1990s or 2000s?

[Helm]

Oh wow the 'poser' term sure made this thread explode. Metal being dead after 1993 is an equally loaded statement. The 00's have had their share of great HM releases, though it is true that further down the line copycatting has become a bigger problem. But I bring attention to that copycatting was an issue in the 80's as well, but back then, some dudes listened to a mercyful fate record and a candlemass record and those where their influences so when they made their own music it came out more distinctive than it comes out when a young bands influences are 'power metal' and 'epic metal'. Why?

Because if you try to copy a few bands, chances are you won't really sound like them because they're too distinctive to effortlessly emulate. You'll end up sounding like yourselves, eventually. But if you try to copy a genre, let's say thrash metal for example. its generic traits, the generic 'thrash riff' the generic polka beat, the generic shouty singer, the generic sociopolitics-lite lyrical content, what you're doing is making a clone of generalities! This is both easy to do and really boring to listen to, but people are proud of themselves because now they sound like 'a real thrash band'. This post-modern disease is a 90's-00's issue much more than an 80's issue.

[bigfootkit]

Oh wow the 'poser' term sure made this thread explode. Metal being dead after 1993 is an equally loaded statement. The 00's have had their share of great HM releases, though it is true that further down the line copycatting has become a bigger problem. But I bring attention to that copycatting was an issue in the 80's as well, but back then, some dudes listened to a mercyful fate record and a candlemass record and those where their influences so when they made their own music it came out more distinctive than it comes out when a young bands influences are 'power metal' and 'epic metal'. Why?

Because if you try to copy a few bands, chances are you won't really sound like them because they're too distinctive to effortlessly emulate. You'll end up sounding like yourselves, eventually. But if you try to copy a genre, let's say thrash metal for example. its generic traits, the generic 'thrash riff' the generic polka beat, the generic shouty singer, the generic sociopolitics-lite lyrical content, what you're doing is making a clone of generalities! This is both easy to do and really boring to listen to, but people are proud of themselves because now they sound like 'a real thrash band'. This post-modern disease is a 90's-00's issue much more than an 80's issue.

Hats off to you sir, that's an interesting and valid point well made.
I totally agree with your thoughts on the sub-genre generalities making individuality a rare trait in modern bands.
It's as if there's a checklist that must be ticked to nail your credentials as a band, in order to fit into a sub-genre box, in order to define your band.
Quite the antithesis of what the Metal of old was about, rebellion, freedom and non-conformism.
The "herd mentality" writ large.
I'll finish this thought with a quote which seems apt:
When people are free to do as they please, they usually imitate each other. -Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

[Cochino]

Yeah, when bands limitate themselves to the "typical" topics and ideas of a genre it sucks. Some people think that being old school is sounding exactly like the old bandsm when those bands did not sound like the bands previous to them. The important thing is try to capture the feeling and atmosphere of those bands, but with your own tools. Also the problem is that other bands are desesperate to be original and they end up being totally ridiculous. I don't think you can really choose to be old school, or original, if is into you it will show, otherwise it won't. Because in a minor way is still art, not a craft, and even though aftere building 100 crappy tables you might build a nice one, after writing 100 crappy songs, probably you'll keep on writing shit.
And I am saying that being a member of a band, and being aware of the fact that we might not be as good as we would like to be.

[Helm]

Bigfootkit, thanks. I think this copying of genres instead of inspiration from bands is probably one of the biggest problems with modern HM, but then again you'd think more specific-inspiration bands like Stormwarrior (that target Walls of Jericho, early Running Wild and Blind Guardian only) would make for perhaps better metal than the generic type, but it turns out that homage-derivation is pretty taxing too (at least for 3 records in a row it is as is the case for Stormwarrior). It amounts to tribute worship and I don't think that's any sort of solution. I think a honest 00's HM band has to do this: not copy the form of any band, or any genre, but instead try to pinpoint what it is about HM aesthetics they enjoy that makes them so potent, and think on that and try to expand on it, using whichever form is most appropriate. A song can be creepy doom atmospheric because they had in mind hopelessness and fatalism, and another song can be power-thrash because they had in mind strength and passion, that sort of thing. There was a time when HM was like this, why can't it be like this again?

However I think this sort of 'intellectual' process is a bit backwards for most metal bands that make music out of primal impulse, you know, turning up guitars, letting out some killer riffs and jamming. But those that go about things this way surely stand out. I am thinking of Lord Weird Slough Feg or While Heaven Wept, both bands with great range of expression but which surely are in the end heavy like granite and and metal like molten steel.

[ION BRITTON]

Because if you try to copy a few bands, chances are you won't really sound like them because they're too distinctive to effortlessly emulate. You'll end up sounding like yourselves, eventually. But if you try to copy a genre, let's say thrash metal for example. its generic traits, the generic 'thrash riff' the generic polka beat, the generic shouty singer, the generic sociopolitics-lite lyrical content, what you're doing is making a clone of generalities! This is both easy to do and really boring to listen to, but people are proud of themselves because now they sound like 'a real thrash band'. This post-modern disease is a 90's-00's issue much more than an 80's issue.

