Goth and Metal?
Me vs. You
I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
a lot of the goth people are just weird.
What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
the music and styles from both sides.
What's the big difference?
A
The big difference is that metal is metal and goth is goth.
Give us a break, what next cross posting between the metal NG and the
cheeseburger one and soliciting comparisons???
One Sad Bunny
A wrote:
> The big difference is that metal is metal and goth is goth.
> Give us a break, what next cross posting between the metal NG and the
> cheeseburger one and soliciting comparisons???
Actually, I could come up with comparisons between metal and anything
with Cheese.
Nowadays, wouldn't a crossposting between AG and a Raver newsgroup be a
little more apropos?
--
Kangal
Everyone loses, no one wins/I have seen the future/And this is how it
begins
Chaos and riots/Screeching machines/No right and no wrong/And no
in-between/
They fall one by one/The queen to her fool/Dos dedos mis
amigos/Everything's cool...
CATACOMB: http://www.catacomb.org
INSTY-PRINTS: http://www.dcinsty.com
maggot
"Me vs. You" wrote:
>
> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
It probably has a lot to do with jerks who insist on discussing the
differences in music and constantly going on about the differences
between people.
> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
> the music and styles from both sides.
What gives is that people like you can't see far enough into the past to
see that said crossover is a very recent phenominon.
> What's the big difference?
That wierdoes and whiners keep bringing it up forcing people to
constantly pontificate on the subject.
maggot
--
"The first casualty of the war for profit is the capacity to make
elementary rational connections. -David Cromwell and David Edwards
maggot
One Sad Bunny wrote:
>
> A wrote:
>
> > The big difference is that metal is metal and goth is goth.
> > Give us a break, what next cross posting between the metal NG and the
> > cheeseburger one and soliciting comparisons???
>
> Actually, I could come up with comparisons between metal and anything
> with Cheese.
>
> Nowadays, wouldn't a crossposting between AG and a Raver newsgroup be a
> little more apropos?
Or Metal and Madonna, I mean they've both been protested...
maggot
Dark Nite
"Me vs. You" <me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote in message
news:7kp80ts9fl55tpijp...@4ax.com...
>
> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
>
> the music and styles from both sides.
>
>
I think the major difference is that a lot of Goth has a kind of melancholy
dark vibe to it, where as the darker metal stuff is aggressive. It's sort of
the difference between the characters in the Anne Rice novels- you got that
wuss, Louis- who is sad and doesn't want to be a vampire. Then you got
Lestat- the ultimate hunter, who revels in the pain he brings and the curse
that has been put upon him. Lestat is metal. dark...@optonline.net
Liz
Me vs. You <me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote in message
news:7kp80ts9fl55tpijp...@4ax.com...
>
> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
>
> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
> the music and styles from both sides.
>
> What's the big difference?
>
>
I think goth and metal should blend together(although alot of goths and
metalheads totally dissagree with me)........between goth and metal...I
prefer metal.....but, I choose some of the darker metal(by darker, not
harder)...the band who has bridged metal and goth the best IMO is
Metallica....they have what I call a "Classical Metal" sound that blends
what I term goth and metal.....that's one of the things that seperated
Metallica from everyone else.....and why I think they're the best out
there.....I vote for the Goth/Metal sound!
Liz
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
<me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote:
>
>I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
>a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
>people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
>metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
>a lot of the goth people are just weird.
>
>What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
>the music and styles from both sides.
>
>What's the big difference?
>
This is very generalized, but here's my personal view:
Metal=macho, often aggressive, big guitar riffs, almost obligatory
soloing(which I find more "acrobatic" and "athletic" than "musical"),
often homophobic, and more of a "knock you on the head with power"
kind of aesthetic.
Goth=androgynous(sometimes very feminine), glam and punk influenced
(few heavyassed chugging guitars, as one finds in metal), more
ambient/atmospheric/ethereal(however one wants to say that)guitars,
deals more with personal issues and personally relevent imagery,
simple solos(if any) that accent the song and express a feeling rather
than dominating it and showing off how many inversions the guitarist
can do on a scale through a distortion pedal, and more of a "draw you
in" sort of aesthetic....
To put it extremely simply, Metal tends to be more extroverted, while
Goth tends to be more introverted.
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
wrote:
....so have some Goth bands...
When I saw the Cure this past summer, there were some christians
warning us against the evils of "sodomy, drug use"..etc...
maggot
> >One Sad Bunny wrote:
Well, they've clrearly targeted the right group in that department -
sheesh!
I rememeber being so glad I turned down the gid at Cal Expo Amphitheatre
when I bumped into a buddy who's primary job involved mopping up the
blood after the Country Western concerts, you know God and Country types
Like Willie and Reba.
What about the evils of smashing your fist into somebodies face while
Willie reinvents 'Crazy' for the hundredth time?
maggot
Dark Nite
"Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" <revca...@myemailwashacked.net> wrote in message
news:3a053453...@news.pacifier.com...
obligatory but actually a nescessary tool to infuse the feeling of chaos and
perhaps anxiety to the situation expressed in the songs. (that is what good
guitarists do anyway). I guess you feel that Paginni's classical works
aren't musical? Just because a guitarist plays fast doesn't mean he is not
expressing an emotion. Even if it's pure anger- isn't anger an emotion?
Dark Nite
"Liz" <grnm...@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:pAdN5.909$1z1.2...@nnrp1.sbc.net...
> I think goth and metal should blend together(although alot of goths and
> metalheads totally dissagree with me)........between goth and metal...I
> prefer metal.....but, I choose some of the darker metal(by darker, not
> harder)...the band who has bridged metal and goth the best IMO is
> Metallica....they have what I call a "Classical Metal" sound that blends
> what I term goth and metal.....that's one of the things that seperated
> Metallica from everyone else.....and why I think they're the best out
> there.....I vote for the Goth/Metal sound!
>
>
> Liz
>
>I fail to see the "goth" in anything that Metallica has done. Please
explain.
Me vs. You
>"Me vs. You" wrote:
>>
>> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
>> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
>> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
>> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
>> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
>>
>> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
>> the music and styles from both sides.
>>
>> What's the big difference?
>
>The big difference is that metal is metal and goth is goth.
>Give us a break, what next cross posting between the metal NG and the
>cheeseburger one and soliciting comparisons???
Bite me.
Me vs. You
>
>"Liz" <grnm...@swbell.net> wrote in message
>news:pAdN5.909$1z1.2...@nnrp1.sbc.net...
>>
>> Me vs. You <me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:7kp80ts9fl55tpijp...@4ax.com...
>
>> I think goth and metal should blend together(although alot of goths and
>> metalheads totally dissagree with me)........between goth and metal...I
>> prefer metal.....but, I choose some of the darker metal(by darker, not
>> harder)...the band who has bridged metal and goth the best IMO is
>> Metallica....they have what I call a "Classical Metal" sound that blends
>> what I term goth and metal.....that's one of the things that seperated
>> Metallica from everyone else.....and why I think they're the best out
>> there.....I vote for the Goth/Metal sound!
I agree...although lately Metallica has gotten away from the
goth themes with their music, and are more in the arena of
mainstream metal these days. Not to mention that they're a
bunch of assholes for their whole Napster lawsuit thing.
>>I fail to see the "goth" in anything that Metallica has done. Please
>explain.
Some of their earlier work centered around death and other goth-like
themes. Their 'Ride the Lightning' album had songs on it like 'Fade to
Black' that opened with a dark and gloomy suicide theme (before
the blaring metal part of it began). There was also the song 'Call
of Ktulu' that has a very dark goth-like vibe to it (and it's loosely
based on the HP Lovecraft 'Call of Cthulhu' story, which to me
is sorta goth).
Me vs. You
>"Me vs. You" wrote:
>>
>> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
>> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
>> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
>> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
>> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
>
>It probably has a lot to do with jerks who insist on discussing the
>differences in music and constantly going on about the differences
>between people.
What's the problem with people being different and accepting
each other as different? We're not all the same, aside from simply
being part of the same species, and I wouldn't want everyone
to be the same.
>> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
>> the music and styles from both sides.
>
>What gives is that people like you can't see far enough into the past to
>see that said crossover is a very recent phenominon.
Really? I've noticed it since the early 80's. So, you consider
a couple decades ago to be "recent"?
>> What's the big difference?
>
>That wierdoes and whiners keep bringing it up forcing people to
>constantly pontificate on the subject.
"Weirdos and whiners"? Just who has the problem with accepting
people that are different here?
Bite me.
maggot
"Me vs. You" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 04 Nov 2000 22:57:04 GMT, maggot <mag...@monkeybrains.net> wrote:
>
> >It probably has a lot to do with jerks who insist on discussing the
> >differences in music and constantly going on about the differences
> >between people.
>
> What's the problem with people being different and accepting
> each other as different?
I don't know, you're the one who brought it up. All I said was that
there's a problem with endlessly pontificating about them. It tends to
bring subtle differences forward in a way that blows them out of
proportion to what people actually have in common.
> >> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
> >> the music and styles from both sides.
> >
> >What gives is that people like you can't see far enough into the past to
> >see that said crossover is a very recent phenominon.
>
> Really? I've noticed it since the early 80's. So, you consider
> a couple decades ago to be "recent"?
You notices a crossover between goth and metal since the early
eighties? What enlightened scene do you hail from that gave you such a
perspective back when the genres had only just begun to gel around a
definable label, especially considering their roots.
What the old Rob Halford connaction?
> >> What's the big difference?
> >
> >That wierdoes and whiners keep bringing it up forcing people to
> >constantly pontificate on the subject.
>
> "Weirdos and whiners"? Just who has the problem with accepting
> people that are different here?
>
> Bite me.
Like I said, you're the one who brought it up. As far as I'm concerned,
from what you've said, your music tastes are right in line with mine,
back to Master of Puppets and my first Joy Division tape. I wasn't
referring to you, but to your qestion, specifically the part where you
said "Some goths seem to hate
metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that a lot of the
goth people are just weird."
I was trying to say that it is people like them who make people like you
wonder what the big difference is. To me the difference is obvious, I
spent my teen years having half my music collection bashed on by my
friends depending on who I was hanging around with because the
"crossover" was in no way apparent to people in general until the mid
90's, when goth hit critical mass and became a household word. Most
people who have been in one scene or another tend to rail against the
idea that Joy Division, Sex Gang Children, and Siouxie copuld have ever
found an audience with the Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax crowd, though
many people like myself crossed over, that had more to do with my
diverse tases and not any inherent similarities in the music so much as
the content of the songs.
But like there are goth songs about partying, chicks, and politically
incorrect behavior, I would not attempt to define a music genre by the
subject of their songs before giving precendence to the sound.
Which brings us to the one and only part of my post that you should take
personally. The fact is that it was not until the 90's that the
creation of a third genre best described as black metal which combines
elements of both goth and metal, i.e. Marylin Manson, but not appealing
to either the goth or metal crowd in general took place. This event, if
you will, provoked the introduction for many to the genre of goth
(erroneously as us crusties would have it) and thus the similarities
seemed obvious to many, though they were only the result of a recent
fusion, and only losley their proximity to one another in the past.
Crossover, yes, as far back as the 70's there are origins for both
genres, but generally and at large the genres are as disparate as their
adherents, black leather aside.
maggot
Jetrock
>
>>>I fail to see the "goth" in anything that Metallica has done. Please
>>explain.
>
>Some of their earlier work centered around death and other goth-like
>themes. Their 'Ride the Lightning' album had songs on it like 'Fade to
>Black' that opened with a dark and gloomy suicide theme (before
>the blaring metal part of it began). There was also the song 'Call
>of Ktulu' that has a very dark goth-like vibe to it (and it's loosely
>based on the HP Lovecraft 'Call of Cthulhu' story, which to me
>is sorta goth).
>
are not exclusively "goth" themes. They're metal themes as well, themes
that predate "goth" by quite a while--hell, they predate metal by quite a
while!
Every song on "Ride the Lightning" was about death, except "The Call of
Ktulu" (which was an instrumental.) "That Which Should Not Be" on _Master
of Puppets_ was more explicitly based on H.P. Lovecraft, The Lovecraft
influence was due to Metallica's original bass player Cliff Burton, who
ran the CALL OF CTHULHU roleplaying game for the other members of
Metallica and was a Lovecraft buff. I stopped listening to Metallica
shortly after Cliff Burton died.
But no, Metallica is not and has never been goth. Most "goth" songs aren't
about death or suicide, or even about vampires--go listen to some actual
"goth" music (we're talkin Bauhaus, we're talkin Sisters of Mercy, we're
talkin Siouxsie, we're talkin Joy Division) and note that most of the
songs are NOT about death, suicide, monsters, etcetera.
Meanwhile, let's take a look at metal that came far before the "gothic"
theme even got established and note that the genre was filled with songs
of doom, death, suicide and the spooky from the late sixties on! Go listen
to some Ozzy-era Sabbath (Children of the Grave, N.I.B., Black Sabbath,
Hand of Doom) or Alice Cooper (Cold Ethyl, I Love the Dead) or Led
Zeppelin (who based much of their music on the more occult-preoccupied
blues artists) and so on.
Thematically, there are some vague similarities, but neither genre is
limited to doom & gloom (witness the quantity of metal songs written about
girls, motorcycles, and drinking lots of beer.)
Actual musical similarities are fewer--metal is more blues-influenced,
where gothic music came from a more pop/glam root with very different
styles. Early goth used the traditional rock/punk drum/bass/guitar/singer
combination as metal did, but was far more eager to utilize synths and
unconventional instruments--whereas the traditional metal band stuck with
that combo for far longer--and people screamed bloody fuckin' murder when
Van Halen used synths for the first time on "1984", or when Iron Maiden
used a guitar synthesizer on "Somewhere in Time."
Trust me on this one, fella. I spent plenty of time in both subcultures,
and no, they're not even vaguely similar. The personalities and
preoccupations of the two cultures are RADICALLY DIFFERENT--goths at least
tend to have a pose of intellectuality (whether or not they actually know
their ass from a hole in the ground) and are far more accepting of
"alternative lifestyles" (homosexuality and bisexuality) whereas
metalheads tend to be more anti-intellectual (most of my metalhead friends
from high school are either fixing cars, working fast-food, driving trucks
or doing time) and are rampantly homophobic.
And don't even get me started on the horrifying dorks I see at "new metal"
shows. Baseball caps and wallet chains to make a guy run in horror.
--
--Jetrock, Man With Too Many Leisure-Time Activities
SKIN JOB LEATHER custom leatherwork: http://www.darkpassions.com
UBERKUNST web page: http://emrl.com/~jetrock
A
"Me vs. You" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 04 Nov 2000 16:33:13 -0500, A <A...@nojunk.com> wrote:
>
> >"Me vs. You" wrote:
> >>
> >> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
> >> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
> >> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
> >> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
> >> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
> >>
> >> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
> >> the music and styles from both sides.
> >>
> >> What's the big difference?
> >
> >The big difference is that metal is metal and goth is goth.
> >Give us a break, what next cross posting between the metal NG and the
> >cheeseburger one and soliciting comparisons???
>
> Bite me.
Now that's clearly goth, like "yeah I'll put 50 rings on my ear lobe and
pick up somebody at a bar and pretend he's a vampire and let him (as you
put it) bite me"
METAL on the other hand is the manifestation of classy and strong art in MUSIC.
Consider yourself bitten...elvira
A
Liz wrote:
>
> Me vs. You <me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote in message
> news:7kp80ts9fl55tpijp...@4ax.com...
> >
> > I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
> > a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
> > people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
> > metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
> > a lot of the goth people are just weird.
> >
> > What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
> > the music and styles from both sides.
> >
> > What's the big difference?
> >
> >
>
> I think goth and metal should blend together(although alot of goths and
> metalheads totally dissagree with me)........between goth and metal...I
> prefer metal.....but, I choose some of the darker metal(by darker, not
> harder)...the band who has bridged metal and goth the best IMO is
> Metallica....they have what I call a "Classical Metal" sound that blends
> what I term goth and metal.....that's one of the things that seperated
> Metallica from everyone else.....and why I think they're the best out
> there.....I vote for the Goth/Metal sound!
>
> Liz
Funny how no metal fan wants to be embarrased by goth, but goth fans are
always listening to Metallica (their idea of metal) and sending demos to
metal labels and so on.
