In the Defense of Criticism Towards Metal

Mr ProgFreak wrote: BaldFriede wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: BaldFriede wrote: To sum it up: If you growl on a few songs: Nothing wrong with it. If you do it all the time: Ridiculous. Generally I'd say that whenever an artist uses a highly distinctive technique too much, there's a chance that people will grow tired of it. *Contrast* is something that I always look for in music ... but then again that doesn't mean that artists should change style all the time, does it? Every artist is (or should be) unique. If some use growling all the time (or double bass, another technique you don't like), contrast might be achieved by changing other elements of the music. To sum up my response: If the growling fits the music: nothing wrong with it. If it doesn't: I'm not comfortable with using words like "ridiculous" because I think they're disrespectful to the artist, but I certainly will give lower ratings to such albums. You still don't seem to get my take on double-bass drumming. I am not objected to it per se; in fact there is a drummer I like very much who plays with two bass drums (he is listed in the "different kind of drum poll I made; see if you can spot him there). http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=55755&FID=42 No, what I dislike is what most people do with a double bass-drum. They could learn a lot from the man I am talking of, who has a very tasteful way of using them. Of course that's MY taste only; others may disagree. I am actually thinking of getting a second hi-hat for my kit, by the way. As far as I know nobody has ever done that. . Makes at least as much sense as a double bass drum. I would actually like to take some songs which use excessive double bass-drumming and record them again using two hi-hats instead of two bass drums. Of course other changes would have to happen in the arrangement of the song. And with growling it is just the same. If it fits, fine; but just as with double bass-drumming people use it to excess. Since I am a in the culinary business, let me use a culinary metaphor: Double bass drumming is like a spice; use to much of it, and the flavour of the food gets lost; you only taste the spice. I think you're over-simplifying the matter. My guess is that you generally don't like the aggressiveness of metal, and you can't take it seriously. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but you can't really expect others to adopt such an extreme point of view. In any genre, if I want some advice I will try to find someone who likes what the genre is about. If I want some extreme metal recommendations I would try to find some one who enjoys growling and/or double bass, and the typical metal topics/lyrics. These persons will not like all the albums the same ... even among those albums which feature growling in every track an expert (as in: having listened to a great deal of albums) will tell you that some are better and some are worse, on some the growling is appropriate on on others not so much, and so on. What I'm trying to say is that your point of view is simply extremely biased. Yet you continue to look down on those who don't share it ... exemplified by your statement that those other drummers "could learn a lot" from the guy who *you* happen to like. I think that's the basic difference between you and me (or more specifically, between our posts): You tell people what's better than their favorite music and artists, I tell people what they might also enjoy. Not that there aren't bands that I don't like and which in my opinion are overrated ... but I don't have to mention it all the time.

Wrong, totally wrong! I love aggressiveness! But I don't consider double bass-drumming to be aggressive at all, at least not those "thunderstorms". That's where we seem to differ. Actually I am pretty much disappointed by most prog metal bands because of the lack of aggressiveness. Speed and double-bass drumming don't make music aggressive at all when it is all flat and consonant and not in the least off-key, which is where real aggressiveness comes from, in my opinion. This is what mostly disappoints me about prog metal. There may be exceptions, but it is mostly right. Most prog metal bands are really "tame", in my opinion; I have yet to find a prog metal band that is as aggressive as, for example, High Tide.
Jean and are currently taking a tour through all the prog metal bands in the archives, by the way, and listen to any sound examples we can find, weither here or on youtube or elsewhere. We are still at "A", so it will take some more time.
Some bands which are filed under prog metal which we have already listened to we would have put under "heavy prog" and not under "prog metal". But we will make a complete report of our opinions (with seperate votes) once we have fisinshed with them all. So far nothing really exiting yet, but we only just started. And of course we will come across names which aere already familiar to us, though we are definitely not experts on prog metal. But that's mostly because of what we heard so far did not excite us at all, including the examples you gave us. Our impression about prog metal is "Dogs that bark but don't bite at all". All too clean and neat to be really aggressive.

