Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Register   * Login 



Reply to topic
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
hells_unicorn
Veteran

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:32 pm
Posts: 2816
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 6:00 pm 
 

LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
hells_unicorn wrote:
If I were going to identify a thrash metal band that stands directly in the middle and splits the difference between traditional and extreme metal influences, it would be Destruction.


I've said before that I consider the line to be Slayer (maybe particularly RIB and HA as someone else mentioned), but I can grok why someone could place it slightly differently. I don't know if it possibly has to do with age/when someone got into metal or how much extreme metal they listen to compared to other subgenres. As I mentioned on the first page, I think the vocal style is the biggest dichotomy, but instrumentation also factors in. Part of it is that I know numerous guys who are/were into 80s thrash and liked Slayer, but they dislike anything that is overtly growly, as that's just too far for them.


Slayer is sort of a complex beast in my opinion. In terms of vocals, Schmier is slightly more extreme than Tom Araya, but I'd argue that Slayer is actually slightly more extreme if you focus on the actual music (i.e. I'd put them firmly in the extreme camp of thrash metal, though not too much further than Destruction), particularly the riffing style on Hell Awaits and Reign In Blood, both of which have a direct link to the American death metal sound, whereas Destruction has a slightly lesser but still existing commonality with some of the transitional death metal in Europe during the early 90s, particularly in their native Germany and Sweden. Some of their post-reunion material qualifies as extreme, whereas their middle-era material ("Release From Agony" and "Cracked Brain") came off as being closer to mainline thrash. It's a somewhat subjective standard, but when I listen to Slayer's mid-80s albums, I have to put it firmly in the extreme camp.

Ill-Starred Son wrote:
I don't see most melodic death metal as being extreme either.


I'd say that melodic death metal occupies a similar space as thrash metal on this subject, a lot of highly popular melodeath bands like In Flames (prior to Reroute To Remain, anyway), Dark Tranquillity and Arch Enemy are musically mainline, the only thing that's a stumbling block for people who aren't into extreme metal is the vocals, so you kind of have to determine whether a harsher vocal style alone can tip the balance. I could see putting In Flames' "Lunar Strain" and Dark Tranquillity's "Skydancer" in the extreme camp, but everything after that (up until 2000 in the case of In Flames) is kind of borderline.
_________________
My music:
Ominous Glory Spotify
Ominous Glory YouTube
Ominous Glory Facebook

My reviews.

R.I.P. Ronnie James Dio (July 14, 1942 - May 16, 2010)

Top
 Profile  
collingwood77
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 3:43 pm
Posts: 235
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 8:24 pm 
 

Some of you have missed the point I made earlier, it's not about vocals or guitar or whatever. The extreme metal classification came about in the 90s, thrash predated that. So TM is not extreme but DM and BM are, You don't add something to a category retrospectively. The EM term only came about because there was a need for it - before that, there was no need for it.

Top
 Profile  
Ill-Starred Son
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:10 pm
Posts: 1224
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 8:32 pm 
 

Spiner202 wrote:
Ill-Starred Son wrote:
21stCenturySkippyMan wrote:
Depends on the band. Sodom, Demolition Hammer, Sadus, Sepultura, Kreator, Slayer: Yes. Metallica, Tankard, Razor, Anthrax, Exodus, Carnivore: No.
It can be hard to draw the line sometimes, but Extreme Metal has a dark, sadistic and/or unhinged feel to it. The former bands whilst being Thrash clearly fall into that more sinister realm IMO. However, the latter bands have a sound that resembles a more punky, "human-like" anger/outrage and thus cannot be considered extreme metal.


Listen to Razor's Shotgun Justice.

Not sure I'd call it extreme, but man is it SUPER aggressive.

One of my all time favorite thrash albums in terms of sheer aggression.

Might be time to shut this thread down because there won't be a worse take than this :lol:

Shotgun Justice is absolutely an extreme metal album.


I wouldn't take huge issue with you calling it that because of how heavy it is, and it's a damn amazing album, but still, it's lack of heavy vocals and also, the type of guitar not being as thick on the bottom end as a lot of extreme metal, make me not sure I'd consider it one.

Just about the only thrash that i fully support as extreme is early Kreator and early Sodom, (well, early Sepultura was black and/or death metal), but Morbid Saint probably gets an in too. Then of course all the albums I consider to be black-thrash.

I mean, like I said, Shotgun Justice might be my favorite thrash album, or at least one of them, but if that is then why isn't Pantera's Vulgar Display of Power?

Knock it all you want (and honestly I'm a huge fan of early Pantera) but that's a heavy ass album.

Extreme to me means something a little more than just super aggressive, it's a specific sound, but then again, I could change my mind, and anyways, it's not like I don't like lots of metal albums that I wouldn't necessarily classify as extreme.

One way or another, it's absolutely badass and super aggressive.


Last edited by Ill-Starred Son on Fri Nov 26, 2021 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Ill-Starred Son
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:10 pm
Posts: 1224
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 8:35 pm 
 

collingwood77 wrote:
Some of you have missed the point I made earlier, it's not about vocals or guitar or whatever. The extreme metal classification came about in the 90s, thrash predated that. So TM is not extreme but DM and BM are, You don't add something to a category retrospectively. The EM term only came about because there was a need for it - before that, there was no need for it.


This would make sense to me.

I mean, does anyone know exactly when and where the term "extreme metal" was first used and how it was used?

I do think it's highly unlikely it existed before death metal, black metal and grindcore became more established genres in the 90s, so if it really didn't exist when thrash was the predominant heavy genre (of course we had some early extreme stuff like Bathory, Napalm Death, Repulsion, early Death etc) then can we really call it extreme?

Top
 Profile  
Bingewolf
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:59 pm
Posts: 853
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:02 pm 
 

I think that Ill-Starred makes a good point... Because, Razor's 'Shotgun Justice' is awesome but it's not extreme metal. This is probably still a youth debate... Go listen to Razor... They're sick. And they're not extreme.

This is where I go back to Napalm Death,,, Go listen to a band and then put on Napalm Death and tell us if they are extreme!?

Top
 Profile  
hells_unicorn
Veteran

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:32 pm
Posts: 2816
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:27 pm 
 

collingwood77 wrote:
Some of you have missed the point I made earlier, it's not about vocals or guitar or whatever. The extreme metal classification came about in the 90s, thrash predated that. So TM is not extreme but DM and BM are, You don't add something to a category retrospectively. The EM term only came about because there was a need for it - before that, there was no need for it.


