#1
I'm thinking about writing a few Doom Metal songs. I know a few things about the basics/theory of the style and the drum parts (they are usually a lot like slowed down Hard Rock drum beats, right). I also know a bit about the basslines (they usually have simple basslines that mirror the guitar parts and closely listens to the drums) . What I'm asking about is how you write a Doom Metal guitar part/lead. 

Do I just write a decent Metal lead or melody and slow it down? There has to be more to it. 
"I don't know what you're trying to suggest. There's no shame in taking what you need to hold your position!"

Super Buu (DBZ) on assimilation (it could also apply to blues guitar and guitar soloing in general).
#2
Well the first question really is... what kind of doom?  Traditional?  Funeral?  Gothic?

What sort of bands are you trying to emulate?
R.I.P. My Signature. Lost to us in the great Signature Massacre of 2014.

Quote by Master Foo
“A man who mistakes secrets for knowledge is like a man who, seeking light, hugs a candle so closely that he smothers it and burns his hand.”


Album.
Legion.
#3
All of the above (especially Gothic) ...

However I usually think of bands like Witchfinder General and Candlemass
"I don't know what you're trying to suggest. There's no shame in taking what you need to hold your position!"

Super Buu (DBZ) on assimilation (it could also apply to blues guitar and guitar soloing in general).
Last edited by RonaldPoe at May 31, 2017,
#4
You ask this same question every month or so about a different style of music. The answer is always the same. There is no magic secret that people can tell you. You have to actually listen to the music and figure out what they're doing and then figure out how to do it yourself. Listen, analyze, and imitate.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#5
I'm afraid I have to agree with Kristen here, Roland. You always ask the same question but you don't seem to take the advice to heart. The thing you should strive towards is the ability to figure this stuff out by yourself, since you can't always ask a forum. "Listen, analyze, and imitate", as Kristen put it, is what you should be doing and practicing.

Your approach is also overly technical and overthought. You don't need to dissect stuff like the drum beats so meticulously, as you can honestly use whatever kind of drums, basslines and guitar parts you like. "Do I write a generic metal part and slow it down?", well, you tell me. When you listen to Doom Metal, does it sound like generic metal slowed down? If it doesn't, why is that? What makes it different? Try asking these questions yourself first, and you might not need our help at all.
Quote by Jet Penguin
Theory: Not rules, just tools.

Quote by Hail
*note that by fan i mean that guy who wants his friends to know he knows this totally obscure hip band that only he knows about with 236 views on youtube. lookin' at Kev here
#6
I try listening to the songs and looking up audible tabs on Songsterr of the style in question (it's a good way to see what the artists are doing). Sometimes you need a little help figuring out the basics and cliches. I believe that once you get down the basics and know some of the style's cliches, you should be able to attempt writing in the style. I learn to play songs and know a lot of general theory (intervals, rhythms, chords, modes, ect) but have trouble applying it (you should already know that). I already know a bit about the drum and bass parts but need help writing the leads.

Also I never said Doom Metal sounds like "generic metal slowed down" but I did say that you need decent leads and good melodies. I'm looking for advice and haven't really gotten any. Were any of the things said correct?
"I don't know what you're trying to suggest. There's no shame in taking what you need to hold your position!"

Super Buu (DBZ) on assimilation (it could also apply to blues guitar and guitar soloing in general).
#7
You got the same advice you always get when you post these threads. Listen and analyze what they're doing. Nobody can give you magical secrets. It's like you're not trying to have us help you with your homework. You want us to give you the answers when you need to be finding them yourself. If you can't lick up on clichés or figure out if there should be melodies (and guitar melodies are nowhere near universal in doom and are often absent) or what kind of melodies should be used, you clearly haven't listened to enough of the music you want to imitate, which should be your first step.

Listen to more music, listen to more music, listen to more music, etc. Until you do that, you're not going to make any progress.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#8
Theory destroys music.  Just saying.  Everyone I know who writes knows jack shit, everyone I know who are Nth degree black belts in theory can't write a lick to save their life.  
"I definitely don’t write all my music in a blackout, like I used to, although I did come up with some good stuff in a blackout."
-Matt Fucking Pike
#9
Quote by Badluckpalms
Theory destroys music.  Just saying.  Everyone I know who writes knows jack shit, everyone I know who are Nth degree black belts in theory can't write a lick to save their life.  


