Is Rock Really DEAD?!/Opinions are Opinions...

I can see that although some might argue that metal was getting away from rock n roll hedonism into a sort of morbid "realist fantasy" territory and apocalyptic predictions (Reagan era doomsaying is a common trope in classic 80's metal) and sometimes the human narrative perspective in general going the way of the dodo in many styles of metal, especially the more extreme ones. Even more melodic metal bands were toughening up after a while.

edited 20th Apr '14 8:46:51 PM by StillbirthMachine

Metal was more influenced by Punk than by Post-Punk, but what we've been referring to is the Post-Punk era ('77 to about '83/'84 apparently, though I'd argue that many of the developments of that era continued afterwards, making the latter date somewhat arbitrary IMO, though it does reflect the end of an era as far as the mainstream goes) rather than necessarily the genre. And that was the era during which Punk's influence kinda seeped into music as a whole.

Metal kinda changed a lot during that era- hell, in a lot of Metalhead's opinions, it didn't really EXIST prior to that era except in the work of Black Sabbath. Though personally, I consider most Proto-Metal/Heavy Rock from the early 70s (Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Budgie, Uriah Heep, Blue Oyster Cult- hell, even Queen and Aerosmith to an extent) to BE Metal for all intents and purposes. But then, I'm a fan of music in general, not primarily/exclusively a Metalhead, and thus I'd imagine I define the genre differently from the tr00 crowd, or even most more sane Metalheads. So, whatever... That's another discussion anyways.

Genre classification has its purposes, especially to those interested in the history of a genre or its relationships to other genres, but its still a somewhat arbitrary game, and too many people interpret something "belonging" or not to a certain genre to be a mark of quality (or lack thereof) and are willing to simply accept or reject something on the basis of that. For example, I don't consider something's proximity to Metal or adherence to Metal's musical structures or aesthetics to be a mark of quality one way or the other- (almost) every genre has its good or bad artists, and ultimately even that is a matter of opinion. if it speaks to you, then I guess it's good for you, basically.

This whole thing, as I've repeatedly said since the beginning, is subjective, and it's not my place to convince someone else that something sucks, even if I think it absolutely does. It REALLY bugs me when people act like their opinions on any subject, but music especially, are objective fact. They're NOT.

The most I can (and should) do is state my opinion as exactly that- my opinion. And this applies to everyone else, IMO.

Long-ass rant, but it's something I felt needed to be said. Apologies if I come across like an asshole...

edited 20th Apr '14 10:48:22 PM by sharkcrap11

Also, I've heard some Post-Punk bands cite Black Sabbath as an inspiration- but notably not any later Metal bands. Make of that what you will. Must've been the "doominess".

Anyway, punk's influence on metal was sort of like that of punk on a band like Young Marble Giants, who despised the sonic and stylistic aspects of punk rock but had the same contrarian anti-conformist streak. Metal absorbed punk and garage rock's speed, raw energy and minimalism into its framework of aggression, swagger and malevolent purpose, leading over time to speed metal, then death metal and black metal.

That last one, especially, is sometimes punk in an almost Desperate Bicycles/Half-Japanese way: Noisy, uncompromising, lo-fi, hysterical, not incompetent yet not focused on technicality, experimental in a fairly understated way. And death metal certainly has a kinship with those bands that existed on the blurrier edge between post-punk and progressive rock, say later RIO groups like Aksak Maboul or the likes of This Heat and Metabolist, even Pere Ubu. And then you've got doom, sludge, grind, interlopers like power violence...

As for bands who took a metal influence within post-punk itself, Killing Joke were far from the only ones. Joy Division and Gang of Four were both heavily influenced by older hard rock and early metal, and Crawling Chaos frequently veered into metal territory with their riffs despite being completely ludicrous sonically. And hardcore? Black Flag, for sure, and Flipper, Void, even Meat Puppets and Husker Du.

I agree with everything here- you've pretty much hit on the key examples of Metal influence within Post-Punk, and the key effects Punk Rock had on Metal. Also, nice to see someone agree with my opinions on something. It happens sometimes, but it's always nice to not be alone in thinking something...

Genre classification has its purposes, especially to those interested in the history of a genre or its relationships to other genres, but its still a somewhat arbitrary game, and too many people interpret something "belonging" or not to a certain genre to be a mark of quality (or lack thereof) and are willing to simply accept or reject something on the basis of that. For example, I don't consider something's proximity to Metal or adherence to Metal's musical structures or aesthetics to be a mark of quality one way or the other- (almost) every genre has its good or bad artists, and ultimately even that is a matter of opinion. if it speaks to you, then I guess it's good for you, basically.