Wait, so Scream Bloody Gore, Leprosy, Slowly We Rot, Altars Of Madness, Beneath The Remains, Under The Sign Of The Black Mark, The Return, Deathcrush, and any demos put out by Cannibal Corpse and Deicide/Amon prior to 1990 are not death/black metal? Or are you implying that death and black metal albums from the 80s are grandfathered in? The latter would seem to contradict your initial point.

Ill-Starred Son wrote:
I do think it's highly unlikely it existed before death metal, black metal and grindcore became more established genres in the 90s, so if it really didn't exist when thrash was the predominant heavy genre (of course we had some early extreme stuff like Bathory, Napalm Death, Repulsion, early Death etc) then can we really call it extreme?


Sure we can. A term denoting a particular style usually comes about after it has been established (usually it occurs when a style is popularized, which can happen years after it is established). It's pretty well stipulated that death metal was established before 1990 and simply developed/evolved afterward, and inferences can be made as to connections between death and black metal and the forerunners that influenced them, especially if they are contemporaries. Besides, I find the whole notion of putting Bathory, Napalm Death, Repulsion and pre-1990 Death in the same category as Judas Priest because of the year the material was released just a little bizarre. There is some subjectivity when deciding where the cut-off would be, but this "the term was coined in 1990/1991/1992 so nothing before that is the term" strikes me as arbitrary.
_________________
My music:
Ominous Glory Spotify
Ominous Glory YouTube
Ominous Glory Facebook

My reviews.

R.I.P. Ronnie James Dio (July 14, 1942 - May 16, 2010)

Top
 Profile  
LithoJazzoSphere
Veteran

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:11 pm
Posts: 3142
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:58 pm 
 

Ill-Starred Son wrote:
I would still consider Cannibal Corpse, even with clean vocals, to be extreme, as odd as the idea is to imagine.

The way the guitar and overall instrumentation sounds, it's still so thick and heavy, I'd call it extreme.


Possibly, for example, would you consider this extreme metal?

Spoiler: show


Probably the best and closest example on a band basis is Desultor. We list them as tech death, but I'm not sure I agree. They're a fascinating mixture of it and power, but the music feels too melodic to be purely tech death, and the vocals a bit too harsh to be pure power metal.

Spoiler: show


Ill-Starred Son wrote:
And off topic, but no offense, you just named several supposed sub-genres that I don't even consider to be real sub-genres and was wondering if these really are agreed upon sub-genres.

Electronic metal? What bands fall under that label? I've never heard of it. We've got industrial, but electronic?

Pagan metal? Is that really distinctly different from viking, folk, and black? What bands are Pagan metal that couldn't be called any of those? I don't see it as a real sub-genre.

Experimental metal? I don't see that as legit either. It's FAR too vague. Even Avant-garde is kind of the throw away genre where there are some similarities between bands but between others there are none.

Symphonic is more a sub-genre of power metal, as stoner is a sub-genre of doom, but I guess they're legit genres.

Speed metal has always seemed to be the same as thrash, but I know that's an ongoing debate.

So I don't know, maybe it's just me, but you have named a bunch of genres that are questionable as to whether or not they really exist, and some others that fall into sub-sub genre categories which are more legit.

Certainly I personally have never heard of electronic metal ever used as a term, not sure what experimental metal would be, and don't see pagan metal as being anything uniquely different from bands that often fall under the umbrella of viking, folk or black.


I'm just using our genre page for reference.

https://www.metal-archives.com/browse/genre

Whether all of those given the way they're grouped are to be each considered separate legitimate subgenres is probably worth its own thread. The point is that the poster is frustrated that this isn't a thrash-centric message board, but there are numerous subgenres that you didn't list which get less discussion than thrash, it's not like thrash is completely neglected by this board.

Electronic metal always seems to be used as a modifier, so M-A might not consider it separate. Pagan metal is used a lot on its own, so I assume M-A considers it legitimate. Same with experimental metal.

Symphonic metal is often related to power, but I don't think it's a subgenre of it. Its origins are more connected to bands like Therion, Celtic Frost, Septicflesh, and Waltari. Lots of bands in symphonic metal are way too slow and not really connected to power metal at all. I would not call Within Temptation or Delain power metal bands, for example. It's just bands like early Nightwish and Epica that have conflated them.


Last edited by LithoJazzoSphere on Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Benedict Donald
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:36 am
Posts: 579
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:06 pm 
 

draconiondevil wrote:
droneriot wrote:
draconiondevil wrote:
Thrash is definitely extreme. Even the most commercial of thrash like Master of Puppets or something is basically noise to the average person who doesn't listen to metal.

Yeah but then all metal is extreme metal. Not sure you really thought that through.


80's Iron Maiden? 70's Judas Priest? Black Sabbath? Are you telling me these examples are just as heavy as Master of Puppets? I guarantee the average music listener would find them more musical and less extreme than MoP.


Agreed. My family are NOT metal fans. Heck, they can barely tolerate popular rock such as the Beatles.
When I play somethig like Maiden, they dont complain (much). When I play 80s thrash, they typically make odd faces and walk away. When I play death metal, they cover their ears, ask me "how can you listen to this?" and run like the dickens.

Top
 Profile  
LithoJazzoSphere
Veteran

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:11 pm
Posts: 3142
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:28 pm 
 

Ill-Starred Son wrote:

Just about the only thrash that i fully support as extreme is early Kreator and early Sodom, (well, early Sepultura was black and/or death metal), but Morbid Saint probably gets an in too. Then of course all the albums I consider to be black-thrash.


So you wouldn't count Demolition Hammer? Incubus? Psychic Possessor? Ripping Corpse? Protector? Solstice? Imperator? Merciless? Infected? Messiah? Loudblast? Hektor?

Top
 Profile  
Ill-Starred Son
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:10 pm
Posts: 1224
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 12:03 am 
 

LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
Ill-Starred Son wrote:

Just about the only thrash that i fully support as extreme is early Kreator and early Sodom, (well, early Sepultura was black and/or death metal), but Morbid Saint probably gets an in too. Then of course all the albums I consider to be black-thrash.


So you wouldn't count Demolition Hammer? Incubus? Psychic Possessor? Ripping Corpse? Protector? Solstice? Imperator? Merciless? Infected? Messiah? Loudblast? Hektor?


Honestly a lot of those I haven't listened to much, with the exception of Ripping Corpse who I thought I remembered being more death metal, and Merciless I thought I'd remembered being death metal as well.

I'm not the most knowledgable poster when it comes to thrash. As mentioned, I know most of the classic bands but it was more of a stepping stone on the way to death and black metal for me.

But I should probably listen to all those.

Top
 Profile  
Tornado
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 3:21 pm
Posts: 520
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 4:12 am 
 

It's possible the term Extreme Metal came from an early 1990's magazine called Xtreme Noize (think there were only 2 published), which came out shortly after another early 90's publication called Thrash n' Burn (think just 6 editions came out), both magazines covering Thrash and Death Metal bands. I believe the writers for both magazines had previously written for Metal Forces.

