Page 3 of 18
#81
Quote by ChemicalFire
And this is where your argument falls apart. How is this anything but your opinion on how metal should work? This is purely your subjective opinion.

You can back it up with as much as you like, it's still only an opinion, not a fact. You should really stop treating it as such.
My opinion is based on objective facts garnered from observing the past, because... wait for it... those ideals were used to create the genre... and modern bands have lost sight of those ideals (now, you have bands forming "to be brutal" or "heavy" or "to sound like X, Y and Z"... not "to write music which rewards the listener on an objective level by providing insight towards some abstract idea or concept through musical expression") so for the genre to continue, rather than stagnate and die... that must happen again, only now, as I said before, it's impossible to "out-do" other bands by trying to achieve aesthetic unfamiliarity, because there's already been 40 years of that. Hence, musical literacy (so as to be able to perceive music on a level other than aeshetics) is needed, so that aspiring musicians can write, and conceive of music on a level that is not strictly aesthetic.

Again, you seem to have no perspective of Metal's history. Heavy metal started when Black Sabbath merged heavy guitar rock (Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Cream) with the soundtracks from horror films (Wikipedia's article on Sabbath will corroborate this with numerous citations, if you care that much). They did this by exclusively using power chords, which, because they do not contain the notes that mark them as major or minor chords, lend themselves to moving in streams, like a melody played in chords. The result is that Black Sabbath structured their songs around the interplay and variation of these melodies, instead of focusing on transitions between points of fixed harmony (static, repeating verses/choruses) like rock/pop music, and subsequently invented a new style of music that took nearly thirty years to grow into the musical ideal first suggested back in 1970.
Quote by eazy-c
I just think you could do with realizing that the world does not adhere to strict logical doctrines, the rigid 18th-century approach you're taking to critical analysis of an art form completely misses the point of why we listen to and enjoy music in the first place, a base reaction based upon something sounding pleasant to our ears. You can theorise about how Gorguts incorporate inverted retrograde disharmonic development or whatever as much as you want, that doesn't change the fact most people (quite rightly) are just looking for good riffs.
I'm not so much caught up in "trying to prove music as scientifically good/bad", but rather, I believe that one should base their opinion of art in objective logic and reasoning as opposed to the situation which you describe (something that I know is what forms the "evaluation" process of 99% of music listeners). For example, I can listen to a song and note (for example) that there is little consideration to having the individual phrases contain references to previous phrases in the forms of motifs, and hence, understand that that music is not as structurally coherent as, say, Bach, and thusly, I can decide that I don't like that, and not listen to it.

Of course, expecting everyone interpret music that way is quite unrealistic, but I do think that using that sort of process is far more intellectually gratifying, and beneficial compared to the opposite. And while engaging in public dissemination of the ideas of which I speak, it's my hope that at least some of the people who read arguments/debates as opposed to participating in them will find them to be sensible, at the least, though I will confess that trying to be civil towards the other person is certainly ideal for appealing to said observers.
Quote by eazy-c
You can look for whatever technicalities you want in music, but to assume that anyone else will give fuck about what you look for without giving their view at least some respect is simply arrogant.
This is reasonable.
Quote by eazy-c
The way you conduct yourself on this forum can be borderline autistic with how little consideration you have for the validity of others opinions, and whilst I realise that you probably just see yourself as being a crusader for true metal justice or whatever, there's no way you're ever going to properly engage someone without attempting to reach some sort of compromise, all it leads to is two people talking at each other, instead of to each other.
I have to confess that since this is the internet, I don't really give a shit if I hurt someone's feelings or not, but I also understand your point here.
Quote by eazy-c
You can also be a bit picky with the truth in order to support your own arguments, to say black metal was the last genre to emerge from metal is plain false.
What do you believe to be the most recent outbreak of a new subgenre, then?
Last edited by Steve08 at Jan 24, 2013,
#82
Have you ever read Ozzy's autobiography?

He explains Sabbaths early writing process as a him singing over a bunch of riffs that Iommi had written.

You're giving FAR too much credit to a bunch of uneducated Brummies. Sure that may of been the outcome of their music but I doubt it was their intention to do what you seem to imply was some kind of musical genius.