That's less of a problem with the actual classification and more of how people treat said classifications as anything other than the equivalent of organizers you'd use to file your papers. Besides, the only people who really do that in my experience tend to exist only in the minds of paranoid wet-behind-the-ears-newbies to metal fearful of the ever present shadow of the straw-elitist.

This whole thing, as I've repeatedly said since the beginning, is subjective, and it's not my place to convince someone else that something sucks, even if I think it absolutely does. just bugs me It REALLY bugs me when people act like their opinions on any subject, but music especially, are objective fact. They're NOT.

I don't see anything wrong with people bringing up debate as to what makes some music great and others inferior. Yes, it means someone's toes have to get stepped on but I'd rather have people willing to explore the very foundations of what makes us value music so much and what can make us despise it all the same.

Anyway, punk's influence on metal was sort of like that of punk on a band like Young Marble Giants, who despised the sonic and stylistic aspects of punk rock but had the same contrarian anti-conformist streak. Metal absorbed punk and garage rock's speed, raw energy and minimalism into its framework of aggression, swagger and malevolent purpose, leading over time to speed metal, then death metal and black metal.

I'm already aware of this and have been for years but I'm more interested in the post punk side of the equation. I could possibly see it in some of the indie/post rock hybrids. For more recent death metal I'd say the more dramatic "chamber prog" a la Univers Zero and Shub-Niggurath fit that genre's more horror movie inspired take on tonality but I'm not that familiar with Aksak Maboul myself.

edited 21st Apr '14 8:03:09 AM by StillbirthMachine

It's not just a strawman- those types do exist. I've met a couple online and even a few in real life. They are somewhat rare, thankfully, but they DO exist. Also, you'd better not be calling me a newbie to Metal...

While I agree in principle with defending the music you love, there's no reason to be a dick about it. Besides, if you hate an entire genre simply because... while, because, then why discuss it at all? I'm not overly fond of most Gangsta Rap, so I just don't talk about it much. No harm done. I know I'm not one to judge what makes good and bad Gangsta Rap, so I don't really try for the most part. The fact remains that it's STILL a matter of opinion, and if you dislike a genre, then it's not your place to judge music that falls within it, so don't waste your time doing so? Another example: to me, the Metalhead who dislikes an Alternative Rock band simply for being an Alternative Rock band has little credibility in that particular case. He/she hates the whole genre, so there's little point in them bothering to criticize any particular band in it.

Which is fine, but in that case, one should at least make it clear that's it your OPINION that the genre sucks, and not some kind of statement of fact. Too many people act as though their opinions on something are the final word on the subject. Get over it.

Basically I'm saying stick to criticizing music in genres you're familiar with/like- you'll be happier that way, anyways. And if you hate something in said genres, you'll be able to say why and be more credible doing so...

At the end of the day, I'm trying to enjoy music for myself, and I have no interest in being more "right" than anyone else or in trying to ruin their enjoyment of whatever the hell they listen to. Listen to whatever you want- listen to Justin Bieber, for all I care. The most I'll do in that case is have a laugh or three about it privately. But I don't think you're a bad person or anything for it...

It's not just a strawman- those types do exist. I've met a couple online and even a few in real life. They are somewhat rare, thankfully, but they DO exist. tongue Also, you'd better not be calling me a newbie to Metal... wink

It honestly sounds like you're just using some ridiculous strawman to describe people who have particular tastes and judging their dislike of some genres based on their preferenes of others. If we're going to play that game, I've never encountered anyone like this for the 16 years I have been listening to metal, interacting with its fans, and participating in its subculture. The only people I have ever seen do this were people still feeling pissed off at having been schooled by some metalheads who actually knew what they were talking about and lashing out irrationally in some attempt to play up the victim card.

While I agree in principle with defending the music you love, there's no reason to be a dick about it. Besides, if you hate an entire genre simply because... while, because, then why discuss it at all? I'm not overly fond of most Gangsta Rap, so I just don't talk about it much. No harm done. I know I'm not one to judge what makes good and bad Gangsta Rap, so I don't really try for the most part. The fact remains that it's STILL a matter of opinion, and if you dislike a genre, then it's not your place to judge music that falls within it, so don't waste your time doing so? Another example: to me, the Metalhead who dislikes an Alternative Rock band simply for being an Alternative Rock band has little credibility in that particular case. He/she hates the whole genre, so there's little point in them bothering to criticize any particular band in it.