This is the most absurd thing I have read all day. And considering this one thread I have been posting in, I have read some pretty absurd things.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#10
Quote by theogonia777
This is the most absurd thing I have read all day.  And considering this one thread I have been posting in, I have read some pretty absurd things.

It is absurd.  But something being absurd doesn't make it empirically false.

My experience isn't contestable by you  
 
"I definitely don’t write all my music in a blackout, like I used to, although I did come up with some good stuff in a blackout."
-Matt Fucking Pike
#11
Quote by Badluckpalms
It is absurd.  But something being absurd doesn't make it empirically false.

My experience isn't contestable by you  
 


Your experience is clearly limited and you're probably not hanging around with competent musicians. The long held and widespread belief that music theory somehow kills creativity and limits a musician is silly and anyone that believes it is either using it as an excuse for avoiding theory or is unaware of people actually knowing their theory.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#12
Quote by Badluckpalms
It is absurd.  But something being absurd doesn't make it empirically false.
 

It's not absurd, it's just very very dumb, and blatantly untrue.
Quote by RonaldPoe Also I never said Doom Metal sounds like "generic metal slowed down" but I did say that you need decent leads and good melodies. I'm looking for advice and haven't really gotten any. Were any of the things said correct?

My bad, somehow I thought you used the word generic. But it's not like doom metal leads are rocket science. Minor scales, harmonic minors, diminished scales, chromatics etc. are a good start. Usually doom metal leads are dark, and either melancholic and sad or dissonant and tense. And it's not that hard to write a sad melody tbh.
Quote by Jet Penguin
Theory: Not rules, just tools.

Quote by Hail
*note that by fan i mean that guy who wants his friends to know he knows this totally obscure hip band that only he knows about with 236 views on youtube. lookin' at Kev here
#13
 Your experience is clearly limited and you're probably not hanging around with competent musicians. The long held and widespread belief that music theory somehow kills creativity and limits a musician is silly and anyone that believes it is either using it as an excuse for avoiding theory or is unaware of people actually knowing their theory. 

Eh
 It's not absurd, it's just very very dumb, and blatantly untrue. 

Eh
"I definitely don’t write all my music in a blackout, like I used to, although I did come up with some good stuff in a blackout."
-Matt Fucking Pike
#14
And you can try and claim that your experience isn't contestable, but by the logic you can't contest the experience of people here who have the opposite experience. And experience that something does exist trumps the experience of a lack of evidence that something exists every time.

I'll give you an example. Bears are very uncommon where I live. If I were to tell you that I have never seen a bear in my town, you can't contest that that I have never seen a bear in my town. However, numerous people have, in fact, seen bears in my town in recent years. Their evidence that bears do occasionally come through my town trumps my experience of having never seen a bear in town and therefore the conclusion is that there are bears that come through my town.

The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, as they say.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
Last edited by theogonia777 at Jun 1, 2017,
#15
Quote by theogonia777 anyone that believes it is either using it as an excuse for avoiding theory or is unaware of people actually knowing their theory.

Pretty much, usually it's just laziness. People tell themselves that theory kills creativity because it's too much of a bother to actually put some work into your craft, and it's easier to make up an excuse than admit to other people that you're too lazy to study.

RonaldPoe 

Another idea here: what does doom metal make you feel? Never mind the scales and the intervals and all that, what elements in the music interest you, and how does the music achieve those elements? When I listen to a doom metal song, I don't pay attention to stuff like "wow that was such a creative use of the minor scale", but I do notice which parts get me excited and immersed in the music. Try to identify which parts in particular get you excited about doom metal, and listen closely. What makes those parts tick? And I don't mean in terms of pure theory, but rather stuff like this part has a great atmosphere, and this part has great rhythm, this melody is really cool etc. After you know the essential parts that make doom metal so great, you can study those parts in particular and apply them to your own stuff. And you don't need theory to do this, just try to come up with stuff that has the same feel, relying just on your ears.
Quote by Jet Penguin
Theory: Not rules, just tools.

Quote by Hail
*note that by fan i mean that guy who wants his friends to know he knows this totally obscure hip band that only he knows about with 236 views on youtube. lookin' at Kev here
#16
theogonia777  but by the logic you can't contest the experience of people here who have the opposite experience 

You're absolutely right.  

