Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives
https://forum.metal-archives.com/

Question for Older Metalheads
https://forum.metal-archives.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=94231
Page 1 of 1

Author:  DeathcoreDecimator [ Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Question for Older Metalheads

This is a question that has been on my mind for years now, and I figured this would be the perfect place to ask it. When I say old school metalheads, I'm talking about the ones who were around before death metal began. Now in that context, was there dissent towards the development of this new genre from this group of people, in the same way that metalheads today usually don't like deathcore? Or in the same way glam or nu-metal was looked at? I could imagine the answer is no in most cases, but I'm curious to hear the different perspectives. I know that the people who were involved in the roots of black metal used it as a way to get away from the "mainstream" influence of death metal, but I'm more interested in the perspectives of metalheads who are into traditional metal and thrash.

Author:  OzzyApu [ Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

This thread gives some insight: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=91356&hilit=older

Author:  DeathcoreDecimator [ Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

Sweet, thank you! To keep this thread alive then, I'm curious as to what made genres such as death metal and black metal more appealing as they were first developed, as opposed to when glam and nu-metal came out. Was it purely because of the commercial factor or instrumental simplicity, or was it from hip-hop influence? I can totally understand dissent towards glam, but towards nu-metal not so much. Every genre developed from the underground, so what were initial reactions to underground nu-metal, before the likes of Slipknot and Korn were brought to attention by the mainstream media?

Author:  Twin_guitar_attack [ Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

My dad started listening to metal with sabotage by black sabbath (I assume when it was releasd), and loved death metal from the start, as he did thrash and black metal. He's seen cannibal corpse, anaal nathrakh, amon amarth, nile, akercocke, mayhem and tons of others.

Author:  Funsize999 [ Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

Exhorder wrote a song called "Death in Vain" which I am pretty sure is about Possessed. Shit, Slaughter in the Vatican might just be about Possessed. Poor Poossessed.

Author:  Oxenkiller [ Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

part of the reaction to both glam and the modern Korn/Slipknot "Metal" is that it tried to represent itself as something that it wasn't. Bands like Bon Jovi, Ratt, Poison, etc were never more than pure rock n'roll. When they tried to pass it off as "Metal" (and this was as much the fault of MTV and the music press as the bands themselves) the purists cried foul. The late 90's rap/metal/rock fusion thing (call it what you will) was seen as something as a novelty by both the press and by some hard rock/metal fans. But again, purists thought, "well they have some downtuned, loud guitars, heavy riffs and such, so it's KINDA metal but...there is definatly something MISSING." and overall the asthetic affect just didn't do it for most of the older metalheads. It was like, metal that had fused with a bunch of other non-metal subgenres, and in the process became so watered down and so far from it's roots that you couldnt really call it metal anymore.

Death metal, on the other hand, was like thrash had been- metal that had traced it's lineage back to the "classics" except with an up-ratcheting in intensity and heaviness. It appealed to the same asthetic of those who had once heard "Black Sabbath" (the song in particular, as well as the band) and thought it the most powerful music that existed. Nu Metal can't capture that asthetic, even from the beginning it was never geared to that.

Author:  Unded Infidel [ Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

This is an interesting thread, i never really thought about this but it deffenetly makes me kinda look at "metalcore" and all of its brother genres in a somewhat differently, i personally dont like the music and i hope that one day when kids think back on metal from 2012 they dont think of asking alexandria, cuz i would beat them with my cane.

Author:  mjollnir [ Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

I'm 47 years old and have been listening to metal and "proto-metal" (i.e. Sabbath, Zeppelin, Rush, U.F.O., etc) for a very long time. I HATED most hair or glam metal (I still think that Ratt, Dokken, early Crue and W.A.S.P. were more metal than glam). When thrash arrived I thought that the German/Euro thrash was way more superior to some of the watered down US thrash ***cough Metallica, Pantera, Anthrax cough***. When mall-core and rap metal arrived I was appalled and thanked the GODS for death metal and black metal and their sub-genres. The appeal (especially for me with black metal) was the atmosphere it created.

Author:  Horus666 [ Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

There has always been people complaining whenever a new generation/genre would arrive. Especially when Metal has gone in more extreme directions. An overview of Metal's popularity would pretty much look like this: Heavy > Thrash > Death > Black. I clearly remember how a lot of the older Thrash fans hated growling and went on to listen to stuff like Helmet, Pantera and early Machine Head and even grunge at the time Death Metal arrived, and how a lot Death Metal fans hated Black Metal, and so on. There might be older folks left in the scene, but the truth is that the majority of people who bought records in the 80'es left Metal a long time ago. I see that especially when a band like Annihilator comes to town. Then you'll see these 40+ people that you hasn't been to a show since '92.