If people only discussed the things they enjoyed and showed no willingness to venture outside the boundaries of their comfort zones and asked those uncomfortable questions that inevitably invite controversy, we would have a very boring community that would be sorely lacking in critical thinking skills and the ability to visualize how their chosen genres stand in relation to others. Besides, saying that we're not allowed to judge music we don't really listen to or into whose fandom we don't fall reeks of an infinitely far worse elitism of its own - namely, "none of those dirty outsiders expressing their dirty outsider opinions because they aren't a part of the tribe".

edited 21st Apr '14 9:13:48 AM by StillbirthMachine

To be fair, I have met only a few people like that, and none in person since high school. Also, everyone like that that I knew back then has grown out of that attitude, so make of that what you will. It's a very rare attitude, but it exists among some (mostly teenage) fanboys. Then again, maybe people who have such opinions aren't really part of the larger Metal subculture. As I've said before, I don't affiliate myself with any musical subculture(s), so you would know more about that particular case than me.

And, incidentally, I wasn't trying to accuse you or anyone else here of that- I was simply stating a point about an attitude I dislike.

Fair enough. I suppose I stated my point poorly. It's not that you have no right to have those opinions, it that you should be polite about expressing them, and make it clear that they ARE ONLY OPINIONS. It's good to have an opinion. It's not so good to think your opinion is a fact, or the only one allowed to matter. Remember, if you feel free to step on other's toes about such things, than others will feel free to do the same to you- sometimes other people have strong opinions too, and those opinions won't always agree with each other.

And still, if one is prejudiced against a whole genre, than one's opinion will obviously be biased, and usually, well, obviously so. Thus, more neutral observers (i.e. those who feel less strongly- keeping in mind that true objectivity doesn't exist in these situations, since everyone has opinions) will be able to see this bias a mile away and won't take the opinion of said biased individual seriously.

Again, sorry to put this in a somewhat less-than-polite manner. No personal rancor is being intended. I'm simply attacking an attitude I dislike.

The thing is that a lot of people use the "but it's just an opinion" canard to stifle any sort of potentially interesting discussion because they're afraid their sacred cows will be the first to end up on the chopping block when people start to give everyone's favourite bands and artists a second look. And these are the same people who tend to spout ignorant nonsense along the lines of "Slayer single-handedly created death metal", "metal was dead in the 90's because of grunge", "Led Zeppelin was an NWOBHM band", and "classic metal doesn't exist anymore" and claim that in spite of evidence being incredibly easy to find for the opposite that it's "just an opinion." This produces a very toxic environment for any kind of debate that could explore and help us to better understand the genre at large because of pervasive intellectual dishonesty.

edited 21st Apr '14 9:36:57 AM by StillbirthMachine

I don't mind people having an opinion about genres/songs/artists they usually don't listen to. The problem is judging those genres/songs/artists through the lens of their own limited culture or through the criteria that's applied to specific music genres ("no, rock fan, you don't dismiss Disco just because the lyrics aren't deeeeeep").

And let's not even get into criticism of non-Western music through Western music criteria.

edited 21st Apr '14 10:04:24 AM by Quag15

But if we were to judge everything on its own terms then most of those people who like saying that everything sucks now wouldn't be complaining about that. And then where would we be? (In a happier world, for one...)

Even inside musical genres there's a lot of what you're complaining about. Look up the term "moldy fig" if you have to know more.

Orthodoxy/purism in terms of music criticism is just as bad imo.

It's because of narrow-minded people who have their own form of orthodoxy to push that very influential people (a list starting with the Original Dixieland Jazz Band and Paul Whiteman and continuing well into the rock era) get left out of the history books like they never made an impact at all.

Everything the last couple of posts have said I agree with to some extent. Good points.

Ultimately, I'm not interested in stifling opinions- I just want people to do two things:

• Admit to themselves and others that their opinions are not, in fact, facts, but are in fact just that: THEIR OPINIONS. Is that really so hard to do?! While things like the musical criteria by which a genre is defined are (mostly) fairly objectively factual, whether one genre (or even one band) is better than another is NOT.
• Be polite and reasonable about stating their opinions. "You don't like X, therefore you're a bad person and your opinion means nothing! Hah!" is not cool, but variations of it get thrown around more than anyone would care to admit, and not just (or even primarily) by Metalheads- that attitude can be found in any subculture/fanbase.