I can tell I've ruffled a few feathers.  For that I don't care much, but I understand why.  I happen to know a lot of musicians and have myself been active for a some time.  My statement requires clarification.  Theory plays a part in all music.  I understand that.  Having a basis in fundamentals and a broad knowledge of why and how music works is important.

My experience is, one which you don't have to respect but nonetheless have to accept, is that the people I know who trained day in day out learning other bands music and training in theory and making formal music a lifestyle have a much more difficult time not overthinking music.  They have such a difficult time that often they end up as lead guitarists in bands whose music they had no play in writing.  The theory they know applies well when they jump in, but the moment they try to do a solo project or write something for themselves they struggle to write even a basic riff.  On the flipside, those I know who are brilliant in writing music can't even read charted music and more than likely can't even tell you what chord they are playing.

It's a thing, it is real.  It doesn't mean it's universal.  It doesn't mean it's your experience.  It doesn't mean all theory is bad.  That said, I stand behind my belief that the person sitting and studying theory until they're blue in the face struggles to write more than the person who is learning to write by practicum.  
"I definitely don’t write all my music in a blackout, like I used to, although I did come up with some good stuff in a blackout."
-Matt Fucking Pike
#17
Badluckpalms 

This is all fine. I'm not saying that everyone who studies theory is automatically creative. Nor am I saying that one who does not study theory can't be creative.
But let's be real here: you said "theory kills music". This is not true, it's also not an opinion, it's just plain false. Do some people overthink theory and so it kills their creative drive? Sure. Does this mean that theory kills music and creativity? Not by a long shot.
Quote by Badluckpalms That said, I stand behind my belief that the person sitting and studying theory until they're blue in the face struggles to write more than the person who is learning to write by practicum.  

All professional musicians I know study both. I myself study a lot of theory, but I learn all of my music by ear and I write my own music by ear. Theory is not a part of my creative process, and if you think theory should be a part of the creative process, you have misunderstood it's core point.

I'm sorry if I was rude, but tbh you said a really dumb thing and proceeded to act like a troll so whatever. There's a big difference between claiming that someone who only studies theory while ignoring the practical side of songwriting will lack creativity, and saying that studying theory in general makes you a worse musician. The former is what you apparently meant, but the latter is what you sounded like.
Quote by Jet Penguin
Theory: Not rules, just tools.

Quote by Hail
*note that by fan i mean that guy who wants his friends to know he knows this totally obscure hip band that only he knows about with 236 views on youtube. lookin' at Kev here
#18
Not a big deal.  It was a dumb statement, and was not indicative of my actual opinion/belief.  

I have this sense that both of you to some degree agree that theory in overabundance can be detrimental toward the song writing process, otherwise you wouldn't have suggested several times to Ronald that he needed to move past his over analysis and overly technical approach.
 
Original dumb statement aside, I do think moderation is the key to everything, including the philosophy and approach of a musician. I also know that my statement reads to some that making music is and should be a natural thing - and by those means indicates the idea that you either "have it or don't".  In reflection I definitely want to assert that is not my stance.  My wife is an artist and art professor, and many of my friends are professional artists, so I am very familiar with the ideology that "creativity" is natural and unlearned.  This philosophy is ridiculous.  My wife and I tend to believe that a person who can't draw to save their life can study for 4, 8, 10 years and study the history and build the skills and contextual knowledge of those skills and become an expert.  

My initial words contradict that philosophy wholly.  

As for the original thread.  I am primarily a doom musician.  Me and the guys listen to records.  We are audiophiles.  We are gear heads always looking for the bigger badder tone.  And songs are written while jamming.  I've always liked to say "doom is blowouts and then what happens when the blowouts get boring"

cheers
"I definitely don’t write all my music in a blackout, like I used to, although I did come up with some good stuff in a blackout."
-Matt Fucking Pike
#19
BadluckPalms, I have a question for you. Since you're primarily a Doom Metal musician, how do you make guitar parts? I'm trying to learn and maybe write some myself. I want it to sound right. 