As for me, yeah, I'd still put Thrash in the Extreme Metal camp. Sure, much of it isn't anywhere near extreme by today's standards, but a lot of it is. I remember first hearing Master of Puppets back in 1987, and it was the fastest, heaviest shit I'd ever heard (although I'd only been into metal less than a year and only been exposed to stuff like Maiden, Accept, Krokus, the Kerrang! Kompilation etc.

At school, the 6th Formers had a 'Common Room' for hanging out in at break times, and there was a stereo in there. Only a handful of pupils were into metal, but to most of them Thrash was a no-go area, as it was considered pure noise (even Metallica). I think they went as heavy as Helloween (Keepers 2). Except for 2 of us, who were always on the look out for faster, heavier bands.

But Thrash is still considered extreme today by many. And judging by the requests they get on Planet Rock, the majority of listeners don't ask for anything much heavier than early Metallica (although, there was a request for Hell Awaits a few months ago, which ACTUALLY GOT PLAYED. I couldn't quite believe it).

Top
 Profile  
des91
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:51 pm
Posts: 218
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 4:17 am 
 

It seems harsh vocals or an unclean production are what tip the scales of a borderline album being extreme or not.

Non Metal listeners seem to really be put off by production that isn’t t super clear.

Top
 Profile  
21stCenturySkippyMan
Mallcore Kid

Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2021 9:30 am
Posts: 14
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:00 am 
 

AxeCapitol wrote:

You had me til you put Carnivore as No. vehemently disagree there.


Carnivore is fast and aggressive, but not in the dark, twisted sense of a Kreator or DM + BM bands. Their aggression is more of the punky/hc variety like most crossover bands for obvious reasons.

Ill-Starred Son wrote:

Listen to Razor's Shotgun Justice.

Not sure I'd call it extreme, but man is it SUPER aggressive.

One of my all time favorite thrash albums in terms of sheer aggression.


I listen to it frequently. Great album and indeed very fast and aggressive, but again I would characterise Razor's aggression as the more "human-like" punky/hc variety (They're metal not punk obviously, but their music has that energy to it). Its angry music, but not twisted if that make sense.

Top
 Profile  
MetalVermont
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2021 8:23 pm
Posts: 139
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 11:46 am 
 

Smalley wrote:
Bingewolf wrote:
Spiner202 wrote:
I feel like you are just deciding what's extreme based on what you like. You can tell the posters that are older/have a better understanding of the historical context of metal tend to label most thrash as extreme metal.


To me, it's the exact opposite. The older people here continue to say that "this was extreme in my day" -- and, frankly, Slayer is not an extreme metal band. Put on Slayer and then put on Napalm Death after and tell me what is extreme.

I'm also one of those people who doesn't even like thrash because of how cheesy it can be. So you can call me biased. BUT, extreme metal was born with grindcore and came to include death metal, black metal, etc. It seems to me that those who make the argument that thrash is extreme are mostly saying "well, Slayer was extreme back then" - and that's not indicative of where we are today. We all know Metallica was extreme back then - but now it's you will hear "Jump In The Fire," "Whiplash," and "Seek and Destroy" on the radio.

To be honest, it doesn't matter what USED to be extreme... You have to look at what is "extreme" now and base the music on that.
Agreed; as far as I'm concerned, the only way that what was extreme back in the day would still be relevant is if it still was back in the day. But, it's not nineteen eighty-whatever, it's 2021, time machines don't exist, and Metal, like time, only ever flows forward, so you have to look at where the genre has settled in the present day, not back then. I know Ride The Lightning seemed extreme in '84, especially when compared to most of the Metal that came before it, but we've still lived in a post-Napaln Death world for decades now, so we can't just ignore that.


The problem with this line of reasoning is that 30 years from now, metal fans will look back and laugh and say "can you believe they used to think death and black were extreme? lol" Every generation naively thinks they've reached the pinnacle of understanding. Scientists have been doing this for centuries. "NOW we have the ultimate truth, believe nothing we've said before!" Generation after generation.

Top
 Profile  
LithoJazzoSphere
Veteran

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:11 pm
Posts: 3142
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 1:23 pm 
 

Some things get really marginal in how much more intense they can be though. The death metal coming out now is actually often less extreme than it was two decades ago. When you have metal that's pretty much just a wall of abrasive sound with barely decipherable notes and rhythms, where do you go from there? We had that stuff decades ago and haven't really been able to top it. Grindcore, dissodeath, dissoblack, tech death, brutal death, the murkiest imaginable cavernous death, or in non-metal genres, power electronics, harsh noise, industrial, hardcore, they've all pretty much run into an asymptotic limit and been stuck there for quite some time now.

Top
 Profile  
AxeCapitol
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2021 12:38 pm
Posts: 179
Location: NYC
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 1:34 pm 
 

LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
Some things get really marginal in how much more intense they can be though. The death metal coming out now is actually often less extreme than it was two decades ago. When you have metal that's pretty much just a wall of abrasive sound with barely decipherable notes and rhythms, where do you go from there? We had that stuff decades ago and haven't really been able to top it. Grindcore, dissodeath, dissoblack, tech death, brutal death, the murkiest imaginable cavernous death, or in non-metal genres, power electronics, harsh noise, industrial, hardcore, they've all pretty much run into an asymptotic limit and been stuck there for quite some time now.


Good point. Where to go from here? Start playing music backwards?

Top
 Profile  
Gravetemplar
Veteran

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:08 am
Posts: 3249
Location: Antarctica
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 3:37 pm 
 

LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
Some things get really marginal in how much more intense they can be though. The death metal coming out now is actually often less extreme than it was two decades ago. When you have metal that's pretty much just a wall of abrasive sound with barely decipherable notes and rhythms, where do you go from there? We had that stuff decades ago and haven't really been able to top it. Grindcore, dissodeath, dissoblack, tech death, brutal death, the murkiest imaginable cavernous death, or in non-metal genres, power electronics, harsh noise, industrial, hardcore, they've all pretty much run into an asymptotic limit and been stuck there for quite some time now.

Nah, stuff like Ad Nauseam would have been unthinkable 20 years ago, the same way Gorguts in the 90s made a difference when they released Obscura. Sure, it's been a very slow process but death metal has become way more extreme, it's us that have become desensitized to this kind of music over the decades. There have been of course a few bands ahead of their time (Nuclear Death come to mind) but most 90s and 2000s death metal is very melodic and catchy as hell compared to the level of insanity we've reached.