Can't say I blame them though
Geist
Me vs. You <me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote in message
news:7kp80ts9fl55tpijp...@4ax.com...
>
> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
>
> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
> the music and styles from both sides.
>
> What's the big difference?
Other people have said it, but I will reiterate: goth music in general is
very drawn-in, and fairly simple musically, barring any orchestration or
some such thing. Metal, on the other hand, can go either way, being drawn-in
or a loud-out-and-about style. Goths who hate metal seem to do so because
metal does not put as much of an emphasis on self-meditation, etc, and the
tragedy of dying. Some metalheads who hate goth see it as namby-pamby
pity-me music, and as a sidenote, also because it is trendy to be into goth
*points to the cheesy corpse-painted MTV mobs* and do stereotypical things
in accordance with that genre. Another reason could be the occasional
melodramatic quality of goth music, and goths could dislike metal's grittier
images that are not extremely tragic and dramatic. Everything else has
pretty much been said already.
--
In meinem Himmel gibt es keinen Gott. -Rammstein, "Weißes Fleisch"
You're still hiding in a mask
You take your fun seriously
No, don't blow this year's chance
Tomorrow your mold goes back on.
After Halloween.
-Dead Kennedys, "Halloween"
You may be a financial wizard, with a sack of loot.
But all I see is a slimy lizard, with an expensive suit.
-Motörhead, "Just Cos You Got the Power"
Grant us strength in this journey
Chaos my destiny
My palace of wisdom
Swirling winds by moonlight
Cries of birdsong at dawn
-Winter "Destiny"
A
henceforth to mainstream.goth.I.have.25.noserings.to.get.a.boyfriend
newsgroup - thank you.
P.S: While I am here, let me shatter some more MTV myths for you: KITTIE
AND KORN are not metal or metal-related.
maggot wrote:
> So which is Motley Crue, classy or strong art?
>
> maggot
Me vs. You
>On Sun, 05 Nov 2000 16:44:46 -0600, Me vs. You wrote:
>>
>>>>I fail to see the "goth" in anything that Metallica has done. Please
>>>explain.
>>
>>Some of their earlier work centered around death and other goth-like
>>themes. Their 'Ride the Lightning' album had songs on it like 'Fade to
>>Black' that opened with a dark and gloomy suicide theme (before
>>the blaring metal part of it began). There was also the song 'Call
>>of Ktulu' that has a very dark goth-like vibe to it (and it's loosely
>>based on the HP Lovecraft 'Call of Cthulhu' story, which to me
>>is sorta goth).
>>
>uh, I hate to break this to you, but themes like death, suicide, etcetera
>are not exclusively "goth" themes. They're metal themes as well, themes
>that predate "goth" by quite a while--hell, they predate metal by quite a
>while!
Already know that...but I know where you're coming from
on that issue.
>Every song on "Ride the Lightning" was about death, except "The Call of
>Ktulu" (which was an instrumental.) "That Which Should Not Be" on _Master
>of Puppets_ was more explicitly based on H.P. Lovecraft, The Lovecraft
>influence was due to Metallica's original bass player Cliff Burton, who
>ran the CALL OF CTHULHU roleplaying game for the other members of
>Metallica and was a Lovecraft buff. I stopped listening to Metallica
>shortly after Cliff Burton died.
>
>But no, Metallica is not and has never been goth. Most "goth" songs aren't
>about death or suicide, or even about vampires--go listen to some actual
>"goth" music (we're talkin Bauhaus, we're talkin Sisters of Mercy, we're
>talkin Siouxsie, we're talkin Joy Division) and note that most of the
>songs are NOT about death, suicide, monsters, etcetera.
I never claimed Metallica was a goth band, simply that they had
some very goth tendencies in a lot of their earlier music. I also
agree that when Cliff Burton died, so did a better part of that
band.
I have quite a few Bauhaus, SOM, Joy Division, etc. discs
around...and there's a lot of death related stuff on them. Ian Curtis
sang almost exclusively about alienation and death, IMO.
>Meanwhile, let's take a look at metal that came far before the "gothic"
>theme even got established and note that the genre was filled with songs
>of doom, death, suicide and the spooky from the late sixties on! Go listen
>to some Ozzy-era Sabbath (Children of the Grave, N.I.B., Black Sabbath,
>Hand of Doom) or Alice Cooper (Cold Ethyl, I Love the Dead) or Led
>Zeppelin (who based much of their music on the more occult-preoccupied
>blues artists) and so on.
>
>Thematically, there are some vague similarities, but neither genre is
>limited to doom & gloom (witness the quantity of metal songs written about
>girls, motorcycles, and drinking lots of beer.)
I never claimed that either genre is limited to doom and gloom,
just that it's one area that both genres find similar ground on in
many cases.
>Actual musical similarities are fewer--metal is more blues-influenced,
>where gothic music came from a more pop/glam root with very different
>styles. Early goth used the traditional rock/punk drum/bass/guitar/singer
>combination as metal did, but was far more eager to utilize synths and
>unconventional instruments--whereas the traditional metal band stuck with
>that combo for far longer--and people screamed bloody fuckin' murder when
>Van Halen used synths for the first time on "1984", or when Iron Maiden
>used a guitar synthesizer on "Somewhere in Time."
>
>Trust me on this one, fella. I spent plenty of time in both subcultures,
>and no, they're not even vaguely similar.
So have I, and I disagree. There are quite a few similarities, and
there has been a lot of crossover over the years.
>The personalities and
>preoccupations of the two cultures are RADICALLY DIFFERENT--goths at least
>tend to have a pose of intellectuality (whether or not they actually know
>their ass from a hole in the ground) and are far more accepting of
>"alternative lifestyles" (homosexuality and bisexuality) whereas
>metalheads tend to be more anti-intellectual (most of my metalhead friends
>from high school are either fixing cars, working fast-food, driving trucks
>or doing time) and are rampantly homophobic.
Sterotyping never does anyone any good.
>And don't even get me started on the horrifying dorks I see at "new metal"
>shows. Baseball caps and wallet chains to make a guy run in horror.
That's more about the rap/metal hybrid, IMO
maggot
maggot
Geist wrote:
>
> Me vs. You <me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote in message
> > What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
> > the music and styles from both sides.
> >
> > What's the big difference?
>
> Other people have said it, but I will reiterate: goth music in general is
> very drawn-in, and fairly simple musically, barring any orchestration or
> some such thing. Metal, on the other hand, can go either way, being drawn-in
> or a loud-out-and-about style. Goths who hate metal seem to do so because
> metal does not put as much of an emphasis on self-meditation, etc, and the
> tragedy of dying.
Yeah, Peek-a-boo and Kiss Kiss Ban Bang really put the emphasis on dark
thoughts don't they. Not like Deicide or Nokturnal, they're way too
upbeat. I mean I can't listen to the Cure's Love Cats without wanting
to kill myself.
(But I'm not sure if that has anything to do with the lyrics)
> Some metalheads who hate goth ...
> and as a sidenote, also because it is trendy to be into goth
Which is a damn good reason to hate goth by night goths, but not a very
good reason to hate goth.
maggot
maggot
"Me vs. You" wrote:
>
> On 5 Nov 2000 16:56:25 -0800, jetrock@REMOVE_ME.emrl.com (Jetrock) wrote:
> >But no, Metallica is not and has never been goth. Most "goth" songs aren't
> >about death or suicide, or even about vampires--go listen to some actual
> >"goth" music (we're talkin Bauhaus, we're talkin Sisters of Mercy, we're
> >talkin Siouxsie, we're talkin Joy Division) and note that most of the
> >songs are NOT about death, suicide, monsters, etcetera.
>
> I never claimed Metallica was a goth band, simply that they had
> some very goth tendencies in a lot of their earlier music.
But is it fair to consider something "goth tendencies" if it predates
the whole concept of such a thing and is nonexclusive to any particular
genre. I mean especially in the 80's up until FotN there was little
similarity to speak of between anything goth and the darkest, dreariest
that Metallica had to offer.
>
> I have quite a few Bauhaus, SOM, Joy Division, etc. discs
> around...and there's a lot of death related stuff on them.
SOM? Bauhaus? These bands have a few songs that might be referred to
in that way, but to imply that it covers more than a vague percentage of
either band is pretty misleading. I'll grant you astronger case for Joy
Division, but they pale next to a lot of metal bands, especially in the
80's.
> >Thematically, there are some vague similarities, but neither genre is
> >limited to doom & gloom (witness the quantity of metal songs written about
> >girls, motorcycles, and drinking lots of beer.)
>
> I never claimed that either genre is limited to doom and gloom,
> just that it's one area that both genres find similar ground on in
> many cases.
As does folk music, the blues, and rap, you just don't see a lot of it
on the radio. But then I hardly think what they do play on the radio is
representative of any genre, except perhaps sappy chikk love songs
(which fall into their own category altogether wether they be sung by
G&R or Whitney Houston).
> >
> >Trust me on this one, fella. I spent plenty of time in both subcultures,
> >and no, they're not even vaguely similar.
>
> So have I, and I disagree. There are quite a few similarities, and
> there has been a lot of crossover over the years.
But you have yet to make an actual argument for this. Names of bands,
places and influences would be helpful, especially regarding the 80s.
> >The personalities and
> >preoccupations of the two cultures are RADICALLY DIFFERENT--goths at least
> >tend to have a pose of intellectuality (whether or not they actually know
> >their ass from a hole in the ground) and are far more accepting of
> >"alternative lifestyles" (homosexuality and bisexuality) whereas
> >metalheads tend to be more anti-intellectual (most of my metalhead friends
> >from high school are either fixing cars, working fast-food, driving trucks
> >or doing time) and are rampantly homophobic.
>
> Sterotyping never does anyone any good.
We are talking about scenes here, how can one not generalize. Besides,
are you actually defending the metal scene as a positive environment for
open expressions of homosexuality. I mean I literally had to hide even
my Ministry tapes behind my bed when some of my friends came over (this
was, of course, before Jesus Built My Hotrod). I just don't see how you
can honestly compare the audience at the genres respective concerts,
unless you want to start calling KMFDM, Korn, and Manson metal or goth.
> >And don't even get me started on the horrifying dorks I see at "new metal"
> >shows. Baseball caps and wallet chains to make a guy run in horror.
>
> That's more about the rap/metal hybrid, IMO
It's the hybridization that's got things so confused. I mean what's up
with Jarheads at KMFDM shows?
maggot
A wrote:
>
> Obviously you have no idea what metal is so kindly keep the discussion
> henceforth to mainstream.goth.I.have.25.noserings.to.get.a.boyfriend
> newsgroup - thank you.
Obviously you have no idea what sarcasm is, but then again you probably
weren't there in the 80's to have to see Motley Crue and the Scorpions
usurp the metal label either...
maggot
Me vs. You
>"Me vs. You" wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 04 Nov 2000 22:57:04 GMT, maggot <mag...@monkeybrains.net> wrote:
>>
>> >What gives is that people like you can't see far enough into the past to
>> >see that said crossover is a very recent phenominon.
>>
>> Really? I've noticed it since the early 80's. So, you consider
>> a couple decades ago to be "recent"?
>
>You notices a crossover between goth and metal since the early
>eighties? What enlightened scene do you hail from that gave you such a
>perspective back when the genres had only just begun to gel around a
>definable label, especially considering their roots.
>
>What the old Rob Halford connaction?
No, there was a ton of stuff coming out in the early eighties that
crossed between the goth and metal worlds. Just off the top of my
head I can think of bands like the Southern Death Cult (later to
become just The Cult), Venom, Misfits, etc. (all *very* different
bands, but all having some sort of goth/metal thing going on).
A lot of the girls I knew back then that were little metalheads
all of a sudden started dying their hair black, wearing the long
black dresses, fishnets, corsets, etc. and there was a weird
morphing going on between the punk/metal/goth worlds. I
was a kid listening to the Misfits, Iron Maiden, Bauhaus, etc.
and liking it all. I've drifted in the metal/goth/punk scenes
most of my life, and have always known a lot of people
doing the same...since the early 80's.
It's really not as recent of a phenomenon as you think it
is, IMO.
I guess what I've noticed lately is more of a seperation of
these crowds than I've seen before. Hence my original
post.
Me vs. You
>"Me vs. You" wrote:
>>
>> On 5 Nov 2000 16:56:25 -0800, jetrock@REMOVE_ME.emrl.com (Jetrock) wrote:
>
>> >Trust me on this one, fella. I spent plenty of time in both subcultures,
>> >and no, they're not even vaguely similar.
>>
>> So have I, and I disagree. There are quite a few similarities, and
>> there has been a lot of crossover over the years.
>
>But you have yet to make an actual argument for this. Names of bands,
>places and influences would be helpful, especially regarding the 80s.
>
>We are talking about scenes here, how can one not generalize. Besides,
>are you actually defending the metal scene as a positive environment for
>open expressions of homosexuality. I mean I literally had to hide even
>my Ministry tapes behind my bed when some of my friends came over (this
>was, of course, before Jesus Built My Hotrod). I just don't see how you
>can honestly compare the audience at the genres respective concerts,
>unless you want to start calling KMFDM, Korn, and Manson metal or goth.
>
>> >And don't even get me started on the horrifying dorks I see at "new metal"
>> >shows. Baseball caps and wallet chains to make a guy run in horror.
>>
>> That's more about the rap/metal hybrid, IMO
>
>It's the hybridization that's got things so confused. I mean what's up
>with Jarheads at KMFDM shows?
I spent many nights in clubs and at shows for bands like Iggy Pop,
The Cramps, Front 242, Lords of the New Church, the Saints,
Nick Cave, SOM, Siouxsie Sioux, etc. and there was a definite mix
of punks, metalheads and goths there. Some of them, including a
close friend, were very openly gay. There was very little
reason to hide anything from anybody that I knew. I listened
to Ministry ('With Sympathy' era and beyond), Danse Society,
along with the Misfits, Cramps, Venom, Manowar, Metal
Church, Bauhaus, the Mission, SOM, or anything else I felt like
listening to. Most of my friends were cool with it, some of
them gave me shit about some of the stuff they didn't like,
but for the most part the mix was fine.
If you want to consider the hair-band boys that followed
bands like Judas Priest, Scorpions, Iron Maiden, etc. as the
typical 80's metalheads, then yes, there was a lot of misplaced
testosterone with those guys back then...but then, they
aren't really any different than those jarheads that are at
the Korn, NIN, Manson shows today, IMO. They are the
mainstream american boys with too much confused angst
for their own good. That's not the crowd I'm talking about.
They'll always be around...loud, stupid, and angry as ever.
maggot
"Me vs. You" wrote:
>
> On Sun, 05 Nov 2000 23:45:55 GMT, maggot <mag...@monkeybrains.net> wrote:
> >You notices a crossover between goth and metal since the early
> >eighties? What enlightened scene do you hail from that gave you such a
> >perspective back when the genres had only just begun to gel around a
> >definable label, especially considering their roots.
> >
> >What the old Rob Halford connection?
>
> No, there was a ton of stuff coming out in the early eighties that
> crossed between the goth and metal worlds. Just off the top of my
> head I can think of bands like the Southern Death Cult (later to
> become just The Cult), Venom, Misfits, etc. (all *very* different
> bands, but all having some sort of goth/metal thing going on).
I think punk was a whole lot more relevant to the lot, but then, back
then there wasn't a lot of difference between punk and goth, or more
accurately, there wasn't an adequately defined punk sound, which is how
I look back and see things. Most of what I saw that came to be labeled
as goth music seems best defined as music that goths, being those punks
who are partial to black, preferred.
> A lot of the girls I knew back then that were little metalheads
> all of a sudden started dying their hair black, wearing the long
> black dresses, fishnets, corsets, etc. and there was a weird
> morphing going on between the punk/metal/goth worlds.
Well, depending on which "back then" you are talking about, I think you
are referring to the fact that in the mid-late 80's the music actually
began to get disseminated widely. It also had a lot to do with the fact
that for completely separate reasons the two scenes had very similar
dress styles. I saw a lot of people adopting the fashion of the scene
who had been pretty disparate about which scene they belonged to, but I
can't say it was anything partial to the girls who hung out with
heschers that I knew. In fact, I do recall the great rift between most
guys I knew and the girls we hung out with who generally were more
partial to plugging in Poison, or some shit, than listening to Slayer.
