Fan of albums, not bands

[Dead1]

1 hour ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

I just don’t hear it, at best, I’d say those bands are metal adjacent. But I am way too lazy to go back and listen to any slipknot songs, confirmation bias probably means that well as very much poisoned in any case.

No offense but it seems like you've never heard either band.

 

Because if Trivium weren't metal, then neither are In Flames or Dark Tranquility or Soilwork.  That whole Ameircan metalcore scene was just melodic death metal with shitty emo pop choruses (which arguably started with metal stuff like Fear Factory) and breakdowns (and even then those were used Pantera and Machine Head in early-mid 1990s).

 

And Slipknot fit right in with a lot of modern Nuclear Blast death metal, thrash, deathcore and groove metal.  Again if Slipknot aren't metal then we can say Pantera or modern Behemoth or Fear Factory or Lamb of God or Machine Head or whatever flavour of the month plastic metal band isn't  metal either.

 

 

Again not a fan of either band but I do like to get my facts straight.

 

(Heavens forbid what you think of the less extreme metal formats - Nightwish, Epica, Helloween, Accept, Motley Crue,  - not metal either?!?)

 

[RelentlessOblivion]

4 hours ago, Dead1 said:

No offense but it seems like you've never heard either band.

 

Because if Trivium weren't metal, then neither are In Flames or Dark Tranquility or Soilwork.  That whole Ameircan metalcore scene was just melodic death metal with shitty emo pop choruses (which arguably started with metal stuff like Fear Factory) and breakdowns (and even then those were used Pantera and Machine Head in early-mid 1990s).

 

And Slipknot fit right in with a lot of modern Nuclear Blast death metal, thrash, deathcore and groove metal.  Again if Slipknot aren't metal then we can say Pantera or modern Behemoth or Fear Factory or Lamb of God or Machine Head or whatever flavour of the month plastic metal band isn't  metal either.

 

 

Again not a fan of either band but I do like to get my facts straight.

 

(Heavens forbid what you think of the less extreme metal formats - Nightwish, Epica, Helloween, Accept, Motley Crue,  - not metal either?!?)

 

Is the driving force behind Pantera metal? Yes, same goes for Helloween and Iron Maiden. Queen had metallic elements as did Rush no one called them metal. Equally no one calls Terrorizer metal because grindcore is a punk offshoot. Actually, sorry you’re In Flames point it’s accurate because much like the only trivium i’ve heard they’ve got far more in common with melodic metal core then melodeath. You’re welcome to disagree of course, but consider this: it is entirely possible that, due to the massive commercial popularity of slipknot, bands have Inc, some elements of their sound to try and appeal to a wider audience, and therefore make more money? Metal isn’t safe from grip of capitalism, unfortunately.

 

[Dead1]

Melodic metalcore is just Americanised melodic death metal with a dollop of emo.  Indeed many American melodic DM bands like Shadows Fall and All That Remains added some of these emo and other trappings but musicially stayed the same.

 

Trivium are more rooted in conventional melodic death metal than Pantera is in metal as a whole and I say that as someone who loves Pantera and hates.   Listen to In Flames circa Clayman or most modern Soilwork and you will hear the similarities ie Trivium is far closer to In Flames and Soilwork

Pantera always had other major influences that were more hard rock than metal (Van Halen and KISS as well as Randy Rhoads).  Same for Vinnie Paul - again KISS.  And they grew up in a blues household.  It explains some of that wierdness you get with Pantera's music.  I think it is what grates with metalheads- Pantera don't just chug on and the music structure is often more rock.  It is basically extreme glam metal.

 

Also people do call Terrorizer metal (they are even on Metal Archives) coz original grindcore was about mashng metal and hardcore together.  Mick Harris was a metal guy and he introduced the original Napalm Death guys to Slayer and Celtic Frost (you can really hear the Celtic Frost influence on Scum).

 

The key guys from Terrorizer were ex thrash metal guys.  They were influenced by Napalm Death and were always more on the metal side of grind than hardcore (same with Brutal Truth).

