"The New Heavy Metal Movement"...

pzman · Post by **pzman** » Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:12 pm

The_Elite wrote: I also think the internet seems to have blown the idea of a band 'making it' out of all proportion, you think Enforcer have sold more than a couple of thousand cds at a push??? Just because you hear about them and see them everywhere doesn't automatically equate with 'success'.

yep i think this is largely the reason behind the whole new wave thing

ION BRITTON · Post by **ION BRITTON** » Sun Jul 18, 2010 6:34 pm

Black Axe wrote:First albums are usually the best because the musicians have no idea what they're doing, they just wrote what ever they came up with along the way. After that first album they start thinking and their minds get clouded with 'what should we do to prolong the succes/get better results' thought processes and ruin it. This might be slightly forced upon a band by the label wanting a follow-up soon, or wanting more succes after a disappointing debut. But it's usually due to the bands own stupid mistake deciding to think about what they're doing.

With this I can agree for the most part + the fact that inspiration usually run dry as years go by.

About the label owners influencing bands: This does not always and automatically happen. Dozens of bands have mentioned in 'zine interviews that they were free to do what they wanted during the process of writing/recording their albums. The bigger labels have a tendency to step in the bands plans/thoughts/musical direction they want to follow although it's not some sort of rule that they will definitely do it. The indy labels on the other hand usually leave the bands the do what they want, not whatever they want though, if a band signs to a small label it's not very reasonable to expect that the label will allow them to play funk pop because that's what the band believes to be right at that moment.

FuneralCircle · Post by **FuneralCircle** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 6:48 am

In the case of Primordial, that is a band that took a while (22 years actually) before they became onto Metal Blade. They started off quite different to what they ended up, and the biggest difference between them and a band like Enforcer is the originality within. I can name a dozen bands that sound like Enforcer, but not many that sound like Primordial, a band I hold very dear. Enforcer sound cliche, they look cliche, but they got popular so god damned quickly it's almost a joke.

It's not the "struggle" of life I'm talking about, but more so the battle to release music and get it out there, which is a "struggle" - Black Sabbath in Birmingham may have struggled in the 60s, but how long until Warner Bros. released their first album? Quickly! Does this mena I hate Black Sabbath? No, they're my favorite band after Pagan Altar.

But what separates them from Enforcer? Their original sound. I can respect a band staying small or becoming huge if they have the balls to tread in unknown territories. I'm trying to not target small tidbits to respond to and ignite a argument concerning semantics. I just think bands like Skull Fist, Cauldron, and yes - Enforcer among them - got very popular, very fast, doing very unoriginal work. That's what I hate about mainstream music, and if it happens in Metal I think it's no different. Becuase they play Heavy Metal, I won't make an exception.

However! This is merely my view on the matter, and I don't mean to shift the goal posts around and retract behind golden mean fallacy, which I am trying hard not to do, but I find these bands to just be pretty... well, lame.

Dodens Grav · Post by **Dodens Grav** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am

It sounds like you're (perhaps inadvertently) throwing out a shotgun blast of arguments against certain bands all the while truly saying "I think they're bad". They're not bad because they got popular 'fast', or because their record label worked out a licensing deal with Earache, or because they dress a certain way, or because they didn't struggle -- they're bad because they're unoriginal. That's the only argument you needed to say (and honestly the only argument with any merit). I have no objection to people dismissing bands because they offer nothing new, I just don't always agree.

FuneralCircle · Post by **FuneralCircle** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:11 am

Dodens Grav wrote:It sounds like you're (perhaps inadvertently) throwing out a shotgun blast of arguments against certain bands all the while truly saying "I think they're bad". They're not bad because they got popular 'fast', or because their record label worked out a licensing deal with Earache, or because they dress a certain way, or because they didn't struggle -- they're bad because they're unoriginal. That's the only argument you needed to say (and honestly the only argument with any merit). I have no objection to people dismissing bands because they offer nothing new, I just don't always agree.

Sorry if I'm being very obscure, but I'm trying to say that "not only are they bad and I find them unoriginal, but their popularity skyrocketing is also just odd to me."

That's all it is, I find it weird and I think there are more deserving bands, personally. I have NOTHING against recognition.

ION BRITTON · Post by **ION BRITTON** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:46 am

That of course doesn't mean that all original bands are great and being unoriginal doesn't always mean you're bad too. Sometimes the riffing/melodies/songs don't click with everybody no matter how well played or well produced or original they are, it's simply a matter of taste and it needs no further justification.

FuneralCircle · Post by **FuneralCircle** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:37 am

ION BRITTON wrote:That of course doesn't mean that all original bands are great and being unoriginal doesn't always mean you're bad too. Sometimes the riffing/melodies/songs don't click with everybody no matter how well played or well produced or original they are, it's simply a matter of taste and it needs no further justification.

I suppose so!

I think this is probably coming to an end. I wouldn't say this was a stupid thread, if anything it got a bit more in tune with the members on this forum and I'm open to different views of course. I still think these bands are pretty dire, but fuck it - To each their own!

The_Elite · Post by **The_Elite** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:34 am

FuneralCircle wrote:In the case of Primordial, that is a band that took a while (22 years actually) before they became onto Metal Blade. They started off quite different to what they ended up, and the biggest difference between them and a band like Enforcer is the originality within. I can name a dozen bands that sound like Enforcer, but not many that sound like Primordial, a band I hold very dear. Enforcer sound cliche, they look cliche, but they got popular so god damned quickly it's almost a joke.

