American and European Metal

I simply disagree or I have heard other bands than you.

Well, could I also have some examples of those bands not stuck in the 80's or 90's, from America, that you like?

edit: Maiden never considered themselves Punk, they strongly deny it in their first biography. With arguments which I might type out here, later.
 
Forostar said:
Well, could I also have some examples of those bands not stuck in the 80's or 90's, from America, that you like?
Click to expand...

Read my post again. I said I hate their music. I merely like their attitude. That goes for bands like Avenged Sevenfold or Mastodon. Read again: I hate their music.

edit: Maiden never considered themselves Punk, they strongly deny it in their first biography. With arguments which I might type out here, later.
Click to expand...

I never said that either. I said people considered them punk back in the day, not that they considered themselves punk. That's a difference.
 
"They may have great songwriting and talented musicians, but they just don't bend the borders. That's why, for though I loathe the music itself, I greatly appreciate the American Metalcore bands, because they're not stuck in the 80's or 90's, but add and remove complete elements to their music not caring what people say."

Sorry, I thought that the blue part had to with the green part, which (I thought) was about European bands.

I didn't misread the second thing. I just added something of my own. And a lot of "people" didn't think consider Maiden punk either.
 
Forostar said:
"They may have great songwriting and talented musicians, but they just don't bend the borders. That's why, for though I loathe the music itself, I greatly appreciate the American Metalcore bands, because they're not stuck in the 80's or 90's, but add and remove complete elements to their music not caring what people say."

Sorry, I thought that the blue part had to with the green part, which (I thought) was about European bands.
Click to expand...

The green part was about European bands, the blue one about American ones. I'll explain it again, in other words: I think that nearly all recent European bands I heard kept doing the same thing. Many are good, and I really like that same thing, but it is always that same thing to my ears.
The American Metalcore bands are doing something different. I don't like what they're doing, but they're doing something different. And they're saying "fuck off" to everyone who says they suck for doing something different. That's what I appreciate. I still hate their music.
 
Perun said:
The green part was about European bands, the blue one about American ones. I'll explain it again, in other words: I think that nearly all recent European bands I heard kept doing the same thing. Many are good, and I really like that same thing, but it is always that same thing to my ears.
Click to expand...

That's indeed a matter of interpretation. I am glad that I find new things in some European bands.

Perun said:
The American Metalcore bands are doing something different. I don't like what they're doing, but they're doing something different. And they're saying "fuck off" to everyone who says they suck for doing something different. That's what I appreciate. I still hate their music.
Click to expand...

I wonder what that difference is, then. That genre is around for a while as well. How did they develop?
 
Forostar said:
That's indeed a matter of interpretation. I am glad that I find new things in some European bands.
Click to expand...

As I said (and that was the beginning of everything), I'd be happy to hear names. I simply haven't head the same bands as you did.

I wonder what that difference is, then. That genre is around for a while as well. How did they develop?
Click to expand...

It's just a comparison. I don't know shit about these bands. All I know comes from seeing such bands support Maiden. And reading one or two interviews along the way. So yeah, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's not so much an opinion as much more an impression.
 
Forostar said:
That's indeed a matter of interpretation. I am glad that I find new things in some European bands.

I wonder what that difference is, then. That genre is around for a while as well. How did they develop?
Click to expand...

Short version, "Metalcore is a fusion genre that incorporates elements of the hardcore punk and heavy metal genres. The term is a portmanteau of heavy metal and hardcore punk. While the term appears to have taken on its current meaning in the late 1990s (to describe Earth Crisis),[1] the rudiments of the genre were established as early as 1989 in the work of Integrity.[2]"

Long version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metalcore

I'm glad you find something new in the European scene, because it is definitely not the general consensus. Again, the supposed Second Golden Era is mostly carried by new 80's Scandinavian bands with the "new" elements being either a folkish or pseudo symphonic touch, but as stated by Perun, take away these "different touches" and you essentially get a Helloween/Stratovarius clone.

The NWOAHM is much more varied, again, just with Atreyu, Avenged Sevenfold and Mastodon as examples. Atreyu combines clean vocals with growls backed by a traditional metal sound. Avenged Sevenfold sings... "cleanly" M. Shadows voice is very raspy due to fucking it up during his stint in a death metal band, you can tell when he literally strains to reach higher notes, it is masked though through layered choruses. Mastodon's vocal and musical style is much more thrash, with aggressive, but not growling vocals a la Metallica/Motorhead.