Quote by Steve08
My opinion is based on objective facts garnered from observing the past, because... wait for it... those ideals were used to create the genre... and modern bands have lost sight of those ideals (now, you have bands forming "to be brutal" or "heavy" or "to sound like X, Y and Z"... not "to write music which rewards the listener on an objective level by providing insight towards some abstract idea or concept through musical expression") so for the genre to continue, rather than stagnate and die... that must happen again


It's still just your opinion man. No matter what you think, all things in music are subjective. As this argument has proved. Sure I may not have an opinion you value because I've not spent years looking at guitar tabs... I've had other things I'd rather be doing... like listening to an enjoying music for the sounds it makes in ma ear holes, but in the end my opinion is JUST as valid as yours about what I THINK should/can/will happen in metal. You can't change that no matter how many long fancy paragraphs you write about what you've discovered by staring at guitar pro; basically implying that you are the one tr00 saviour of the realm that is metal. You gotta have a conversation bro. You write to convince as well as a hammer cements bricks together.

The sooner you understand that the sooner you'll chill out.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
Last edited by ChemicalFire at Jan 24, 2013,
#83
Quote by Steve08
Again, you seem to have no perspective of Metal's history. Heavy metal started when Black Sabbath merged heavy guitar rock (Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Cream) with the soundtracks from horror films (Wikipedia's article on Sabbath will corroborate this with numerous citations, if you care that much). They did this by exclusively using power chords, which, because they do not contain the notes that mark them as major or minor chords, lend themselves to moving in streams, like a melody played in chords. The result is that Black Sabbath structured their songs around the interplay and variation of these melodies, instead of focusing on transitions between points of fixed harmony (static, repeating verses/choruses) like rock/pop music, and subsequently invented a new style of music that took nearly thirty years to grow into the musical ideal first suggested back in 1970.


I understand what you're saying here, but I think a lot of people read this part and think to themselves, "I highly doubt Sabbath were thinking about variation and interplay! They just let the music flow, man!". So, they take it as any Metal band that is worth their load must be musical messiahs and gods at their instruments to be in the Metal community. I imagine that's the problem a lot of people had, hell, even I had this problem and for two years I was stressing over never being good enough at anything because of it. I kind of moved myself into other genres because of how suffocating that felt, which may be what people mean by "growing out of" Metal as well.

^The first sentence of Chemicals post is a perfect example of what I just said.
#84
I'd still argue that they weren't fully aware of what they were doing. They were the poorest of the poor in Brum and didn't have a musical education worth a damn if any at all. I'd bet they said "hey this sounds good lets play that". Instead of the stuff Steve has been saying.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
#85
Quote by ChemicalFire
Have you ever read Ozzy's autobiography?
No.
Quote by ChemicalFire
He explains Sabbaths early writing process as a him singing over a bunch of riffs that Iommi had written.
Like 99% of Metal bands, yes.
Quote by ChemicalFire
You're giving FAR too much credit to a bunch of uneducated Brummies. Sure that may of been the outcome of their music but it was never their intention to do what you seem to imply was some kind of musical genius.
The end result is the only thing that really matters, now isn't it? Regardless, it's commonly said that the band sought to create the musical equivalent to a horror film.
Quote by ChemicalFire
It's still just your opinion man.
Yes, but would you not agree that one opinion can be based in an objective standard?
Quote by ChemicalFire
No matter what you think, all things in music are subjective.
This makes no sense. Are you trying to make the implication that all occurrences in music are something that we imagine?
Quote by ChemicalFire
As this argument has proved. Sure I may not have an opinion you value because I've not spent years looking at guitar tabs... I've had other things I'd rather be doing... like listening to an enjoying music for the sounds it makes in ma ear holes, but in the end my opinion is JUST as valid as yours about what I THINK should/can/will happen in metal. You can't change that no matter how many long fancy paragraphs you write about what you've discovered by staring at guitar pro.

The sooner you understand that the sooner you'll chill out.
I haven't even thought this way for as much as a year, and I don't listen to music that doesn't appeal to me emotionally, either, even if I can respect the technical designs that are responsible for creating that music.
Quote by Morphogenesis26
I understand what you're saying here, but I think a lot of people read this part and think to themselves, "I highly doubt Sabbath were thinking about variation and interplay! They just let the music flow, man!".
You are correct in presuming that almost all Metal bands are musically illiterate, however, my whole thing, really, is that by encouraging musical literacy and other such shit, we can have Metal which is CONSCIOUSLY written in the way that I describe. Does that make sense?
Last edited by Steve08 at Jan 24, 2013,
#86
Quote by Steve08
but would you not agree that one opinion can be based in an objective standard?