Top
 Profile  
collingwood77
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 3:43 pm
Posts: 235
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 4:29 pm 
 

hells_unicorn wrote:
collingwood77 wrote:
Some of you have missed the point I made earlier, it's not about vocals or guitar or whatever. The extreme metal classification came about in the 90s, thrash predated that. So TM is not extreme but DM and BM are, You don't add something to a category retrospectively. The EM term only came about because there was a need for it - before that, there was no need for it.


Wait, so Scream Bloody Gore, Leprosy, Slowly We Rot, Altars Of Madness, Beneath The Remains, Under The Sign Of The Black Mark, The Return, Deathcrush, and any demos put out by Cannibal Corpse and Deicide/Amon prior to 1990 are not death/black metal? Or are you implying that death and black metal albums from the 80s are grandfathered in? The latter would seem to contradict your initial point.

This is not meant to be a perfect answer and I'm sure it has holes you can drive a car through, but I think those albums you mentioned were, back then, on the fringes of the metal scene, and any and all demos released prior to 1990 were extremely underground. As an example, I was a metalhead already stuck in my ways, I guess, by 1986, and I was still just into thrash and traditional metal up to at least 1989. But by 1990-92 tho EM genres became mainstream within the metal scene, and thrash and trad metal came close to dying out. So EM existed in the metal mainstream by (say) 1992, but not before 1989-90. So I don't grandfather those releases into the definition of EM - they just existed before it, like the Stooges and MC5 existed before the Sex Pistols and Ramones if you like.

Top
 Profile  
hells_unicorn
Veteran

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:32 pm
Posts: 2816
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 4:50 pm 
 

collingwood77 wrote:
hells_unicorn wrote:
collingwood77 wrote:
Some of you have missed the point I made earlier, it's not about vocals or guitar or whatever. The extreme metal classification came about in the 90s, thrash predated that. So TM is not extreme but DM and BM are, You don't add something to a category retrospectively. The EM term only came about because there was a need for it - before that, there was no need for it.


Wait, so Scream Bloody Gore, Leprosy, Slowly We Rot, Altars Of Madness, Beneath The Remains, Under The Sign Of The Black Mark, The Return, Deathcrush, and any demos put out by Cannibal Corpse and Deicide/Amon prior to 1990 are not death/black metal? Or are you implying that death and black metal albums from the 80s are grandfathered in? The latter would seem to contradict your initial point.

This is not meant to be a perfect answer and I'm sure it has holes you can drive a car through, but I think those albums you mentioned were, back then, on the fringes of the metal scene, and any and all demos released prior to 1990 were extremely underground. As an example, I was a metalhead already stuck in my ways, I guess, by 1986, and I was still just into thrash and traditional metal up to at least 1989. But by 1990-92 those extreme genres became mainstream within the metal scene, and thrash and trad metal came close to dying out. So EM existed in the metal mainstream by (say) 1992, but not before 1989-90. So I don't grandfather those releases into the definition of EM - they just existed before it, like the Stooges and MC5 existed before the Sex Pistols and Ramones if you like.


Fair enough, for me the sticking point is that I don't think that the timing of the term being coined by a publication necessarily disqualifies an immediate predecessor with a comparable sound, and even if we didn't have any proper death metal albums prior to 1990/1991 when "extreme metal" was codified as a term in the public discourse, you would have bands within the thrash metal scene that were so divergent from the mainstream version that we'd have to question if there at least an extreme element at play. Things exist prior to becoming mainstream, and the fact that the term does not exist until the thing it denotes become mainstream does not disqualify the predecessors from being included provided that they meet the definition. I think I'm also not quite clear on your point earlier where you stated "It's not about the guitar, vocals, or whatever...", is there not an objective definition for extreme metal apart from its timing as a coined term? If we have a band like Morbid Saint or Sepultura that blurs the lines between thrash and death metal in the late 80s, to the point where it's dangerously close to territory occupied by Death or Revenant, shouldn't we infer it having at least a relation to the extreme camp? I think there is a point where we get too strict in our definitions and end up with too many outliers, causing the whole vocabulary we're attempting to employ to become dysfunctional.
_________________
My music:
Ominous Glory Spotify
Ominous Glory YouTube
Ominous Glory Facebook

My reviews.

R.I.P. Ronnie James Dio (July 14, 1942 - May 16, 2010)

Top
 Profile  
LithoJazzoSphere
Veteran

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:11 pm
Posts: 3142
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 5:06 pm 
 

Gravetemplar wrote:
LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
Some things get really marginal in how much more intense they can be though. The death metal coming out now is actually often less extreme than it was two decades ago. When you have metal that's pretty much just a wall of abrasive sound with barely decipherable notes and rhythms, where do you go from there? We had that stuff decades ago and haven't really been able to top it. Grindcore, dissodeath, dissoblack, tech death, brutal death, the murkiest imaginable cavernous death, or in non-metal genres, power electronics, harsh noise, industrial, hardcore, they've all pretty much run into an asymptotic limit and been stuck there for quite some time now.

Nah, stuff like Ad Nauseam would have been unthinkable 20 years ago, the same way Gorguts in the 90s made a difference when they released Obscura. Sure, it's been a very slow process but death metal has become way more extreme, it's us that have become desensitized to this kind of music over the decades. There have been of course a few bands ahead of their time (Nuclear Death come to mind) but most 90s and 2000s death metal is very melodic and catchy as hell compared to the level of insanity we've reached.


I guess we'll have to see who else chimes in, but I don't see Ad Nauseam as radically different from what Gorguts was doing two decades ago, or in different capacities Portal, Immolation, Demilich, Timeghoul, and probably others. Heck, Ulcerate's first EP is now almost two decades ago. But admittedly I have less taste for this style than others here. But that's still the dissonant, avant-garde fringe of metal, although there's more of it than ever. The average OSDM revival band isn't really any more extreme than the bands they're inspired by were 2-3 decades ago. There don't seem to be as many brutal and tech death bands trying to bash your face in with their playing as there were in the 00s. And the ones that aren't trying to be ultra-outre tend to be relatively mild as far as extreme metal goes, your Tomb Molds, Gatecreepers, Dead Congregations, Dismas, Hooded Menaces and such.

Top
 Profile  
Ill-Starred Son
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:10 pm
Posts: 1224
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:26 pm 
 

Metal Vermont said:

"The problem with this line of reasoning is that 30 years from now, metal fans will look back and laugh and say "can you believe they used to think death and black were extreme? lol" Every generation naively thinks they've reached the pinnacle of understanding. Scientists have been doing this for centuries. "NOW we have the ultimate truth, believe nothing we've said before!" Generation after generation."[/quote]




That wouldn't be any kind of real problem IMO.