Compare that to say.... Nightwish, Epica, Sirenia, Therion who all use the Opera soprano/Death growl formula with symphonic elements. or Hammerfall, Sonata Arctica and their progenitor Stratovarius. While far from 'symphonic" they do stick to high range vocalists, though male, unlike the symphonic bands that usually go for female leads.

To the untrained ear at the very least, though the people here probably know more about metal than the average joe, the American scene is currently more varied, if not more innovative, than the European. However, BOTH movements are enjoying a wave of popularity lost to metal through most of the 90s.
 
Just in case I didn't mean you are wrong, and the bands I mentioned might also not appear as innovative or new for everyone.

It's a big mass of metal, and a lot left to discover...

@Onhell:

Onhell said:
Compare that to say.... Nightwish, Epica, Sirenia, Therion who all use the Opera soprano/Death growl formula with symphonic elements. or Hammerfall, Sonata Arctica and their progenitor Stratovarius. While far from 'symphonic" they do stick to high range vocalists, though male, unlike the symphonic bands that usually go for female leads.
Click to expand...

I still can find differences between those bands. Within subgenres (such as melodic death metal) there are many different bands and styles as well. Especially in Scandinavia.

With all respect, the descriptions of the American bands that you gave, all that stuff has been done in Europe as well. Maybe America's development came later than in Europe, but that doesn't mean that I -a European- see this development in America as something new. Even though we haven't agreed on what innovative exactly means, I would never say that American metal is more innovative than European.
 
Forostar, I think you underestimate how much I appreciate the Scandinavian metal scene.  Scandinavia is probably the region that contributes the most to my music listening; at least I listen to more bands from Scandinavia than from any other region.  I do appreciate the Scandinavian metal scene, even though I accused it of being rather uninnovating (see Onhell's post, he said it much better).  However, like Onhell, I don't think that simply adding symphonic touches (as an example) makes a band new; Nightwish and others did that already in the 90s.  

You probably do know more about the Scandinavian metal scene than I do, but I think our definition of "innovating" varies.  I don't consider small new touches really innovating because, let's face it, melodic death metal with symphonic elements is still melodic death metal.  It's still melodic, uses growled (and possibly clean also) vocals, and draws the majority of its influence from the original innovators of its genre: Dark Tranquillity, At the Gates, In Flames, Carcass, and the like.  Those bands were properly innovating, and I think that's where our disagreement stems from: I demand more from a band for it to be properly "innovating".

However, I don't really care about that because I'm still happy with the older 80s/90s bands.  Almost all of them are still touring, making new albums, and in general being very active.  However, my point was that, at least in Scandinavia, it does seem that the older 90s bands are really upholding the metal scene, not new bands.  Maybe their time will also come.

Edit: Oops, I didn't notice your latest post.
 
Perun said:
The green part was about European bands, the blue one about American ones. I'll explain it again, in other words: I think that nearly all recent European bands I heard kept doing the same thing. Many are good, and I really like that same thing, but it is always that same thing to my ears.
The American Metalcore bands are doing something different. I don't like what they're doing, but they're doing something different. And they're saying "fuck off" to everyone who says they suck for doing something different. That's what I appreciate. I still hate their music.
Click to expand...

I fail to see how endlessly recycling riffs from 'Slaughter of the Soul' and other mid-to-late 80s/early 90s albums can be seen as original.  On the other hand, there's just as much homogeneity in the European scene as there is in the American scene, and for every Trivium, Avenged Sevenfold, Scar Symmetry and Opeth, you can find Ulvers, Wolves in the Throne Rooms, Primordials and Deathspell Omegas, to name but a few.  Both scenes are churning out homogeneous, bland, overproduced metal, and to say that one side is more original than the other is quite flawed when, really, the sounds are not that far removed from each other, anyway.  Both have excessibely triggered drums, sterile production, same old harsh vocals (whether 'screamo' or growls)...the metalcore movement may be flipping the bird to the critics, but when they have the virtually unconditional support of most of the mainstream press, that's not really much of a venture, is it?

And, for the record, I agree with Perun, that some of the 'same old' metal is not necessarily a bad thing.  But I fail to see just what metalcore bands are doing differently, since their song construction, instrumentation and style is not exactly built to be unconventional or avant-garde.
 
It’s not a quick process to appreciate “metal in general”.