I wouldn't say that at all, it would be against everything I've been saying. What I WOULD say that it doesn't make your opinion any greater than any other opinions. If it what makes you happy then I'm all for it, it's cool. It doesn't however make you "right" in any way, shape or form

Quote by Steve08

This makes no sense. Are you trying to make the implication that all occurrences in music are something that we imagine?


Okay so perhaps not everything, but it all boils down to opinion. There are lots of bands considered good by people other than you that probably don't like, that don't share the characteristics of metal bands you like. Which again is fine, but again what it doesn't do is mean that these bands are intrinsically bad or not metal as it is all based on what you think is good and what you think is metal, you have objective information to back up your opinion, you know why you like things and why you don't, but you've not stumbled upon some great intrinsic law of the universe which indicates this is what metal is, and always HAS to be.

Quote by Steve08

I haven't even thought this way for as much as a year, and I don't listen to music that doesn't appeal to me emotionally, either, even if I can respect the technical designs that are responsible for creating that music.


But would you listen to a band that appeals to you emotionally to start with, but then once they don't fit in with "Steve's Laws of Metal" would you stop?

Quote by Steve08

You are correct in presuming that almost all Metal bands are musically illiterate, however, my whole thing, really, is that by encouraging musical literacy and other such shit, we can have Metal which is CONSCIOUSLY written in the way that I describe. Does that make sense?


You can encourage musical literacy without saying that IT HAS TO BE THIS BECAUSE IT'S WHAT I THINK.

Because that's incredibly closed minded.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
Last edited by ChemicalFire at Jan 24, 2013,
#87
Quote by Steve08
Are you trying to make the implication that all occurrences in music are something that we imagine


Beyond the physical structure of the sounds waves involved, pretty much everything in music is open to at least some degree of subjective interpretation.

And simply giving people an education in music theory is useless without them having some sort of creative spark or something worthwhile to say. That's why you get people with music degrees who'll never write an interesting piece and people like Black Sabbath revolutionisng music from a council flat in the middle of a shithole like Birmingham.
Quote by ChemicalFire
The point of underground bands is their not popular or famous most of the time. Thus there is a good chance they suck.
Last edited by eazy-c at Jan 24, 2013,
#88
Quote by ChemicalFire
I wouldn't say that at all, it would be against everything I've been saying. What I WOULD say that it doesn't make your opinion any greater than any other opinions. If it what makes you happy then I'm all for it, it's cool. It doesn't however make you "right" in any way, shape or form
So, do you believe that objective reality, in fact, does not exist at all, but is rather a solipsistic dream invented by each human on an individual basis?
Quote by ChemicalFire
Okay so perhaps not everything, but it all boils down to opinion. There are lots of bands considered good by people other than you that probably don't share the characteristics of metal bands you like. Which again is fine, but again what it doesn't do is mean that these bands aren't intrinsically bad or not metal as it is all based on what you think is good and what you think is metal, you have objective information to back up your opinion, you know why you like things and why you don't, but you've not stumbled upon some great intrinsic law of the universe which indicates this is what metal is, and always HAS to be.
I'm curious. Do you think that biology is all a matter of conjecture? Interpret that question as literally as possible.
Quote by ChemicalFire
But would you listen to a band that appeals to you emotionally to start with, but then once they don't fit in with "Steve's Laws of Metal" would you stop?
No, because I can very quickly ascertain whether or not something meets my standards while I'm in the process of listening to it.
Quote by eazy-c
Beyond the physical structure of the sounds waves involved, pretty much everything in music is open to at least some degree of subjective interpretation.
So, by this logic, I could read a piece of music and see that the tones A, C and E are written on that sheet, and someone with an equivalent knowledge/understanding would possibly interpret that as, uh, something else?

Quote by eazy-c
And simply giving people an education in music theory is useless without them having some sort of creative spark or something worthwhile to say. That's why you get people with music degrees who'll never write an interesting piece and people like Black Sabbath revolutionisng music from a council flat in the middle of a shithole like Birmingham.
Hence why I think art is essentially a method of expressing the human condition (which you allude to in mentioning "something worthwhile to say"), and if that expression is not technically sound (which is why I advocate musical literacy; to determine whether or not something is written haphazardly in regards to what that artist is trying to "say"), it's compromised in some objective way (obviously, the average listener could hear it and decide whether or not they like it, but that's not based in any objective reason to begin with).
Last edited by Steve08 at Jan 24, 2013,
#89
Quote by Steve08
Do you think that biology is all a matter of conjecture? Interpret that question as literally as possible.