I remember seeing, in 1992, girls who had been all the rage about the
top 40 shite that passed for music in the 80s, when the goth scene
really started it's climb to mass media exposure (and subsequent cliche)
who were strutting around in goth clubs doing the sexy deth chikk thing.
I remember distinctly because these were not girls who would talk to me
in high school, but all of a sudden I was cool.
But aside from that pointless tangent, I know a lot of goths who grew up
listening to metal, and, like myself, got into goth and industrial as
exposure to the music grew, but I don't have a single friend who carried
over from the old metal days, with the exception of my brother.
But then I know far more goths who never listened to metal, who came
from punk, pop, glam, etc.
But as we like to say in discussions about scenes, YMMV.
> I
> was a kid listening to the Misfits, Iron Maiden, Bauhaus, etc.
> and liking it all. I've drifted in the metal/goth/punk scenes
> most of my life, and have always known a lot of people
> doing the same...since the early 80's.
>
> It's really not as recent of a phenomenon as you think it
> is, IMO.
I'm referring to the impression that people seem to have that they are
versions of the same thing, such as those crazy "goths" from Littleton
who listened to heavy metal like "KMFDM." I agree with you
wholeheartedly that there are many people who like multipe genres
equally, but I never saw any mass exodus from one scene into another. I
certainly never saw people arguing about the links between metal and
goth until the mid 90s when shit like Manson began to corrupt a new
generation of youngsters.
> I guess what I've noticed lately is more of a seperation of
> these crowds than I've seen before. Hence my original
> post.
Where exactly do you hail from? In Northern California the distinction
was so rock solid that goths didn't often go out alone at night because
heschers traveled in packs.
Me vs. You
>> I guess what I've noticed lately is more of a seperation of
>> these crowds than I've seen before. Hence my original
>> post.
>
>Where exactly do you hail from? In Northern California the distinction
>was so rock solid that goths didn't often go out alone at night because
>heschers traveled in packs.
I've bounced between the Chicago and Minneapolis areas
for most of my life...with short stints in Texas and California
that sent me running back home as soon as I could.
maggot
"Me vs. You" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 06 Nov 2000 05:18:39 GMT, maggot <mag...@monkeybrains.net> wrote:
>
> >> So have I, and I disagree. There are quite a few similarities, and
> >> there has been a lot of crossover over the years.
> >
> >But you have yet to make an actual argument for this. Names of bands,
> >places and influences would be helpful, especially regarding the 80s.
> >
> >We are talking about scenes here, how can one not generalize. Besides,
> >are you actually defending the metal scene as a positive environment for
> >open expressions of homosexuality.
<snip>
>
> I spent many nights in clubs and at shows for bands like Iggy Pop,
> The Cramps, Front 242, Lords of the New Church, the Saints,
> Nick Cave, SOM, Siouxsie Sioux, etc. and there was a definite mix
> of punks, metalheads and goths there.
That's where we get into defining metalheads, punks, and goths, relative
proportions, etc. I mean you did not see exact the same crowd at 242 as
you did at Siouxie, though there certainly were people from disparate
groups, these are very popular bands. There were probably, depending on
how recently you saw them, a wide as Hell mix of people there. It would
be more accurate to look at the crowds that helped spawn their rise to
popularity.
> Some of them, including a
> close friend, were very openly gay.
That's not hard to believe given the shows that you list. Did you ever
go to Iron Maiden with them?
> There was very little
> reason to hide anything from anybody that I knew. I listened
> to Ministry ('With Sympathy' era and beyond), Danse Society,
> along with the Misfits, Cramps, Venom, Manowar, Metal
> Church, Bauhaus, the Mission, SOM, or anything else I felt like
> listening to. Most of my friends were cool with it, some of
> them gave me shit about some of the stuff they didn't like,
> but for the most part the mix was fine.
Doesn't sound to me like you've had the experience of hanging out with
metalheads, but those nebulous inbetween label freaks like you and me.
Sounds like you had a more diverse pool of friends (or better taste)
than I, because your experiences pretty much equate to my own for the
past five to eight years, once I started diverging myself from the goth
scene, and long after I had said good riddance to bad rubbish which was
the matal scene of the 80s. I still know a lot of people in both
scenes, and the intolerance of going to metal bars is somethig I can not
endure, and this is in the CA BAy Area, land of tolerance.
In fact your scene pretty much describes what the goth scene was to me
before it hit big, a pretty diverse group of people hanging out
together, dressing similarly but having a wide latitude of musical
interests.
> If you want to consider the hair-band boys that followed
> bands like Judas Priest, Scorpions, Iron Maiden, etc. as the
> typical 80's metalheads, then yes, there was a lot of misplaced
> testosterone with those guys back then...
Actually those were the "chick bands" as we referred to them.
> but then, they
> aren't really any different than those jarheads that are at
> the Korn, NIN, Manson shows today, IMO.
Any popular band is sure to collect its mass of shitheads, but even in
big venues, metal used to be pretty much leather and long hair, beefcake
was only incidental, not the rule of the day.
> They are the
> mainstream american boys with too much confused angst
> for their own good. That's not the crowd I'm talking about.
> They'll always be around...loud, stupid, and angry as ever.
Unfortunately...
maggot
Me vs. You
>"Me vs. You" wrote:
>>
>> I spent many nights in clubs and at shows for bands like Iggy Pop,
>> The Cramps, Front 242, Lords of the New Church, the Saints,
>> Nick Cave, SOM, Siouxsie Sioux, etc. and there was a definite mix
>> of punks, metalheads and goths there.
>
>That's where we get into defining metalheads, punks, and goths, relative
>proportions, etc. I mean you did not see exact the same crowd at 242 as
>you did at Siouxie, though there certainly were people from disparate
>groups, these are very popular bands. There were probably, depending on
>how recently you saw them, a wide as Hell mix of people there. It would
>be more accurate to look at the crowds that helped spawn their rise to
>popularity.
Since I am talking about the early and mid 80's, I think we were
the crowds that spawned their rise.
>> Some of them, including a
>> close friend, were very openly gay.
>
>That's not hard to believe given the shows that you list. Did you ever
>go to Iron Maiden with them?
Actually, yes. I remember going to an Iron Maiden/Scorpions double
bill with no problems. Of course, we didn't stick around in the parking
lot after the show to drink...that's where things usually got ugly for
little or no reason.
>> There was very little
>> reason to hide anything from anybody that I knew. I listened
>> to Ministry ('With Sympathy' era and beyond), Danse Society,
>> along with the Misfits, Cramps, Venom, Manowar, Metal
>> Church, Bauhaus, the Mission, SOM, or anything else I felt like
>> listening to. Most of my friends were cool with it, some of
>> them gave me shit about some of the stuff they didn't like,
>> but for the most part the mix was fine.
>
>Doesn't sound to me like you've had the experience of hanging out with
>metalheads, but those nebulous inbetween label freaks like you and me.
Some of my friends back then were definitely metalheads, playing
in basement/garage bands and wearing their spiked leather jackets
and wristbands, etc. Some of them were knuckleheads, but for the
most part they were an alright bunch. We sure shared a common
enjoyment of drugs, alcohol and getting laid.
>Sounds like you had a more diverse pool of friends (or better taste)
>than I, because your experiences pretty much equate to my own for the
>past five to eight years, once I started diverging myself from the goth
>scene, and long after I had said good riddance to bad rubbish which was
>the matal scene of the 80s. I still know a lot of people in both
>scenes, and the intolerance of going to metal bars is somethig I can not
>endure, and this is in the CA BAy Area, land of tolerance.
The metal bars here are usually out in the suburbs, and not really
places I ever liked hanging out at. I pretty much stick to the urban
clubs downtown, where the crowds are a little bigger and more
diverse...and more fun.
>In fact your scene pretty much describes what the goth scene was to me
>before it hit big, a pretty diverse group of people hanging out
>together, dressing similarly but having a wide latitude of musical
>interests.
That's the way it was and has been until recently, except for the
few dance clubs that cater to a specific crowd (S&M leather
crowd, etc.)..they still get a pretty diverse bunch there.
>> If you want to consider the hair-band boys that followed
>> bands like Judas Priest, Scorpions, Iron Maiden, etc. as the
>> typical 80's metalheads, then yes, there was a lot of misplaced
>> testosterone with those guys back then...
>
>Actually those were the "chick bands" as we referred to them.
I liked those bands (except maybe the Scorpions...never liked
that little Klaus guys singing very much).
>> but then, they
>> aren't really any different than those jarheads that are at
>> the Korn, NIN, Manson shows today, IMO.
>
>Any popular band is sure to collect its mass of shitheads, but even in
>big venues, metal used to be pretty much leather and long hair, beefcake
>was only incidental, not the rule of the day.
>
>> They are the
>> mainstream american boys with too much confused angst
>> for their own good. That's not the crowd I'm talking about.
>> They'll always be around...loud, stupid, and angry as ever.
>
>Unfortunately...
I still wouldn't classify most metal fans in that group, though. I've
known a lot of metal fans over the years, and most of them have
been pretty decent people. There have been some idiots along
the way, but that goes for the punks and goths I've known too.
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
wrote:
>What about the evils of smashing your fist into somebodies face while
>Willie reinvents 'Crazy' for the hundredth time?
He plays it differently in concert? I should really catch him
sometime, I don't think he attracts the usual types of country fans,
and though I prefer the Patsy Cline version, Crazy is a pretty cool
song and I'd like to thank him for writing it.
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
wrote:
>Rev. Carroll - I personaly don't feel that guitar soloing is athletic or
>obligatory but actually a nescessary tool to infuse the feeling of chaos and
>perhaps anxiety to the situation expressed in the songs. (that is what good
>guitarists do anyway). I guess you feel that Paginni's classical works
>aren't musical? Just because a guitarist plays fast doesn't mean he is not
>expressing an emotion. Even if it's pure anger- isn't anger an emotion?
Well, first off, you contradict yourself by saying the solo is "not
obligatory, but neccessary".....
I'm not neccessarily talking about the speed, but rather how it's
often used as a showcase for "talent", I'm sure there's metal
guitarists who put alot of thought into their solo and who actually
compliment the song, but overall, most of what I hear detracts from
the song. And another thing that bugs me about metal is this idea that
"*insert guitar player here* is a great guitar player because he
bases his solos on Paganini/Bach/etc..." Not to downplay those
composers, but anybody who can read music can take some old classical
peice and play it on a guitar, making sure not to go out of key...or
ditto with a scale. For me, most metal solos are too busy, speed's
part of it, but moreso, it's the abundance of notes, which (again, my
POV) make a wall and suffocate the flow of the song, which keeps me
from getting into it. And of course, since they're
obligatory....er....oops....neccessary...most of them don't have any
more though to them than "ok, let's put the solo here".They're there
so the band can make "a kickass metal song, dude!".
I'd prefer a solo that accents the song, sounds spontaneous, isn't a
scale, and was written the century the song was made...
But that's just me.
Anger gets better expression in punk and industrial songs, where the
chaos is tangible rather than implied, than in metal, where
everything's planned out according to modes, scales, keys, and theory
is God..
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
<me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote:
>
>I agree...although lately Metallica has gotten away from the
>goth themes with their music,
When has Metallica ever had a goth theme?
Kirk Hammet wearing a Sisters Of Mercy shirt does not a goth themed
song make...
>and are more in the arena of
>mainstream metal these days. Not to mention that they're a
>bunch of assholes for their whole Napster lawsuit thing.
Total agreement here...
>
>>>I fail to see the "goth" in anything that Metallica has done. Please
>>explain.
>
>Some of their earlier work centered around death and other goth-like
>themes. Their 'Ride the Lightning' album had songs on it like 'Fade to
>Black' that opened with a dark and gloomy suicide theme (before
>the blaring metal part of it began). There was also the song 'Call
>of Ktulu' that has a very dark goth-like vibe to it (and it's loosely
>based on the HP Lovecraft 'Call of Cthulhu' story, which to me
>is sorta goth).
Oh I see...."Goth=horror and death"....wrong! Not without the
romance...
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
>METAL on the other hand is the manifestation of classy and strong art in MUSIC.
>
Uh...you forgot to ad "derivative" before the "art"...
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
>Obviously you have no idea what metal is so kindly keep the discussion
>henceforth to mainstream.goth.I.have.25.noserings.to.get.a.boyfriend
>newsgroup - thank you.
Mainstream goth? Where?
>
>P.S: While I am here, let me shatter some more MTV myths for you: KITTIE
>AND KORN are not metal or metal-related.
Oh dear....
Korn are more metal than metal....at least musically speaking.
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
<me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote:
>No, there was a ton of stuff coming out in the early eighties that
>crossed between the goth and metal worlds. Just off the top of my
>head I can think of bands like the Southern Death Cult (later to
>become just The Cult), Venom, Misfits, etc. (all *very* different
>bands, but all having some sort of goth/metal thing going on).
Not much goth about Venom, and the Misfits were/are(not the same
without Danzig....) neither goth nor metal, but punk...
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
>
>Funny how no metal fan wants to be embarrased by goth, but goth fans are
>always listening to Metallica (their idea of metal) and sending demos to
>metal labels and so on.
>Can't say I blame them though
I would never send a demo to a metal label. I also rarely listen to
Metallica, and when I do, it's from when they *were* metal...
Why would a band that sounds like The Cure or Joy Division send a disc
to a metal label? Sounds like a waste of time to me.
It's like sending a metal album to a Boy Band label...
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
<AOS_EnterprisesF&@#SPAM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>tragedy of dying. Some metalheads who hate goth see it as namby-pamby
>pity-me music, and as a sidenote, also because it is trendy to be into goth
>*points to the cheesy corpse-painted MTV mobs*
There's goths on MTV?
Where?
When was the last time a goth band's been on the charts? Oh,
wait...1992...but that wasn't a very goth sounding song, so I'm not
sure that counts..
maggot
"Me vs. You" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 06 Nov 2000 07:39:46 GMT, maggot <mag...@monkeybrains.net> wrote:
> >It would
> >be more accurate to look at the crowds that helped spawn their rise to
> >popularity.
>
> Since I am talking about the early and mid 80's, I think we were
> the crowds that spawned their rise.
Fair enough, I didn't see much of them in the 80's, too busy writing
Warhammer campaigns. I hadn't yet made the connection between listening
to music and going to see it.
> >Doesn't sound to me like you've had the experience of hanging out with
> >metalheads, but those nebulous inbetween label freaks like you and me.
>
> Some of my friends back then were definitely metalheads, playing
> in basement/garage bands and wearing their spiked leather jackets
> and wristbands, etc.
Sigh. Not that I criticize my folk for pulling me out of the midwest,
but it sounds like I missed a lot of cool shit by moving away from
Chicago. Metalheads in my town were pretty much jeans, T-shirt, James
Dean leathers -AND THAT'S IT!
Oh, yeah, "nigger" had to be a regular part of your vocabulary, but that
had more to do with the late 80's skinz movement.
> Some of them were knuckleheads, but for the
> most part they were an alright bunch. We sure shared a common
> enjoyment of drugs, alcohol and getting laid.
Heh! I remember it coming as a shock to me when I discovered that for
all the namby pamby artsieness of the goth scene that was pretty much
the uniting bond there as well. That's when I started defining myself
as a namby pamby artist and the old school labels sort of faded away.
> > I still know a lot of people in both
> >scenes, and the intolerance of going to metal bars is somethig I can not
> >endure, and this is in the CA BAy Area, land of tolerance.
>
> The metal bars here are usually out in the suburbs, and not really
> places I ever liked hanging out at. I pretty much stick to the urban
> clubs downtown, where the crowds are a little bigger and more
> diverse...and more fun.
Suburban would definetly describe a lot of whaty I've experienced, but
the bars and clubs I was referring to *are* in urban clubs downtown.
Hell, even the goth clubs got really homoginized for a while, though
that was, I think, a lot more of a reaction to the huge number of
mundanes that were crowding the clubs to be cool and freaky for a night,
maybe score with a deth rokk chikk. Thus the dress code was introduced,
but it did keep a lot of clubs from losing their core crowd through the
days of goth popularity. But then, like metal and its introduction to
professional wrestling and jock culture, neither scene has had much
appeal for me since.
> >> If you want to consider the hair-band boys that followed
> >> bands like Judas Priest, Scorpions, Iron Maiden, etc. as the
> >> typical 80's metalheads, then yes, there was a lot of misplaced
> >> testosterone with those guys back then...
