non prog metal vote

I find Metallica and their ilk tedious and soulless.

They are not to my taste.I have heard all their albums and they do nothing for me.If you criticise something on this forum you are automatically accused of either never having heard any of the band's music or having an axe to grind.I do not like Metallica's style at all.I do believe that I have heard it all before, but that is because they do not affect me positively-there is nothing wrong with this view,otherwise everybody would like every kind of music.

And the whole point of a discussion is that people have differing opinions - just because yours are held to question doesn't mean that they're being shot down in flames, it's simply that someone else has different opinions to your own and wishes to discuss salient points.

You are arguing about my taste in music. I understand you when you say you are discussing what I have opined, but I made it pretty clear that it was a matter of my personal taste-which obviously, is not open for argument.

I'm not arguing about your taste, I'm simply making the case against the qualifiers you used. I disagreed with what you said.

You've made another salient point that I cannot agree with - I am puzzled as to where you could have heard Metallica's style before (unless you mean Metal Church). I am simply curious, and wish to know what "Kill 'Em All" reminds you of, as it came completely out of the blue as far as I can tell - there was simply very little by way of precedent for Metallica's thrashing style.

When I wrote "I've heard it all before" I wasnt referring to their "style" as such,just the small things such as the chords, notes and arrangements No,seriously, just as I accept that Geddy Lee's vocals put many people off Rush,as soon as I hear that growl it puts me off.It homogenises the whole genre to me.I am not saying that is a sound technical argument-just the effect it has on me.

The chords, notes and arrangements... er... how deep do you want to go? I could argue that the atonal composers of the early 1900s used up all the notes and chords... I don't understand that argument obviously couldnt see the () I explain after the ()

. One of the points I was making was that they spearheaded this whole new style - I even quoted some influences. I could go into a discussion on how music evolves - but I'm sure that's easy enough to grasp on any level...

Of course, the inspirations are evident - Diamond Head, Motorhead, Budgie, Hawkwind, Black Sabbath, Killing Joke et al - but what I'm getting at is that the style Metallica evolved was unique, albeit with the usual bandwagon jumpers close behind, and inspiration to just about every metal band these days (even if they don't openly admit it - there's more prestige to saying you're inspired by Rush, but less evidence in most bands' music).
Might be on this forum,but not in real life trust me.Ask Rhythm magazine. The editor (at that time) once said (I kid you not!) "in future I am going to edit out any reference to Neil Peart in interviews"

Sorry, old chap - I don't get that. What "might be on this forum"? err " more prestige to saying you're inspired by Rush"

It's not a case of axe-grinding, just basic, open curiosity.

I'm not suggesting that you have but you dont seem to understand that if that type of metal does nothing for me,I am not going to persevere and scratch the surface. Maybe it is an age thing-but that is the reaction I have.To me,I repeat,I cant get past the ridiculous vocals-so it all sounds the same to me.

You don't have that problem with Lemmy?
No,in the same way I dont have a problem with Lee,it's just the old adage "beauty is in the eye of the beholder"-you know,put two equally desirable objects side by side ask someone to choose and then get them to explain the choice.....you seem to want to make music appreciation an exact science, and maybe that works for you,but not for most people I believe.

Cert sees things in them that I dont. He also occasionally has difficulty from discerning the difference between "opinion" and "fact".

er... actually, I hear things that you don't... maybe I should lay off the cactus juice
It seems to me that any person liking music that someone else dislikes will necessarily hear something the other doesnt.That seems obvious and something that you dont appear to understand.I mean that's the basis of musical taste isnt it?

That was a kind of jokey aside...
Yes, I know () but you miss the point-that is exactly why different people like certain groups in a genre but not others:I mean explain liking Triumvirat but not ELP or visa-versa.

As to the last comment, we all have difficulty drawing the line, and I know I blur it occasionally, but I'm not going to write "IMO" every time I express an opinion.

I agree about the "IMO", but early in my prog archives membership,I was savaged (not by you) for suggesting that writing "IMO" was stupid and unnecessary tautology. I was informed it was a necessary "Forum Protocol" ()

I think it's good protocol to make it reasonably clear where you're expressing opinions - and it's always good to back up opinions with some understanding - which is why I only tend to chime in with positive ones. It might make me look a bit of a "fanboy", but it's better than posting empty negative opinions that have no substance (that wasn't a direct dig, BTW, it was a generalism that applies to the real offenders on this forum).

Give over-you know there is only you and I reading this dross......

If he believes more prog-metal bands have been influenced by Metallica than Rush,that is his opinion.

I just use my ears and hear the openly stolen riffs.
Is it not more like handling stolen goods?

Being an avid "browser" in my local newsagent,I have read many, many musician's magazines and from what I can see, the percentage of prog-metal musicians who cite Rush as their major influence is so high as you can virtually,but not actually,say all of them.This I cant prove,but have no reason to be dishonest or mistaken about this.To me it is a fact.

Yes, but the number of those bands who incorporate Rush-style riffs in their music can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand. I'm guessing, of course - I just haven't heard many bands that remind me in any way of Rush.

The thrashing style that Metallica pioneered is evident almost everywhere in prog and nu-metal.
So, are you saying that Metallica invented Thrash Metal, if so why dont you just say that and your post will make more sense.

No - I'm saying they spearheaded the whole genre. As it stands, I believe that Metal Church invented the thrash style - but they were part of a whole culture in San Francisco from whence the genre emerged 23 or so years ago. Since it's still very much alive, it strikes me that here is a musical genre that has survived longer than most - pretty much unchanged. So it must be fairly fundamentally important in recent musical evolution - even if you don't like it!
Because it is servicable headbanging music for headbangers who dont want anything too complicated.
As for growling vocals......wtf is that all about?

I wrote a paper about that for my 20th Century music exams - what I said boils down to the fact that the music is growly, so the vocals were made growly to suit it. I find Death (early albums) particularly funny in that respect. I got a starred first for that paper 

(doesn't mean I was right, of course - I just argued the case and the examiner agreed. Easiest and most fun paper I ever sat!)

If this view is symptomatic of my lack of understanding of this particular sub-genre, then so be it.

It is - it shows that you haven't listened to much of it. Your call, of course, there are many here who don't even accept prog metal as a sub-genre of prog - and I can sympathise with that.

I just think that, since the music is well over 20 years old now, you might find something of interest in there. If nothing else, I'd recommend a listen to "Master of Puppets" and "...And Justice for All". Then listen to "Images and Words" by Dream Theater - and laugh at the amount of plagiarism.

........Re-listen to Master and Puppets...........

Re-listen - yes! Good idea! It's a great album.

if you like that sort of thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As I said - if you can think of a single pre-1986 album that does everything you hear on "Master of Puppets", or a single album that pre-empts "Kill 'Em All" (apart from Metal Church's debut, which I know about) - I'd be very interested to hear it to fill in the gaps in my historical knowledge. I truly believe it is a classic that has yet to get the wide acceptance it deserves. I can, of course, elucidate further...
 Who was it who said "pedantry is the last refuge of the anally-retentive"

I dunno - you?

Doh!

I have a recording of my mother-in-law's dog yapping along to Paranoid- if you want to take it off my hands,Cert!

You're too kind. But no thanks - I've already got a copy of Meddle...