People assumed Newton had gravity sewn up for hundered of years. Any good scientist will tell you the models we use are by no means objectively right, they're simply practical.

EDIT: What do you make of this Steve?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TV6LPx1ezYs
Quote by ChemicalFire
The point of underground bands is their not popular or famous most of the time. Thus there is a good chance they suck.
Last edited by eazy-c at Jan 24, 2013,
#90
Quote by Steve08
So, do you believe that objective reality, in fact, does not exist at all, but is rather a solipsistic dream invented by each human on an individual basis?I'm curious. Do you think that biology is all a matter of conjecture? Interpret that question as literally as possible.


Reality is open to personal interpretation, which is why we have several religions and philosophies which no one can agree on. You yourself subscribe to one of them which seems to leave no scope for the possibility of others.

No but that is a science, not an art.

You're treating art like a science which is the crux of the issue I have with your arguments. It's YOUR way of looking at music, doesn't mean it's everyone's, again. OPINION.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
Last edited by ChemicalFire at Jan 24, 2013,
#91
Quote by eazy-c
People assumed Newton had gravity sewn up for hundered of years. Any good scientist will tell you the models we use are by no means objectively right, they're simply practical.
OK. So, how does that not utterly corroborate my thought that there is a way to evaluate music which is literally just more logical than listening to something and seeing how that makes you feel?

edit: I'll listen to that song in a moment.
edit2: That song strikes me primarily as sonic wallpaper, in that "something happens" in the form of vocals, but the musical accompaniment just... doesn't... change (other than the introduction of basslines, at times... while the underlying piano progression remains the same). Shit's boring, IMO.
Quote by ChemicalFire
Reality is open to personal interpretation, which is why we have several religions and philosophies which no one can agree on. You yourself subscribe to one of them which seems to leave no scope for the possibility of others.
Yes, but when you see something happening, you can observe facts about what is happening. If you see a clown on a bike crashing into a schoolbus, how can you interpret that in ANY other way than a factual one? Maybe he could have actually been riding a moped or something!!!... even though, in fact, said clown was riding a bicycle.
Quote by ChemicalFire
No but that is a science, not an art.
But the process of noting how a life-form exists, and establishing the notion that there is a quantifiable idea of "life" in general, is EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IN A DIFFERENT CONTEXT, guy.
Last edited by Steve08 at Jan 24, 2013,
#92
I don't see how anything could be more logical than listening to music to evaluate it...
Quote by ChemicalFire
The point of underground bands is their not popular or famous most of the time. Thus there is a good chance they suck.
#93
Quote by eazy-c
I don't see how anything could be more logical than listening to music to evaluate it...
Which is exactly what I'm doing, except in a more defined, articulated way. Huh.
#94
Quote by Steve08
Which is exactly what I'm doing, except in a more defined, articulated way. Huh.


Analysis of musical structure =/= just listening to it.

Quote by Steve08
Yes, but when you see something happening, you can observe facts about what is happening. If you see a clown on a bike crashing into a schoolbus, how can you interpret that in ANY other way than a factual one? Maybe he could have actually been riding a moped or something!!!... even though, in fact, said clown was riding a bicycle.But the process of noting how a life-form exists, and establishing the notion that there is a quantifiable idea of "life" in general, is EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IN A DIFFERENT CONTEXT, guy.


Way to miss the point bro, waaaay to miss the point.

If you've not got it yet, I'm not saying you can't believe what you believe about music. I'm saying it's not any more right than anyone else's view point, because it just isn't.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
Last edited by ChemicalFire at Jan 24, 2013,
#95
Quote by ChemicalFire
Analysis of musical structure =/= just listening to it.
You can analyze it... by listening to it... are you kidding me?
Quote by ChemicalFire
Way to miss the point bro, waaaay to miss the point.
What the fuck are you talking about? That is literally central to the crux of this entire debate.
Quote by ChemicalFire
If you've not got it yet, I'm not saying you can't believe what you believe about music. I'm saying it's not any more right than anyone else's view point, because it just isn't.
It has more evidence behind it, which, again, ties in with my overall stance that people should judge music based on objective standards... not subjective ones.
Last edited by Steve08 at Jan 24, 2013,
#96
You're evaluating music based purely on it's compositional merit, I imagine in an attempt to make yourself feel intellectually superior because everyone in real life thinks the music you listen is unstructured noise.