> >
> >Actually those were the "chick bands" as we referred to them.
>
> I liked those bands (except maybe the Scorpions...never liked
> that little Klaus guys singing very much).
Oh, I thought you were talking about the real hair bands like Poison,
Winger, Testament, etc..
> >> They are the
> >> mainstream american boys with too much confused angst
> >> for their own good. That's not the crowd I'm talking about.
> >> They'll always be around...loud, stupid, and angry as ever.
> >
> >Unfortunately...
>
> I still wouldn't classify most metal fans in that group, though. I've
> known a lot of metal fans over the years, and most of them have
> been pretty decent people. There have been some idiots along
> the way, but that goes for the punks and goths I've known too.
That's the fundamental difference in our experience then. I would
classify the great, vast majority of contemporary metal fans in that
group, and I think it's panned out by the concerts I've been to both
big and small. Granted there are a lot of cool people, but wide and
large, as a culture, I find that metal has risen out of the suburbs.
maggot
maggot
Actually, yeah, Wille Nelson concerts are among the most violent
American concerts-period. When I was working at Cal Expo, the
amphitheatre would always quadruple their security for country shows.
It wasn't a crowd specific thing, so much as a seriously violent faction
of people that would inevitably show up, though admittedly things are
supposed to be much tamer in the midwest.
maggot
(oh, and "ressurect" would be a better way of my description of him and
Crazy, I've always despised that song)
maggot
"Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" wrote:
>
It probably has something to do with a the kiddies who send their metal
shite around to goth groups looking for MM fans who appreciate the fact
that they can do a two finger power chord.
maggot
maggot
"Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" wrote:
>
Oh, but it's terribly trendy. I mean look at all the goths in movies.
Everyone wants to be a goth now.
Or everyone wants to fuck one.
Did I mentiont he blond who was trying to get me drunk last night?
maggot
Axel
<me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 05 Nov 2000 23:45:55 GMT, maggot <mag...@monkeybrains.net> wrote:
>>What the old Rob Halford connaction?
>
>No, there was a ton of stuff coming out in the early eighties that
>crossed between the goth and metal worlds. Just off the top of my
>head I can think of bands like the Southern Death Cult (later to
>become just The Cult), Venom, Misfits, etc. (all *very* different
>bands, but all having some sort of goth/metal thing going on).
SDC were never metal.
The Cult turned into a metal band when they released 'Love Removal
Machine', but they stopped being a Goth band at the same time.
I blame Big Country myself.
Venom were never Gothic. They didn't cross over to Goth Punk either.
It could be argued that they drew from Punk, and indeed there were
quite a few Punks & Skins at Venom gigs, but that the was the part of
Punk that Gothic Punk didn't draw from.
The Misfits were never Goth either. they're American.
Back in the day it was really easy to spot the difference between the
two crowds:
Metalheads had long hair & Goths didn't.
Any more?
Axel... ...Callisti
Everything is true, even false things
axel <at> arvotek DOT net
A
"Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" wrote:
>
> On Sun, 05 Nov 2000 22:24:54 -0500, A <A...@nojunk.com> wrote:
>
> >Obviously you have no idea what metal is so kindly keep the discussion
> >henceforth to mainstream.goth.I.have.25.noserings.to.get.a.boyfriend
> >newsgroup - thank you.
>
> Mainstream goth? Where?
Every second kid downtown is walking around like a 'goth'...it's THE
trendy HS (read that homosexual or high school as you wish) thing.
It's the beautiful people you know!! ha ha
>
> >
> >P.S: While I am here, let me shatter some more MTV myths for you: KITTIE
> >AND KORN are not metal or metal-related.
>
> Oh dear....
> Korn are more metal than metal....at least musically speaking.
Well obviously you know zilch about metal, so never mind.
For the public at large: hip hop and pyjama/ adidas rock is to metal
what Marilyn Manson is talent.
Back to bed kids.
Kev Young
<mag...@monkeybrains.net> writes
>
>
>"Me vs. You" wrote:
>>
>> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
>> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
>> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
>> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
>> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
>
>It probably has a lot to do with jerks who insist on discussing the
>differences in music and constantly going on about the differences
>between people.
>> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
>> the music and styles from both sides.
>
>see that said crossover is a very recent phenominon.
mid 1980's
--
ferretk
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
>
>>
>> Oh dear....
>> Korn are more metal than metal....at least musically speaking.
>
>Well obviously you know zilch about metal, so never mind.
>For the public at large: hip hop and pyjama/ adidas rock is to metal
>what Marilyn Manson is talent.
>Back to bed kids.
Sure, they got some hip hop in there, but overall, the guitar parts
are metal...exaggerrated metal, but still metal.
If I was still in my buttrock phase, I'd be all over Korn...as it is,
they're kinda fun sometimes.
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
wrote:
>
>Oh, but it's terribly trendy. I mean look at all the goths in movies.
>Everyone wants to be a goth now.
>
>Or everyone wants to fuck one.
Where's MY peice of that?
Dammit, I'm in need....
Calling all Gothfuckers: Give to the needy dammit!!!
Dark Nite
"Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" <revca...@myemailwashacked.net> wrote in message
news:3a069310...@news.pacifier.com...
I was using the word "obligatory" in the sense that you where using it, in a
derogatory way. Hey, I'll be the first to admit that I don't "get it" when
it comes to most goth music. To me it sounds like there's nothing going on-
like the TV is on but I'm just staring at white static. I don't expect
people that listen to goth music to get why I listen to metal either. That's
why this post is redundant- who started this anyway? But, that's what makes
the world go round. If we all thought the same and liked the same music we'd
all be listening to country music or something.
maggot
A wrote:
>
> "Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 05 Nov 2000 22:24:54 -0500, A <A...@nojunk.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Obviously you have no idea what metal is so kindly keep the discussion
> > >henceforth to mainstream.goth.I.have.25.noserings.to.get.a.boyfriend
> > >newsgroup - thank you.
> >
> > Mainstream goth? Where?
>
> Every second kid downtown is walking around like a 'goth'...it's THE
> trendy HS (read that homosexual or high school as you wish) thing.
> It's the beautiful people you know!! ha ha
Ah, I see the confusion. You've been watching reruns of the Littlton
massacre.
> >
> > >
> > >P.S: While I am here, let me shatter some more MTV myths for you: KITTIE
> > >AND KORN are not metal or metal-related.
> >
> > Oh dear....
> > Korn are more metal than metal....at least musically speaking.
>
> Well obviously you know zilch about metal, so never mind.
> For the public at large: hip hop and pyjama/ adidas rock is to metal
> what Marilyn Manson is talent.
If that's suposed to be a jibe I think you've gone further to
enlightening us as to why you think goth is trendy. Go troll in
alt.marylin.mansom. Shit, I'll join you.
maggot
maggot
Kev Young wrote:
>
> In article <3A04952D...@monkeybrains.net>, maggot
> <mag...@monkeybrains.net> writes
> >What gives is that people like you can't see far enough into the past to
> >see that said crossover is a very recent phenominon.
>
> mid 1980's
Wow, what a concise and coherent argument. Really coming down a little
hard aren't you? It was only an offhand comment.
maggot
maggot
"Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" wrote:
>
Well, I'd fuck you, but I like my ass a bit stretch out first.
maggot
(besides, you aren't young, waifish, or bearing large pendulous globules
of adolescent flesh from your pecks.)
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
wrote:
>>
>> Where's MY peice of that?
>> Dammit, I'm in need....
>> Calling all Gothfuckers: Give to the needy dammit!!!
>
>Well, I'd fuck you, but I like my ass a bit stretch out first.
>
>maggot
>(besides, you aren't young, waifish, or bearing large pendulous globules
>of adolescent flesh from your pecks.)
Yeah, and I'm sorta looking for the same....although size doesn't
matter to me much.
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
wrote:
>
>I was using the word "obligatory" in the sense that you where using it, in a
>derogatory way. Hey, I'll be the first to admit that I don't "get it" when
>it comes to most goth music. To me it sounds like there's nothing going on-
>like the TV is on but I'm just staring at white static. I don't expect
>people that listen to goth music to get why I listen to metal either. That's
>why this post is redundant- who started this anyway? But, that's what makes
>the world go round. If we all thought the same and liked the same music we'd
>all be listening to country music or something.
Very good points.
Each to zir own, of course. I didn'treally mean "obligatory" in a
derogatory way much, except in the sense that I explained, that
"we're a metal band, so we better have a solo" type thinking.
sometimes a solo can be really good, more often, to me anyway, it
sounds like it's just there to be there...but of course, there's songs
out there with great solos that get me, like the solo in From The Edge
Of The Deep Green Sea from the Cure, it really captures the sense of
frustration in the song.
maggot
"Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 07 Nov 2000 07:25:38 GMT, maggot <mag...@monkeybrains.net>
> wrote:
> >(besides, you aren't young, waifish, or bearing large pendulous globules
> >of adolescent flesh from your pecks.)
>
> Yeah, and I'm sorta looking for the same....although size doesn't
> matter to me much.
Yeah, but you actually spend time in gothic venues (or at least forums,
I don't know much about your personal life) for a "legitimate purpose.
I mean, barring David G. I can't think of many who have gotten laid lots
by frequenting AG.
Size probably doesn't matter to a lot of guys, but the salient portion
are the "globules of adolescent flesh." Got globules? You got what I
want...
maggot
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
wrote:
>
>Yeah, but you actually spend time in gothic venues (or at least forums,
>I don't know much about your personal life) for a "legitimate purpose.
>
>I mean, barring David G. I can't think of many who have gotten laid lots
>by frequenting AG.
True...
I need money so I can get out more, but I'm between dayjobs and don't
have any music out at the moment or gigs coming up...
>
>Size probably doesn't matter to a lot of guys, but the salient portion
>are the "globules of adolescent flesh." Got globules? You got what I
>want...
>
Wish I had globules, but then they'd look silly with my bodyhair and
schlong.....
maggot
"Rev. Carroll D. Kraston" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 07 Nov 2000 15:21:23 GMT, maggot <mag...@monkeybrains.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Yeah, but you actually spend time in gothic venues (or at least forums,
> >I don't know much about your personal life) for a "legitimate purpose.
> >
> >I mean, barring David G. I can't think of many who have gotten laid lots
> >by frequenting AG.
>
> True...
> I need money so I can get out more, but I'm between dayjobs and don't
> have any music out at the moment or gigs coming up...
I don't know, now that I have money I don't get out nearly as much as I
did when I was broke all the time. I mean I wasn't a big opera fan, and
I couldn't afford to go to many shows, but somehow I always managed to
find something to do, even if it was going to the local all-ages club,
or hanging out in a park.
> >Size probably doesn't matter to a lot of guys, but the salient portion
> >are the "globules of adolescent flesh." Got globules? You got what I
> >want...
> >
>
> Wish I had globules, but then they'd look silly with my bodyhair and
> schlong.....
You should come down to SF and tell the hustlers in the Tenderloin
that. Someone needs to.
maggot
Panurge
>>METAL on the other hand is the manifestation of classy and strong art in
>>MUSIC.
>
>Poison.....next.
Nobody, least of all the band, AFAIK, ever thought of Poison as metal.
OTOH, metal purists seemed to like to think they did--unfair, perhaps, but
then the truth hasn't gotten in the way of some self-proclaimed
hip/credible/whatever group's efforts to construct a cultural mythology
for a long time.
--
The old is dying and the new cannot be born. In the interregnum, a
variety of strange and morbid symptoms appears. --Antonio Gramsci
Edvamp
>
Sorry, don't do requests.
Ever and Always
Edvamp
Perkygoth Supreme
Edvamp
>MUSIC.
Poison.....next.
Edvamp
>
Most music called hardcore nowadays is just metal. I think everyone just tries
to avoid the label now and call it everything but.
Edvamp
>trendy HS (read that homosexual or high school as you wish) thing.
>It's the beautiful people you know!! ha ha
Please name one mainstream goth band.
>Well obviously you know zilch about metal, so never mind.
>For the public at large: hip hop and pyjama/ adidas rock is to metal
>what Marilyn Manson is talent.
>Back to bed kids.
Well obviously you are afraid to actually back up your arguments by naming some
real metal bands.
maggot
Edvamp wrote:
>
> >METAL on the other hand is the manifestation of classy and strong art in
> >MUSIC.
>
> Poison.....next.
Beat ya there :P
maggot
maggot
Edvamp wrote:
>
> >Korn are more metal than metal....at least musically speaking.
> >
>
> Most music called hardcore nowadays is just metal. I think everyone just tries
> to avoid the label now and call it everything but.
Wish they'd do that with Dark Ambiant Esquire.
maggot
Nick/Yaruar
> edv...@aol.comKILLKILL (Edvamp) wrote:
>
> >>METAL on the other hand is the manifestation of classy and strong art in
> >>MUSIC.
> >
> >Poison.....next.
>
> Nobody, least of all the band, AFAIK, ever thought of Poison as metal.
Apart from everyone into the subgenre of metal that was the west coast
glam-metal scene....... Always defined as metal by us purists!
Nick/Yaruar - getting into Limp Biskitz or whoever they are the more they
begin to sound like RATM.......
Cam
wrote:
> edv...@aol.comKILLKILL (Edvamp) wrote:
>
>>>METAL on the other hand is the manifestation of classy and strong art in
>>>MUSIC.
>>
>>Poison.....next.
>
No. Poison were Boutique Rock. If you want to split hairs (ha!).
Cam
____________________________________________________________
The bomb lives only as it is falling.
- Iain M. Banks, 'Use of Weapons'
ICQ: 16386278
WorLord
edv...@aol.comKILLKILL (Edvamp) :
>>Well obviously you know zilch about metal, so never mind.
[snip]
>Well obviously you are afraid to actually back up your arguments by naming some
>real metal bands.
I can list a few, if you're interested (even though I didn't post the
original comment). Here's a brief history, listed in *approximately*
- as I remember living through it and studying it's subtleties -
chronological order:
-----
-Classic Metal-
In the Beginning <s>, there was what is now referred to as "old
school" or "classic" Metal. Such bands helped define metal at the
movement's beginnings. This type of music generally consisted of song
structures relying heavily on the rigidity of Classical Music played
on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
(typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
are:
+ Black Sabbath
+ Iron Maiden
+ Judas Priest
+ Twisted Sister
+ Quiet Riot
[Note: some would argue bands like Led Zepplin here, but - while
they were important to the eventual formation of Metal - they are not
generally considered actual Metal; merely strong influences to the
movement's beginnings. This is analogous to Elvis, often known as the
"father of Rock and Roll", when his music was actually little more
then electrified country with odd hip motions - sounding little like
what the typical Rock and Roll sound later encompassed.]
-Speed/Thrash Metal-
4-10 years into the metal movement (which, AFAIK, really started
gaining some kind of momentum in the late '70s), there was a
progression and branching off from the standard Metal sound. One of
these branches involved what would become known as Speed and/or Thrash
metal. Structure- and content-wise, the Classical influence was still
undeniable, but a bit of Baroque was thrown in, and the tempos were
both accelerated and less likely to change in any given song. The
lyrical content also shifted, to more reality-based and darker issues
(although you could still get a good story here and there). Typical
Examples include:
+ Helloween
+ Slayer
+ (Early) Metallica
+ (Early) Megadeth
-Glam/Hair Rock-
At about the same time, this genre emerged. I'm listing it, even
though it's membership into the metal family is in question - because
it happens to be what this thread is centering on right about now. ;-)
Structure and Content wise, this is nothing but pop in metal clothing
- simple pop structures, simple pop content, almost no tempo changes
per song, hooks to appeal to the mainstream - all done with
instruments and mix typically reserved for the Heavy Metal genre. At
the beginning, it was kind of a black sheep: not enough Metal for the
metalheads, too much Metal for mainstream Pop Rock. No one would
profess to like any of it, but, oddly, nearly everyone had a copy of
_Slippery when wet_ stashed in the house somewhere (which, when
discovered, would usually prompt the owner to quickly say, "shit,
how'd *that* get there? Must be my girlfriend's/boyfriend's/mother's
tape.") Popular examples:
+ Bon Jovi
+ Poison
+ list your fave "hair band" here
[Note : Though it sounds like it, anyone who knows a bit about metal
will usually never bring up bands like the above listed into the
conversation, IMO. Mostly because in a conversation about metal,
there just isn't enough to work with there other then the fact that
Glam employs electric guitars.]