By calling it "extreme" we aren't necessarily subscribing to the idea that it can't get any heavier, it's just a category.

So if in fact this term "extreme metal" was coined in the early 90s to define death, black, grind and musical styles which hadn't been common before, then there might be some need to stay true to the definition.

The only problem I'd see would be that if they were talking about say, those 3 sub-genres (and I think they are the 3 main extreme sub-genres) then they'd have to acknowledge that some bands of those genres existed prior to the 1990s like Bathory, Repulsion, Napalm Death, Death, Necrophagia, etc.

Otherwise, I don't see an issue with this idea.

It's kind of like why we have a problem with 1st wave black metal, because despite the fact that I sort of like it as a descriptor, the criticism of it remains true that it's a very loosely defined group of bands that were mostly defined retroactively.

Whatever the term "extreme metal" is meant to cover, if we were REALLY doing a true scholarly study of it, would have to be true to its original meaning, and we'd have to find out what that original meaning was, along with where and when it came from.

Top
 Profile  
Ill-Starred Son
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:10 pm
Posts: 1224
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:29 pm 
 

LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
Some things get really marginal in how much more intense they can be though. The death metal coming out now is actually often less extreme than it was two decades ago. When you have metal that's pretty much just a wall of abrasive sound with barely decipherable notes and rhythms, where do you go from there? We had that stuff decades ago and haven't really been able to top it. Grindcore, dissodeath, dissoblack, tech death, brutal death, the murkiest imaginable cavernous death, or in non-metal genres, power electronics, harsh noise, industrial, hardcore, they've all pretty much run into an asymptotic limit and been stuck there for quite some time now.


This does seem to be true for now, but if you see my last post, it doesn't matter.

It's really all about what "extreme metal" first meant if we were to REALLY do a scholarly study of it, not about whether or not metal can become more extreme so that what we now think of extreme is tame by comparison.

If somehow 30 years from now we've got mega metal, tomb metal and blood metal (really stupid terms I know lol) and they make black, death and grind seem tame by comparison, we could just call those metal styles "ultra metal", and extreme metal would still have been the descriptor for styles like black, death and grind.

Top
 Profile  
Gravetemplar
Veteran

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:08 am
Posts: 3249
Location: Antarctica
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:41 pm 
 

LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
Gravetemplar wrote:
LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
Some things get really marginal in how much more intense they can be though. The death metal coming out now is actually often less extreme than it was two decades ago. When you have metal that's pretty much just a wall of abrasive sound with barely decipherable notes and rhythms, where do you go from there? We had that stuff decades ago and haven't really been able to top it. Grindcore, dissodeath, dissoblack, tech death, brutal death, the murkiest imaginable cavernous death, or in non-metal genres, power electronics, harsh noise, industrial, hardcore, they've all pretty much run into an asymptotic limit and been stuck there for quite some time now.

Nah, stuff like Ad Nauseam would have been unthinkable 20 years ago, the same way Gorguts in the 90s made a difference when they released Obscura. Sure, it's been a very slow process but death metal has become way more extreme, it's us that have become desensitized to this kind of music over the decades. There have been of course a few bands ahead of their time (Nuclear Death come to mind) but most 90s and 2000s death metal is very melodic and catchy as hell compared to the level of insanity we've reached.


I guess we'll have to see who else chimes in, but I don't see Ad Nauseam as radically different from what Gorguts was doing two decades ago, or in different capacities Portal, Immolation, Demilich, Timeghoul, and probably others. Heck, Ulcerate's first EP is now almost two decades ago. But admittedly I have less taste for this style than others here. But that's still the dissonant, avant-garde fringe of metal, although there's more of it than ever. The average OSDM revival band isn't really any more extreme than the bands they're inspired by were 2-3 decades ago. There don't seem to be as many brutal and tech death bands trying to bash your face in with their playing as there were in the 00s. And the ones that aren't trying to be ultra-outre tend to be relatively mild as far as extreme metal goes, your Tomb Molds, Gatecreepers, Dead Congregations, Dismas, Hooded Menaces and such.

I really don't get what your point is. Of course OSDM bands aren't more extreme, that's why they're OSDM. They're emulating old school bands, if they were radically different than those early bands then they wouldn't be OSDM.

Getting from this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCifcUvvNlg to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1089rItOTes wasn't something that was achieved overnight. Sure, death metal was way more shocking back in the day in comparison but you can only say this kind of stuff because you have the perspective of more than 30 years of artists pushing this sound to the limit and an audience that is completely desensitized by oversaturation. Saying death metal nowadays is less extreme than it was 20 years ago is just a crazy concept, unless your definition of "extreme" is limited to just brutal death metal, which thankfully isn't trendy anymore. I really don't understand how can you think death metal is less extreme today when we have entire sub-subgenres filled with crazy stuff like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF6IU7WnSqA like it's nothing. As I've said there were bands far ahead of their time already toying with much more extreme sounds like Nuclear Death but that wasn't the norm.

As for Ad nauseam stuff not being different from Gorguts', we'll agree to disagree because both bands have very few in common imho. Obscura was groovy and was very riff oriented, Ad nauseam don't even have the same kind of riffing.

Ill-Starred Son wrote:
Whatever the term "extreme metal" is meant to cover, if we were REALLY doing a true scholarly study of it, would have to be true to its original meaning, and we'd have to find out what that original meaning was, along with where and when it came from.

The meaning of stuff can change, you know? What you propose would be like saying Cannibal Corpse aren't metal because they sound nothing like Black Sabbath. Stuff evolves.

I still think people are missing the point entirely. Extreme metal has never been some academic strict categorization or anything, just an umbrella term that's used to describe metal subgenres, mostly black and death but also some thrash and some doom metal. Usually the closer both of these sound to black and death metal, the more extreme these bands are.

Top
 Profile  
Ill-Starred Son
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:10 pm
Posts: 1224
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:53 pm 
 

Gravetemplar said: [/quote]

"The meaning of stuff can change, you know? What you propose would be like saying Cannibal Corpse aren't metal because they sound nothing like Black Sabbath. Stuff evolves.

I still think people are missing the point entirely. Extreme metal has never been some academic strict categorization or anything, just an umbrella term that's used to describe metal subgenres, mostly black and death but also some thrash and some doom metal. Usually the closer both of these sound to black and death metal, the more extreme these bands are."[/quote]





I didn't necessarily think it was ever SUPER strict, but I think it was coined at some point and it's worth asking when and where and what for, as those questions make sense when talking about artistic genres or categories.

Sure, terms can change, but they can also stay the same. Death metal and black metal still mean now what they did when they were coined as terms, they've just broadened.