I've seen you make no comments regarding without a doubt the most important aspect of music; performance. You've rubbished the idea the production and aesthetic choices are an part of an artist's music (hint; it's 2012, what you choose to do with regards to recording, production and packaging are integral parts of the creative process). Having worked with professional musicians on a regular basis, I can tell you they'd probably just laugh at your ability to wildly miss the point when listening to a piece of music.

Have you ever read any Descartes? You could learn a lot from Meditations on First Philosophy.
Quote by ChemicalFire
The point of underground bands is their not popular or famous most of the time. Thus there is a good chance they suck.
Last edited by eazy-c at Jan 24, 2013,
#97
Quote by Steve08
What the fuck are you talking about? That is literally central to the crux of this entire debate.It has more evidence behind it, which, again, ties in with my overall stance that people should judge music based on objective standards... not subjective ones.


It isn't, at least it hasn't been for a while. The last few pages have been me trying to explain that while you think what you think you think it doesn't make you "right" in any way beyond me looking at a painting and saying "yup, he used blue in this painting".
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
#98
Quote by eazy-c
You're evaluating music based purely on it's compositional merit, I imagine in an attempt to make yourself feel intellectually superior because everyone in real life thinks the music you listen is unstructured noise.
No, I have a lot of friends who listen to the same kind of music that I do, actually.
Quote by eazy-c
I've seen you make no comments regarding without a doubt the most important aspect of music; performance. You've rubbished the idea the production and aesthetic choices are an part of an artist's music (hint; it's 2012, what you choose to do with regards to recording, production and packaging are integral parts of the creative process).
Aesthetics only matter in the PRESENTATION of music, not how that music exists on its own right (compositional merits, as you described). If the aesthetics aren't wildly contradictory to the point of the music itself then what reason is there to talk about as if it actually, like, matters in determining the quality of the music as it exists purely as a collection of tones? A band like The Acacia Strain writes music based around the premise of "being heavy" but the problem with their "heaviness" is that it's an illusion that is completely created by their guitar tone and tuning; if they played the same songs in E standard on 6 string guitars with a clean tone, nobody would give a shit, and yet Mayhem's Freezing Moon sounds like pure sepulchral coldness even if you play it in a different tuning, or a different instrument entirely, such as a violin, piano, bassoon, etc. because the writing is sound.
Quote by eazy-c
Have you ever read any Descartes? You could learn a lot from Meditations on First Philosophy.
No. I'll make a note of it.
Last edited by Steve08 at Jan 24, 2013,
#99
Quote by Steve08

A band like The Acacia Strain writes music based around the premise of "being heavy" but the problem with their "heaviness" is that it's an illusion that is completely created by their guitar tone and tuning; if they played the same songs in E standard on 6 string guitars with a clean tone, nobody would give a shit


But they don't do that and it sounds heavy. So what's the problem?

Why does it matter if it can be converted as such or doesn't it.

Other than the fact that you say so of course, because all those people who LIKE that band are ALL wrong and all have INVALID opinions.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
Last edited by ChemicalFire at Jan 24, 2013,
#100
Quote by ChemicalFire
But they don't do that and it sounds heavy. So what's the problem?
Because the composition is so vapid and shallow that you can COMPLETELY unhinge it by making one aesthetic change...? So, there's not many... objective reasons to like it, and everyone who listens to that band does so because they buy into the subjectively derived notions of "value" (fake heaviness, in this instance) that the music is written under...?

Whereas an album like Incantation's Onward to Golgotha would still sound like Hell even if it was played by a horn section, because it's written based on the emotional impression that the intervallic distances between notes are indicative of, not aesthetic gimmickery.
Last edited by Steve08 at Jan 24, 2013,
#101
I love me some metal. I think we will see more dubstep influence in metal. Electronic music and metal seem to jive.
#102
Quote by Steve08
Because the composition is so vapid and shallow that you can COMPLETELY unhinge it by making one aesthetic change...? So, there's not many... objective reasons to like it, and everyone who listens to that band does so because they buy into the subjectively derived notions of "value" (fake heaviness, in this instance) that the music is written under...?

Whereas an album like Incantation's Onward to Golgotha would still sound like Hell even if it was played by a horn section, because it's written based on the relationships between notes, not aesthetic gimmickery.


But only you care, you think like that, people who like the band don't, they have a different OPINION ON A SUBJECTIVE ART THAN YOU.