The thing I like about Doom Metal is the same thing I like about Black Metal, the way the dark atmosphere connects to a good melody (the heaviness is certainly a plus though). I write little riffs myself as a matter a fact and some of them sound pretty good. I also have examined some pieces in the style but it's not really helping (neither is the "go analyze it" advice I keep getting). 

My strategy for writing riffs is to listen to bits of different pieces (at least 8), select a key/scale, and see what happens. Then I write down the first thing that sounds good.
"I don't know what you're trying to suggest. There's no shame in taking what you need to hold your position!"

Super Buu (DBZ) on assimilation (it could also apply to blues guitar and guitar soloing in general).
Last edited by RonaldPoe at Jun 1, 2017,
#20
well, my evolution was as a punk guitar player to D-Beat and to Doom.  This progression rooted me in riff-based writing.  

It sounds to me like you have all the parts to the songs but you struggle to execute them as a "song."  Listen to Thou, Graves at Sea, Boris, Sunn O))), countless others, many songs are literally one riff.  My suggestion is to play with concept of a riff, lets say you have 4 cool riffs, what's to say those 4 riffs together are just one bigger riff.  Playing with the listeners expectation of a repeat riff (returning to the root) builds suspense, and is commonly employed in doom and black metal.

I'm always an advocate for studying the history of a genre and paying attention to what people are listening to.  Instead of emulating a band and their music, emulate their evolution as musicians.  What records were they listening to is a good start.  Also, consider the historical context of the technology available during the different waves of the genre.  I'm not going to write a 20 paragraph history lesson.  But I will say the things that make a style of music unique and shine are often lost by the self-reflexivity of reference-based song writing.  Wave one listens to some albums, wave two references the first, third the second, and so on, until finally musicians are wondering how to put a bunch of chords together and make a song that sounds like xyz.  

That's about all I can offer.
"I definitely don’t write all my music in a blackout, like I used to, although I did come up with some good stuff in a blackout."
-Matt Fucking Pike
#21
I personally feel that if you're going to write in a style, get a feel for it in its various eras. From Black Sabbath and Pentagram (another early influence on Doom Metal) to Candlemass (Epic Doom) and Witchfinder General (great Classic Doom Metal band) to Paradise Lost (pioneer of Gothic Metal style of Doom) to Boris (although they're more of an acquired taste than Pentagram). Another band I really like is Within Temptation (although they're more Symphonic Metal for goths than actual Doom Metal). I'd recommend Songsterr for finding similarities between bands in a genre.

Here's a few things I noticed in general. The snare is almost always on the backbeat and kick is often on the 1st and 3rd beat (it can vary quite a bit though). The bass often mirrors the guitar riff and listens to the drums. There's a misconception that Doom Metal has to have a tempo under 100 BPM (many of the bands I listed above have songs that are between 110 and 135 BPM but still sound gloomy and dark enough). The melodies (when at a tempo below 100 BPM) often make use of eighth notes and are almost always strong and dark (high quality melodies that sound good both faster and slower). It's recommended that you can write high quality melodies and fairly dark lyrics.

That's all I really know for now but it should be sufficient. 
"I don't know what you're trying to suggest. There's no shame in taking what you need to hold your position!"

Super Buu (DBZ) on assimilation (it could also apply to blues guitar and guitar soloing in general).
#22
Quote by Badluckpalms
  I have this sense that both of you to some degree agree that theory in overabundance can be detrimental toward the song writing process, otherwise you wouldn't have suggested several times to Ronald that he needed to move past his over analysis and overly technical approach.

It's more about misunderstanding how to apply theory. Theory isn't, at least for me as I said, a great songwriting tool. It can help, and it can give inspiration but I do agree on that when I try to take a very theoretical approach to songwriting, the results are kind of bland. But the true benefit of theory, in the realm of popular music and not classical context necessarily I might add, is not composition, it's communication. Theory simply gives names and context to different musical concepts, and makes it tremendously easier to discuss music and ideas with other musicians. It's a common language for all musicians, a standardized system that was created so that music could be more easily understood as something more than just an abstract concept. I mean, notes, harmony, rhythm, all that exists anyway, so why shouldn't you study a system that gives common names to these concepts that you can use in communication and analysis?
I'm a big advocate for ear training and communication via sound, of course. Music is sound, and it's best understood through sound. But sometimes, you simply need a written/spoken language you can use to express the same ideas on paper or via speech.