That was a quite interesting explanation i must admit. However, i do believe that the main problem is not the too numerous ''influences'' the bands have today that will result in playing a generic style. You mentioned that bands should try to understand what's the feeling/atmosphere that's hidden behind those riffs/vocals/lyrics/whatever. May i ask this then: I, for example, feel angry and strong very frequently and i really believe i do. Does that mean that if i start my own band, i will make the thrash masterpiece people were waiting for more than 20 years? I have my doubts... What i believe newer bands lack is a clearer vision of what they want to SAY with their music. Do they have to offer a different, unique point of view or do they simply want to necessarily make a record and see their CD being sold because someone told them that that would be cool? This doesn't mean that many of the older bands weren't thinking this way, it's something you meet on a regular basis nowadays though. Maybe you can call this ''lack of inspiration'', it doesn;t make much difference for me.

Another very important issue is that metal music was explored to a very important degree in the 80s and the early 90s. How many good variations of "Breaking the law" can you actually hear? The 1st one was great, the 2nd one cool, the 3rd one very interesting but what about the 30th one? Throwing your personal element in your music ain't that easy anymore. Many bands did this in the past and they formed their own disctinctive sound. It's easier to sound different than two bands who have their own sound than to sound different than 100 bands who have their own sound, can't explain this one better, i hope you know what i mean. Cirith Ungol were amazing with an unbelievably original sound. Imo Doomsword are great, but their influences are quite obvious, they don't have a very personal sound. On the other hand Slough Feg have a more personal sound, but i don't find their material mindblowing. You see, something's always missing. Hard days for a metal band.

[Helm]

May i ask this then: I, for example, feel angry and strong very frequently and i really believe that i do. Does that mean that if i start my own band, i will make the thrash masterpiece people were waiting more for more than 20 years?

I think if you make a band and are concerned about whether or not you'll make what 'people have been waiting for for 20 years' you've already lost the battle. If you feel angry and strong often and desire to put that into HM music then you should do that as an end in itself and if the result stands up to your own evolved standard as a listener, then it's guaranteed to have an audience in other HM listeners, because they will not value your ambition to make 'the lost thrash metal masterpiece' they will value the emotion in there, and skill that went into getting it out there.

A great HM release isn't self-aware as in being in competition with other records. A great HM release is in its own universe, if it envelops you and it puts you under its spell, the ONLY HM release that there's ever been.

What i believe newer bands lack is a clearer vision of what they want to SAY with their music.

I agree generally. Just keep in mind that a lot of what we consider 'classic' HM today is as aimless as the 00's 'let's make a band!' types. Sometimes it just comes together in inexplicable ways and although the musicians involved wouldn't be able to articulate why they made what they made to save their lives, somehow the end result is inspiring. This has happened in the 80's, it happened in the 90's and it's happening right now and nobody can explain it, it's just how it is when people create art. In the case of HM, it's sort of a 'a million monkeys on playing a million riffs' variation, heh.

Do they have to offer a different, unique point of view or do they simply want to necessarily make a record and see their CD being sold because someone told them that that would be cool?

Again I agree, but on the other hand back in the 80's, how many bands simply picked up guitars to become WORLD CLASS HEAVY METAL MUSICIANS after hearing an Accept record? Even if you go to the 'source' and you ask Judas Priest about their views and different themes, what you'll get is laughable. Yet Judas Priest is revered as one of the quintessential HM bands, and their lyrical and aesthetic content is paper-thin (especially 80's Priest. 70's are better) to the point of dishonesty.

[ION BRITTON]

I think if you make a band and are concerned about whether or not you'll make what 'people have been waiting for for 20 years' you've already lost the battle.

I agree. Suppose i don't have in mind making that masterpiece. Just feeling this way and want to play metal.

If you feel angry and strong often and desire to put that into HM music then you should do that as an end in itself and if the result stands up to your own evolved standard as a listener, then it's guaranteed to have an audience in other HM listeners, because they will not value your ambition to make 'the lost thrash metal masterpiece' they will value the emotion in there, and skill that went into getting it out there.

Correct. But let me tell you this: I have a friend who has a band playing a thrash/black style that i am generally very fond of: that in the Sodom/Destruction/Bathory vein. And we also share the same opinion on the issue we are discussing now. You know something? His music is mostly boring and even bad at times. He isn't copy-pasting riffs, he's trying to play what he believes is sounding good to him. That's what he says, and, yes i haven't heard any stolen riff on his material. Result? 1 great song out of the 15 i've heard from him. Apparently, something's missing.

Hypothetically speaking, let's say that i was a musician and also shared a lot of the same ideas with Quorthon (RIP) on how the music should be played, what's metal, had the same music influences etc etc. We would have lots of thing in common. The only difference between us would be that i couldn't compose such great music in my entire life, not the slightest chance. He is a Artist, i'm a mere guitar player who plays metal. He has the charisma of translating in an amazing way his inner thoughts and feeling into music notes, while i don't have it. Learning to play the guitar and having a good ''intellectual'', like you've said, backround are good weapons to enter the battle, but those things alone won't necessarily deliver the new metal masterpiece. More when we meet, english language is a pain in the ass


Fast Edit: I violently disagree on the Priest comment!