Obviously saying only children like metal isn't valid, look how many adults play and buy metal music.

I don't like metal too much, maybe a few things here and there. but I don't understand the need to insult people and call them childish, to me that seems like very 'juvenile' behaviour.

Trademark wrote: Not using the quote from Corinthians to back up my position, just as an illustration that "perpetual youth" is not necessarily the best or only way to live.  Adolescence, like other seasons of life, is meant to end.  Most members here gave up Barney at some point, and metal, which is fiercely, even defiantly  adolescent, isn't any different. What I find juvenile is that you would feel insulted or threatened by an opinion.

Words like "childish", "ridiculous" etc. ... they may be based on personal opinions, but they are offensive. "Free speech" ... of course it's important, but it doesn't mean that I have to agree with everyone.

About the point you're trying to make: Who defines what's the best way to live? In the end we're all going to die. If I choose to continue to enjoy listening to metal, then I'll do that. It's not hurting anyone. It's my choice. Last week I was "celebrating" my 34th birthday ... I listen to all kind of music, some more sophisticated than most things that I liked as a teenager, but some as raw and "childish" as it gets. Like I said above: I love contrast. I can enjoy a nice red wine, or a cool beer. Among my most favorite albums of all time are beautiful Jazz albums like Karrin Allyson's Ballads: Remembering John Coltrane, but also highly offensive stuff like Celtic Frost - Monotheist. In my humble opinion this versatility of mine is a huge asset when it comes to giving advice to other prog fans. My goal is to judge music by quality alone, regardless of style. I'm not actively trying to enforce this "guideline", but my musical journey is taking me in that direction ... and I hope that it will last a while longer. I'd hate to see my musical scope reducing with age ... ideally it should be ever expanding, until the bitter end.

BaldFriede wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: BaldFriede wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: BaldFriede wrote: To sum it up: If you growl on a few songs: Nothing wrong with it. If you do it all the time: Ridiculous. Generally I'd say that whenever an artist uses a highly distinctive technique too much, there's a chance that people will grow tired of it. *Contrast* is something that I always look for in music ... but then again that doesn't mean that artists should change style all the time, does it? Every artist is (or should be) unique. If some use growling all the time (or double bass, another technique you don't like), contrast might be achieved by changing other elements of the music. To sum up my response: If the growling fits the music: nothing wrong with it. If it doesn't: I'm not comfortable with using words like "ridiculous" because I think they're disrespectful to the artist, but I certainly will give lower ratings to such albums. You still don't seem to get my take on double-bass drumming. I am not objected to it per se; in fact there is a drummer I like very much who plays with two bass drums (he is listed in the "different kind of drum poll I made; see if you can spot him there). http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=55755&FID=42 No, what I dislike is what most people do with a double bass-drum. They could learn a lot from the man I am talking of, who has a very tasteful way of using them. Of course that's MY taste only; others may disagree. I am actually thinking of getting a second hi-hat for my kit, by the way. As far as I know nobody has ever done that. . Makes at least as much sense as a double bass drum. I would actually like to take some songs which use excessive double bass-drumming and record them again using two hi-hats instead of two bass drums. Of course other changes would have to happen in the arrangement of the song. And with growling it is just the same. If it fits, fine; but just as with double bass-drumming people use it to excess. Since I am a in the culinary business, let me use a culinary metaphor: Double bass drumming is like a spice; use to much of it, and the flavour of the food gets lost; you only taste the spice. I think you're over-simplifying the matter. My guess is that you generally don't like the aggressiveness of metal, and you can't take it seriously. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but you can't really expect others to adopt such an extreme point of view. In any genre, if I want some advice I will try to find someone who likes what the genre is about. If I want some extreme metal recommendations I would try to find some one who enjoys growling and/or double bass, and the typical metal topics/lyrics. These persons will not like all the albums the same ... even among those albums which feature growling in every track an expert (as in: having listened to a great deal of albums) will tell you that some are better and some are worse, on some the growling is appropriate on on others not so much, and so on. What I'm trying to say is that your point of view is simply extremely biased. Yet you continue to look down on those who don't share it ... exemplified by your statement that those other drummers "could learn a lot" from the guy who *you* happen to like. I think that's the basic difference between you and me (or more specifically, between our posts): You tell people what's better than their favorite music and artists, I tell people what they might also enjoy. Not that there aren't bands that I don't like and which in my opinion are overrated ... but I don't have to mention it all the time. Wrong, totally wrong! I love aggressiveness! But I don't consider double bass-drumming to be aggressive at all, at least not those "thunderstorms". That's where we seem to differ. Actually I am pretty much disappointed by most prog metal bands because of the lack of aggressiveness. Speed and double-bass drumming don't make music aggressive at all when it is all flat and consonant and not in the least off-key, which is where real aggressiveness comes from, in my opinion. This is what mostly disappoints me about prog metal. There may be exceptions, but it is mostly right. Most prog metal bands are really "tame", in my opinion; I have yet to find a prog metal band that is as aggressive as, for example, High Tide.