You're either incredibly arrogant or just too in love with the idea that you're the king of metal to seem to accept ideas outside of your bubble, even if you don't agree with them.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
#103
On the whole, in this forum we don't discuss abstract compositions, we discuss recorded music. All elements and choices involved in producing that piece of recorded music are entirely relevant to it's merits and failures as a work of art. Would anyone give a shit about Freezing Moon if it was played on the piano? Would they fuck, because as much as you may want to tell yourself otherwise, they are not a hivemind Chopin, they're a metal band whose appeal (and artistic success) is equally (if not more) reliant upon aesthetic and production choices as it is composition.
Quote by ChemicalFire
The point of underground bands is their not popular or famous most of the time. Thus there is a good chance they suck.
#104
Quote by ChemicalFire
But only you care, you think like that, people who like the band don't, they have a different OPINION ON A SUBJECTIVE ART THAN YOU.

You're either incredibly arrogant or just too in love with the idea that you're the king of metal to seem to accept ideas outside of your bubble, even if you don't agree with them.
They think that way because they have not ever been conditioned to think otherwise, or even been made aware of that there is an "otherwise" at all, which explains the predictably high amount of cognitive dissonance at play whenever a discussion of this nature occurs. I think people should judge music for how it is, not how they think it is.
#105
Quote by Steve08
They think that way because they have not ever been conditioned to think otherwise, or even been made aware of that there is an "otherwise" at all, which explains the predictably high amount of cognitive dissonance at play whenever a discussion of this nature occurs. I think people should judge music for how it is, not how they think it is.


I think this conversation has proved that just because they were made aware of it doesn't mean they'd instantly agree with you. Hell if I thought you had a point I'd of told you by now. In part I think you DO and you have interesting ideas, but you're just so catastrophically closed minded that any ideas you may have are completely wasted and instead of being a smart guy you're just a dick.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
#106
Quote by technicolour
Well, myself, and many others would disagree that the 10% of good djent bands are worth it, and furthermore those 10% aren't very interesting either. As far as I've heard the general framework of djent is odd time chugging with sweeps over top.
The 10% was more referring to 10% of both modern Progressive Metal and Djent. As far as just Djent goes, you're 100% correct; most of it is just odd chugging with sweeps. But there's about 1% of Djent which I would say is good or at least ok (mainly because of the composition). Basically, imho, there's 3 "Djent" bands that are good, namely Periphery, The HAARP Machine, and Vjildharta. (I'm sure there's a few others, but I don't have the capability to listen to EVERY Djent band to determine that.)

Most Djent bands I look up on Youtube and go, "BORING!"

I don't think Steve is implying that nothing new has happened in metal, however, many of these so called progressions labelled by others aren't real progression, eg: adding a banjo to a metal song. That's not actually changing anything significant. Real progression like I already said seems (to me anyways) to be much more subtle, again just gonna use Antediluvian as an example cause they're the first band that springs to mind. Metal musicians shouldn't be focused on just slapping different styles of contemporary music together, so much as focus on song form or flow.
Well...I basically agree with this entire paragraph, man. I guess what I was saying is that I would put a lot of emphasis on those subtle changes. I would say those are moving metal forward, albeit slowly.

Also, using a banjo in Metal isn't progressive; it's a lame attempt to blend musical styles that doesn't really work (or at least, it doesn't seem like it would work, in my head).

Quote by Steve08
Well, in terms of any new, legitimate Metal subgenres being created, uh, that is literally true-- the last emergence of a major style, as I stated previously, would be Black Metal, which came around at the end of the 80s. However, it's not so much that there are not modern bands which serve to progress Metal, but rather, that these select few worthy, new bands are drowning amidst a sea of over-saturation, because kids who pick up instruments these days do not look to the past, just the present, and consequently, are merely reiterating styles rather than trying to actively mine the artistic/musical potential within those styles, something which has only been touched upon by alpha-tier Metal bands for the most part.

Ok, I can agree with that. We really do need more Metal musicians to look to the roots of Metal and stop playing the latest fad or whatever. I would say, if more people studied not only the history of Metal but also other genres of music (classical, jazz, certain styles of rock, etc.), then we would have more progression, more forward motion, so to speak.


No, I don't think that at all; but writing/perceiving music only at the aesthetic level is not the way to achieve that. Advocating the incorporation of Classical ideals in Metal on a massive scale is the way to achieve that. It's no longer possible to "out-do" other bands merely by introducing aesthetic unfamiliarity.

Ok. I somewhat agree, but I wouldn't say classical ideals are the ONLY way. Jazz (at the forms of it that emphasize theory and such) has a lot to offer as well.