Either way, it's obviously an umbrella term for the absolute heaviest and darkest stuff out there, and with how dark and heavy so much music gets these days, it really is questionable how much thrash can fit in.

But the problem is also of course that extremity and heaviness is a spectrum and since thrash (along with groove metal and perhaps even some other styles like metalcore or deathcore) fall in the middle of the spectrum, and with no single authority to turn to, it can probably be endlessly debated whether thrash as a whole, or individual thrash bands, are extreme.

At the very least I think most of us can agree that thrash itself as a blanket genre doesn't necessarily make it in, but in general, if something is death (not melodic death), black or grindcore, then it usually makes it in just based alone on it being in those sub-genres.

Top
 Profile  
Gravetemplar
Veteran

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:08 am
Posts: 3249
Location: Antarctica
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:00 pm 
 

Ill-Starred Son wrote:
Either way, it's obviously an umbrella term for the absolute heaviest and darkest stuff out there, and with how dark and heavy so much music gets these days, it really is questionable how much thrash can fit in.

But the problem is also of course that extremity and heaviness is a spectrum and since thrash (along with groove metal and perhaps even some other styles like metalcore or deathcore) fall in the middle of the spectrum, and with no single authority to turn to, it can probably be endlessly debated whether thrash as a whole, or individual thrash bands, are extreme.

At the very least I think most of us can agree that thrash itself as a blanket genre doesn't necessarily make it in, but in general, if something is death (not melodic death), black or grindcore, then it usually makes it in just based alone on it being in those sub-genres.

I can agree with this. There's obviously going to be some subjectivity and grey areas about bands that are in the middle of the spectrum as you say. People saying stuff like Metallica is extreme metal are just wrong though. No way around it.

Top
 Profile  
oldmetalhead
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2021 1:30 am
Posts: 501
Location: Helltown, United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:18 pm 
 

Gravetemplar wrote:
Ill-Starred Son wrote:
Either way, it's obviously an umbrella term for the absolute heaviest and darkest stuff out there, and with how dark and heavy so much music gets these days, it really is questionable how much thrash can fit in.

But the problem is also of course that extremity and heaviness is a spectrum and since thrash (along with groove metal and perhaps even some other styles like metalcore or deathcore) fall in the middle of the spectrum, and with no single authority to turn to, it can probably be endlessly debated whether thrash as a whole, or individual thrash bands, are extreme.

At the very least I think most of us can agree that thrash itself as a blanket genre doesn't necessarily make it in, but in general, if something is death (not melodic death), black or grindcore, then it usually makes it in just based alone on it being in those sub-genres.

I can agree with this. There's obviously going to be some subjectivity and grey areas about bands that are in the middle of the spectrum as you say. People saying stuff like Metallica is extreme metal are just wrong though. No way around it.

Whatever, we didn't call it "extreme" at the time but it was the heaviest shit there was at the time.

If growling, shrieking vocals are what defines an extreme now, have at it.

Top
 Profile  
Gravetemplar
Veteran

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:08 am
Posts: 3249
Location: Antarctica
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:22 pm 
 

oldmetalhead wrote:
Gravetemplar wrote:
Ill-Starred Son wrote:
Either way, it's obviously an umbrella term for the absolute heaviest and darkest stuff out there, and with how dark and heavy so much music gets these days, it really is questionable how much thrash can fit in.

But the problem is also of course that extremity and heaviness is a spectrum and since thrash (along with groove metal and perhaps even some other styles like metalcore or deathcore) fall in the middle of the spectrum, and with no single authority to turn to, it can probably be endlessly debated whether thrash as a whole, or individual thrash bands, are extreme.

At the very least I think most of us can agree that thrash itself as a blanket genre doesn't necessarily make it in, but in general, if something is death (not melodic death), black or grindcore, then it usually makes it in just based alone on it being in those sub-genres.

I can agree with this. There's obviously going to be some subjectivity and grey areas about bands that are in the middle of the spectrum as you say. People saying stuff like Metallica is extreme metal are just wrong though. No way around it.

Whatever, we didn't call it "extreme" at the time but it was the heaviest shit there was at the time.

If growling, shrieking vocals are what defines an extreme now, have at it.

Black Sabbath was the most extreme metal band in 1969 too and that doesn't make them extreme metal either.

Edit: typo.


Last edited by Gravetemplar on Sun Nov 28, 2021 9:31 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top
 Profile  
oldmetalhead
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2021 1:30 am
Posts: 501
Location: Helltown, United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:24 pm 
 

Gravetemplar wrote:
Black Sabbath was the most extreme metal band in 1969 and that doesn't make them extreme metal either.

Point being what was or is extreme in the time.

Top
 Profile  
Gravetemplar
Veteran

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:08 am
Posts: 3249
Location: Antarctica
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:29 pm 
 

oldmetalhead wrote:
Gravetemplar wrote:
Black Sabbath was the most extreme metal band in 1969 and that doesn't make them extreme metal either.

Point being what was or is extreme in the time.

But nobody here is discussing Metallica being the most extreme band at the time or anything. Just that Metallica aren't black or death metal, which are the two main genres that are usually categorised as extreme metal. Extreme as an adjective isn't the same as extreme metal as an umbrella term for black and death metal. Why is it even necessary to explain this? It should be well known by anyone who listens to metal at this point.

If instead of "extreme metal" black and death had been categorised as necro metal or some other dumb term that had stuck around instead of "extreme metal" we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Top
 Profile  
oldmetalhead
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2021 1:30 am
Posts: 501
Location: Helltown, United States
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:38 pm 
 

Gravetemplar wrote:
oldmetalhead wrote:
Gravetemplar wrote:
Black Sabbath was the most extreme metal band in 1969 and that doesn't make them extreme metal either.

Point being what was or is extreme in the time.

But nobody here is discussing Metallica being the most extreme band at the time or anything. Just that Metallica aren't black or death metal, which are the two main genres that are usually categorised as extreme metal. Extreme as an adjective isn't the same as extreme metal as an umbrella term for black and death metal. Why is it even necessary to explain this? It should be well known by anyone who listens to metal at this point.

I'm just talking from an older point. Again, extreme wasn't a term back then. I have listened to metal for over 40 years now and still do. I don't care for harsh vocals, it's fine in parts but It's not my cup of tea as a totality in the music. If that is what defines extreme, that is fine. Not going to argue it. I'm just trying to say it was all about speed and how heavy it was when Metallica, Slayer and Sepultura came about. Who was faster, who was heavier.

