]

@kb1 but there are different types of metal and subgenres that were built upon that. Whether you like it or not, it's a type of metal. It may not be your pure heroin-binge metal like Maiden, but it's still metal. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music#Recent_styles:_mid.E2.80.93late_2000s_and_2010s

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Djent

[[McD] James]

Heroin-binge metal? Really? 

[DesecratorJ]

lol at Djent

[NeedHealth]

Horse-tranquilizer grindcore anyone?

[Mr. Freeze]

Metal elitism is pathetic. Metalsucks put it best

 

Quote

The root of the problem is that bands are only considered “REAL metal” if they are either old, or sound like an old band. So yes, there are tons of new metal bands, but all of them sound like old bands, and none of them are commercially successful because it is 2015 and nobody gives a shit about ur dumb band that sounds like JUDAS PRIEST meets EXCITER.

 

The only successful, newer “metal” bands are actually bands who were once written off as “garbage scene bands”: VEIL OF MAYA, BORN OF OSIRIS, CHELSEA GRIN, WHITECHAPEL, SUISIDE SILENSE, THE BLACK DAHLIA MURDER, and so forth. This is a good start, because these bands bring in a new, younger fanbase and that is key to keeping the genre alive.

 

But we cannot stop here. The next step is to admit the obvious, and start calling AVENGED SEVENFOLD, BLACK VEIL BRIDES, FFDP, BRING ME THE HORIZON and ASKING ALEXANDRIA “metal.” First of all, any normal person already thinks of these bands as metal so u just sound like a pedantic dick when u say otherwise. Second, these bands are fucking huge and can serve as a gateway to “Real Metal” bands. How many kids do u think checked out DEATH because Oli Sykes wears their shirts all the time?

 

I am not saying that u have to LIKE any of these bands, all u have to do is include them under the umbrella of “metal” for the good of the genre.

 

 

[kb1]

7 hours ago, stru said:

@kb1 but there are different types of metal and subgenres that were built upon that. Whether you like it or not, it's a type of metal. It may not be your pure heroin-binge metal like Maiden, but it's still metal. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music#Recent_styles:_mid.E2.80.93late_2000s_and_2010s

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Djent

No, the music starts sucking when they binge...

 

4 hours ago, Mr. Freeze said:

Metal elitism is pathetic. Metalsucks put it best

 

 

 

Oh, liking metal is pathetic? Cause dude on internet says so. Ok. I'm glad you're a "normal person", and you speak for all of them. If that's true, why can't you classify music? And, wtf is wrong with a band being "old"?

 

Here's the way I see it: "New Metal" is to Doom 3 as "Metal" is to Doom/Doom II. They have similar names, but they're not the same - at all. Doom III may have nice graphics, and cool effects everywhere. But, it ain't Doom - not really.

 

Source ports are like putting remastered Metal on CDs. Doom/Metal are basically already good as-is - they don't need to be changed into something they're not.

 

I'm all for innovation. Yes, young people: Make something new that's awesome. But, no, you don't get to shit on the pioneers, and at the same time take their name to somehow make your creation more legitimate.

 

I don't "say otherwise", and I could care less if you think I'm being a dick for stating the blatantly obvious. A band being huge simply means that the radio has played them enough for them to stick in people's heads - it has never been an indication of skill or quality.

 

The key to keeping the genre alive is certainly not calling people dicks for holding bands accountable when they claim to be something they are not, and it's certainly not pissing on the bands that created the genre to begin with.

 

For the "good of the genre", you keep the genre alive by following in the footsteps of the "old guys". You don't get to be called Metal by putting bass strings on your guitars, kicking your singer in the nuts repeatedly, and telling your drummer to play "Track and Field" with his feet. You spend years perfecting your craft, before you ever try to perform. You work your fingers to the bone, until you become virtuosos. You find a singer with presence who can hold a tune - yes, a melodic tune. You find a drummer that can keep a beat, fast and slow, with accuracy. You find a bass player that can actually groove, and not just be a mirror of the rhythm guitar. This band must practice for years until they become extremely tight, in any setting. You choose people that have burning desires to make music, not just get famous.

 

Maybe that is elitist, so what? That's what I like. That's Metal.