E.g., for me it took about three years to get into the harder kind of (death/black) metal.
And the following also took years: Within every (sub)genre I discovered interesting and less interesting bands. In other words, I learnt what to appreciate in bands and what not.

Sometimes, categorizing a band can be misleading. I disagree with:

“melodic death metal with symphonic elements is still melodic death metal”.

Why? Because band A with growl and keyboard can still sound different than band B with growl and keyboard. It depends on how instruments are integrated in the music, the use (or the lack of) of choirs, the kind of rhythms, the variety in the guitar work, the melodies that are used, the vocals, the list is endless. 

Over the last couple years I am consuming less and less metal, in a sense of number of different bands. I’ve seen this development coming. It’s too much to follow all, but it’s still cool to pick out new quality bands (I know that’s personal).

“Quality or quantity, a choice you have to make”
Greg Graffin (Bad Religion, 1990)
 
I think our disagreement stems from perspective. Most of the conversation pertains to the big picture, two movements on opposite sides of the Atlantic, subgenres as a whole and the overlaping similarities across bands and even in both movements. You keep bringing it to minute details and emphasis their importance. I agree that it makes a big difference HOW a band uses the symphonic elements (which is why Haggard kicks ass, yet similar bands SUCK), but in the end I personally feel these details do get lost and lose importance in the big picture. Reason being while we may know our metal, what I wanted to bring to the fore is the argument that said movements are supposedly bringing metal as a whole back into the limelight, in other words to people that either don't know metal too well or at all, to audiences who wouldn't be able to differentiate Dark Tranquility from In Flames... ok maybe that's exaggerating, but you get the idea.
 
Since this thread has been resurrected a couple of times already, I thought I'd throw in a thought:

I've been wondering why big bands always tour with so bad warm-up bands.  It seems any reasonably big metal band always chooses American metalcore (or similar) bands as their openers.  Of "big" bands I've seen/will see soon:
Maiden: Avenged Sevenfold, Trivium two years ago
Slayer: Trivium, Mastodon (also Amon Amarth but that's very different and I like them)
Metallica: Lamb of God, Mastodon
In addition, Tuska Open Air, Scandinavia's biggest metal festival, had Killswitch Engage as one of the main bands on the bill, which I believe was the first time a metalcore band was on the main stage.
That's three, but there have been tours in other parts of the world with similar bands opening for big bands.  This just made me wonder whether these big bands see something we don't, or at least acknowledge it; are these metalcore bands the future of metal, and that's why the big bands are helping them by taking them as openers?  I think local smaller bands as openers instead of globally touring metalcore bands would be a lot better and more enjoyable for most of the audience.  There's loads of great small bands that haven't got far in many countries, and they'd make great openers as well as allow metalheads to feel more in touch with their local metal scenes.  When I saw Megadeth in February there was a Danish band (Volbeat) and a Finnish folk metal band (Ensiferum), and they were a lot more interesting to watch than Avenged Sevenfold last summer.

And it just pisses me off to see these bad American bands multiple times a year just because they're opening for good bands.
 
In the previous century, things were different. Iron Maiden support acts in the nineties:
Helloween, Megadeth, My Dying Bride.

Nowadays, I guess it's more about "supporting" these support-bands.
 
I don't see why people have so much against Mastodon. They're not a favourite of mine by any means, but I thought Blood Mountain had some really interesting stuff on it. The instrumental work is excellent.
 
Well, to be honest, I just clump them under the "new American bands" group along with the likes of Trivium, Killswitch Engage, and Avenged Sevenfold.  I've never given much attention to them to be honest, I've barely heard some songs.
 
Shadow said:
I don't see why people have so much against Mastodon. They're not a favourite of mine by any means, but I thought Blood Mountain had some really interesting stuff on it. The instrumental work is excellent.
Click to expand...

I agree.  I like Blood Mountain quite a bit. 

Not in the same category as the "newer" American bands, but just curious why Symphony X gets relatively little love on these boards.  Just picked up Paradise Lost recently, and it is awesome.  
 
Mastodon are great. Leviathan and Blood Moutain are amazing albums. As for Symphony X. I like them a lot. Initially I found them too much of a Dream Theater Clone, but they've grown on me. My favorite albums are Twilight on Olympus and The Odyssey. Paradise Lost, while it's their heaviest and has it's moments I found it too boring and unoriginal. Their build-ups and solos are the same from previous efforts or they do what too many bands already do, I expected more from them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top