Please, enough with the nit-picking! It's like you would be complaining about a horror movie if it doesn't actually frighten you. Of course metal is not really aggressive in the sense that it would intimidate the listener. But when I play some of the stuff to my mother, I'm pretty sure she would call it aggressive.

I surely know which kind of aggressiveness you're talking about - but I wouldn't call it that. Dark, Avant-Garde, Gloomy, Dissonant ... those are the attributes that I *guess* intrigue you. But, as much as I love them, I would say that the more you listen to them the more "tame" they become. You can get used to anything.

Getting back to metal: I love these types of aggressiveness ... from the "really tame", cheesy style of European Power Metal to old school, "nasty" Black Metal. And I can tell you that most of the listeners take the music seriously. Neither do most prog fans ... else they would hang themselves to some of those VdGG tunes ...

BaldFriede wrote: Jean and are currently taking a tour through all the prog metal bands in the archives, by the way, and listen to any sound examples we can find, weither here or on youtube or elsewhere. We are still at "A", so it will take some more time. Some bands which are filed under prog metal which we have already listened to we would have put under "heavy prog" and not under "prog metal". But we will make a complete report of our opinions (with seperate votes) once we have fisinshed with them all. So far nothing really exiting yet, but we only just started. And of course we will come across names which aere already familiar to us, though we are definitely not experts on prog metal. But that's mostly because of what we heard so far did not excite us at all, including the examples you gave us. Our impression about prog metal is "Dogs that bark but don't bite at all". All too clean and neat to be really aggressive.

I don't find High Tide to be aggressive either. Each to their own, I guess ...

BTW: You're very welcome to tag some albums at Progfreak.com ... or look up some albums based on the tags already assigned:

http://progfreak.com/home/charts.xhtml?y=*any&tags=avant_garde&g=metal

BaldFriede wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: BaldFriede wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: BaldFriede wrote: To sum it up: If you growl on a few songs: Nothing wrong with it. If you do it all the time: Ridiculous. Generally I'd say that whenever an artist uses a highly distinctive technique too much, there's a chance that people will grow tired of it. *Contrast* is something that I always look for in music ... but then again that doesn't mean that artists should change style all the time, does it? Every artist is (or should be) unique. If some use growling all the time (or double bass, another technique you don't like), contrast might be achieved by changing other elements of the music. To sum up my response: If the growling fits the music: nothing wrong with it. If it doesn't: I'm not comfortable with using words like "ridiculous" because I think they're disrespectful to the artist, but I certainly will give lower ratings to such albums. You still don't seem to get my take on double-bass drumming. I am not objected to it per se; in fact there is a drummer I like very much who plays with two bass drums (he is listed in the "different kind of drum poll I made; see if you can spot him there). http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=55755&FID=42 No, what I dislike is what most people do with a double bass-drum. They could learn a lot from the man I am talking of, who has a very tasteful way of using them. Of course that's MY taste only; others may disagree. I am actually thinking of getting a second hi-hat for my kit, by the way. As far as I know nobody has ever done that. . Makes at least as much sense as a double bass drum. I would actually like to take some songs which use excessive double bass-drumming and record them again using two hi-hats instead of two bass drums. Of course other changes would have to happen in the arrangement of the song. And with growling it is just the same. If it fits, fine; but just as with double bass-drumming people use it to excess. Since I am a in the culinary business, let me use a culinary metaphor: Double bass drumming is like a spice; use to much of it, and the flavour of the food gets lost; you only taste the spice. I think you're over-simplifying the matter. My guess is that you generally don't like the aggressiveness of metal, and you can't take it seriously. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but you can't really expect others to adopt such an extreme point of view. In any genre, if I want some advice I will try to find someone who likes what the genre is about. If I want some extreme metal recommendations I would try to find some one who enjoys growling and/or double bass, and the typical metal topics/lyrics. These persons will not like all the albums the same ... even among those albums which feature growling in every track an expert (as in: having listened to a great deal of albums) will tell you that some are better and some are worse, on some the growling is appropriate on on others not so much, and so on. What I'm trying to say is that your point of view is simply extremely biased. Yet you continue to look down on those who don't share it ... exemplified by your statement that those other drummers "could learn a lot" from the guy who *you* happen to like. I think that's the basic difference between you and me (or more specifically, between our posts): You tell people what's better than their favorite music and artists, I tell people what they might also enjoy. Not that there aren't bands that I don't like and which in my opinion are overrated ... but I don't have to mention it all the time. Wrong, totally wrong! I love aggressiveness! But I don't consider double bass-drumming to be aggressive at all, at least not those "thunderstorms". That's where we seem to differ. Actually I am pretty much disappointed by most prog metal bands because of the lack of aggressiveness. Speed and double-bass drumming don't make music aggressive at all when it is all flat and consonant and not in the least off-key, which is where real aggressiveness comes from, in my opinion. This is what mostly disappoints me about prog metal. There may be exceptions, but it is mostly right. Most prog metal bands are really "tame", in my opinion; I have yet to find a prog metal band that is as aggressive as, for example, High Tide.

Please, enough with the nit-picking! It's like you would be complaining about a horror movie if it doesn't actually frighten you. Of course metal is not really aggressive in the sense that it would intimidate the listener. But when I play some of the stuff to my mother, I'm pretty sure she would call it aggressive.

I surely know which kind of aggressiveness you're talking about - but I wouldn't call it that. Dark, Avant-Garde, Gloomy, Dissonant ... those are the attributes that I *guess* intrigue you. But, as much as I love them, I would say that the more you listen to them the more "tame" they become. You can get used to anything.

Getting back to metal: I love these types of aggressiveness ... from the "really tame", cheesy style of European Power Metal to old school, "nasty" Black Metal. And I can tell you that most of the listeners take the music seriously. Neither do most prog fans ... else they would hang themselves to some of those VdGG tunes ...

BaldFriede wrote: Jean and are currently taking a tour through all the prog metal bands in the archives, by the way, and listen to any sound examples we can find, weither here or on youtube or elsewhere. We are still at "A", so it will take some more time. Some bands which are filed under prog metal which we have already listened to we would have put under "heavy prog" and not under "prog metal". But we will make a complete report of our opinions (with seperate votes) once we have fisinshed with them all. So far nothing really exiting yet, but we only just started. And of course we will come across names which aere already familiar to us, though we are definitely not experts on prog metal. But that's mostly because of what we heard so far did not excite us at all, including the examples you gave us. Our impression about prog metal is "Dogs that bark but don't bite at all". All too clean and neat to be really aggressive.