 

Why is it dickish to demand accuracy and excellence? I'm a dick, because I know the difference? That's an odd stance. "My dumb bands" that are not commercially successful (as if that has ever had anything to do with anything). Funny, the "old guys" are still touring and putting out great new music. Time will tell...

 

Nah, I don't have to include any band under the "umbrella of metal", if they aren't metal. And, no, I can't help it if the kids latch onto anything that's remotely edgy. I don't blame them for wanting something expressive and powerful. I don't hold it against them for what they've found. But, now, why not go all the way, and check out some real music with some soul, instead of just making Mommy and Daddy cringe?

[kb1]

@Mr. Freeze: I actually just checked out the link (cause I might be full of shit), and I realized that your post was quoting that rather idiotic offsite post, where the guy basically says: "You know that music you liked? Say you don't like it anymore, and like this other stuff, cause the industry needs you to vote for these new bands, cause I like 'em, so you must like 'em. And you must call them 'metal', to save the genre."

 

He doesn't "say it best." He doesn't say anything I can relate to. I listen to the song he linked to. Try-hard, dime-a-dozen kids proclaiming "I'm tough and cool, because he can grunt vs. sing, and he plays E F G# (oooh, Devil's interval, that's so new and innovative). Utterly forgettable and boring. I was hoping to be wrong. I want to have more cool music to listen to. My God, how does that mess rate favorably over Aces High? Over the Wizard? There's no comparison. It's like uploading a video of a kid throwing a temper tantrum in a grocery store, and calling it "The Terminator".

 

No, I guess that's a bit harsh. I could see it being one song of an album from one band. But, to me, it literally sounds carbon-copy, and, honestly, it's irritating. It doesn't move me. My instinct is to turn it down, which is massively anti-metal. That's how I know it's not metal. I haven't changed, so I know it's not me. For some reason, people say that I should change my definition of metal. No thanks, I'll just change the CD.

 

There's plenty of non-metal music I love, as well, and it's all labelled pretty accurately. That's all I ask for.

[[McD] James]

 

1 hour ago, kb1 said:

For the "good of the genre", you keep the genre alive by following in the footsteps of the "old guys". You don't get to be called Metal by putting bass strings on your guitars, kicking your singer in the nuts repeatedly, and telling your drummer to play "Track and Field" with his feet. You spend years perfecting your craft, before you ever try to perform. You work your fingers to the bone, until you become virtuosos. You find a singer with presence who can hold a tune - yes, a melodic tune. You find a drummer that can keep a beat, fast and slow, with accuracy. You find a bass player that can actually groove, and not just be a mirror of the rhythm guitar. This band must practice for years until they become extremely tight, in any setting. You choose people that have burning desires to make music, not just get famous.

 

There are countless styles of metal that don't necessitate a strong level of technical proficiency. When Sodom put out their demo in 1982, they were just a bunch of kids who barely knew how to play their instruments, but were still able to compose music that was passionate and authentic. Slayer have composed some of the greatest metal ever written, even though Kerry King's playing was always a bit sloppy. Not every metal band needs to be Nevermore. 

 

Edited August 22, 2017 by Ajora

[DesecratorJ]

3 hours ago, Ajora said:

 

 

There are countless styles of metal that don't necessitate a strong level of technical proficiency. When Sodom put out their demo in 1982, they were just a bunch of kids who barely knew how to play their instruments, but were still able to compose music that was passionate and authentic. Slayer have composed some of the greatest metal ever written, even though Kerry King's playing was always a bit sloppy. Not every metal band needs to be Nevermore. 

 

Yeah absolutely, this apply to most extreme metal bands of the 80s hehe. It made a part of what made this music so good imo.

[UglyStru]

@kb1 tl;dr 

 

You are getting way too heated about this. 

[UglyStru]

13 hours ago, NeedHealth said:

Horse-tranquilizer grindcore anyone?

BREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Megalyth]

So many objective opinions in this thread.

[Swine & Roses]

> MetalSucks

 

Ahahahahaha... Into the trash it goes...

 

[june gloom]

In retrospect I probably need not have posted earlier in this thread. kb1 is illustrating my point perfectly.

[rehelekretep]

yeah i dont understand this metal puritanism. metal is big enough for 'traditional' metal and more 'new' stuff to coexist.

[Cruduxy Pegg]

This thread is rude to cellos and keyboards. 