It's not the "struggle" of life I'm talking about, but more so the battle to release music and get it out there, which is a "struggle" - Black Sabbath in Birmingham may have struggled in the 60s, but how long until Warner Bros. released their first album? Quickly! Does this mena I hate Black Sabbath? No, they're my favorite band after Pagan Altar.

But what separates them from Enforcer? Their original sound. I can respect a band staying small or becoming huge if they have the balls to tread in unknown territories. I'm trying to not target small tidbits to respond to and ignite a argument concerning semantics. I just think bands like Skull Fist, Cauldron, and yes - Enforcer among them - got very popular, very fast, doing very unoriginal work. That's what I hate about mainstream music, and if it happens in Metal I think it's no different. Becuase they play Heavy Metal, I won't make an exception.

However! This is merely my view on the matter, and I don't mean to shift the goal posts around and retract behind golden mean fallacy, which I am trying hard not to do, but I find these bands to just be pretty... well, lame.

Again you're failing to grasp the basics- none of these bands have 'made it', or are 'popular' or have sold loads of records, they all work regular jobs just like you- they've just had a little attention thrown on them by the magnifying glass of the internet. Your arguments about originality is your opinion which you are totally entitled to, the rest of your argument kinda sounds like jealously!

Judge not lest ye be judged!

FuneralCircle · Post by **FuneralCircle** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:14 pm

The_Elite wrote:
FuneralCircle wrote:In the case of Primordial, that is a band that took a while (22 years actually) before they became onto Metal Blade. They started off quite different to what they ended up, and the biggest difference between them and a band like Enforcer is the originality within. I can name a dozen bands that sound like Enforcer, but not many that sound like Primordial, a band I hold very dear. Enforcer sound cliche, they look cliche, but they got popular so god damned quickly it's almost a joke.

It's not the "struggle" of life I'm talking about, but more so the battle to release music and get it out there, which is a "struggle" - Black Sabbath in Birmingham may have struggled in the 60s, but how long until Warner Bros. released their first album? Quickly! Does this mena I hate Black Sabbath? No, they're my favorite band after Pagan Altar.

But what separates them from Enforcer? Their original sound. I can respect a band staying small or becoming huge if they have the balls to tread in unknown territories. I'm trying to not target small tidbits to respond to and ignite a argument concerning semantics. I just think bands like Skull Fist, Cauldron, and yes - Enforcer among them - got very popular, very fast, doing very unoriginal work. That's what I hate about mainstream music, and if it happens in Metal I think it's no different. Becuase they play Heavy Metal, I won't make an exception.

However! This is merely my view on the matter, and I don't mean to shift the goal posts around and retract behind golden mean fallacy, which I am trying hard not to do, but I find these bands to just be pretty... well, lame.
Again you're failing to grasp the basics- none of these bands have 'made it', or are 'popular' or have sold loads of records, they all work regular jobs just like you- they've just had a little attention thrown on them by the magnifying glass of the internet. Your arguments about originality is your opinion which you are totally entitled to, the rest of your argument kinda sounds like jealously!

Judge not lest ye be judged!

I think you're putting words in my mouth. I don't know, I find a band appearing on the cover of Terrorizer magazine is a little more than a magnifying glass on the internet. Maybe it started out that way, but it's a bit bigger than that. Jealousy? Yeah.......

As jealous as I am of 3 Inches of Blood or Toxic Holocaust, no doubt!

No need to start getting nasty.

The_Elite · Post by **The_Elite** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:18 pm

I'm just making the point that aside from a personal taste thing the rest of your argument is completely irrational.

Black Axe · Post by **Black Axe** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:39 pm

Oh look! A striking bat, and a deceased example of some sort of large quadruped mammal. What to do?

FuneralCircle · Post by **FuneralCircle** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:49 pm

How droll...

Professor Black · Post by **Professor Black** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:57 pm

Speaking as someone who has contributed to the efforts of several bands, I tend to avoid these kinds of threads. But directed to nobody in particular I would add:

Nothing happens by accident. Nothing is given away for free. It's true that luck will play a role, but that is just a fact of human life, and there is no such thing as success without work.

Finally, whether or not a similar experience is among your own band's goals, until you have lived in a van for 5 weeks of summer in the USA, you're not in a position say anything about what Cauldron or Enforcer has earned. That, my friends, is honest, old-fashioned work. Accomplishing the work does not in itself entitle a band to further success so much as it represents a success in itself, which (also paradoxically) the media functions to attempt to celebrate as well as facilitate.

Anyway, almost all artists are amateurs. Collaboration and cooperation are, by nature, difficult. Therefore, it's hard for me not to be happy for any band that accomplishes even one of its goals.

jared · Post by **jared** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:03 pm

at this point, this declaration is essentially off topic, but let me say that the new enforcer album will easily be one of the best of the year. total barnstormer, and leagues better than the debut.

Dark Stranger · Post by **Dark Stranger** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:14 pm

Yeah, I agree with you entirely Jared. I think it's unfair to lump Enforcer in with this new wave lot, I mean Cauldron and White Wizzard and all are total bollocks.

Plus Enforcer at Up The Hammers this year was the most insane and energetic show I've ever seen.