Top
 Profile  
des91
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:51 pm
Posts: 218
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 1:25 am 
 

One thing this thread has made me reinforce to my brain is that Thrash is more diverse than it gets credit for. I hear so often that Thrash is a very narrow genre and that’s why there’s only a handful of good acts that came out post early 90s. I mean you have the lighter stuff that most people know of but also the other end (my favorite style of any metal genre) of harsher acts. Plus technical thrash and crossover.

I mean does anybody really think that “Hell Awaits” sounds anything like any Metallica? Besides that chugging guitar riffing sometimes? Of course not! Twisted Into Form sounds nothing like Epidemic of Violence, By Inheritance nothing like Bonded by Blood etc.

Top
 Profile  
oldmetalhead
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2021 1:30 am
Posts: 501
Location: Helltown, United States
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 2:32 am 
 

des91 wrote:
ver.

I mean does anybody really think that “Hell Awaits” sounds anything like any Metallica? .

No but they are in the same field, biggest difference (early Metallica) is that James actually sings and Araya just shouts and uses distortion for an extra evilness.

Top
 Profile  
Spiner202
Metalhead

Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 3:32 pm
Posts: 2429
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 8:35 am 
 

des91 wrote:
One thing this thread has made me reinforce to my brain is that Thrash is more diverse than it gets credit for. I hear so often that Thrash is a very narrow genre and that’s why there’s only a handful of good acts that came out post early 90s. I mean you have the lighter stuff that most people know of but also the other end (my favorite style of any metal genre) of harsher acts. Plus technical thrash and crossover.

Oh yeah thrash is way more diverse than it gets credit for. Modern bands today only rip off Slayer/Exodus/Kreator in some form (which are all great bands; arguably the 3 greatest thrash bands), but where are the groups that take influence from Realm, Coroner, Toxik, Gammacide, Heathen, etc?

Power/thrash and tech thrash are wildly underexplored because bands lean too hard into the power side or into worshipping one band directly rather than creating their own unique brand. Look at a song like Nice Dreams by Powermad - how does that fit into a thrash record? It doesn't really, but bands weren't afraid to take chances back in the 80s and it ended up being the best song on an otherwise fairly straightforward record.

Thrash is far and away the best subgenre, and I love what the new bands are doing, but there's a lot more to the genre than we hear from it these days (all that said, I think the new Exodus is still the best thrash release of the year :lol: )
_________________
Check out my review webzine: Skull Fracturing Metal

Top
 Profile  
LithoJazzoSphere
Veteran

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:11 pm
Posts: 3142
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 8:46 am 
 

Gravetemplar wrote:
I really don't get what your point is. Of course OSDM bands aren't more extreme, that's why they're OSDM. They're emulating old school bands, if they were radically different than those early bands then they wouldn't be OSDM.

Getting from this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCifcUvvNlg to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1089rItOTes wasn't something that was achieved overnight. Sure, death metal was way more shocking back in the day in comparison but you can only say this kind of stuff because you have the perspective of more than 30 years of artists pushing this sound to the limit and an audience that is completely desensitized by oversaturation. Saying death metal nowadays is less extreme than it was 20 years ago is just a crazy concept, unless your definition of "extreme" is limited to just brutal death metal, which thankfully isn't trendy anymore. I really don't understand how can you think death metal is less extreme today when we have entire sub-subgenres filled with crazy stuff like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF6IU7WnSqA like it's nothing. As I've said there were bands far ahead of their time already toying with much more extreme sounds like Nuclear Death but that wasn't the norm.

As for Ad nauseam stuff not being different from Gorguts', we'll agree to disagree because both bands have very few in common imho. Obscura was groovy and was very riff oriented, Ad nauseam don't even have the same kind of riffing.


But OSDM revival is one of the most popular trends in DM over the past decade+. Whereas the trends from the 90s into the 00s were more about increasing brutality and technicality, and these were popular bands at the time (and still today), like Necrophagist, Dying Fetus, Decapitated and such. Those bands are more extreme than the Tomb Molds and such of today, that's just my point there, the focus in the death metal mainstream has shifted in the last couple decades from cutting edge, precision, slamming production and writing to nostalgia acts. The more out-there bands on the edges aren't the ones that dominate the overall movement. The avant-garde facets have become a tad more extreme, but it's still a pretty minor shift, and a smaller movement. Some of the bands now have more angular writing, more dissonance, and some are murkier, but it's not a far cry from a decade or two ago, and arguably in ways it feels less extreme because the sonic mud can make it seem ambient and soundscapey rather than savage. Where we are now isn't really light years away from a decade or two ago in terms of extremity.

16 years ago

Spoiler: show


18 years ago

Spoiler: show


20 years ago

Spoiler: show


21 years ago

Spoiler: show


Spoiler: show


25 years ago

Spoiler: show


26 years ago

Spoiler: show


I just don't see the new crop as massively more extreme than those, but maybe others do. And they aren't isolated examples, there are numerous others. I just feel somewhere around '95-'05 we kind of hit a wall where you can't really push the extremity much further, so you have to find other creative things to do or just variations on what has already been done.

Top
 Profile  
Gravetemplar
Veteran

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:08 am
Posts: 3249
Location: Antarctica
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 10:06 am 
 

I'm not trying to play the devils advocate or anything but all those bands you posted get more extreme as years go by except maybe Nile. Not massively more extreme but each one pushes the sound of death metal a bit further. Cryptopsy sound more extreme than Molested and Discordance Axis sound more extreme than Crytpopsy, etc. I truly don't believe "somewhere around '95-'05 we kind of hit a wall where you can't really push the extremity much further" because death metal as a whole genre has become more extreme as years go by. Of course death metal isn't 200% more extreme because humans can only play so fast so there is obviously going to be a point where it's physically impossible to play faster (which is arguably one of the most defining aspects of death metal, specially regarding the drums) but saying stuff has actually gotten more melodic these past few years makes no sense, sorry.

I disagree about Nile Nile though, they've always struck me as a very melodic band full of catchy hooks and a very cool atmosphere, which is why I love them. They were the first band to get that ultratechnical and very polished drum sound and Kollias is a beast but overall I don't consider them one of the most extreme death metal bands.

It's also worth mentioning that a lot of the stuff you mentioned in this message was mostly developed in the past 10 years or so and that your initial message clearly stated you think "death metal coming out now is actually often less extreme than it was two decades ago".

LithoJazzoSphere wrote:
Some things get really marginal in how much more intense they can be though. The death metal coming out now is actually often less extreme than it was two decades ago. When you have metal that's pretty much just a wall of abrasive sound with barely decipherable notes and rhythms, where do you go from there? We had that stuff decades ago and haven't really been able to top it. Grindcore, dissodeath, dissoblack, tech death, brutal death, the murkiest imaginable cavernous death, or in non-metal genres, power electronics, harsh noise, industrial, hardcore, they've all pretty much run into an asymptotic limit and been stuck there for quite some time now.