[Mr. Freeze]

keyboards suck in metal tbh

 

haven't heard one example besides Faith No More that didn't make me giggle

[DesecratorJ]

Keyboards can rule the shit out in metal tho. Well, everyone as a different perspective of music.

[kb1]

I decide what I like and don't like, and it's not really something I have control of, it just happens. And if I can't control it, no one else has a chance. Unless they play some good metal.

 

You can use any label you want. Music is a personal experience, which means that I decide what is metal or not, for me. I love that which I describe as metal, and those linked bands surely ain't it. So, where does that leave us?

 

I would suggest using your own judgement, and avoiding trying to dictate what everyone else should think and feel. Again, I wanted to like those bands, but I just don't. I will continue to look for music I like, and I will continue to categorize it as I hear it.

 

Don't you want the truth? Or, do you prefer to dictate?

 

[[McD] James]

24 minutes ago, Mr. Freeze said:

keyboards suck in metal tbh

 

haven't heard one example besides Faith No More that didn't make me giggle

 

[Megalyth]

10 minutes ago, kb1 said:

I decide what I like and don't like, and it's not really something I have control of, it just happens. And if I can't control it, no one else has a chance. Unless they play some good metal.

 

You can use any label you want. Music is a personal experience, which means that I decide what is metal or not, for me. I love that which I describe as metal, and those linked bands surely ain't it. So, where does that leave us?

 

I would suggest using your own judgement, and avoiding trying to dictate what everyone else should think and feel. Again, I wanted to like those bands, but I just don't. I will continue to look for music I like, and I will continue to categorize it as I hear it.

 

Don't you want the truth? Or, do you prefer to dictate?

 

Comedy gold, 10/10, post of the century.

 

Practice what you're preaching if you expect to be taken seriously.

[Mr. Freeze]

Somewhere in Time was better m8. Concept albums display why musicians are musicians, and not writers. See also: Dream Theater

[[McD] James]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Freeze said:

Somewhere in Time was better m8. Concept albums display why musicians are musicians, and not writers. See also: Dream Theater

 

Both albums are masterpieces.

 

I can think of quite a few excellent metal concept albums that are both enjoyable to listen to, and tell interesting stories. One such example is The Key, by Nocturnus which is about a cyborg that travels back in time to murder Jesus in his infancy. Nocturnus are also one of many examples of a metal band that make good usage of keyboards. 

 

Being a talented musician and talented at writing lyrics and stories aren't mutually exclusive. Jon Nödtveidt's lyrics were sublime, and entertaining enough to read on their own.

[rehelekretep]

21 minutes ago, kb1 said:

I decide what I like and don't like, and it's not really something I have control of, it just happens. And if I can't control it, no one else has a chance. Unless they play some good metal.

 

You can use any label you want. Music is a personal experience, which means that I decide what is metal or not, for me. I love that which I describe as metal, and those linked bands surely ain't it. So, where does that leave us?

 

I would suggest using your own judgement, and avoiding trying to dictate what everyone else should think and feel. Again, I wanted to like those bands, but I just don't. I will continue to look for music I like, and I will continue to categorize it as I hear it.

 

Don't you want the truth? Or, do you prefer to dictate?

 

yeah, genres dont work that way, considering theyre commonly accepted terms for describing music to other people you dont get to unilaterally decide what is and isnt metal

[DesecratorJ]

lol, 7th son is my favourite Maiden album ever, but that doesn't remove my love for Somewhere in time either. Arguing about which one is the best is dumb imo.

The synth used on this one is brillant as the keyboards on the other.

 

 

 

[june gloom]

1 hour ago, kb1 said:

I decide what I like and don't like, and it's not really something I have control of, it just happens. And if I can't control it, no one else has a chance. Unless they play some good metal.

 

You can use any label you want. Music is a personal experience, which means that I decide what is metal or not, for me. I love that which I describe as metal, and those linked bands surely ain't it. So, where does that leave us?

 

I would suggest using your own judgement, and avoiding trying to dictate what everyone else should think and feel. Again, I wanted to like those bands, but I just don't. I will continue to look for music I like, and I will continue to categorize it as I hear it.

 

Don't you want the truth? Or, do you prefer to dictate?

 

Doomworld really needs a laugh react.