The Corroseum forum (new design under construction)

Snatch-Back's "Eastern Lady" c/w "Cryin' to the Night".

Kick - Rough 'n' Smooth EMI 1979

Book: "The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal Singles" published by Scrap Metal Records, 2005 (Martin Popoff)

D.A.'S 1st Demo was from 1980 so that's how it is.

malegys wrote:

Buried By Time and Dust wrote:Hey since Desolation Angels moved to Los Angeles do you consider them a USPM band

malegys wrote:
Yes, they did & were considered part of the NWOBHM at the time,atleast musically.

No, i considered them "too late for everything HM".hows's that?

Buried By Time and Dust wrote:D.A.'S 1st Demo was from 1980 so that's how it is.

malegys wrote:

Buried By Time and Dust wrote:Hey since Desolation Angels moved to Los Angeles do you consider them a USPM band

No, i considered them "too late for everything HM".hows's that?

Here we go:
http://www.metal-archives.com/search/ad ... ]=4#albums
although there might be other bands which the Archives don't consider "metal enough".

Also, ignore that Cockney Rejects single, they were not metal at the time.

'79 Raw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5RaQwEtrgE

Buried By Time and Dust wrote:'79 Raw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5RaQwEtrgE

Cheers! I get to see them here soon. It may not be '79 anymore but it will do!

Lynx, good link, thanks.

lynx wrote:Here we go:
http://www.metal-archives.com/search/ad ... ]=4#albums
although there might be other bands which the Archives don't consider "metal enough".

Also, ignore that Cockney Rejects single, they were not metal at the time.

MA leaves out a ton of early NWOBHM, so their list should be considered a minimum list at best. Several years ago I asked the moderators why they excluded so many nwobhm bands, but all I got was a snarky reply full of attitude about how most NWOBHM isn't 'real' metal, which is hilarious coming form a site that features every two-bit black metal bedroom project from the past 10 years

nightsblood wrote:Several years ago I asked the moderators why they excluded so many nwobhm bands, but all I got was a snarky reply full of attitude about how most NWOBHM isn't 'real' metal, which is hilarious coming form a site that features every two-bit black metal bedroom project from the past 10 years

There is a lot of stuff from that period that is more hard rock than fully HM, so I see where they're coming from.

Ernest Thesiger wrote:

nightsblood wrote:Several years ago I asked the moderators why they excluded so many nwobhm bands, but all I got was a snarky reply full of attitude about how most NWOBHM isn't 'real' metal, which is hilarious coming form a site that features every two-bit black metal bedroom project from the past 10 years

There is a lot of stuff from that period that is more hard rock than fully HM, so I see where they're coming from.

True, but it can be a fine line between HR and HM. It irked me b/c they add every shitty band that has ProTools and a facebook page, but when it comes to NWOBHM they suddenly become very picky about what constitutes a 'real' metal band. Also, I didn't appreciate their attitude at all; the reply reeked of (paraphrased), "We know better than you what is and isn't a Metal band, so go away and quit bothering us about some shitty British band that we Decree From On High to be rock, not metal". Even when I pointed out that several bands they exclude are commonly covered in heavy metal books, price guides, magazines, etc, their reply was "those books are full of errors", as though only MA Editors can decide what is and isn't metal, and everyone else doesn't have a clue as to what they're talking about. Few things in metal irritate me more than elitist asses who think their opinions should be The Law of the Land.

nightsblood wrote:It irked me b/c they add every shitty band that has ProTools and a facebook page

And actual physical releases. It's hardly elitist if that sort of stuff's included. There's other archival & discographical sites out there, thankfully.

Ernest Thesiger wrote:

nightsblood wrote:It irked me b/c they add every shitty band that has ProTools and a facebook page

It's hardly elitist if that sort of stuff's included.

That's my point- why do they include everything imaginable EXCEPT when it comes to NWOBHM? They make a big deal out of the huge number of bands they profile- there's a counter right at the top of the main page- yet they get very narrow-minded about bands from that one sub-genre.

Don't get me wrong- thee are indeed a lot of bands/records from the early 80s that are Rock, not Metal, and are fine to exclude. Sometimes it's a judgement call. But when every other reference includes a band in the 'Metal' category, it seems strange that MA refuses to include them.

And again, their attitude sucked. They could have just said something like, "we try not to include bands that are sort of borderline on the early rock-metal transition, that's just how we decided to do the site". OK, fair enough. But instead, their reply reeked of arrogance, claiming that everyone and every reference that calls those bands metal is Wrong and only the Great and Wise MA Editors have it Right. I have little tolerance for people who insist that theirs is the only correct opinion and that those who disagree are wrong by default.

Ah, but enough of this- I thought they were jerks about the whole thing, so I don't contribute to their site anymore. End of story.

m-a is a useful resource, a good starting point, but I have to laugh 1/2 the time I look something up. They have left so much out and why would anyone want to contribute to this site? Their attitude lends itself to volunteers not being willing to help.

Last time I checked they had Urchin listed, but not Praying Mantis.

GJ wrote:Last time I checked they had Urchin listed, but not Praying Mantis.

That's coz everyone is gay for Maiden i suppose...