-Progressive Metal / Art Rock-
During the late '80s, early '90s (or so), we started to see a lot of
this "thinking man's metal" (and it's still gaining fringe momentum
today). Influenced by bands like Rush, Mid-Era Iron Maiden (7th son
era, c. 1988), and others, this is really a fusion genre. As a
_base_, it's structure relies heavily upon metal, but with a LOT more
influences... most notably from the Romantic and Jazz styles of music.
Other instruments - anything from classical strings to horns to
harmonicas - outside of the typical Metal mold of
guitar/guitar/bass/drum/vocals often find their way into this music.
Lyrically, it is broad, and more often then not, entire albums
surround a similar concept (either as a 'concept album' or 'rock
opera'). It's unpredictable, and though some of it is quite good,
it's not for everyone - some of it comes off sounding like musical
masturbation, or a bunch of styles thrown together in the same box in
search of coherency. Some of the better (read: usually done right,
IMO) examples of pioneers in the field of Prog Metal are:
+ Dream Theater
+ (post-John Arch) Fates Warning
+ (modern-era) Savatage
+ (middle-era) Helloween
+ Pain of Salvation (lots of Goth influences here, BTW, especially the
"One Hour by the Concrete Lake" CD.)
[Note: a lot of people like to add bands like Rush and the Moody blues
here, either as Prog Metal proper or as influences of. While I agree
that they are both Progressive Bands and have similar styles,
structures, and content, I feel they lack enough of the classical
Metal sound and tempo to qualify... but YMMV.]
-----
Now these are some commonly-known bands that are most often considered
"Metal," as far as musical Structure / Content / Sound are concerned.
However, things like Alternative (e.g. Nirvana, Faith No More) and
what's become known as Nu-Metal (a misnomer, IMO, for bands like Korn,
Limp Bizket, MM) - given the overall structure and content - are
disqualified. The metal *influence* may be undeniable, in terms of
instrument sound and general aggressiveness, but - especially in the
Alternative genre - the structure and content, when analyzed, are
much, MUCH closer to Typical Pop. Nu-Metal, OTOH, is much closer to
Hip Hop. For example, all Snoop Doggy-Dogg would have to do to cross
over into the realm of NuMetal is scream his lyrics and change all of
his background noises from electronica to electric guitars. He would
be virtually indistinguishable from Korn if he did this. Korn, OTOH,
would have to re-structure every song, learn to play their instruments
in much more complex and faster ways, learn more complex melodies and
musical theories, and almost totally shift the content of their songs
to fit the musical definition of Metal.)
Note: I'm not insulting any band listed above, only responding to a
post and pointing out differences in genre's of metal. In fact, I at
least like a song or two from each band I've listed in this post, and
currently cannot wait to get my hands on Helloween's new one, "The
Dark Ride."
Also, know that this post is not at all inclusive of some of the
smaller, splinter factions, and I didn't even bother to write on Death
metal 'cause frankly, I really wouldn't know what the hell I'm talking
about there (in terms of history, structure, etc.). I *do* know that
Obituary is *very* classical in structure, and some of it is quite
good, but "cookie moster" growling nonsense lyrics are just something
I can't get into.
--WorLord
"You could spend an hour counting the petals in a flower
It might take you a year to count the veins in each petal
If you spent ten lifetimes, maybe you could count its cells...
...but you'd have completely missed the point
You fuckhead."
exile
} edv...@aol.comKILLKILL (Edvamp) :
} -Classic Metal-
} In the Beginning <s>, there was what is now referred to as "old
} school" or "classic" Metal. Such bands helped define metal at the
} movement's beginnings. This type of music generally consisted of song
} structures relying heavily on the rigidity of Classical Music played
} on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
} (typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
} are:
Blue Cheer? Jimi Hendrix? Deep Purple? Steppenwolf? Hawkwind?
The Who? Free? 3o5 other bands I've not got time to list?
} + Black Sabbath
Blue Oyster Cult? Uriah Heep? Jethro Tull? 3o2 other bands
I've not got time to list?
Glitter:
Alice Cooper, Mott the Hoople, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, Todd
Rundgren, ~2o7 others, etc
__________________________________________________
New School:
} + Iron Maiden
} + Judas Priest
Nazareth? I was listening to Glitter, so I wasn't really paying
attention?
Country stuff like the Outlaws and Molly Hatchet?
Garbage:
} + Twisted Sister
} + Quiet Riot
You forgot Loverboy.
} [Note: some would argue bands like Led Zepplin here, but - while
} they were important to the eventual formation of Metal - they are not
} generally considered actual Metal; merely strong influences to the
^ No commente {Tho' they are a prime example of what too much
of the Lord of the Rings and not enough time with the girls at
the bar will do to you. And a shining example of why your
"fantasy" tag is just plain bullshit.
} movement's beginnings. This is analogous to Elvis, often known as the
} "father of Rock and Roll", when his music was actually little more
} then electrified country with odd hip motions - sounding little like
} what the typical Rock and Roll sound later encompassed.]
That's the "King" and You ain't heard Carl Perkins yet, have you?
} -Speed/Thrash Metal-
} 4-10 years into the metal movement (which, AFAIK, really started
} gaining some kind of momentum in the late '70s), there was a
This should read... "Which we all got together and buried in
the late '7os."
} progression and branching off from the standard Metal sound. One of
} these branches involved what would become known as Speed and/or Thrash
} metal. Structure- and content-wise, the Classical influence was still
} undeniable, but a bit of Baroque was thrown in, and the tempos were
} both accelerated and less likely to change in any given song. The
} lyrical content also shifted, to more reality-based and darker issues
} (although you could still get a good story here and there). Typical
} Examples include:
}
} + Helloween
} + Slayer
} + (Early) Metallica
} + (Early) Megadeth
I was into punk... I start to get sketchy around here. Metal was
dead and buried by then anyway.
} -Glam/Hair Rock-
The reason I distinguish Glam from Glitter. This shit was useless.
"Glam" was useless. And... I'm late for work...
--
{http://www.freespeech.org/apophysis/}
Now is the time for decadent pleasures, for teasing the cat, for
grasping life by the scruff of the neck and shaking it 'till all
the sugary bon-bons come floating to the surface. Now is the time
for putting on eyeliner and taking the train downtown... {exile}
exile
} On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Panurge wrote:
} > edv...@aol.comKILLKILL (Edvamp) wrote:
} > >Poison.....next.
} >
} > Nobody, least of all the band, AFAIK, ever thought of Poison as metal.
}
} Apart from everyone into the subgenre of metal that was the west coast
} glam-metal scene....... Always defined as metal by us purists!
Why is "garbage" so difficult for so many folk to spell?
WorLord
<ex...@21stcentury.net> :
>} on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
>} (typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
>} are:
> Blue Cheer? Jimi Hendrix? Deep Purple? Steppenwolf? Hawkwind?
> The Who? Free? 3o5 other bands I've not got time to list?
You didn't read the note at the bottom, did you? The one that had
words something to the effect of "listings are not at all inclusive or
complete"? :-)
(And for the record - from what I've read and studied anyway - I'm
pretty sure the word "Metal" was never actually attributed to these
guys until AFTER the success of the more popular acts like Maiden and
Priest [Which is funny, 'cause I think Blue Oyster Cult actually were
the first documented to use it.] And even *then*, not attributed to a
good majority of that quick little list above... most people seem to
agree that *all* of the above contributed names fall under the
category of "Classic Rock," in fact, with the exception being
Steppenwolf and [possibly, and not even that often] Hawkwind.)
(I hold most of them as "fathers" of the movement, myself... that
helped inspire, but not define, the actual Genre. YMMV.)
> Glitter:
> Alice Cooper, Mott the Hoople, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, Todd
> Rundgren, ~2o7 others, etc
You also brushed over the part where I said I was ignoring (for
brevity's sake) pseudo-categories and splinter factions, as well. Of
course, how you could list a shock-rocker like Cooper in the same
sentence as the word "glitter" totally baffles me, and I'm duly
interested to hear read why you did that. ;-)
You also seem to be skipping the subject header, which reads "a
*painfully* brief history" - meaning I was so limited by time (and
motivation to jot down a longer history) that I cut all but the most
*basic* premesis.
> New School:
>} + Iron Maiden
>} + Judas Priest
You call that "new school"?
These are some of the first acts to actually come out and openly name
themselves "Heavy Metal" acts. Without their popularity and
agressive, heavy edge, I doubt the musical movement would even exist
today.
> Nazareth? I was listening to Glitter, so I wasn't really paying
> attention?
Dumb of me to forget Nazareth, I do agree. D'oh.
> Garbage:
>} + Twisted Sister
>} + Quiet Riot
Is garbage another splinter-pseudo faction? I've never even heard the
term.
> You forgot Loverboy.
If I were writing about Pop, I would have included them. As it is, I
can't think of a single soul, both in and out of the biz, who has
written a book or studied the period or just flat-out had ears and
rudimentary knowledge of musical structure, who has ever considered
Loverboy to be Metal.
> of the Lord of the Rings and not enough time with the girls at
> the bar will do to you. And a shining example of why your
> "fantasy" tag is just plain bullshit.
How so?
One *can* have fantasy lyrics and *not* be metal, you know. Also note
how I used the word "typically," as in "(typically) had fantasy based
lyrics or concepts."
I'm getting the impression that you just totally brushed over my post.
That's kind of disappointing, knowing I wasted 20 minutes (plus
however long it's taking to write this) putting it together to answer
your question.
> That's the "King" and You ain't heard Carl Perkins yet, have you?
Not really, no.
> This should read... "Which we all got together and buried in
> the late '7os."
So you liked the metal influencing-hard/classic rock bands, and not
the Metal Proper bands. And that's fine.
But saying that it got "buried" in the late '70s is to totally ignore
history, at least as far as the term "Metal" is involved. Metal's
heyday - the part where all the bands comprising the self-titled Metal
Genre actually made the most bank (both in terms of money/popularity)
appears to fall in the 1980-1986 range, with a couple years margin of
error on either side.
I mean, you *know* it's at the peak of it's popularity when it's
denounced as a tool of Satan(TM) by someone High Up(TM). W.A.S.P.
Twisted Sister. Priest. OZZY, for fuck's sake. The core of this
happened at around '83-'85, with these band's being household names
(and drawing record crowds).
(Of course, there are those that point to the tens-of-thousands of
people-class crowds that the latest Pantera and Iron Maiden concerts
drew in the last 2-3 years as a sign that it's far from "buried"
today, but YMMV.)
> I was into punk... I start to get sketchy around here. Metal was
> dead and buried by then anyway.
See above.
>} -Glam/Hair Rock-
> The reason I distinguish Glam from Glitter. This shit was useless.
> "Glam" was useless. And... I'm late for work...
I'd actually agree to that, mostly.
But then again, I kind of feel the same about Punk.
maggot
It's, unfortunately the same argument sdo many make to say that MM is
goth, Korn is industrial, GD is punk, etc. It's almost universally
accepted by those with little, or passing interest in the genre, and
universally rejected by anyone who holds dear to certain genres.
I unfortunately fall into the category where they all (at leats the ones
I listed) fall into the 'Pop' category, and thus should be categorically
dismissed when brought into such discussions.
Nevertheless, it is funny to hear a guy rip on MM to put us poor
gothlings down who...
Well I don't know what, I've been listening to metal since 1984.
maggot
--
"The first casualty of the war for profit is the capacity to make
elementary rational connections. -David Cromwell and David Edwards
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
>WorLord <gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> writes:
>} edv...@aol.comKILLKILL (Edvamp) :
>
>} -Classic Metal-
>} In the Beginning <s>, there was what is now referred to as "old
>} school" or "classic" Metal. Such bands helped define metal at the
>} movement's beginnings. This type of music generally consisted of song
>} structures relying heavily on the rigidity of Classical Music played
>} on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
>} (typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
>} are:
>
> Jimi Hendrix?Deep Purple? Steppenwolf?
Hard Rock...
>Hawkwind?
Prog Rock
> The Who?
Rock & Roll
> Glitter:
>
> Alice Cooper, Mott the Hoople, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, Todd
> Rundgren, ~2o7 others, etc
>
Bowie!
>} progression and branching off from the standard Metal sound. One of
>} these branches involved what would become known as Speed and/or Thrash
>} metal. Structure- and content-wise, the Classical influence was still
>} undeniable, but a bit of Baroque was thrown in, and the tempos were
>} both accelerated and less likely to change in any given song. The
>} lyrical content also shifted, to more reality-based and darker issues
>} (although you could still get a good story here and there). Typical
>} Examples include:
>}
>} + Helloween
>} + Slayer
>} + (Early) Metallica
>} + (Early) Megadeth
>
> I was into punk... I start to get sketchy around here. Metal was
> dead and buried by then anyway.
He also forgot that one of the things that defined Thrash Metal was
the hybridization of Hardcore Punk elements with Metal elements..
>
>} -Glam/Hair Rock-
>
> The reason I distinguish Glam from Glitter. This shit was useless.
> "Glam" was useless.
80s "Hair Band" glam was a crock, it missed the irony of actual Glam
Rock...
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
<gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> wrote:
>> Glitter:
>> Alice Cooper, Mott the Hoople, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, Todd
>> Rundgren, ~2o7 others, etc
>
>You also brushed over the part where I said I was ignoring (for
>brevity's sake) pseudo-categories and splinter factions, as well. Of
>course, how you could list a shock-rocker like Cooper in the same
>sentence as the word "glitter" totally baffles me, and I'm duly
>interested to hear read why you did that. ;-)
He did it because "Shock Rock" is basically just "Scary Glam"...
Glam is defined partially by a certain sound, which I'm too impatient
to describe in detail at the moment, an androgynous aesthetic, big
theatrical stage shows,and themes of stardom/fame/power/etc...Alice
Cooper is a man who uses a female name, wears makeup(which originally
was more genderfucking than his current makeup, and he used to wear
skirts), outrageous costumes, is known for his big productions
onstage, and has had songs dealing with power, money, and the
like...hell, he had an album called Billion Dollar Babies, which Marc
Bolan did some guitar on, and Bolan was pretty much the inventor of
Glam...
Oh, I forgot to mention all the anthemic which are common to Glam, and
School's Out definately fits the bill there...
This is not to say I'm much of a fan of Alice...but I can admit that
people like him and KISS are basically "heavy, slightly scary Glam".
>So you liked the metal influencing-hard/classic rock bands, and not
>the Metal Proper bands. And that's fine.
>
>But saying that it got "buried" in the late '70s is to totally ignore
>history, at least as far as the term "Metal" is involved. Metal's
>heyday - the part where all the bands comprising the self-titled Metal
>Genre actually made the most bank (both in terms of money/popularity)
>appears to fall in the 1980-1986 range, with a couple years margin of
>error on either side.
The term was being used in the 70s though...applied to KISS and Black
Sabbath. I first heard the term applied in about 78....I think...I was
pretty young and going through a hefty KISS phase.
>>} -Glam/Hair Rock-
>> The reason I distinguish Glam from Glitter. This shit was useless.
>> "Glam" was useless. And... I'm late for work...
>
>I'd actually agree to that, mostly.
>
>But then again, I kind of feel the same about Punk.
>
No Punk or Glam, no Goth....
WorLord
>He also forgot that one of the things that defined Thrash Metal was
>the hybridization of Hardcore Punk elements with Metal elements..
???
Examples, if ya got any. I wasn't aware of the correlation, and it
interests me.
Peter Constantine
>> New School:
>>} + Iron Maiden
>>} + Judas Priest
>
>You call that "new school"?
Iron Maiden... definitely 'new school'... prime movers in the NWOBHM.
Judas Priest were different (middle school?)... they pre-date Maiden by at
least five years and are one of the few bands who stayed true to the metal
cause between 1975-80 while everything else was going punk.
x
[speaking from a UK perspective... yank mileage may vary]
Kev Young
s.net>, WorLord <gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> writes
>>} are:
>> Blue Cheer? Jimi Hendrix? Deep Purple? Steppenwolf? Hawkwind?
>> The Who? Free? 3o5 other bands I've not got time to list?
