the 70s prog scene's attitude to early metal

Svetonio wrote: SteveG wrote: Svetonio wrote: silverpot wrote: Strange, I don't recall anyone refering to "metal" during the 70s. Hard rock, but not Metal. Nick Logan and Bob Woffinden were mentioned "heavy-metal" the term several times in The illustrated New Musical Express Encyclopedia of Rock ( 1976 and 1977 Salamander Books Ltd. London, UK). You can read that in the chapters of Led Zeppelin, Uriah Heep, Black Sabbath ( they wrote: "the band get an affirmation as one of the most successful British heavy-metal export acts"), Kiss, also in that separate entry for Ritchie Blackmore (they wrote: "founder of British heavy-metal band Deep Purple"). Did the article go on to say how Led Zeppelin and Ritchie Blackmore from Purple loathed the term 'heavy metal' as they felt it put them in a musical box that they were not willing to be shoved into at the time? I doubt it, but that's how even contemporary history is writtin at times, if Hitler is anything to go by. Who really cares how a musician wants his work to be labeled?

The musician cares. It is he, she or they that have created the music not the audience or the music press and have every right, if not more, to say how they feel their music should be labeled, especially in regards to a new genre.   

Edited by SteveG - July 25 2014 at 14:34

Svetonio wrote: SteveG wrote: Svetonio wrote: SteveG wrote: Svetonio wrote: silverpot wrote: Strange, I don't recall anyone refering to "metal" during the 70s. Hard rock, but not Metal. Nick Logan and Bob Woffinden were mentioned "heavy-metal" the term several times in The illustrated New Musical Express Encyclopedia of Rock ( 1976 and 1977 Salamander Books Ltd. London, UK). You can read that in the chapters of Led Zeppelin, Uriah Heep, Black Sabbath ( they wrote: "the band get an affirmation as one of the most successful British heavy-metal export acts"), Kiss, also in that separate entry for Ritchie Blackmore (they wrote: "founder of British heavy-metal band Deep Purple"). Did the article go on to say how Led Zeppelin and Ritchie Blackmore from Purple loathed the term 'heavy metal' as they felt it put them in a musical box that they were not willing to be shoved into at the time? I doubt it, but that's how even contemporary history is writtin at times, if Hitler is anything to go by. Who really cares how a musician wants his work to be labeled? The musician cares. It is he, she or they that have created the music not the audience or the music press and have every right, if not more, to say how they feel their music should be labeled, especially in regards to a new genre.    Of course that a musician cares, and yet often the musicans strongly disagree in press with how they are labeled by audience, but their "protests" never was / never will change the audience's thoughts.

The metal tag attached to Zeppelin is still after the fact because as I stated, the group abhorred the metal tag as constricting and vulgar and the British music press went along with them for quite a while. So the claim that they are the God fathers of metal is a retro claim in their case and one that they still abhor up this day.

Edited by SteveG - July 25 2014 at 15:02

SteveG wrote: Svetonio wrote: SteveG wrote: Svetonio wrote: SteveG wrote: Svetonio wrote: silverpot wrote: Strange, I don't recall anyone refering to "metal" during the 70s. Hard rock, but not Metal. Nick Logan and Bob Woffinden were mentioned "heavy-metal" the term several times in The illustrated New Musical Express Encyclopedia of Rock ( 1976 and 1977 Salamander Books Ltd. London, UK). You can read that in the chapters of Led Zeppelin, Uriah Heep, Black Sabbath ( they wrote: "the band get an affirmation as one of the most successful British heavy-metal export acts"), Kiss, also in that separate entry for Ritchie Blackmore (they wrote: "founder of British heavy-metal band Deep Purple"). Did the article go on to say how Led Zeppelin and Ritchie Blackmore from Purple loathed the term 'heavy metal' as they felt it put them in a musical box that they were not willing to be shoved into at the time? I doubt it, but that's how even contemporary history is writtin at times, if Hitler is anything to go by. Who really cares how a musician wants his work to be labeled? The musician cares. It is he, she or they that have created the music not the audience or the music press and have every right, if not more, to say how they feel their music should be labeled, especially in regards to a new genre.    Of course that a musician cares, and yet often the musicans strongly disagree in press with how they are labeled by audience, but their "protests" never was / never will change the audience's thoughts. The metal tag attached to Zeppelin is still after the fact because as I stated, the group abhorred the metal tag as constricting and vulgar and the British music press went along with them for quite a while. So the claim that they are the God fathers of metal is a retro claim in their case and one that they still abhor up this day.

Led Zeppelin took a lot of space in the aforementioned book, the authors wrote that about them in superlatives, so I do not believe that the heavy metal tag much harm the band heritage as they themselves are harmed (imo).

Edited by Svetonio - July 25 2014 at 15:18

Raccoon wrote: What a strange idea, calling Led Zep 'heavy-metal'. They seem so far from it... Hard-blues...? Blues with a rock edge does NOT make it 'heavy-metal'. (...)

Of course, I agree that it is strange by our today's perception, but for Nick Logan and Bob Woffinden (who actually wrote the superlatives about the band) back then in 1976/1977 - that *heavy metal* tag for Led Zep was nothing strange and that's it.

Edited by Svetonio - July 25 2014 at 15:31

Especially when that book was revised and rewritten in 1983 

No worries, claiming it's a first edition is easy enough 

^You are still missing the point so I'll say it again. The term 'metal' was used more in American pop culture in the early to mid seventies than it ever was in the UK for the reasons I listed numerous times. It was not until after punk rock exploded in the UK that the 'metal" tag started to be used with some regularity, and even then it was used with confusion. That's why I sugested to the member from Sweden that may have been the reason why he did not recall the term 'metal' being used in the seventies but only 'hard rock'. I worked in the UK at various times in the seventies and that's how I recall it. Because a different term for a genre of music was available on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean or stated in a book does not mean that it was commonly used. Hopefully you understood my point. now 








Edited by SteveG - July 26 2014 at 11:38

LSDisease wrote: Brits always prefered simple music so it's truly amazing that prog rock was invented in Britain. Brits like it simple, they loved punk rock from the start and that love never vanished.  British music in the 60's was the core, the 70's British prog rock the best stuff on earth, the 80's new wave of British heavy metal saved British music in the decade dominated by the US hard rock. The 90's and so on for the British music was a disaster. British music doesn't exist anymore. IQ release album from time to time but nobody cares and that's it.

But where was punk rock invented? If anything, the Brits took American forms and made them more complex like Chicago blues into electric blues rock and then electric blues rock into long  form Sabbath and Zeppelin progressive blues rock. See what I mean?

Edited by SteveG - July 26 2014 at 15:30

^I'm no expert on punk by a long shot but I think it started with the American band Television in 1973. Accounts probably differ so we might need to pick Dean's brain on this one. And then get back to the topic.

Edited by SteveG - July 26 2014 at 15:27

presdoug wrote: I remember in the 70s, the proggers and the metalers would point fingers at each other, with a kind of "Why you moron?" attitude. No kidding. I am generalising, of course, but I remember the mental warfare.