I don't find High Tide to be aggressive either. Each to their own, I guess ...

BTW: You're very welcome to tag some albums at Progfreak.com ... or look up some albums based on the tags already assigned:

http://progfreak.com/home/charts.xhtml?y=*any&tags=avant_garde&g=metal

BaldFriede wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: BaldFriede wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: BaldFriede wrote: To sum it up: If you growl on a few songs: Nothing wrong with it. If you do it all the time: Ridiculous. Generally I'd say that whenever an artist uses a highly distinctive technique too much, there's a chance that people will grow tired of it. *Contrast* is something that I always look for in music ... but then again that doesn't mean that artists should change style all the time, does it? Every artist is (or should be) unique. If some use growling all the time (or double bass, another technique you don't like), contrast might be achieved by changing other elements of the music. To sum up my response: If the growling fits the music: nothing wrong with it. If it doesn't: I'm not comfortable with using words like "ridiculous" because I think they're disrespectful to the artist, but I certainly will give lower ratings to such albums. You still don't seem to get my take on double-bass drumming. I am not objected to it per se; in fact there is a drummer I like very much who plays with two bass drums (he is listed in the "different kind of drum poll I made; see if you can spot him there). http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=55755&FID=42 No, what I dislike is what most people do with a double bass-drum. They could learn a lot from the man I am talking of, who has a very tasteful way of using them. Of course that's MY taste only; others may disagree. I am actually thinking of getting a second hi-hat for my kit, by the way. As far as I know nobody has ever done that. . Makes at least as much sense as a double bass drum. I would actually like to take some songs which use excessive double bass-drumming and record them again using two hi-hats instead of two bass drums. Of course other changes would have to happen in the arrangement of the song. And with growling it is just the same. If it fits, fine; but just as with double bass-drumming people use it to excess. Since I am a in the culinary business, let me use a culinary metaphor: Double bass drumming is like a spice; use to much of it, and the flavour of the food gets lost; you only taste the spice. I think you're over-simplifying the matter. My guess is that you generally don't like the aggressiveness of metal, and you can't take it seriously. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but you can't really expect others to adopt such an extreme point of view. In any genre, if I want some advice I will try to find someone who likes what the genre is about. If I want some extreme metal recommendations I would try to find some one who enjoys growling and/or double bass, and the typical metal topics/lyrics. These persons will not like all the albums the same ... even among those albums which feature growling in every track an expert (as in: having listened to a great deal of albums) will tell you that some are better and some are worse, on some the growling is appropriate on on others not so much, and so on. What I'm trying to say is that your point of view is simply extremely biased. Yet you continue to look down on those who don't share it ... exemplified by your statement that those other drummers "could learn a lot" from the guy who *you* happen to like. I think that's the basic difference between you and me (or more specifically, between our posts): You tell people what's better than their favorite music and artists, I tell people what they might also enjoy. Not that there aren't bands that I don't like and which in my opinion are overrated ... but I don't have to mention it all the time. Wrong, totally wrong! I love aggressiveness! But I don't consider double bass-drumming to be aggressive at all, at least not those "thunderstorms". That's where we seem to differ. Actually I am pretty much disappointed by most prog metal bands because of the lack of aggressiveness. Speed and double-bass drumming don't make music aggressive at all when it is all flat and consonant and not in the least off-key, which is where real aggressiveness comes from, in my opinion. This is what mostly disappoints me about prog metal. There may be exceptions, but it is mostly right. Most prog metal bands are really "tame", in my opinion; I have yet to find a prog metal band that is as aggressive as, for example, High Tide.

Please, enough with the nit-picking! It's like you would be complaining about a horror movie if it doesn't actually frighten you. Of course metal is not really aggressive in the sense that it would intimidate the listener. But when I play some of the stuff to my mother, I'm pretty sure she would call it aggressive.