>
>You didn't read the note at the bottom, did you? The one that had
>words something to the effect of "listings are not at all inclusive or
>complete"? :-)
>
>(And for the record - from what I've read and studied anyway - I'm
>pretty sure the word "Metal" was never actually attributed to these
>guys until AFTER the success of the more popular acts like Maiden and
>Priest [Which is funny, 'cause I think Blue Oyster Cult actually were
>the first documented to use it.]
gotta stamp on this right away
heavy metal was a term used by Hendrix to describe Cream ie late 60's
Priest were one of the second wave of HM acts (mid 70's)
Maiden were NWOBHM (post punk)
--
Kevy
Rev. Carroll D. Kraston
<gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> wrote:
>Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of
>revca...@myemailwashacked.net (Rev. Carroll D. Kraston) :
>
>>He also forgot that one of the things that defined Thrash Metal was
>>the hybridization of Hardcore Punk elements with Metal elements..
>
>???
>
>Examples, if ya got any. I wasn't aware of the correlation, and it
>interests me.
(Early) Metallica, early Slayer...
for example, other than the solo and the classical guitar at the
beginning, Battery is fairly punk.Also note the T Shirts and stickers
these bands were sporting back then, lots of Misfits, a Dead Kennedys
sticker on one of Slayer's guitarists, and the fact that Garage Days
has punk and postpunk covers(Misfits, Killing Joke..), and Slayer
released an album of Punk covers not too long ago.
I've also read interviews where Kerry King(I think...) from Slayer was
talking about how he loved the speed of Hardcore, and Slayer's sound
came from mixing that, and that attitude, with Metal
sensibilities...and of course themes...
exile
} <ex...@21stcentury.net> :
} >} on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
} >} (typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
} >} are:
} > Blue Cheer? Jimi Hendrix? Deep Purple? Steppenwolf? Hawkwind?
} > The Who? Free? 3o5 other bands I've not got time to list?
}
} You didn't read the note at the bottom, did you? The one that had
} words something to the effect of "listings are not at all inclusive or
} complete"? :-)
:} I missed the fine print? Standard disclaimers always apply.
You missed what I considered to be key points.
} (And for the record - from what I've read and studied anyway - I'm
} pretty sure the word "Metal" was never actually attributed to these
} guys until AFTER the success of the more popular acts like Maiden and
} Priest [Which is funny, 'cause I think Blue Oyster Cult actually were
Metal was a lot like goth, back then... it included anyone any
particular metalhead felt like referencing. I forgot folk like
MC5, the Stooges, the Amboy Dukes... :} I could have sworn I
typed Uriah Heep as well. {Ah well... it was early.}
Deep Purple were as metal as it gets. Hawkwind as well {if we're
talkin' the strictest sense of the word.}
} the first documented to use it.] And even *then*, not attributed to a
"I like smokin' lightning... Heavy metal thunder... racing with
the wind and the feeling that I'm under"?
} good majority of that quick little list above... most people seem to
} agree that *all* of the above contributed names fall under the
} category of "Classic Rock," in fact, with the exception being
} Steppenwolf and [possibly, and not even that often] Hawkwind.)
I saw Deep Purple in '73. They were metal. BOC defined the term
every bit as much as Sabbath.
} (I hold most of them as "fathers" of the movement, myself... that
} helped inspire, but not define, the actual Genre. YMMV.)
No... they were metal. The Who was a bit more punkish... and
probably fits more into mainstream rock. Free was a
a bit more rock and roll. I neglected to toss in folk like
the James Gang, Golden Earring, BTO, etc, etc who truly were
peripheral... It seems to me that Zappa needs to be in there
somewhere as well.
} > Glitter:
} > Alice Cooper, Mott the Hoople, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, Todd
} > Rundgren, ~2o7 others, etc
}
} You also brushed over the part where I said I was ignoring (for
} brevity's sake) pseudo-categories and splinter factions, as well. Of
} course, how you could list a shock-rocker like Cooper in the same
} sentence as the word "glitter" totally baffles me, and I'm duly
} interested to hear read why you did that. ;-)
Alice and Bowie fit into the same category in '72. He's a bit
peripheral to Glitter but the press, back then, lumped them
together.
} You also seem to be skipping the subject header, which reads "a
} *painfully* brief history" - meaning I was so limited by time (and
} motivation to jot down a longer history) that I cut all but the most
} *basic* premesis.
But you missed the basics.
} > New School:
} >} + Iron Maiden
} >} + Judas Priest
}
} You call that "new school"?
Yeah. I was getting horribly tired of metal by '75.
} These are some of the first acts to actually come out and openly name
} themselves "Heavy Metal" acts. Without their popularity and
} agressive, heavy edge, I doubt the musical movement would even exist
} today.
Have you heard of the "Heavy Metal Kids?" I remember using the
term heavy metal to describe anyone from the Igster to BOC as
early as '70. The bands referred to themselves that way as well.
Witness MC5.
} > Nazareth? I was listening to Glitter, so I wasn't really paying
} > attention?
}
} Dumb of me to forget Nazareth, I do agree. D'oh.
Aside from their invention of the metal ballad... they were
a pretty decent band.
} > Garbage:
} >} + Twisted Sister
} >} + Quiet Riot
}
} Is garbage another splinter-pseudo faction? I've never even heard the
} term.
Garbage is stuff that's not actually worth mentioning.
} > You forgot Loverboy.
}
} If I were writing about Pop, I would have included them. As it is, I
} can't think of a single soul, both in and out of the biz, who has
} written a book or studied the period or just flat-out had ears and
} rudimentary knowledge of musical structure, who has ever considered
} Loverboy to be Metal.
I'm tossing them into parody pop garbage with Twisted Sister
and Quiet Riot.
Outlaws? Molly Hatchet?
} > of the Lord of the Rings and not enough time with the girls at
} > the bar will do to you. And a shining example of why your
} > "fantasy" tag is just plain bullshit.
}
} How so?
}
} One *can* have fantasy lyrics and *not* be metal, you know. Also note
} how I used the word "typically," as in "(typically) had fantasy based
} lyrics or concepts."
I'll give you that... I was being sarcastic to some extent.
Not a lot of metal has to do with fantasy though.
} I'm getting the impression that you just totally brushed over my post.
} That's kind of disappointing, knowing I wasted 20 minutes (plus
} however long it's taking to write this) putting it together to answer
} your question.
Not brushed over at all. You're, quite simply, not very accurate
in a lot of it.
} > That's the "King" and You ain't heard Carl Perkins yet, have you?
}
} Not really, no.
:} Too bad.
} > This should read... "Which we all got together and buried in
} > the late '7os."
}
} So you liked the metal influencing-hard/classic rock bands, and not
} the Metal Proper bands. And that's fine.
}
} But saying that it got "buried" in the late '70s is to totally ignore
} history, at least as far as the term "Metal" is involved. Metal's
} heyday - the part where all the bands comprising the self-titled Metal
} Genre actually made the most bank (both in terms of money/popularity)
} appears to fall in the 1980-1986 range, with a couple years margin of
} error on either side.
}
} I mean, you *know* it's at the peak of it's popularity when it's
} denounced as a tool of Satan(TM) by someone High Up(TM). W.A.S.P.
} Twisted Sister. Priest. OZZY, for fuck's sake. The core of this
} happened at around '83-'85, with these band's being household names
} (and drawing record crowds).
}
} (Of course, there are those that point to the tens-of-thousands of
} people-class crowds that the latest Pantera and Iron Maiden concerts
} drew in the last 2-3 years as a sign that it's far from "buried"
} today, but YMMV.)
That was the second wave. Heavy Metal is from the early '7os.
I'm not ignoring history... just clarifying it.
} > I was into punk... I start to get sketchy around here. Metal was
} > dead and buried by then anyway.
}
} See above.
}
} >} -Glam/Hair Rock-
} > The reason I distinguish Glam from Glitter. This shit was useless.
} > "Glam" was useless. And... I'm late for work...
}
} I'd actually agree to that, mostly.
}
} But then again, I kind of feel the same about Punk.
That's too bad as well...
Panurge
>Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of exile
><ex...@21stcentury.net> :
>
>>} on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
>>} (typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
>>} are:
>> Blue Cheer? Jimi Hendrix? Deep Purple? Steppenwolf? Hawkwind?
>> The Who? Free? 3o5 other bands I've not got time to list?
>
>You didn't read the note at the bottom, did you? The one that had
>words something to the effect of "listings are not at all inclusive or
>complete"? :-)
>
>(And for the record - from what I've read and studied anyway - I'm
>pretty sure the word "Metal" was never actually attributed to these
>guys until AFTER the success of the more popular acts like Maiden and
>Priest [Which is funny, 'cause I think Blue Oyster Cult actually were
>the first documented to use it.]
It's pretty much conventional wisdom that it goes back to the "heavy metal
thunder" in Steppenwolf's "Born To Be Wild" (from '69, mind you)--and
_they_ might've gotten that phrase from William Burroughs'
_The_Naked_Lunch_. It's just that it took a while for the elements to
come together into an integrated style (which is exactly the point at
which exile would probably say it "died"; to a lot of people, "integrated
style" = codification = exhaustion).
>> New School:
>>} + Iron Maiden
>>} + Judas Priest
>
>You call that "new school"?
Or have you never heard the term "New Wave Of British Heavy Metal"? But
you're right about one thing: If any music is metal, the music from this
era is it.
Thrash/speed metal, OTOH, by incorporating punk influences, eventually
killed metal in order to save it (depending, of course, on your conception
of the "death" metaphor), despite their more-metal-than-thou attitude.
>> Garbage:
>>} + Twisted Sister
>>} + Quiet Riot
>
>Is garbage another splinter-pseudo faction? I've never even heard the
>term.
Clue: She's making a value judgment.
>> You forgot Loverboy.
>
>If I were writing about Pop, I would have included them. As it is, I
>can't think of a single soul...who has ever considered
>Loverboy to be Metal.
Well, you have to understand--there are plenty of people who'll call
_anything_ with tenor vocals, power chords, and no punk influence "metal".
>>You ain't heard Carl Perkins yet, have you?
>
>Not really, no.
You really should. As far as the development of rock'n'roll is concerned,
he's just as important (though from what I can tell he's more country than
Elvis, which appears to be her point).
>> This should read... "Which we all got together and buried in
>> the late '70s."
>
>So you liked the metal influencing-hard/classic rock bands, and not
>the Metal Proper bands. And that's fine.
>But saying that it got "buried" in the late '70s is to totally ignore
>history, at least as far as the term "Metal" is involved.
But it's entirely consistent with standard punk-culture procedure--see
something you don't like, summarily declare it "dead" or irrelevant
(thereby closing off any other possibilities), get the verdict published
in all the right magazines, sway public opinion. They've been
staggeringly good at it for over twenty years, which, to be blunt, is why
punk culture rules rock'n'roll.
BTW, you'll have to ask her what she means by "we" and "buried" in
addition to "dead". You'll also have to ask her why all the people who
aren't included in "we"--you know, the ones who wonder why metal (or
whatever) can't be brought back to life--somehow *don't count*.
Panurge
>On Sun, 05 Nov 2000 15:42:16 GMT, "Dark Nite" <dark...@optonline.net>
>wrote:
>>Rev. Carroll - I personaly don't feel that guitar soloing is athletic or
>>obligatory but actually a nescessary tool to infuse the feeling of chaos and
>>perhaps anxiety to the situation expressed in the songs. (that is what good
>>guitarists do anyway). I guess you feel that Paginni's classical works
>>aren't musical?
>
>...anybody who can read music can take some old classical
>piece and play it on a guitar, making sure not to go out of key...or
>ditto with a scale.
But most don't bother to do either... :-P
>For me, most metal solos are too busy, speed's
>part of it, but moreso, it's the abundance of notes, which (again, my
>POV) make a wall and suffocate the flow of the song, which keeps me
>from getting into it.
For me, I'd rather have too much than too little. Most post-punk rock
sounds to me so bound by a minimalist ethos that hardly anything gets
said.
>I'd prefer a solo that accents the song, sounds spontaneous, isn't a
>scale, and was written the century the song was made...
>But that's just me.
Well, we _all_ want one that "accents the song." I guess our ideas of
such differ, though I agree that the little Baroque-isms can be a bit
cheezy. My personal view is that both sides don't realize that they need
each other--or at least they once didn't. OTOH, what realization there's
been has tended to result in music that's half of both rather than music
that's _all_ of both.
But there's lots to be said for the joy of playing and the mastery of
craft (without which, how much expression is really possible?). Last
Monday, I was at a concert by guitarist John McLaughlin and tabla player
Zakir Hussain, accompanied by two Indian musicians. Well, let's just say
that the virtuosity level started at "monster" and went up from there, but
_no_one_ in that audience of more than a thousand people would've accused
any of the musicians of insensitivity to the needs of the musical moment.
Virtuosity is generally respected in practically every other musical
tradition--classical, jazz, country, bluegrass, Celtic folk, Indian. Why
should it be different in rock?
>Anger gets better expression in punk and industrial songs, where the
>chaos is tangible rather than implied, than in metal, where
>everything's planned out according to modes, scales, keys, and theory
>is God..
Well, if you want CHAOS, go to an Ornette Coleman concert.
exile
} On 08 Nov 2000 14:41:29 -0600, exile <ex...@21stcentury.net> wrote:
} >WorLord <gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> writes:
} >} edv...@aol.comKILLKILL (Edvamp) :
} >} -Classic Metal-
} >} In the Beginning <s>, there was what is now referred to as "old
} >} school" or "classic" Metal. Such bands helped define metal at the
} >} movement's beginnings. This type of music generally consisted of song
} >} structures relying heavily on the rigidity of Classical Music played
} >} on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
} >} (typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
} >} are:
} >
} > Jimi Hendrix?Deep Purple? Steppenwolf?
}
} Hard Rock...
Deep Purple was metal. Hendrix a major influence. Steppenwolf
created the term tho' they didn't do all that much that could
be classified as metal. Santana was a major influence as well
as the Doors.
} >Hawkwind?
}
} Prog Rock
Metal "Heavy"
As in DroooOoooOoooOoooOoooOoooOoooOoooOoooOoooOooone.
Qualuudes and beer stuff like Status Quo.
} > The Who?
}
} Rock & Roll
Yeah... but Who's Next helped set the stage. Quadrophenia
was close but improved on metal by leaps and bounds.
} > Glitter:
} >
} > Alice Cooper, Mott the Hoople, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, Todd
} > Rundgren, ~2o7 others, etc
}
} Bowie!
Bowie! Who did do "Width of a Circle" and "Black Country Rock."
Pavlovs Dog? Areosmith? Foghat? Kiss? Ted Nugent?
} >} progression and branching off from the standard Metal sound. One of
} >} these branches involved what would become known as Speed and/or Thrash
} >} metal. Structure- and content-wise, the Classical influence was still
} >} undeniable, but a bit of Baroque was thrown in, and the tempos were
} >} both accelerated and less likely to change in any given song. The
} >} lyrical content also shifted, to more reality-based and darker issues
} >} (although you could still get a good story here and there). Typical
} >} Examples include:
} >}
} >} + Helloween
} >} + Slayer
} >} + (Early) Metallica
} >} + (Early) Megadeth
} >
} > I was into punk... I start to get sketchy around here. Metal was
} > dead and buried by then anyway.
}
} He also forgot that one of the things that defined Thrash Metal was
} the hybridization of Hardcore Punk elements with Metal elements..
So did punks just get metallic or did metalheads rip punk off?
} >} -Glam/Hair Rock-
} >
} > The reason I distinguish Glam from Glitter. This shit was useless.
} > "Glam" was useless.
}
} 80s "Hair Band" glam was a crock, it missed the irony of actual Glam
} Rock...
That's 'cause it had no "Glitter." And nothing, at all, in common
with the earlier movement.
exile
} >> Glitter:
} >> Alice Cooper, Mott the Hoople, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, Todd
} >> Rundgren, ~2o7 others, etc
} >
} >You also brushed over the part where I said I was ignoring (for
} >brevity's sake) pseudo-categories and splinter factions, as well. Of
} >course, how you could list a shock-rocker like Cooper in the same
} >sentence as the word "glitter" totally baffles me, and I'm duly
} >interested to hear read why you did that. ;-)
}
} He did it because "Shock Rock" is basically just "Scary Glam"...
