15yo "Masters Of Metal"...?

Helm · Post by **Helm** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:31 pm

The only way I am interested to classify someone's love of HM is to see if they know the lyrics, they know the music they love intimately and they have assigned personal meaning to these pieces of art they say they love. They can explain to me what it makes them feel and how it has made their life better. That's all. If they can do that while being 15 and having 10.000 records or if they can do that at 40 years old with a collection of priceless vinyl is completely not interesting to me. I've met both for example, a 19 year old girl whom had considered her HM intimately, and a 40 year old 'record collector' that couldn't tell you what HM was about fundamentally. So I don't judge by age.

I get very excited when I meet someone with a sincere love of Heavy Metal as a statement, not just as a sound. We all start with sound. Heavy guitars and double-bass drums and high pitched screams. But after these years I've spent listening to HM, I can no longer be satisfied just by the form, I need to appreciate the content and I am looking for people that appreciate it too. You can spot these people not by how uber-obscure their listening habits are, but by ethos and emotional depth.

There is no such thing as going through HM too quickly. If someone is curious and apt and it suits their idiom, within a year of careful listening they would have understood what HM is about on a bare level and I could talk with them about it for lengths of time happily. There is however the case that some people listen to HM in a wrong way. They SAY they understand what they listen to and yes, I accept that it might spark in them some rudimentary emotion related to the form, but they haven't really spent the time with the content. These people can be 15 or 30, doesn't matter.

Some people in this thread justify their more honest HM love by saying that they have had to endure hardship to get to the tapes and the rare vinyls. Sacrifice of time does create bonds, I'm sure. But for me it's not so much how difficult it is to find a record, but what you do with it. My favourite record is 'Awaken the Guardian', it can be found in any good record store. I didn't have to cross unknown lands or swim an ocean to find this LP and I wouldn't justify its value by how much I had to suffer for it in any case. I played it for years and at some point it opened up to me. It wasn't a painful proccess, it was just about patience. These kids with 10,000 mp3s, some of them will have the patience to weed out the good stuff from that selection in the next 5 years, some of them not. If they didn't have this esoteric patience to sit with a record and listen to it 100 times, then it wouldn't help them at all to be more 'serious' about their HM habits if it was difficult to find records like in the 1980s.

In effect, the ease of getting material today helps those potential serious listeners a great deal without hurting anyone. There'll always be posers, who cares. The idea is for the serious people to have the ability to listen to ye olde obscure heavy metal without sacrificing absurd amounts of time or money.

Fils Du Metal · Post by **Fils Du Metal** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:42 pm

I'm 26 and I don't have any Queensryche or Accept LPs.
I wouldn't even know what Queensryche sounds like.

Something I would never understand (I will get 40 this year...) but probably it is like writte already: Everybody walks his own path in and through metal. Most of my age would NEVER understand how you can overgo Accept's "Balls to the Wall" or still better the older stuff. But this is because we were young when this was the latest and best metal.

Actually I would expect you to listen new Pantera and Trivum stuff (not offending but most young kids listen to this). Jumping to the other end is strange (Lord Ryur) but that is the orld of information. Google wins, in some hundred years no one can think himself or store info anymore in brain. Everything is typed automatically in Google..My prediction

ION BRITTON · Post by **ION BRITTON** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:03 pm

MercyfulUngol wrote: This may get me kicked off this board, but seriously, this is ridiculous...

Ion, no offense but you really do sound like those teens that flaunt their superiority (regardless if you've been listening to metal in 1788 when "No one else was"). To me it seems like you're the one showing off their "Metal knowledge" and whatnot... I mean read that post you just made: "I reckon you haven't heard a single note from SACRED WARRIOR, OMEGA POINT, SCARLET RAYNE or LETHAL either. That would make sense...not being interested in 'RYCHE sound at all."

Like how is that any more acceptable? Honestly...
How is the dude spinning Priest testing a stupid young kid's knowledge, any better than the kid flaunting? The pot calling the kettle black. You may know more, but that doesn't change the fact that you're still being a douchebag like he is.

So long as someone's heart is in the right place, why should it matter to you?

First and foremost, you are not going to be kicked out of the forum because we don't share the same opinion. Stuff like that happens in other forums...