I surely know which kind of aggressiveness you're talking about - but I wouldn't call it that. Dark, Avant-Garde, Gloomy, Dissonant ... those are the attributes that I *guess* intrigue you. But, as much as I love them, I would say that the more you listen to them the more "tame" they become. You can get used to anything.

Getting back to metal: I love these types of aggressiveness ... from the "really tame", cheesy style of European Power Metal to old school, "nasty" Black Metal. And I can tell you that most of the listeners take the music seriously. Neither do most prog fans ... else they would hang themselves to some of those VdGG tunes ...

BaldFriede wrote: Jean and are currently taking a tour through all the prog metal bands in the archives, by the way, and listen to any sound examples we can find, weither here or on youtube or elsewhere. We are still at "A", so it will take some more time. Some bands which are filed under prog metal which we have already listened to we would have put under "heavy prog" and not under "prog metal". But we will make a complete report of our opinions (with seperate votes) once we have fisinshed with them all. So far nothing really exiting yet, but we only just started. And of course we will come across names which aere already familiar to us, though we are definitely not experts on prog metal. But that's mostly because of what we heard so far did not excite us at all, including the examples you gave us. Our impression about prog metal is "Dogs that bark but don't bite at all". All too clean and neat to be really aggressive.

I don't find High Tide to be aggressive either. Each to their own, I guess ...

BTW: You're very welcome to tag some albums at Progfreak.com ... or look up some albums based on the tags already assigned:

http://progfreak.com/home/charts.xhtml?y=*any&tags=avant_garde&g=metal

Dean wrote: I'm 51 I love metal - I admit it, I never want to grow-up. Your call.

I'm with Dean on this one, well mostly. Some metal gives me a headache, I'm not a huge fan of growling and I don't like the overuse of double bass drums, but last Sunday morning I got in the car and whacked on "In Flames" at overly loud volume. Fantastic!
Sometimes I feel like some quiet, relaxing music, sometimes the old brain cells need blasting. I don't see why it's "juvenile" or "comedy" (although it is hard to take some of them seriously at times).

Just to ease the tension ... rather than debating all the time, let's listen:

http://www.myspace.com/lambofgod

Their new album has just been released ... I think it's really great. Brilliant musicianship, songwriting, production ... and bursting with raw energy. Aggressive? Maybe. Childish? not in my opinion.

Trademark wrote: The quote from Corinthians and the use of the words juvenille & adolescent were meant to indicate (perhaps not clearly enough) a fairly well documented stage of physical and intellectual development; one which ends when the processes of body and brain development are complete (around age 20). The actual point I was trying to make is how odd it seems to me that people not only continue to choose music and other forms of entertainment (video games anyone?) that are designed for and marketed to an adolescent mentality.  Make no mistake about it, the marketing research department at the Roadrunner label has more people on it than all the band rosters put together.  This music is "marketing metal", and the target audience is High School boys and it shows.  I enjoyed it and listened to it in my season, but I don't understand adults treating it as if it were something other than what it is in a seemingly desperate attempt to "maintain a youthful spirit". The dogged determination to hold onto this part of life both confuses and amuses me.  Its at a pandemic level here in the states.  The idea that you can only be happy if you're young and totally stupid (which we all are at that age) is not so much the problem as the idea that you should never grow out of it.  Metal is a symptom (a hacking, growling cough), not the disease.

I guess it boils down to whether you'd like to be the pupil or the teacher on Pink Floyd's The Wall. I would choose the pupil ... and I don't think that somehow, at a certain age you're required to not be rebellious/adventurous anymore and instead become docile and tame - or even arrogant and narrow-minded.

BTW: Why do you always simplify the genre so much? Metal is not unlike many other genres in that it has a commercial aspect. But many bands are not commercial at all, and surely not all metal albums are equally bland and tasteless. Some are even mature and thoughtful ... it's a diverse genre. If you're so quick to dismiss music because of some juvenile traits - be careful, you might have to throw away large portions of prog rock as well.


Edited by Mr ProgFreak - March 02 2009 at 17:02