} Glam is defined partially by a certain sound, which I'm too impatient
} to describe in detail at the moment, an androgynous aesthetic, big
} theatrical stage shows,and themes of stardom/fame/power/etc...Alice
} Cooper is a man who uses a female name, wears makeup(which originally
} was more genderfucking than his current makeup, and he used to wear
} skirts), outrageous costumes, is known for his big productions
} onstage, and has had songs dealing with power, money, and the
} like...hell, he had an album called Billion Dollar Babies, which Marc
} Bolan did some guitar on, and Bolan was pretty much the inventor of
} Glam...
He and Bowie. Stick Mick Ronson and the Dolls and Wayne County
in there too.
I did it because that's the way it was in '72... Bowie was
"shock rock" {which I don't think was an actual movement...
more what the press was using to describe folk as varied
as Genesis and Cooper.} Cooper was shock rock... check
your old issues of Creem Magazine.
} Oh, I forgot to mention all the anthemic which are common to Glam, and
} School's Out definately fits the bill there...
Easy Action, Billion Dollar Babies, Killer, etc. I saw
"Billion Dollar Babies" to say it was theatrical is an
understatement
} This is not to say I'm much of a fan of Alice...but I can admit that
} people like him and KISS are basically "heavy, slightly scary Glam".
}
} >So you liked the metal influencing-hard/classic rock bands, and not
} >the Metal Proper bands. And that's fine.
} >
} >But saying that it got "buried" in the late '70s is to totally ignore
} >history, at least as far as the term "Metal" is involved. Metal's
} >heyday - the part where all the bands comprising the self-titled Metal
} >Genre actually made the most bank (both in terms of money/popularity)
} >appears to fall in the 1980-1986 range, with a couple years margin of
} >error on either side.
}
} The term was being used in the 70s though...applied to KISS and Black
} Sabbath. I first heard the term applied in about 78....I think...I was
} pretty young and going through a hefty KISS phase.
"First"? How old were you?
} >>} -Glam/Hair Rock-
} >> The reason I distinguish Glam from Glitter. This shit was useless.
} >> "Glam" was useless. And... I'm late for work...
} >
} >I'd actually agree to that, mostly.
} >
} >But then again, I kind of feel the same about Punk.
} No Punk or Glam, no Goth....
No punk... you'd be listening to Blackmore cover old English
Minstrel tunes and top 4o would be nothing but wankers like
Satriani back to back with Olivia Newton John covers.
exile
} Iron Maiden... definitely 'new school'... prime movers in the NWOBHM.
Something I still deny ever happened.
No... I don't recall ever hearing Def Leppard or Survivor or
Michael Shenker either.
} Judas Priest were different (middle school?)... they pre-date Maiden by at
Sort of... Scorps, all that...
} least five years and are one of the few bands who stayed true to the metal
} cause between 1975-80 while everything else was going punk.
Actually... it was relatively few of us. {US perspective}
exile
} Chom...@the.Bit wrote:
} ><ex...@21stcentury.net> :
} >>} on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
} >>} (typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
} >>} are:
} >> Blue Cheer? Jimi Hendrix? Deep Purple? Steppenwolf? Hawkwind?
} >> The Who? Free? 3o5 other bands I've not got time to list?
} >
} >You didn't read the note at the bottom, did you? The one that had
} >words something to the effect of "listings are not at all inclusive or
} >complete"? :-)
} >
} >(And for the record - from what I've read and studied anyway - I'm
} >pretty sure the word "Metal" was never actually attributed to these
} >guys until AFTER the success of the more popular acts like Maiden and
} >Priest [Which is funny, 'cause I think Blue Oyster Cult actually were
} >the first documented to use it.]
}
} It's pretty much conventional wisdom that it goes back to the "heavy metal
} thunder" in Steppenwolf's "Born To Be Wild" (from '69, mind you)--and
} _they_ might've gotten that phrase from William Burroughs'
} _The_Naked_Lunch_. It's just that it took a while for the elements to
} come together into an integrated style (which is exactly the point at
} which exile would probably say it "died"; to a lot of people, "integrated
} style" = codification = exhaustion).
It gelled with Sabbath and BOC. It lived for 4 or 5 years then died.
} >> New School:
} >>} + Iron Maiden
} >>} + Judas Priest
} >
} >You call that "new school"?
}
} Or have you never heard the term "New Wave Of British Heavy Metal"? But
} you're right about one thing: If any music is metal, the music from this
} era is it.
Do you mean "hackneyed, cliched and boring as hell?"
} Thrash/speed metal, OTOH, by incorporating punk influences, eventually
} killed metal in order to save it (depending, of course, on your conception
} of the "death" metaphor), despite their more-metal-than-thou attitude.
I doubt they gave a damn about saving metal.
} >> Garbage:
} >>} + Twisted Sister
} >>} + Quiet Riot
} >
} >Is garbage another splinter-pseudo faction? I've never even heard the
} >term.
}
} Clue: She's making a value judgment.
He is not.
} >But saying that it got "buried" in the late '70s is to totally ignore
} >history, at least as far as the term "Metal" is involved.
}
} But it's entirely consistent with standard punk-culture procedure--see
} something you don't like, summarily declare it "dead" or irrelevant
} (thereby closing off any other possibilities), get the verdict published
} in all the right magazines, sway public opinion. They've been
} staggeringly good at it for over twenty years, which, to be blunt, is why
} punk culture rules rock'n'roll.
As a relevant, vital movement with new ideas and sounds... metal
was dead by the mid '7os.
} BTW, you'll have to ask her what she means by "we" and "buried" in
} addition to "dead". You'll also have to ask her why all the people who
} aren't included in "we"--you know, the ones who wonder why metal (or
} whatever) can't be brought back to life--somehow *don't count*.
Why bother?
Nick/Yaruar
> } (And for the record - from what I've read and studied anyway - I'm
> } pretty sure the word "Metal" was never actually attributed to these
> } guys until AFTER the success of the more popular acts like Maiden and
> } Priest [Which is funny, 'cause I think Blue Oyster Cult actually were
>
> Metal was a lot like goth, back then... it included anyone any
> particular metalhead felt like referencing. I forgot folk like
> MC5, the Stooges, the Amboy Dukes... :} I could have sworn I
> typed Uriah Heep as well. {Ah well... it was early.}
>
> Deep Purple were as metal as it gets. Hawkwind as well {if we're
> talkin' the strictest sense of the word.}
Lets not forget Motorhead too, although Lemmy hates anyone calling him
metal as he just plays rock and roll ;-)
Still like his reaction when he was asked if he felt like an influence for
Slipknot...
'They're just shit, they're absolutely nothing to do with what we do, we
play rock and roll, they're just noise'
And can't forget bands like Rainbow, etc too.
> } (I hold most of them as "fathers" of the movement, myself... that
> } helped inspire, but not define, the actual Genre. YMMV.)
>
> No... they were metal. The Who was a bit more punkish... and
> probably fits more into mainstream rock.
Depends on the era of the who, they've done everything from beach boys
influenced pop-mod through to their current accoustic prog rock ;-)
> } > New School:
> } >} + Iron Maiden
> } >} + Judas Priest
> }
> } You call that "new school"?
>
> Yeah. I was getting horribly tired of metal by '75.
It got ok when punk injected some energy back, especially with the early
maiden, who were really a punk band until bruce joined.
> } > You forgot Loverboy.
> }
> } If I were writing about Pop, I would have included them. As it is, I
> } can't think of a single soul, both in and out of the biz, who has
> } written a book or studied the period or just flat-out had ears and
> } rudimentary knowledge of musical structure, who has ever considered
> } Loverboy to be Metal.
>
> I'm tossing them into parody pop garbage with Twisted Sister
> and Quiet Riot.
>
> Outlaws? Molly Hatchet?
Nelson ;-)
Oh, and Can I just add the subgenre of metal-classical wanking of
Malmsteen et al.
Nick/Yaruar
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> revca...@myemailwashacked.net (Rev. Carroll D. Kraston) writes:
> } On 08 Nov 2000 14:41:29 -0600, exile <ex...@21stcentury.net> wrote:
> } >WorLord <gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> writes:
> } >} edv...@aol.comKILLKILL (Edvamp) :
>
> } >} -Classic Metal-
> } >} In the Beginning <s>, there was what is now referred to as "old
> } >} school" or "classic" Metal. Such bands helped define metal at the
> } >} movement's beginnings. This type of music generally consisted of song
> } >} structures relying heavily on the rigidity of Classical Music played
> } >} on modern, electrified instruments, featuring an operatic vocalist and
> } >} (typically) a fantasy-related lyrical content. Some popular examples
> } >} are:
<snip snip munch>
>
> } >} -Glam/Hair Rock-
> } >
> } > The reason I distinguish Glam from Glitter. This shit was useless.
> } > "Glam" was useless.
> }
> } 80s "Hair Band" glam was a crock, it missed the irony of actual Glam
> } Rock...
>
> That's 'cause it had no "Glitter." And nothing, at all, in common
> with the earlier movement.
Um, but if we're talking about "Poison", damn did they have sluts galore.
--
Be kind to your neighbors, even though they be transgenic chimerae.
exile
} Um, but if we're talking about "Poison", damn did they have sluts galore.
We had women in punk and glitter.
maggot
exile wrote:
>
> Tiny Human Ferret <kla...@clark.net> writes:
>
> } Um, but if we're talking about "Poison", damn did they have sluts galore.
>
> We had women in punk and glitter.
Yeah, but they had *sluts.* Lots of them.
Makes punk and glitter look like military school.
Never understood it, but it panned out when i started wearing make-up.
My meaningless sex ratio went from 1:20 to about 10:1 in one month.
maggot
WorLord
>>You call that "new school"?
As in, "New Wave of BRITISH Heavy Metal"?
Wouln't that imply that it was only Britain that went through two
waves? I never took it to imply that the entire Heavy Metal
Movement(C) went through two waves... just that the UK's contribution
to said movement got a "second wind".
WorLord
<ex...@21stcentury.net> :
>WorLord <gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> writes:
>} <ex...@21stcentury.net> :
> :} I missed the fine print? Standard disclaimers always apply.
Heh. ;-)
> You missed what I considered to be key points.
Oh? I thought I responded to damn near everything you wrote... I'll
try and be more careful in this reply.
> No... they were metal. The Who was a bit more punkish... and
...
I'm seeing a trend here, and I'll try and phrase it without sounding
too incorrect or offensive... but basically, from what I understand of
your writings, you only define metal as a movement when it was still
underground, in its embryonic stages; and you've only listed bands who
- while instrumental in inspriring a style that would *later* become
Heavy Metal - were not, in and of themselves, Metal musicians (as far
as sound/structure/content _as a complete package_ goes).
I use this thread as evidence; most of the bands you've listed to help
your point along (who, purple, etc.) have come under scrutiny by
others... and rightly so, IMO. People could - and have started to in
this thread - argue for days about whether The Who were "metal" or
"Rock and Roll," or whether Purple was just "hard rock" or not.
However, not very many people at all (read: not one) have aruged that
Iron Maiden, Priest, or Ozzy were anything *but* Heavy Metal.
I honestly think your dissatisfaction with my definition of "metal"
seems to be much more taste-based then history-based. (Not that I
really have a problem with that, mind you). I'm not doubting that the
Who and Purple (and all the others) were *popular*; but I *am* arguing
that they were not popular as anything other then Rock and Rollers. I
*am* arguing that - if any era made the words "Heavy Metal" popular -
that era occured long after the first uses of the words as lyrics.
Thougts?
>} motivation to jot down a longer history) that I cut all but the most
>} *basic* premesis.
> But you missed the basics.
When writing a bibliography about a person, do we usually start with
the adventures of that person as an embryo?
I don't think I missed the basics; I think I stuck to the basics just
fine. I just left out those who I felt only inspired and influenced
the movement, and stuck to the world-wide heyday of Heavy Metal.
> Garbage is stuff that's not actually worth mentioning.
You didn't like "we're not gonna take it"? Not even a little bit? ;-)
> Not brushed over at all. You're, quite simply, not very accurate
> in a lot of it.
I think that's far more a statement of opinion rather then fact. (No,
I'm not trying to be insulting, nor was that a flame.)
> :} Too bad.
I'm not too fond of Elvis, as it is, because I'm not too fond of
country in general.
> That was the second wave. Heavy Metal is from the early '7os.
> I'm not ignoring history... just clarifying it.
As far as clarifications go. From what I'm reading, it sounds more to
me like "Heavy Metal pulled from influences that go as far back as the
early 70's."
And Sabbath/Priest *were* early 70's material, along with Maiden
(formed in '73, no?)
>} But then again, I kind of feel the same about Punk.
> That's too bad as well...
I dunno. I mean, it's not for lack of trying... I've tried listening
to Punk on many occations. And it's not like I don't acknowledge that
the Punk I've heard wasn't performed by talented people. It just that
every time I've heard it, I said to myself, "it's upbeat, but does
absolutely nothing for me."
WorLord
>>Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of exile
>><ex...@21stcentury.net> :
>come together into an integrated style (which is exactly the point at
>which exile would probably say it "died"; to a lot of people, "integrated
>style" = codification = exhaustion).
And that's the point I look at and say that HM actually became a
full-fledge hurricane, instead of a series of almost unrelated
tropical depressions. That's the point where I actually think it
became a mucical _style_.
Anything else, IMO, would be like pointing at Punk and calling it
Goth.
>Or have you never heard the term "New Wave Of British Heavy Metal"? But
>you're right about one thing: If any music is metal, the music from this
>era is it.
Thank gods someone agrees with me here. Exile amlost had me convinced
I was actually talking about a whole different genre. ;-)
>BTW, you'll have to ask her what she means by "we" and "buried" in
>addition to "dead". You'll also have to ask her why all the people who
>aren't included in "we"--you know, the ones who wonder why metal (or
>whatever) can't be brought back to life--somehow *don't count*.
Why bother?
I mean, as far as that's concerned, Exile seems to be talking about
metal as anything _but_ a musical style. I'm just concerned with the
music, and how it's percieved and defined as a type of music.
Whether or not it's popular now, or if he views it as "dead," is
pretty much out of the realm of my concern, although it is neat to
talk about it... he's got some interesting viewpoints.
WorLord
<ex...@21stcentury.net> :
> Do you mean "hackneyed, cliched and boring as hell?"
[snip to]
>} Clue: She's making a value judgment.
> He is not.
Does anyone but me find that progression of statements hilarious?
> As a relevant, vital movement with new ideas and sounds... metal
> was dead by the mid '7os.
But as a _style of music_ (which was where this whole thread started
and aimed to explain), it wasn't even developed enough to be *defined*
at that point.
exile
} <ex...@21stcentury.net> :
} >WorLord <gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> writes:
} >} <ex...@21stcentury.net> :
} > No... they were metal. The Who was a bit more punkish... and
} I'm seeing a trend here, and I'll try and phrase it without sounding
} too incorrect or offensive... but basically, from what I understand of
} your writings, you only define metal as a movement when it was still
} underground, in its embryonic stages; and you've only listed bands who
} - while instrumental in inspriring a style that would *later* become
} Heavy Metal - were not, in and of themselves, Metal musicians (as far
} as sound/structure/content _as a complete package_ goes).
Sabbath, in '72, was hardly underground. BOC, was hardly underground.
Heep... was slightly underground, etc...
Sabbath's first album was '69 {from memory... I may be off} I see the
band as dead by the end of their first incarnation. {mid '7os}
You're not going to try to tell me that Sabbath weren't heavy metal
are you?
} I use this thread as evidence; most of the bands you've listed to help
} your point along (who, purple, etc.) have come under scrutiny by
} others... and rightly so, IMO. People could - and have started to in
} this thread - argue for days about whether The Who were "metal" or
} "Rock and Roll," or whether Purple was just "hard rock" or not.
} However, not very many people at all (read: not one) have aruged that
} Iron Maiden, Priest, or Ozzy were anything *but* Heavy Metal.
THe Who were not metal. They were very influential. This is
discussed otherwheres...
} I honestly think your dissatisfaction with my definition of "metal"
} seems to be much more taste-based then history-based. (Not that I
} really have a problem with that, mind you). I'm not doubting that the
} Who and Purple (and all the others) were *popular*; but I *am* arguing
} that they were not popular as anything other then Rock and Rollers. I
} *am* arguing that - if any era made the words "Heavy Metal" popular -
} that era occured long after the first uses of the words as lyrics.
}
} Thougts?