Basically, I just want people to not be assholes about any of this stuff, so a reasonable discussion can be had by all. Is that so much to ask?

edited 21st Apr '14 1:02:48 PM by sharkcrap11

Also, on the subject of strawmen, Stillbirth, your comment about newbies just discovering Metal is in fact a sort of strawman in and of itself, as have been some of the stuff you've said about hipsters and "tuff gai" types. Not that I approve of any of those things, but the point to be made is that, like all strawmen and stereotypes, they exist for a reason- there are always gonna be a few (and I stress the "few" part!) people who embody (or seem to embody) it.

The thing to know about strawmen and stereotypes is that most people DON'T conform to them- but there will always be some who do. And, incidentally, I haven't met any dumbass "tr00" Metal types since high school, so it's almost certainly a maturity thing rather than anything about the Metal subculture specifically- you'll find that kind of person in any fanbase. Apologies for not specifying that earlier.

Finally, while I wasn't gonna play that game, I've been into Metal for about 10 years- I discovered Black Sabbath when I was around about 14-15 or so, and I'm 25 now. It's hard to pinpoint any of this stuff precisely, since getting into Metal or any other genre is for me a gradual process. If I'm less knowledgeable about the genre than some others who have liked it for less time, it's cause a) music, while important to me, is only one of several interests of mine; and b) I'm just as devoted to other genres (Alternative Rock, Punk Rock, Psychedelic Rock, Progressive Rock, Funk, Reggae and Electronic Music, to name some) as I am to Metal.

Again, no offense intended by any of this. Merely stating some things about myself and some opinions.

For example, I have yet to personally meet someone who says, word for word, "I liked them before they were popular" when certain groups are brought up, but I have encountered people who hold that attitude. Likewise, I have never met someone who outright says, "this is not true [genre]" and spits between their fingers when a certain band is mentioned, but I have seen the same attitude, many times.

And to be frank, Stillbirth, the kind of strawmanning of people who like music that you consider "inferior" that you do is not uncharacteristic of that stereotype. You frequently treat those who like things that you don't as somehow less intellectually rigorous or tasteful, and it's honestly pretty annoying. I respect that you have strong and distinct opinions of the genres that you follow, and I have no problem with being discerning in personal taste, but you do have this habit of conflating people with what they listen to, and it is a problem.

Also, on the subject of strawmen, Stillbirth, your comment about newbies just discovering Metal is in fact a sort of strawman in and of itself, as have been some of the stuff you've said about hipsters and "tuff gai" types. Not that I approve of any of those things, but the point to be made is that, like all strawmen and stereotypes, they exist for a reason- there are always gonna be a few (and I stress the "few" part!) people who embody (or seem to embody) it.

I'm not supposed to see how it is supposed to be a "strawman" when metal is at a time when more and more people are discovering at an infintiely faster rate than they had prior to the explosion of the internet (thus, more newbies), Pantera and the nu/metalcore/deathcore that spawned after them more or less created the image of thuggish bald-headed mosh hippos, and the entire post rock/indie axis of metal more or less exists to mooch off of the Pitchfork audience. They aren't really a few when they're practically entire factions in and of themselves of the metal community, in some cases with entire genres being associated with them.

The thing to know about strawmen and stereotypes is that most people DON'T conform to them- but there will always be some who do. And, incidentally, I haven't met any dumbass "tr00" Metal types since high school, so it's almost certainly a maturity thing rather than anything about the Metal subculture specifically- you'll find that kind of person in any fanbase. Apologies for not specifying that earlier.

In all honesty, it's less of "tr00" types and more of certain segments of the metal community having incredibly specific (some might say "narrow") tastes usually associated with a particular group of record labels that are known for certain specializations. Right now the best example of this is probably Nuclear War NOW! Productions' fanbase more or less being the dominant authority on the more feral and barbaric versions of black metal.

Yeah, this has been bugging me for a while. The elitist music snob archetype is a construct, but it's a construct derived from actual behaviours exhibited by enough people to be a trend. Ditto the self-righteous hipster and the clueless newbie.