I still think stuff like this sounds more extreme than the stuff you posted:





Top
 Profile  
LithoJazzoSphere
Veteran

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:11 pm
Posts: 3142
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 11:38 am 
 

I think at this point we're just going to have to agree to disagree about what constitutes a significant advancement in extremity until/if one of the other regulars wants to come in with another perspective. I see it as by the early 00s we have a ton of stuff at mid 11s on a Mohrs Scale of Hardness, and maybe now we have stuff that's high 11s.

And I didn't say anything about it getting more melodic, just that the most common and popular DM releases in the past decade or so tend to be OG icons making comebacks or newer bands paying tribute to those sounds. And that's just an inherently less extreme sound than the brutal and tech death that was more popular in the 00s. The hyper-dissonant end of DM has grown a little bit in both popularity and extremity, but it's still a smaller facet of the DM movement. I think you just listen to a ton of it, and are on a forum of people who do as well, and recent lists like Decibel's, which skew to the extreme make it seem like this represents metal fandom as a whole when it doesn't.

Nile is complicated, because they do have an appeal and memorability beyond a lot of their peers, but they were also one of the first to really push the tempos and technicality to absurd levels. They, Necrophagist, Origin and a few others are a major reason metal was taken over by that sound for quite awhile until people kind of got tired of it and did different things.

Top
 Profile  
chuggingpus
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 3:56 am
Posts: 85
Location: Vatican City
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 12:51 pm 
 

for me personally, Carnivore’s second album was the first metal album I’d heard that seemed to push metal into another level of extremity. The vocals, the speed and heaviness to me was a new thing. I got that album as soon as it came out.

The first Carnivore was great, but the vocals at times sounded cheesy to me, like a goofy Nosferatu quality with too much echo, and they didn’t sound as unhinged and as extreme as on Retaliation.

Retaliation actually took my attention away from Slayer and more towards bands like Kreator, Whiplash, and later on even Sepultura and Napalm Death. I wanted things faster, with more insane vocals and a rawer feeling.

After digesting Carnivore, it got my pallete ready for Death, Bolt Thrower, Napalm Death, Lethal Aggression, Sepultura, and other bands whose albums would soon find their way into my collection.

Thrash metal like Metallica, Megadeth and even Slayer was a huge influence on everyone. But it didn’t have the rawness and filthiness yet that I would equate with more extreme stuff

Top
 Profile  
AxeCapitol
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2021 12:38 pm
Posts: 179
Location: NYC
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 1:34 pm 
 

chuggingpus wrote:
for me personally, Carnivore’s second album was the first metal album I’d heard that seemed to push metal into another level of extremity. The vocals, the speed and heaviness to me was a new thing. I got that album as soon as it came out.

The first Carnivore was great, but the vocals at times sounded cheesy to me, like a goofy Nosferatu quality with too much echo, and they didn’t sound as unhinged and as extreme as on Retaliation.

Retaliation actually took my attention away from Slayer and more towards bands like Kreator, Whiplash, and later on even Sepultura and Napalm Death. I wanted things faster, with more insane vocals and a rawer feeling.

After digesting Carnivore, it got my pallete ready for Death, Bolt Thrower, Napalm Death, Lethal Aggression, Sepultura, and other bands whose albums would soon find their way into my collection.

Thrash metal like Metallica, Megadeth and even Slayer was a huge influence on everyone. But it didn’t have the rawness and filthiness yet that I would equate with more extreme stuff


Would you put Carnivore Retaliation in the extreme camp? I certainly would.

Top
 Profile  
chuggingpus
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 3:56 am
Posts: 85
Location: Vatican City
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 2:05 pm 
 

AxeCapitol wrote:
chuggingpus wrote:
for me personally, Carnivore’s second album was the first metal album I’d heard that seemed to push metal into another level of extremity. The vocals, the speed and heaviness to me was a new thing. I got that album as soon as it came out.

The first Carnivore was great, but the vocals at times sounded cheesy to me, like a goofy Nosferatu quality with too much echo, and they didn’t sound as unhinged and as extreme as on Retaliation.

Retaliation actually took my attention away from Slayer and more towards bands like Kreator, Whiplash, and later on even Sepultura and Napalm Death. I wanted things faster, with more insane vocals and a rawer feeling.

After digesting Carnivore, it got my pallete ready for Death, Bolt Thrower, Napalm Death, Lethal Aggression, Sepultura, and other bands whose albums would soon find their way into my collection.

Thrash metal like Metallica, Megadeth and even Slayer was a huge influence on everyone. But it didn’t have the rawness and filthiness yet that I would equate with more extreme stuff


Would you put Carnivore Retaliation in the extreme camp? I certainly would.


Hell yes. To me it was the first extreme metal album I’d heard. Nuclear Assault still had the high pitch vocals, Celtic Frost and Venom were close but still not quite there. I’d only seen bands I’d call extreme live at that point but many never made records.

Top
 Profile  
AxeCapitol
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2021 12:38 pm
Posts: 179
Location: NYC
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 2:27 pm 
 

chuggingpus wrote:
AxeCapitol wrote:
chuggingpus wrote:
for me personally, Carnivore’s second album was the first metal album I’d heard that seemed to push metal into another level of extremity. The vocals, the speed and heaviness to me was a new thing. I got that album as soon as it came out.

The first Carnivore was great, but the vocals at times sounded cheesy to me, like a goofy Nosferatu quality with too much echo, and they didn’t sound as unhinged and as extreme as on Retaliation.

Retaliation actually took my attention away from Slayer and more towards bands like Kreator, Whiplash, and later on even Sepultura and Napalm Death. I wanted things faster, with more insane vocals and a rawer feeling.

After digesting Carnivore, it got my pallete ready for Death, Bolt Thrower, Napalm Death, Lethal Aggression, Sepultura, and other bands whose albums would soon find their way into my collection.

Thrash metal like Metallica, Megadeth and even Slayer was a huge influence on everyone. But it didn’t have the rawness and filthiness yet that I would equate with more extreme stuff


Would you put Carnivore Retaliation in the extreme camp? I certainly would.


Hell yes. To me it was the first extreme metal album I’d heard. Nuclear Assault still had the high pitch vocals, Celtic Frost and Venom were close but still not quite there. I’d only seen bands I’d call extreme live at that point but many never made records.



Word! And agreed fully. some poster above stated Carnivore were more in the Metallica/Anthrax camp and not extreme enough to hang with Kreator (or some other band) et al. I lol’ed.

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ace_Rimmer, Empyreal, Google [Bot], Metallic Shock, Smalley and 25 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

  Print view
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group