Although, to be clear, I'm not an advocate of Metal that sounds "Jazzy", for the most part. (By which I mean, it usually doesn't sound good, to me, when a Metal band tries to sound Jazzy. There are a few exceptions, such as UneXpect at times [even that is done tastefully, albeit chaotically]. But those exceptions are like 1 out of 1000s.) A band can use Jazz ideals/techniques/etc. without trying to sound Jazzy.

If it's just a matter of production/note choice/vocals/instrumentation being modified, then that is aesthetic "change", not musical "progression". Musical progression occurs when you re-evaluate the goals of your music, or alternatively, how your music achieves those goals.

Ah, that's a wonderful point. Agree wholeheartedly, in the sense that any aesthetic "change" must serve any real "progression".

Quote by Morphogenesis26
I understand what you're saying here, but I think a lot of people read this part and think to themselves, "I highly doubt Sabbath were thinking about variation and interplay! They just let the music flow, man!". So, they take it as any Metal band that is worth their load must be musical messiahs and gods at their instruments to be in the Metal community. I imagine that's the problem a lot of people had, hell, even I had this problem and for two years I was stressing over never being good enough at anything because of it.

I personally have had experience with this on a lesser scale recently. I've been rewriting a few songs that I've had sitting around. (Some of them were written when I first started playing guitar, so you can imagine how that goes.) I looked at them and realized they were NOT conveying the idea/sounds/imagery/etc. that I wanted to convey. However, I had to step back and go, "It doesn't need to be a symphony". I've been focusing rather on the composition aspect.
For instance, guitar 1 plays Riff1a. Guitar 2 plays Riff1b at the same time. How do the notes of Riff1a relate to Riff1b? How do I want that section to sound? And so on? Now, by themselves, Riff1a and Riff1b are ok riffs. Together, they really bring about the sound I want to achieve and "character", so to speak, to that particular part.


Anyway, sort of a side-track, but that was just my personal brush with stressing out over not being good enough lately.

Quote by Steve08
But the process of noting how a life-form exists, and establishing the notion that there is a quantifiable idea of "life" in general, is EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IN A DIFFERENT CONTEXT, guy.

But, when it comes to qualifying music, it's all opinion. Yes, there's technical aspects we can qualify, like "(Guitarist for band X) is using a lot of tremolo picking in Riff Y". (Simplistic example, but I think you get what I'm saying.) But when it comes to evaluating and determining the overall scope of music, it's all opinion. There's no rules that say, "This must be like SO"*.

*Except for certain types of counterpoint, but let's not get into that. Counterpoint can be VERY limiting.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Jan 24, 2013,
#107
Quote by eazy-c
On the whole, in this forum we don't discuss abstract compositions, we discuss recorded music.
Recorded music which has objective facts regarding its composition, yes. I don't see what relevance this bears, though. You're projecting.
Quote by eazy-c
All elements and choices involved in producing that piece of recorded music are entirely relevant to it's merits and failures as a work of art.
How? Substantiate this argument, please. The only "failure" that aesthetics can provide, as I stated, is presenting the music in a way that's contrary to the point of that music, or if you literally cannot perceive the underlying melodic structures due to lack of clarity in the mixing, something which I myself have never encountered. If neither of things are the case then it's a moot point at best.
Quote by eazy-c
Would anyone give a shit about Freezing Moon if it was played on the piano?
Probably not Metal fans, but that does nothing to change the fact that that composition still stands strong independent of its presentation because it's assembled well. You are inverting my own question to be a smart-ass, essentially, and that's funny because I have done nothing but be completely respectful towards you in my responses except until just now.
Quote by ChemicalFire
I think this conversation has proved that just because they were made aware of it doesn't mean they'd instantly agree with you.
That is the definition of cognitive dissonance, essentially.
Quote by ChemicalFire
Hell if I thought you had a point I'd of told you by now. In part I think you DO and you have interesting ideas, but you're just so catastrophically closed minded that any ideas you may have are completely wasted and instead of being a smart guy you're just a dick.
What's funny about this is that you're more close- minded than me because you listen to music based on your subjective notions as to what you "think" is "good" in your own mind, whereas I listen to it independently of what I want or think it to be.
Last edited by Steve08 at Jan 24, 2013,
#108
Quote by Steve08
What's funny about this is that you're more close- minded than me because you listen to music based on your subjective notions as to what you "think" is "good" in your own mind, whereas I listen to it independently of what I want or think it to be.