I'm not going to deny that they have a source but the particular source in and of itself as far as I'm concerned can take so many forms that just going "elitist" or "hipster" in and of itself will likely not be sufficient. The previous example of the NWN PROD fanbase is something I'd say would cause some folks to go "elitist" more or less because of hyper-specific tastes. It is nearly impossible to find a discussion on that specific style without at least a couple of NWN supporters more or less running the conversation. However, I'm not going to confuse them for say, the Shadow Kingdom Records or Dark Descent Records crowds that might share a degree of overlap but tend to have an altogether different focus.

For example, I have yet to personally meet someone who says, word for word, "I liked them before they were popular" when certain groups are brought up, but I have encountered people who hold that attitude. Likewise, I have never met someone who outright says, "this is not true [genre]" and spits between their fingers when a certain band is mentioned, but I have seen the same attitude, many times.

I don't think anyone actually flat out says that as much as they more or less show or imply it through their actions and preferences. It's not uncommon to hear many folks going that they "liked band x before they made stylistic shift y" or that when discussion on band-x comes up, they notably only focus on releases before the y-shift period. Pretentious when paraphrased but in practice fairly mundane and not too notable.

And to be frank, Stillbirth, the kind of strawmanning of people who like music that you consider "inferior" that you do is not uncharacteristic of that stereotype. You frequently treat those who like things that you don't as somehow less intellectually rigorous or tasteful, and it's honestly pretty annoying. I respect that you have strong and distinct opinions of the genres that you follow, and I have no problem with being discerning in personal taste, but you do have this habit of conflating people with what they listen to, and it is a problem.

Fair enough, habits from experience and such.

edited 21st Apr '14 1:59:12 PM by StillbirthMachine

It's true that there a lot of new people discovering Metal (and pretty much any other genre they please) thanks to the 'net, BUT IT IS a strawman argument to assume anything about the personality or opinions of said newbies without talking to them first. That's what I meant by that.

Overspecialization to the point of narrow-mindedness is what I'm referring to when I talk about "tr00" types- they only like one very specific kind of Metal. Calling them "tr00" types is quicker and mostly just saves typing time, hence why I do it.

Also, I should point out that I don't consider you to be one of those people, whatever any other stuff I've posted may sorta imply. I know full-well that you have reasonably varied tastes. Just don't condescend to others who don't share 'em/who like a genre or band you dislike and we'll be fine.

Fair enough, I tend to associate them in general with being a bit naive or rather unknowing of assorted musical/historical elements of metal which usually leads to a few groan-worthy although in some cases understandable cases of poorly thought out statements like those previously put up earlier (ie. Zeppelin as an NWOBHM band, Slayer single-handedly creating death metal, no actual metal in the 90's etc.).

I don't know if I would really call such people "tr00" given that some might argue their incredibly specific subgenres in many cases only represent very small and arguably fringe parts of the greater metal spectrum. Sure, it's "pure" but at best only a particular branch on the tree.

edited 21st Apr '14 3:01:52 PM by StillbirthMachine

Well, they often are, but not always... You have a point here. Those are all VERY groan-worthy statements, too. Zeppelin, NWOBHM?!! Please- they're a first-wave/Proto-Metal band, if they're anything remotely Metal. Slayer single-handedly creating Death Metal?! That's ignoring Kreator, Sodom, Destruction, Sepultura, Possessed, Whiplash and many other very heavy Thrash bands, and of course the actual early Death Metal bands from just slightly later... And let's not even get into the Wall Banger that is "no Metal in the 90s"...

It's a term of personal convenience only- I'll admit it means little beyond that. It's just a way of shortening an explanation that would take a while otherwise...

Rock may not be big as it was in the 60's-80's but I don't think it will ever die. What it need is for a awesome band or a singer to make a major hit to pump energy back into rock.

It's a cycle that the music tastemakers try paint as a linear progression, because they're trying to sell records to people who were too young to remember the last time "the next big thing" was popular. The public gets bored with distorted guitar music, so they turn to some form of dance-pop, and the press hypes said dance-pop as if it's something completely unprecedented in music history. Then the public gets bored with that and turns back to guitar music, and whatever bands ride this wave to success are hyped in the press as the saviors of rock-n-roll! Repeat ad nauseum.

edited 11th Dec '14 6:24:17 PM by MetaFour

What would be completely unprecedented is if we turned to guitar music that you could dance to, really.

Or maybe some sort of naturally rhythmic dance music.