There is this idiotic notion perpetuated by Decibel magazine that grindcore and death metal evolved only out of hardcore when metal was there from the start.  They ignore the metal aspect altogether.

[RelentlessOblivion]

Grind is metal adjacent though I admit Terrorizer we are probably a bad example, as you rightly point out metal is much more involved in their sound. The point I’m making is really bad I don’t consider metal to be the primary sound in the music of slipknot, killswitch engage, and myriad of other commercial entities, masquerading as bands and leeching money from the parents of edgy teens. Yeah I’m an elitist, so what? The metal elements of shadows fall are so watered and to be fairly recognisable. Calling them a metal band is like calling Metallica punk band. Sure, they share some elements, but the label doesn’t fit what they are actually playing.

[Dead1]

3 hours ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

Grind is metal adjacent though I admit Terrorizer we are probably a bad example, as you rightly point out metal is much more involved in their sound. The point I’m making is really bad I don’t consider metal to be the primary sound in the music of slipknot, killswitch engage, and myriad of other commercial entities, masquerading as bands and leeching money from the parents of edgy teens. Yeah I’m an elitist, so what? The metal elements of shadows fall are so watered and to be fairly recognisable. Calling them a metal band is like calling Metallica punk band. Sure, they share some elements, but the label doesn’t fit what they are actually playing.

I am an elitist but don't go as far as calling commercial metal non metal.

 

If Slipknot or Trivium aren't metal than neither are In Flames  (metalcore) Soilwork (metalcore) or even Anthrax (those punky vocals in 1980s and half adozen more rock orientated albums ) or Venom, Sodom, Destruction  (allpunk) or Megadeth (actually most of their stuff is rock orientated with a sheen of metal says a guy with 17 Megadeth CDs) or in fact most commercial metal bands out there.   Hell Iron Maiden are same - most of their songs fron 21st century and 1990s  are prog rock with a sheen of metal (and I own over 30 Iron Maiden albums/EPs/DVDs).

Punk is far more stripped down musically than metal (eg listen to any real punk band).  Pure hardcore is too, hence later bands mixed metal into it (crossover, crust, metalcore).  Oh and metal took punk's aggression (NWOBHM, speed, thrash, death, grindcore).

 

The sound of Slipknot and Shadows Fall and KSE and hell just about most commercial metal bands are metal in terms of song structures, riffing styles. Vocals are generally the only point of difference (and even in "pure" metal these are varied from high pitched banshee vocals to low gutturals to pretty pop singing ala Epica).

 

Oh and real metal was always for edgy teens.  Back in 1980s and early 1990s it wasn't the cool jocks that fucked cheerleaders who were listening to Slayer or Death.  It was the dweeby guy that didn't fit in.  Metal was and still is music for edgy losers and misfits.

 

(And yes I was an edgy loser and misfit and probably still am by social standards).

 

 

As for Metallica and punk, well funny coz back in 1982-83 many people in California scene thought they were a punk band because of the way they played (fast and aggressive).

James Hetfield himself has never hidden the fact that he was heaily influenced by Discharge, GBH and Misfits, all punk/hardcore bands.

 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

Interesting discussion I missed. The main thing I would just like to add to this discussion is that when it comes to the entire genre of what I'll call 'commercial metal' which would include Trivium and 'Knot and KSE and Shadows Fall and Motley Crue and a thousand other bands in addition to the ones being brought up here, I would say that's really a genre unto itself and it's up to each of us to decide which side of the rock/metal line we'd prefer to think of these bands as. I don't see how there's really a right or wrong answer for any of them. Metal is already by definition a sub-genre of its overarching genre of rock music, so you can't ever truly be wrong to call any of these metal bands rock. The heaviest most brutal black and death metal bands you can think of are all still technically rock bands as well.

There are so many bands that straddle the line and have elements of both rock and metal, that it seems to me like a pointless losing battle to try to definitively categorize each and every last one of them as either one or the other. If Trivium's metal riffage leads you to think of them as a metal band, fine. Forced to choose one or the other I would say they're a metal band. If in your mind the uber melodic choruses negate any of these band's metalness and you think that makes them just rock bands, then that's fine too. I really think for some of these bands it could go either way.