The term Heavy Metal was widely used in the early '7os to describe
the very bands I've listed. Discussion otherwise just strikes me
as slightly ludicrous. That the new school has forgotten, is
ignorant of or is ignoring the old school strikes me as fairly
typical of the way "new schools" work.
That you don't remember or haven't heard or refuse to recognize
bands like Deep Purple, Blue Cheer, etc... strikes me as a bit sad.
} I don't think I missed the basics; I think I stuck to the basics just
} fine. I just left out those who I felt only inspired and influenced
} the movement, and stuck to the world-wide heyday of Heavy Metal.
Sad.
} > Garbage is stuff that's not actually worth mentioning.
}
} You didn't like "we're not gonna take it"? Not even a little bit? ;-)
No.
} > Not brushed over at all. You're, quite simply, not very accurate
} > in a lot of it.
}
} I think that's far more a statement of opinion rather then fact. (No,
} I'm not trying to be insulting, nor was that a flame.)
It's just silly...
} > :} Too bad.
}
} I'm not too fond of Elvis, as it is, because I'm not too fond of
} country in general.
That's too bad as well.
} > That was the second wave. Heavy Metal is from the early '7os.
} > I'm not ignoring history... just clarifying it.
}
} As far as clarifications go. From what I'm reading, it sounds more to
} me like "Heavy Metal pulled from influences that go as far back as the
} early 70's."
}
} And Sabbath/Priest *were* early 70's material, along with Maiden
} (formed in '73, no?)
Priest didn't get popular 'till mid period metal... I'm sticking
them into that long spell of boring nonsense that occurred
between that original spark and the death of metal. I, personally,
don't like them... I consider them to be derivative and low brow
and plain boring, as did most of the later stuff. But we're not
discussing my opinions here, are we?
} >} But then again, I kind of feel the same about Punk.
} > That's too bad as well...
}
} I dunno. I mean, it's not for lack of trying... I've tried listening
} to Punk on many occations. And it's not like I don't acknowledge that
} the Punk I've heard wasn't performed by talented people. It just that
} every time I've heard it, I said to myself, "it's upbeat, but does
} absolutely nothing for me."
Ok.
--
-{exile}----------------------{http://www.freespeech.org/apophysis/}-
The following is a non-paid, non-political promotion meant to provide
information regarding the possibilities of your continued survival on
this planet. ftp://ftp.cs.wayne.edu/pub/EC/Welcome.html
exile
} As in, "New Wave of BRITISH Heavy Metal"?
}
} Wouln't that imply that it was only Britain that went through two
} waves? I never took it to imply that the entire Heavy Metal
} Movement(C) went through two waves... just that the UK's contribution
} to said movement got a "second wind".
They got "wind" all right.
WorLord
>} that they were not popular as anything other then Rock and Rollers. I
>} *am* arguing that - if any era made the words "Heavy Metal" globally popular -
>} that era occured long after the first uses of the words as lyrics.
>} Thougts?
> The term Heavy Metal was widely used in the early '7os to describe
> the very bands I've listed. Discussion otherwise just strikes me
> as slightly ludicrous.
Tangent: this may be becasue I was *extremely* young in the 70's, and
only have books and older folk as sources of information on the topic.
Tho' I have read a few books on the topic, and modern music (say, '50s
and on) took up a almost an entire semester of Music Appretiation in
1993. That's mostly where I'm drawing my data from.
> That the new school has forgotten, is
> ignorant of or is ignoring the old school strikes me as fairly
> typical of the way "new schools" work.
Assuming (wrongfully) that this is what is happening in the thread.
I kind of view the earlier metal-influences you've brought up like I
view the "Alternative" music 'movement'. That word - "Alternative,"
*as used by the general public all 'round to define a musical genre* -
didn't come into play until *real* late '80s/early ninties (varies by
area). But the music/bands who made it up had been around much, much
earlier, playing pretty much the same stuff.
In other words, it existed (albeit in a somewhat embryonic form) long
before it had gelled enough to be defined as (or became popular enough
to be known as) an individual style of music. What is so criminally
wrong about saying the same things re: DP and the Who?
> That you don't remember or haven't heard or refuse to recognize
> bands like Deep Purple, Blue Cheer, etc... strikes me as a bit sad.
It strikes me as nothing less then hilarious that you've claimed I
don't remember/haven't heard/refuse to recognize bands I've been
actively discussing in over 5 posts now.
You would have cause to be sad if I said something to the effect of
"who's Deep Purple?"
>} fine. I just left out those who I felt only inspired and influenced
>} the movement, and stuck to the world-wide heyday of Heavy Metal.
> Sad.
Hilarious.
>} I'm not too fond of Elvis, as it is, because I'm not too fond of
>} country in general.
> That's too bad as well.
This, too, is a hilarious notion to me. It looks, to my eyes, like
we're having the following conversation:
You: "You should try vanilla ice cream, it's good."
Me: "I did. Didn't like it too much, it's just not my thing."
You: "Hmp. That's too bad."
:-)
>} And Sabbath/Priest *were* early 70's material, along with Maiden
>} (formed in '73, no?)
> Priest didn't get popular 'till mid period metal... I'm sticking
> them into that long spell of boring nonsense that occurred
> between that original spark and the death of metal. I, personally,
> don't like them... I consider them to be derivative and low brow
> and plain boring, as did most of the later stuff. But we're not
> discussing my opinions here, are we?
Well, why not? I mean, you've pretty much dropped so many hints about
your feelings on the topic that your opinions are pretty much
inextricable from any other contributioin you may have made to the
thread.
That's assuming that Usenet is something other then a bunch of people
discussing their opinions, which I've yet to see convincing evidence
in support of. :-)
exile
} Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of exile
} >WorLord <gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> writes:
} >} <ex...@21stcentury.net> :
}
} >} that era occured long after the first uses of the words as lyrics.
} >} Thougts?
} > The term Heavy Metal was widely used in the early '7os to describe
} > the very bands I've listed. Discussion otherwise just strikes me
} > as slightly ludicrous.
}
} only have books and older folk as sources of information on the topic.
:} I used to hang out with them.
I *am* one of your grandfatherly types...
} Tho' I have read a few books on the topic, and modern music (say, '50s
} and on) took up a almost an entire semester of Music Appretiation in
} 1993. That's mostly where I'm drawing my data from.
I just sort of watched it happen.
} > That the new school has forgotten, is
} > ignorant of or is ignoring the old school strikes me as fairly
} > typical of the way "new schools" work.
}
} Assuming (wrongfully) that this is what is happening in the thread.
}
} I kind of view the earlier metal-influences you've brought up like I
} view the "Alternative" music 'movement'. That word - "Alternative,"
} *as used by the general public all 'round to define a musical genre* -
} didn't come into play until *real* late '80s/early ninties (varies by
} area). But the music/bands who made it up had been around much, much
} earlier, playing pretty much the same stuff.
}
} In other words, it existed (albeit in a somewhat embryonic form) long
} before it had gelled enough to be defined as (or became popular enough
} to be known as) an individual style of music. What is so criminally
} wrong about saying the same things re: DP and the Who?
I think the word "alternative" lost it's meaning once it became
a label. It was no longer an alternative... it was an accepted
musical style.
} > That you don't remember or haven't heard or refuse to recognize
} > bands like Deep Purple, Blue Cheer, etc... strikes me as a bit sad.
}
} It strikes me as nothing less then hilarious that you've claimed I
} don't remember/haven't heard/refuse to recognize bands I've been
} actively discussing in over 5 posts now.
}
} You would have cause to be sad if I said something to the effect of
} "who's Deep Purple?"
Blue Cheer? Pavlovs Dog? The fact that you seem intent on denying
Deep Purple a style they created is sad. I could have sworn that
there's a line in "Highway Star" right near the end when they're
about to do that final "I want it and I need it... I'm a Highway
Star" thing that actually uses the words heavy metal. It doesn't
seem to be in the tabs though. Maybe it's the live version.
Let me put it this way... if you had seen the Machine Head tour...
there'd be no doubt in your mind as to what sort of band they are.
That is the tour, I think, that almost saw them shut out because
their music was at high enough levels to cause permanent ear damage.
} >} I'm not too fond of Elvis, as it is, because I'm not too fond of
} >} country in general.
} > That's too bad as well.
}
} This, too, is a hilarious notion to me. It looks, to my eyes, like
} we're having the following conversation:
}
} You: "You should try vanilla ice cream, it's good."
}
} Me: "I did. Didn't like it too much, it's just not my thing."
}
} You: "Hmp. That's too bad."
}
} :-)
As far as Elvis goes... I love his old stuff... that, I can only
take in small doses though. It's just a bit before my time in regards
to sensibilites. I even have problems with older metal these days...
I can imagine that you have even more problems with it.
} >} And Sabbath/Priest *were* early 70's material, along with Maiden
} >} (formed in '73, no?)
} > Priest didn't get popular 'till mid period metal... I'm sticking
} > them into that long spell of boring nonsense that occurred
} > between that original spark and the death of metal. I, personally,
} > don't like them... I consider them to be derivative and low brow
} > and plain boring, as did most of the later stuff. But we're not
} > discussing my opinions here, are we?
}
} Well, why not? I mean, you've pretty much dropped so many hints about
} your feelings on the topic that your opinions are pretty much
} inextricable from any other contributioin you may have made to the
} thread.
}
} That's assuming that Usenet is something other then a bunch of people
} discussing their opinions, which I've yet to see convincing evidence
} in support of. :-)
I don't think it is either... plain facts just get boring as hell.
It's just that that sort of stuff is so obviously, glaringly
second rate to me that I really don't see why it's not accepted
as such from the start. Apparently lots of folk like Judas Priest
though. I suppose mileage varies. I can admit to liking some of
their stuff... it's the lyrics that just make it unlistenable to
me. Musically... I rather like them.
WorLord
<ex...@21stcentury.net> :
>WorLord <gonzo.nos...@worlord.com> writes:
>} Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of exile
>} Tangent: this may be becasue I was *extremely* young in the 70's, and
>} only have books and older folk as sources of information on the topic.
> :} I used to hang out with them.
> I *am* one of your grandfatherly types...
Jeezus, if you're half as old as you're *making* yourself out to be,
you'd need two crutches and an oxygen tank just to post on Usenet.
;-)
>} to be known as) an individual style of music. What is so criminally
>} wrong about saying the same things re: DP and the Who?
> I think the word "alternative" lost it's meaning once it became
> a label. It was no longer an alternative... it was an accepted
> musical style.
I'd have to agree.
(To me, though, if any music out there is "garbage" music, pretty much
the whole alterna-thing would be in it... including the early,
pre-alternative alternative stuff. That whole 'revolution' had me
bored to tears... some of the stuff produced in that era is just
crap.)
> Blue Cheer? Pavlovs Dog? The fact that you seem intent on denying
> Deep Purple a style they created is sad.
I'm not *denying* them that style; rather, I just see them as
*helping* to create the style, but not *being* the actual style in and
of themselves. Kinda like their sperm (as far as mucical styles go)
gave the child known as "heavy metal" half of it's chromazomes (sp).
I really, *really* don't think I'm all that alone in that, but on a
purely personal level I listen to them and go "gee, *that* where heavy
metal got half it's ideas from. Neat.".
>} This, too, is a hilarious notion to me. It looks, to my eyes, like
>} we're having the following conversation:
>} You: "You should try vanilla ice cream, it's good."
>} Me: "I did. Didn't like it too much, it's just not my thing."
>} You: "Hmp. That's too bad."
>} :-)
> As far as Elvis goes... I love his old stuff... that, I can only
> take in small doses though. It's just a bit before my time in regards
> to sensibilites. I even have problems with older metal these days...
> I can imagine that you have even more problems with it.
Only a very small issue. I don't think I have very many problems with
any of the bands that were discussed in this whole thread (with glam
being the glaring exception, of course... someone should have hit all
of Poison with a speeding mack truck, IMO.)
Having said that, I have to say that the earlier 70's stuff being
discussed is a bit too simple/predictable/lacking in any kind of deep
substance for my tastes. I like much more complexity of
melody/content in my music. I like the kind of music where you can
keep listening periodically over the years and hear a melody/notice a
subcurrent or train of thought that you didn't hear before. Music
that can grow with you, that sorta thing.
I don't get any of that from the fathers of Metal, but I do get it
from Metal. With the older stuff, one can tell there was definitely a
progression being made; but the simplicity of structure and content in
songs from the 50's-60's (oldies!!) is really evident. That earlier
stuff is basically just "fun" music to me: I'll play it at parties,
but it wears itself really thin after only a few listens. Not much
re-play value on my discman at all; ya hear it once or twice, and
that's about all you're gonna get out of it.
>} That's assuming that Usenet is something other then a bunch of people
>} discussing their opinions, which I've yet to see convincing evidence
>} in support of. :-)
> I don't think it is either... plain facts just get boring as hell.
Damn skippy, there.
I wanted that, I'd read a dictionary cover-to-cover ;-).
> It's just that that sort of stuff is so obviously, glaringly
> second rate to me that I really don't see why it's not accepted
> as such from the start.
It can only be second rate if it can reasonably be compared (and I
don't believe it can).
If I may offer this without offence, but this is very typical in
attitude to what I've seen of "old school" mentality: The idea that
the new kiddies out there are fucking up the old, established ways,
without realizing that the old ways weren't really established at all,
and that the new players on the stage have about as much to do with
the old ways as kids have in common with their paraents during the
teenage years.
In other words, apples can't be "second rate" to oranges, since the
comparison isn't really valid. Similarly, Heavy Metal can't be
"second rate" to the bands that helped spawn the style, and most of
Elvis' stuff can't reasonably be called "country music," despite the
heavy *influence* of country.
(Jeezus H. Kerist on a pogo stick, did any of that make any sense to
anyone besides me??)
> Apparently lots of folk like Judas Priest
> though.
The song "turbo" was a brief flash of brilliance, but they (IMO, now)
really were never comfortable enough/developed enough/creative enough
with their own sound to produce a decent record until "Painkiller."
Promply after which (despite excellent CD sales), Halford quit.
And then it *really* went to hell - they hired a new lead and released
"Jugulator," which sounds like Slipknot CD before Slipknot existed,
IMO. But enough of that. ;-)
>I suppose mileage varies. I can admit to liking some of
> their stuff... it's the lyrics that just make it unlistenable to
> me. Musically... I rather like them.
Despite the fact that they're not my faves, what's wrong with the
lyrics? They always managed to put one good made-up story (lyrically)
or myth on each and every CD...
armit...@my-deja.com
Me vs. You <me.v...@sonicnetmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've been a fan of goth music and heavy metal music for
> a long time, but there is this weird shit between some goth
> people and some metalheads. Some goths seem to hate
> metal and metalheads, and a lot of metalheads think that
> a lot of the goth people are just weird.
>
> What gives? I think there's a lot of crossover in some of
> the music and styles from both sides.
>
> What's the big difference?
Well when you're a kid, it's kind of like you have to follow every
rule to be this or that. Me personally I like some Black Metal, but I'd
prefer some Industrial or Gorth rock over it any day of the week. I've
noticed alot of the younger teens trying to be "Goth" are all about
Black Metal and that sort of lot. Try mentioning Bauhaus, or Siouxsie
to some kid these days and they'll just be like Whatever..
Personally I think the morbid sense of interest is the connection
between the two. But Where as Metal is all testastorone(sp?) and anger,
Goth seems to fall on the more Artsy side of things. And I remember
being a stupid metal head kid years ago what is no considered "Goth" we
called Art Fag..I know it's a slanderous phrase but what do you expect
from some dirty white trash kid with a jean jacket and an Iron Maiden T-
shirt.
Fortunatly I realized how stupid it all was and that Skinny Puppy was
a million times scarier than any of those old metal bands.
Best Wishes,
Dave
np:Youth Engine "Revive"
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> exile wrote:
> >
> > Tiny Human Ferret <kla...@clark.net> writes:
> >
> > } Um, but if we're talking about "Poison", damn did they have sluts galore.
> >
> > We had women in punk and glitter.
>
> Yeah, but they had *sluts.* Lots of them.
Damned right, take a look at some of the videos of their live performance,
*damn* did they have sluts. Muy babealicioso.
>
> Makes punk and glitter look like military school.
Ah, actually, a lot of those gals wound up being the leather set...
>
> Never understood it, but it panned out when i started wearing make-up.
> My meaningless sex ratio went from 1:20 to about 10:1 in one month.
Damn.
>
> maggot