What is closed minded is you don't respect my right to view music any way I choose. I've accepted your view, I don't honestly give a shit if you base musical quality on how it makes your butthole vibrate when you sit on your subwoofer if that's how you enjoyed music.

My issue is you expect everyone else to accept that you are in fact the only person that truly understands music like your some kind of God. You understand music in the way you enjoy. Others in the way they enjoy. You refuse to accept that and say they are wrong and I am the closed minded one?
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
#109
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Ok, I can agree with that. We really do need more Metal musicians to look to the roots of Metal and stop playing the latest fad or whatever. I would say, if more people studied not only the history of Metal but also other genres of music (classical, jazz, certain styles of rock, etc.), then we would have more progression, more forward motion, so to speak.
I am elated to read this.
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Ok. I somewhat agree, but I wouldn't say classical ideals are the ONLY way. Jazz (at the forms of it that emphasize theory and such) has a lot to offer as well.
I agree as far as individual musicianship goes, but Jazz composition is almost totally contrary to the structuralist nature of Metal. Keep in mind, I am a Jazz fan myself.
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Although, to be clear, I'm not an advocate of Metal that sounds "Jazzy", for the most part. By which I mean, it usually doesn't sound good, to me, when a Metal band tries to sound Jazzy. There are a few exceptions, such as UneXpect. But those exceptions are like 1 out of 1000s. A band can use Jazz ideals/techniques/etc. without trying to sound Jazzy.
Most "jazz metal" sounds like outsiders trying to play jazz rather than authentic jazz music, the sole exception would be Cynic's Focus (if anyone tells you that Atheist has elements of jazz in their music, kill them, with an axe to the face).
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
But, when it comes to qualifying music, it's all opinion. Yes, there's technical aspects we can qualify, like "(Guitarist for band X) is using a lot of tremolo picking in Riff Y". (Simplistic example, but I think you get what I'm saying.) But when it comes to evaluating and determining the overall scope of music, it's all opinion. There's no rules that say, "This must be like SO"*.
Which ties in with my statement that it's not so much about quantifying music as being bad, but just literally forming an opinion on music based in some quantifiable logic. I think that music should have a clear goal and if the composition doesn't enact that goal as fully as possible, it ought to be re-worked.

For reference, when I listen to music, my thought process is essentially:

A.) What is the intent of the composer?
B.) How well does the music serve that intent?

Which is extremely open-ended and applies to any context.
Quote by ChemicalFire
What is closed minded is you don't respect my right to view music any way I choose. I've accepted your view, I don't honestly give a shit if you base musical quality on how it makes your butthole vibrate when you sit on your subwoofer if that's how you enjoyed music.
Honestly? I don't give a fuck what you listen to, but this whole argument stemmed from your definition of Metal being far more nebulous and subjective than mine. All my statements on objectivity and the like are meant to reinforce the idea that you either play Metal or don't, there is no in between.
#112
Quote by Steve08

Which is extremely open-ended and applies to any context.Honestly? I don't give a fuck what you listen to, but this whole argument stemmed from your definition of Metal being far more nebulous and subjective than mine. All my statements on objectivity and the like are meant to reinforce the idea that you either play Metal or don't, there is no in between.


Well at least we're getting somewhere. Buuuuut you're doing that thing where you're saying if it's not x then it isn't metal again... but at least I have better understanding of WHY you say that and I can see where you're coming from, like I've said I wouldn't say you were wrong per say. I just don't entirely agree with you.

Which is kinda what I was saying from the start, but oh well. I think we need to call a truce on this or we're just going to go on for ever.
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
Last edited by ChemicalFire at Jan 24, 2013,
#113
Quote by ChemicalFire
Which is kinda what I was saying from the start, but oh well. I think we need to call a truce on this or we're just going to go on for ever.
Sounds good.
#116
My contribution to your prize fund is this poem. Enjoy!
Quote by ChemicalFire
The point of underground bands is their not popular or famous most of the time. Thus there is a good chance they suck.
#118
dubstep
*-)
Quote by Bob_Sacamano
i kinda wish we all had a penis and vagina instead of buttholes

i mean no offense to buttholes and poop or anything

Rest in Peace, Troy Davis and Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis and Eric Garner and Mike Brown
#119
Quote by eazy-c
My contribution to your prize fund is this poem. Enjoy!


I just sang that entire thing in the rhythm of the Pirates Of The Caribbean theme.