RonaldPoe 

The problem with this post lies here:
Quote by RonaldPoeThe snare is almost always on the backbeat and kick is often on the 1st and 3rd beat (it can vary quite a bit though). The bass often mirrors the guitar riff and listens to the drums.

This can apply to several different genres of music. Kick on 1 & 3, snare on the backbeat, bass mirrors guitars? Pop music, rock music, metal music, punk music, all kinds of music use this approach. So these indeed are not the things that make doom metal sound like doom metal.
Quote by RonaldPoe There's a misconception that Doom Metal has to have a tempo under 100 BPM (many of the bands I listed above have songs that are between 110 and 135 BPM but still sound gloomy and dark enough).

Do you know the amount of songs I can play, that I also know the exact tempo of? Zero. Tempo is one of those things that, imo, are definitely best felt, not measured exactly. Doom metal is usually either slow, or slower mid-tempo, and that's all I'd care about. I've never heard of doom requiring a sub-100bpm tempo, and I'm a pretty big fan of the genre.


I'm not trying to discourage you even though I feel like I'm having that effect, but we're not joking when we tell you that a good songwriting ability stems from the cycle of learning, analyzing, imitating and creating. I feel like you're getting stuck on the analysis part, and not paying enough attention to the learning+imitating side of things. How many doom metal songs can you play? How many doom metal songs have you written? If you want to get good in the genre, you need to have a solid repertoire in it and you need to actually write music in the style.
Quote by Jet Penguin
Theory: Not rules, just tools.

Quote by Hail
*note that by fan i mean that guy who wants his friends to know he knows this totally obscure hip band that only he knows about with 236 views on youtube. lookin' at Kev here
#23
Quote by Kevätuhri
It's more about misunderstanding how to apply theory. Theory isn't, at least for me as I said, a great songwriting tool. It can help, and it can give inspiration but I do agree on that when I try to take a very theoretical approach to songwriting, the results are kind of bland. But the true benefit of theory, in the realm of popular music and not classical context necessarily I might add, is not composition, it's communication. Theory simply gives names and context to different musical concepts, and makes it tremendously easier to discuss music and ideas with other musicians. It's a common language for all musicians, a standardized system that was created so that music could be more easily understood as something more than just an abstract concept. I mean, notes, harmony, rhythm, all that exists anyway, so why shouldn't you study a system that gives common names to these concepts that you can use in communication and analysis?
I'm a big advocate for ear training and communication via sound, of course. Music is sound, and it's best understood through sound. But sometimes, you simply need a written/spoken language you can use to express the same ideas on paper or via speech.

And it's not only about communication. If you know theory, making observations about music becomes so much easier, and you just become more aware of stuff that is happening in music. When you hear a song, you can instantly understand what's happening in it and you can more easily pay attention to certain details in it. With theory knowledge it's just so much easier to "make sense" of music.

As a songwriter, why would you not want to be able to make observations of other people's music? Why would you not want to have an understanding of the stuff that you are writing? (But sure, for a classical composer having a good understanding of theory is much more important than for a pop songwriter.)

If you hear something that sounds cool, you can instantly recognize the sound. When it comes to writing songs, of course theory itself doesn't give you ideas. That's something that comes from yourself, and if you simply can't come up with good sounding ideas, you shouldn't blame your knowledge of theory on that. That has more to do with not being in the right state of mind, not listening to music that would inspire you to write something or simply not having enough songwriting experience. But what do you do after you have some ideas and want to develop those ideas? I think that's where the knowledge of theory helps. Of course you should always use your ears, and nothing replaces good ears. But good theoretic understanding + good ears is even better.

Being analytical only works if you also have a practical understanding of things. But if your "analysis" is more about "this is how people usually describe the genre, I want to hear how you would describe the genre", that kind of misses the point, and that's when my advice would be "why don't you just listen to the music and figure it out yourself?" There are different ways of being analytical. Some analysis completely misses the point, and some analysis helps you understand the style much better. Words can't perfectly describe music. You also need to hear the music and only then do the descriptions of other people make sense.

Now, if Ronald gave an example of a lead guitar part that he had written (or maybe a rhythm part that needed a lead guitar on top of it), or if he had a specific question about a specific song, then my advice would also be more specific (well, I would probably not be the best person to give advice since I really don't listen to much doom metal). Just listen to stuff and figure it out yourself is not always the best answer. But to this question it really is the only answer.