[Avenger]

Oh yes I read them and that is why the comment, they have been really amusing.

This "bias of a record label" just proves you know nothing of the variety of music on my label and that 70% of the stuff I released is from before your dead-date. But I wouldn't expect you to since to you metal is dead.

Sigh, the bias of a record label that releases new material.

I think that if you actually read my posts in this thread in their entirety, you would actually know how that comment was truly directed.

Whether it's 1%, 99.9% or 70% it makes no difference.

You still release new material.

I've reviewed your distro/label many times in the past, I mean, after all you do have a website, so it's not a secret...

Regardless, that's really not the point...

[Piotr Sargnagel]

I think one of the reasons someone should start a band is to create music that they want to hear. Like Euronymous said - no-one was playing what they wanted to hear so it fell to Mayhem to create it! Another reason is to express emotions a group of people can't express elsewhere. There are many many bands that were started with nothing more in mind than to have something to do at weekends and that have become big because people listen to them and enjoy hearing what that band play. Reasons for listening are manifold but I reckon that fans listen because they enjoy, not because it makes them cool. How sad it would be if there are people in their thirties and forties who insist on listening to HM because they think it makes them cool. What someone enjoys can't be changed or influenced and if someone enjoys Desaster or Bullet (Swe) or Liege Lord or Slough Feg, THAT IS WHAT THEY ENJOY and no-one can change that, no matter if it is just the same formula guitar+bass+drums+vocals+big volume every time!

[Avenger]

What this all boils down to your contradiction.

How the hell can you claim that "clones are essentially a waste of time" yet attempt to promote modern day metal?

There is no contradiction. I can do that because there is a vast wealth of metal bands today that are not clones but doing their own thing. Had you had the slightest clue what you are talking about you would have known this, and it would have been easier to take you seriously.

You honestly don't get it, do you?

Nearly every single element that any modern band, (whether it's a mix of a thousand bands or just a couple) has been done before. There is no such thing as an 100% original metal band and with each passing album the genre falls further into that "it's all been done before" status. That's not to say that X modern band is a clone of X band from the 80's but the resemblance is there.

Either way, this does not make some modern bands terrible, but original, not even close. That's not to say that the 80's weren’t the same way, but that's not my claim nor yours here.

[ION BRITTON]

I don't think you can really choose to be old school, or original, if is into you it will show, otherwise it won't. Because in a minor way is still art, not a craft, and even though aftere building 100 crappy tables you might build a nice one, after writing 100 crappy songs, probably you'll keep on writing shit.

Haha, i loved the tables part! First sentence is really important and i definitely agree.

[Helm]

Apparently, something's missing.

Well of course, but

Learning to play the guitar and having a good ''intellectual'', like you've said, backround are good weapons to enter the battle, but those things alone won't necessarily deliver the new metal masterpiece.

I'm just saying without these things, in the 00's, it's even less possible to make great HM. It's becoming increasingly more impossible to just 'stumble' into greatness in our field.

More when we meet, english language is a pain in the ass

Sure! I guess Up The Hammers fest?

Fast Edit: I violently disagree on the Priest comment!

I was sure someone would. It saddens me to say such things too.

edit:

Avenger, why don't you check out the band Maudlin of the Well and their two releases 'Bath' and 'Leaving Your Body Map', both released in the 00's and tell me if they sound original or not on the whole. Or perhaps you could check out the second Confessor disk that came out in 2006 and is by most accounts better than their first effort of 1991. Or you could check out Tyr - Ragnarok that came out also in 2006 and sounds like nothing else but Tyr. How about Spiral Architect that put out one of the best progressive (in the tre sense of the word) releases ever in 2000. How about Warning who in 2007 put out one of the best doom metal albums ever, which sounds like nothing else? How about Dolorian with their newest, Voidwards, that again is peerless?

[ION BRITTON]

Sure! I guess Up The Hammers fest?

I'll be there, quite possibly both days. We'll talk soon!

[King Zombie]

The best years were from 1980 to 1993. Done. 1991 was THE year for death metal Scandinavian death was releasing it's very best recordings.

[Avenger]

Avenger, why don't you check out the band Maudlin of the Well and their two releases 'Bath' and 'Leaving Your Body Map', both released in the 00's and tell me if they sound original or not on the whole. Or perhaps you could check out the second Confessor disk that came out in 2006 and is by most accounts better than their first effort of 1991. Or you could check out Tyr - Ragnarok that came out also in 2006 and sounds like nothing else but Tyr. How about Spiral Architect that put out one of the best progressive (in the tre sense of the word) releases ever in 2000. How about Warning who in 2007 put out one of the best doom metal albums ever, which sounds like nothing else? How about Dolorian with their newest, Voidwards, that again is peerless?

I've already heard a few of these, but will add the others to my "to be heard" list.

However, it still comes down to a matter of opinion I guess.