I can understand some people's frustration with having these super commercial bands lumped in with their precious metals, because they don't want any metal-ignorant normies they  may come across thinking that's the kind of crap they might be listening to when they tell them they listen to "metal." But I think it's pretty silly to declare any metal band with too much melody in the vocals is not really metal. Led Zeppelin, Rush, Aerosmith and AC/DC are exampes of rock bands. Bands like Trivium, 'Knot, Pantera, KSE and Shadow's Fall are clearly not that.

I get that most of us don't like these bands at all and maybe we even wished they didn't exist. But like it or not they do exist, so just get over it and move on with your lives people. I can tell you from experience that it's easy as shit to go through life without ever having to listen to any of these kinds of bands if you so choose. So why argue over shit none of us even listen to? Who fucking cares? Isn't it enough that we all agree we don't like these commercial bands? And if there are any dissenters here who might actually like a few of them then that's fine too, nobody cares what you listen to. I say we forget about these low-hanging fruit bands that are too easy to disparage (it's almost like grown-ups beating up on weak defenseless little kids) and go back to shitting on iconic legacy washed up has-been bands like Priest, Maiden and Megastaine which imo is exponentially much more fun.

Also before I click submit I have to say that anyone claiming that Terrorizer is not a metal band needs to clean the shit out of their ears. Whatever other influences are to be found in there (grindcore) don't negate them being a metal band. Lots of the early big name grindcore bands we all know and love are metal bands, Carcass, Napalm Death, ENT...all of them are metal bands. Because grindcore is just as much a sub-genre of metal (maybe even morseso) than it is a sub-genre of punk. Just like we needed punk to have thrash metal, we needed metal to have grindcore. By the 90's metal and punk were so closely intertwined that it's really impossible to say a lot of extreme bands were just one or the other. Grindcore and crust are fusion genres, every bit as much metal as they are punk. It doesn't have to be either-or.

[AlSymerz]

Terrorizer are coming back in a few months so someone can ask the band if they want to be known as metal when they arrive.

 

 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

47 minutes ago, AlSymerz said:

Terrorizer are coming back in a few months so someone can ask the band if they want to be known as metal when they arrive.

Coming back from where? Have they been inactive? Or do you just mean coming back to Australia?

Metal Archives has them listed as "death metal/grindcore" which in this case I'd have to agree with. Also from their Metal Archives page:

"The band took its name after the song "Terrorizer" by Master." [Master being a very infuential early US death metal band]

"Terrorizer was one of the first bands that producer Scott Burns got to work with. The sound on World Downfall would later be known as the "death metal production." Because of his work, he later went on to be a well-known death metal producer."

So I would say it's really not up to them, it's up to the listeners to decide. But I have no doubt they'd agree they're both grindcore and death metal. Don't see how they could disavow themselves from either genre. Their last album Caustic Attack from 2018 which I happen to have playing right now, leans a bit more towards death metal than World Downfall, which I listened to earlier when making my Terrorizer comments an hour ago. 

[AlSymerz]

Pete broke the band up earlier this year due to his 'busy schedule" but he's decided to reform again with Vincent, Brown and Werner

[Dead1]

1 hour ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Forced to choose one or the other I would say they're a metal band. If in your mind the uber melodic choruses negate any of these band's metalness and you think that makes them just rock bands, then that's fine too.

Good post as always.

If simply uber melodic choruses make something not-metal then pretty much all of power metal, traditional metal, progressive and a lot of more commercial thrash are not metal either.  Someone seriously wants to tell me that Kiske' era Helloween or Blind Guardian aren't metal cause they use melodic vocals that actually wouldn't be out of place in Trivium or Shadows Fall or KSE?

It kind of makes only Venom and it's offshoots metal.  Oh but wait you could argue that's actually closer to punk/hardcore.

At some point you get to the point that you could argue metal doesn't even exist - it's all either rock or punk!  😵😵😵🤪🤪🤪