Author:  Techno Viper [ Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

I'm 41 (good god! How is that possible?!) and I was 15 when Reign in blood came out so I'm probably the demographic you're looking for. I was a HUGE thrash fan,and I witnessed first hand the destruction of the scene, to me, because of the "Black Album". I tried to get into bands such as Obituary, Master etc but the growling turned me off in a huge way, because to my ears, every band ended up sounding the same as opposed to thrash which has great diversity in the vocal department. Disenfranchised with the whole scene,I started smoking pot and listening to Kyuss's Sky Valley and Monster Magnet's "Dopes to Infinity". I was huge into the stoner scene from 95-2000 'til the whole Man's Ruin collapse and that scene became watered down also. It wan't until Opeth's "Ghost Reveries" that I started to appreicate death metal, which got me into bands like Nile. Black metal I don't care for except for Immortal who transcend black metal and are simply awesome. I don't care for power metal very much except for bands like Blind Guardian.

Author:  GTog [ Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

At the time, the next up and coming style of metal was thrash, and all of its practitioners were more or less on the same level. One could listen to Metallica just as easily as Slayer, Exodus, or Overkill. Thrash was moving away from the melodic nature and cleaner vocals of Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, and Ozzy. It was faster, rougher, and had more complex rhythms. But within the decade it had gone about as far as it could go. I welcomed new styles because I wasn't done with metal. I kind of felt that metal was done with me, though. All the bands I knew that had established that thrash subculture didn't seem interested in us anymore. All anyone wanted to do was "break out" and get that big recording contract, which is what a lot of people (now) believe is what killed thrash.

Death metal reestablished the subculture, at a time when a lot of the kids were being siphoned off by the likes of commercial metal and hard rock, which was fine by me.

Author:  Littlewolf [ Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

Ah, distinctly I remember it was in the bleak December....nah, just kidding...

I'm 41 (already!), and I remember a friend borrowing 'Seven chuches' -Possessed tape to me and my first reaction was WTF is this!? Then I listened to it once again, and wow! - I realized it was great! Some of us though it was great, some thought it was crap. Same reacion for Bathory and Venom... To make a long story short - those of us who thought Possessed, Bathory and Venom were great, listen to black or death metal today, and those who thought they were crap, listen to power, neo-thrash, etc, or nothing at all...

Glam, or hair-metal was a strictly American phenomenon, and nobody really took them seriously...o.k. maybe Wasp weren't so bad, at least the first 3 albums (they weren't a hair-metal band anyway), but Motley Crue and the whole entourage of make-up addicted, gender-confused wimps went totally unnoticed, and were wholeheartedly ignored...

Author:  Riffs [ Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question for Older Metalheads

DeathcoreDecimator wrote:
Now in that context, was there dissent towards the development of this new genre from this group of people, in the same way that metalheads today usually don't like deathcore? Or in the same way glam or nu-metal was looked at? I could imagine the answer is no in most cases, but I'm curious to hear the different perspectives. I know that the people who were involved in the roots of black metal used it as a way to get away from the "mainstream" influence of death metal, but I'm more interested in the perspectives of metalheads who are into traditional metal and thrash.


I'm in that demographic. Stories of old time fans who pursued extreme genres are really cool but they're not the norm, they're the exception. The majority of metalheads were turned off by extreme metal with reactions ranging from mild (disinterest) to strong (disgust or laughter at the extreme elements). The two main sticking points were the vocals, which were generally deemed unpleasant and just noise and the musicality, with several people finding the whole thing indecipherable. A lot of people deplored a general lack of virtuosity but deep down, they knew it wasn't always the case (although it is certainly true the "extreme" label allowed some really shitty musicians to make a career).

People moved on to other music, or just stuck to older bands. Or some tried to find modern bands that had a sound that was acceptable to their old standards and ignore the more modern elements. Attendances dropped, as did sales. And eventually, "successful" extreme bands ended up touring in places the size of which older acts wouldn't have deemed acceptable as their backstage toilet.

And that's why Demonaz lives in the basement of Abbath's mother while KK Downing is busy managing his multimillion dollars golf course and banging chicks 35 younger than he is.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/