Secondly, you misunderstood my post. I didn't mention all those band names to tomas to show him that I know them and he doesn't. I just wanted to say that since all those bands were hugely influenced by Queensryche, it is highly doubtful (but not impossible) for a man who doesn't even know how Queensryche sound like to have heard them and much more being a fan of them. I don't know what were you thinking and interpreted my post the way you did, but i guess it's my average english that doesn't help much when trying to say exactly the things i have to say. I will try better next time, and, you, please, try to interpret the things other people say in this forum, not by giving them the most negative meaning possible, but by giving them meaning that goes according to the ''spirit'' of their posts as a whole.

It's a huge contradiction to say that following a specific path is progression. When I'm old and decrepit is it ok to start becoming arrogant and research more bands? How is being an elitist ok when you're older, but unacceptable when you're young? Either way you're an arrogant asshole.

The word ''specific'' needs to be discussed and i can't say i understand 'patas question when he wonders ''what the fuck are the basics?''. I don't see how a 14 yo can identify with PENTAGRAM's sound if he hasn't heard, understood and quite possibly loved the sound of BLACK SABBATH. How likely is for someone who's 2 months into metal to understand and love a band like SLAUTER XSTROYES? MAybe kids are born more clever and more metallic today, so they don't have to listen to all those important bands that shaped the metal sound and they can go straight into the depths of obscure metal and enjoy their music…

We are not criticising the fact that some people who are 15 years younger than some of us know the same obscure bands we do, but the fact that they haven't studied the basics before moving into the obscure metal territory. AGAIN, this doesn't mean that they SHOULD NECESSARILY FUCKING WORSHIP IRON MAIDEN NO MATTER WHAT if they like OMEN or that THEY SHOULD KNOW BY HEART EVERY BLACK SABBATH SONG EVER RECORDED if they listen to CIRITH UNGOL, but the fact that at least they must be familiar with the most important part of the work of the major bands, whose sound is very related to this or that obscure band.

My reference to JUDAS PRIEST or ACCEPT was an example, i could start mentioning many other equally important bands that those obsure metal kids hadn't heard. It's not a big deal if you're 16 and you can't recognise a PRIEST classic.But if it happens not to able to recognise a PRIEST track, not having heard Powerslave, Balls to wall, Angel Witch or Heaven and Hell or trying to undestand ''why the singer changed his voice so much in The Number of the beast?'' while still insisting to be a Heathen's rage or a Virtue die-hard, then there's something wrong.

MercyfulUngol · Post by **MercyfulUngol** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:32 pm

ION BRITTON wrote:
MercyfulUngol wrote: This may get me kicked off this board, but seriously, this is ridiculous...

Ion, no offense but you really do sound like those teens that flaunt their superiority (regardless if you've been listening to metal in 1788 when "No one else was"). To me it seems like you're the one showing off their "Metal knowledge" and whatnot... I mean read that post you just made: "I reckon you haven't heard a single note from SACRED WARRIOR, OMEGA POINT, SCARLET RAYNE or LETHAL either. That would make sense...not being interested in 'RYCHE sound at all."

Like how is that any more acceptable? Honestly...
How is the dude spinning Priest testing a stupid young kid's knowledge, any better than the kid flaunting? The pot calling the kettle black. You may know more, but that doesn't change the fact that you're still being a douchebag like he is.

So long as someone's heart is in the right place, why should it matter to you?
First and foremost, you are not going to be kicked out of the forum because we don't share the same opinion. Stuff like that happens in other forums...

Secondly, you misunderstood my post. I didn't mention all those band names to tomas to show him that I know them and he doesn't. I just wanted to say that since all those bands were hugely influenced by Queensryche, it is highly doubtful (but not impossible) for a man who doesn't even know how Queensryche sound like to have heard them and much more being a fan of them. I don't know what were you thinking and interpreted my post the way you did, but i guess it's my average english that doesn't help much when trying to say exactly the things i have to say. I will try better next time, and, you, please, try to interpret the things other people say in this forum, not by giving them the most negative meaning possible, but by giving them meaning that goes according to the ''spirit'' of their posts as a whole.
It's a huge contradiction to say that following a specific path is progression. When I'm old and decrepit is it ok to start becoming arrogant and research more bands? How is being an elitist ok when you're older, but unacceptable when you're young? Either way you're an arrogant asshole.
The word ''specific'' needs to be discussed and i can't say i understand 'patas question when he wonders ''what the fuck are the basics?''. I don't see how a 14 yo can identify with PENTAGRAM's sound if he hasn't heard, understood and quite possibly loved the sound of BLACK SABBATH. How likely is for someone who's 2 months into metal to understand and love a band like SLAUTER XSTROYES? MAybe kids are born more clever and more metallic today, so they don't have to listen to all those important bands that shaped the metal sound and they can go straight into the depths of obscure metal and enjoy their music…

