GREATEST METAL ALBUM CUP - Winner: Iron Maiden - Seventh Son of a Seventh Son!

Mosh said:
Most music that is enjoyed around here was created for the musicians' own pleasure. Those musicians were fortunate to find an audience that also appreciated that sort of thing, but the listener's preferences are usually the last thing that is considered. Some exceptions, such as classical music that was patronized by a church/monarchy or a lot of top 40 material, but just about everything in this game so far has been "masturbatory" in the way you describe. With that in mind, I fail to see how the term is descriptive.

What is more self indulgent and masturbatory than Iron Maiden playing A Matter of Life and Death in its entirety live when people came to hear Run to the Hills?
Click to expand...

Like I said in my original post "Whether it's fair to use that term when describing certain artist/albums might be a different matter". The point I was making is that if someone uses the term "wank" or a variation thereof, we understand exactly what that person is taking issue with. If someone described Maiden playing the enterity of AMOLAD as "wankery" for the reasons you mentioned, I wouldn't agree with them, but I'd certainly understand the point they were trying to make.
 
The Flash said:
It's a term based on taste, not a descriptive or axiomatic one. When you like what the artist is doing it becomes "artistic integrity", when you dislike it it becomes "self-indulgence". To suggest this is anything more than a matter of taste on the part of the observer of the art is hypocritical.
Click to expand...
... exactly.
 
To add to my previous post - From what I understand, self-indulgence is used when an artist is pushing the boundaries but it's not perceived by the observer as good in terms of his personal taste. In a general sense, all art that stems from the artist's passion for creating art and isn't specifically geared towards the enjoyment of the observer is self-indulgent. That's the first part of art, the creation, and it's an individual, one-way aspect. The reciprocal, two-way aspect happens in the second part, the display. It makes no sense to critique an artist for self-indulgence in the first part. You can only do so in the second part, and to do so would be based strictly on taste, not the motives of the artist in the first part.
 
The Flash said:
To add to my previous post - From what I understand, self-indulgence is used when an artist is pushing the boundaries but it's not perceived by the observer as good in terms of his personal taste. In a general sense, all art that stems from the artist's passion for creating art and isn't specifically geared towards the enjoyment of the observer is self-indulgent. That's the first part of art, the creation, and it's an individual, one-way aspect. The reciprocal, two-way aspect happens in the second part, the display. It makes no sense to critique an artist for self-indulgence in the first part. You can only do so in the second part, and to do so would be based strictly on taste, not the motives of the artist in the first part.
Click to expand...
Exceptionally summed up :ok:
 
Mosh said:
If you can't hear the purpose or direction in a piece of music, I think that is on you.

Also, why the dismissal of jamming? Improvised music has existed for many centuries and makes up a lot of what rock and metal developed out of. While it's not really my thing, there are entire genres of rock music that are entirely based around jamming. It can lead to a level of excitement and spontaneity that doesn't come from composed works.
Click to expand...
I'm not dismissing anyone or anything. I'm saying that when the listener hears the music and doesn't get anything from it, they think it has no direction...they will view it as self-indulgent music (art for the sake of art). Oh, and of course that's on them, but they still think it.

I'll call Three Minute Warning "wanky" because it just sounds so pointless and boring, tucked there at the end of the album. Random, pointless, unmemorable jamming, and it's there just because they can. But I'm absolutely not dismissing the idea of jamming/listening to this kind of stuff.
 
Shmoolikipod said:
Sure, I'll be saying that's their opinion. When I at least see adjectives like those, I just automatically say that's just how they felt while hearing the song... The same way when anyone says this song is good, beautiful, touching, epic.

I don't understand then how those statements are unjustifiable? That's how you (or at the very least, how I) express an opinion, whether positive or negative.
It doesn't matter if the reviewer thinks they're the voice of God, and that what they said is axiomatic. They still just stated an opinion, as valid as the next guy's, even if the words are harsh.
Click to expand...

In a thread that specifically asks participants to share their gut-level opinions on something, I think “wanking“ and “noise” gets the point across nicely.

Unfortunately, I missed this round, but am off to see whether I prefer the wankery to the bombast.
 
I liked both in the tie breaker for different reasons. Steele was cheesy fun. LTE was frenetic and musically impressive.
I take LTE. Sorry for botching up the poll again.
 
"Wanking" is almost always used perjoratively. Sure, some peeps are using it in a more nuanced and meaningful way (as some have attempted to argue here), but the majority aren't. Therein lies the conflict in usage.
 
Does anyone actually think either of these two albums are "the best" of anything?

I voted for LTE, but honestly couldn't give a crap about either of these bands/albums.
 
Whooten said:
Does anyone actually think either of these two albums are "the best" of anything?
Click to expand...
Whichever music website or magazine ranked them in their top 100 probably does. Or else they were trying to fit in music of all tastes to get as wide a readership as possible.
 
Whooten said:
Does anyone actually think either of these two albums are "the best" of anything?

I voted for LTE, but honestly couldn't give a crap about either of these bands/albums.
Click to expand...
Some people surely do. However, we (the people of Maidenfans.com) surely won't let them get close to the "best".
 
Some of the lists LC plundered yo set up the game are assembled via a mix of review averages + how often they were reviewed / given a rating. An album doesn’t have to be the greatest ever so long as enough people give it high marks because they like it.

And then there’s stuff like Rolling Stone...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top