When it comes to "overanalysis", you can do a really profound analysis of something (even if it's a simple pop song) without being overanalytical at all. If you have a good understanding of what you are talking about, your analysis most likely also focuses on meaningful things. So if you really understand theory, you most likely don't overanalyze stuff. Overanalysis only becomes an issue if you only focus on the analysis part and not on the practical side of things. Overanalysis is something that doesn't really benefit anybody. A good example of overanalysis would be focusing on small details and missing the big picture, and I would say a good understanding of theory helps you see the big picture and not focus too much on the smallest details.

What I'm trying to say is that theory knowledge doesn't make you overanalytical. Well, if you don't learn it properly, then that's what may happen. But if you learn it properly, I think it's pretty much the other way around - you can see the big picture of things much easier and stuff like "what is this B flat doing in this song that is in the key of G major" or "what scale is does this song use" becomes pretty much irrelevant (well, sometimes those are important questions, but most of the time they are pretty superficial things).
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#24
To Kev, you've got a good point about the traits I mentioned. They are pretty common in punk-inspired styles (although some Punk bands prefer root based basslines) and Emo. The thing about the tempo is just a misconception (people assume you have to be very slow for Doom but that's not true) and below 100 BPM is a good approximation of very slow (for me at least). 

MM, you don't know the first thing about me (I'm quite dedicated and hardworking when it comes to writing music) helping me out here (you admit you don't even listen to much Doom Metal). I'm not looking for descriptions of the style but basics to apply (if you don't know the essentials of the style, you obviously can't write in it). I already analyzed songs online and looked for common traits (which apparently are used in Punk). I'm still confused about this and was looking for help (like usual). I'm sorry if I sound rude but I'm not looking for condescending "do it yourself" 'advice' (if you can call it that). If I could do it myself, I wouldn't be asking for help here (I'd still visit and give mild advice to others and participate in thoughtful conversations though) and I'd probably have a decent band too (it's hard to find bandmates without using Craigslist). 

By the way, I'm not a troll but an honest and curious musician ...
"I don't know what you're trying to suggest. There's no shame in taking what you need to hold your position!"

Super Buu (DBZ) on assimilation (it could also apply to blues guitar and guitar soloing in general).
Last edited by RonaldPoe at Jun 4, 2017,
#25
Quote by RonaldPoe

looked for common traits (which apparently are used in Punk). I'm still confused about this 

Hi again.

Listen to His Hero Is Gone (Memphis, TN).  It's a crust / punk band that goes quite doomy on some records.

Basically an all star band formed of the members from other accomplished punk bands (Deathreat, warcry, Copout, Severed head of state, among others).  Check out the wiki and listen to the bands all the members came from.  Three of them left and moved to Portland OR and started Tragedy - one of the most notorious D-Beat bands on the block.

Does all this accomplish much?  Not really.  But it does allow you to hear them, and their style translate from punk to D-Beat and Crust and how easily the music they are playing could become Doom.  An additional mention, listen to the latest Tragedy record (Darker Days Ahead).  Bar none it's a D-Beat punk album, but I happen to know they were pretty much only listening to doom and black metal when they were writing it (and keep in mind they are the same guys responsible for the songwriting in His Hero is Gone).

Edit: since we're on the topic, please also listen to From Ashes Rise.  All of it, beginning to end.  That his how fast "punk" can evolve
"I definitely don’t write all my music in a blackout, like I used to, although I did come up with some good stuff in a blackout."
-Matt Fucking Pike
Last edited by Badluckpalms at Jun 5, 2017,
#26
Of course it depends on precisely what tone and genre you're going for... but to me, doom metal is generally slow tempo, down tuned and generally features minor scales. Focus on 3rd harmonies on the guitars. The drums often feature lots of descending tom fills (à la Bill Ward).

This Pallbearer cover of Black Sabbath is a good example:



Truth be told, my way of testing if I've written a good doom metal song is whether it makes me feel somewhat content when I'm sad / gloomy. It's hard to explain, but emotion is what makes good music. It conjures up certain feelings.
Last edited by Joeseye at Sep 29, 2017,