We are not criticising the fact that some people who are 15 years younger than some of us know the same obscure bands we do, but the fact that they haven't studied the basics before moving into the obscure metal territory. AGAIN, this doesn't mean that they SHOULD NECESSARILY FUCKING WORSHIP IRON MAIDEN NO MATTER WHAT if they like OMEN or that THEY SHOULD KNOW BY HEART EVERY BLACK SABBATH SONG EVER RECORDED if they listen to CIRITH UNGOL, but the fact that at least they must be familiar with the most important part of the work of the major bands, whose sound is very related to this or that obscure band.

My reference to JUDAS PRIEST or ACCEPT was an example, i could start mentioning many other equally important bands that those obsure metal kids hadn't heard. It's not a big deal if you're 16 and you can't recognise a PRIEST classic.But if it happens not to able to recognise a PRIEST track, not having heard Powerslave, Balls to wall, Angel Witch or Heaven and Hell or trying to undestand ''why the singer changed his voice so much in The Number of the beast?'' while still insisting to be a Heathen's rage or a Virtue die-hard, then there's something wrong.

Makes a lot more sense now that it's all explained. It first seemed like you were on an attack trying to slash at the inexperienced who are just enthusiastic, and to me that seemed like a big contradiction. I completely understand where you're coming from now - I agree to a T actually... Sorry for the misinterpretation, hahaha.

'pataphysicien · Post by **'pataphysicien** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:30 pm

wow, seems like the board is really acting up with all those strange double posts etc. had my share of that in another thread.

I don't see how a 14 yo can identify with PENTAGRAM's sound if he hasn't heard, understood and quite possibly loved the sound of BLACK SABBATH. How likely is for someone who's 2 months into metal to understand and love a band like SLAUTER XSTROYES? MAybe kids are born more clever and more metallic today, so they don't have to listen to all those important bands that shaped the metal sound and they can go straight into the depths of obscure metal and enjoy their music…

We are not criticising the fact that some people who are 15 years younger than some of us know the same obscure bands we do, but the fact that they haven't studied the basics before moving into the obscure metal territory. AGAIN, this doesn't mean that they SHOULD NECESSARILY FUCKING WORSHIP IRON MAIDEN NO MATTER WHAT if they like OMEN or that THEY SHOULD KNOW BY HEART EVERY BLACK SABBATH SONG EVER RECORDED if they listen to CIRITH UNGOL, but the fact that at least they must be familiar with the most important part of the work of the major bands, whose sound is very related to this or that obscure band.

again though I fail to see the point in holding on to basics as a concept. why could someone not legitimately love Pentagram without having heard Sabbath? I doubt that that particular case happens so often, but the point stands. if the guy, having listened only to Pentagram, tries to convince you that he knows more than you and you happen to have listened not only to Pentagram, but (behold!) also Sabbath, there you go: stupid of him to claim that. but how do you measure love for or understanding of music? do you need to know the lyrics by heart, do you need to know what the dudes listened to, where they lived, what their mothers dogs maiden name was? is there an essence buried in recordings? that model of communication is so far from reality I can't believe it. each connection to, say, a record is special and individual. doesn't mean we can't talk about it to each other, but it does mean that there are infinite ways to decode music, or any kind of "text" for that matter.

also 'obscure' and 'basics' change. only because bands were less known or appreciated in the past doesn't mean their not semi-household names with the "kids" today. (why is it always the "kids" btw?) goes for a lot of what still fares for 'obscure' and 'cult' metal. which of course detracts nothing from the music. sometimes I get the feeling that people are so obsessed with their own version of fandom, the scene idealized, past and present, the proper way to listen to music, even the fucking order in which you're supposed to develop opinions (fucking hell am I dreaming?) that it's just beyond them to concede to each his own. sometimes "different" is not "worse", y'know? obsessing over it will just make you bitter. random example: only beacuse an older guy was into Maiden (whom I for example have no real connection to, wow sacrilege! plus I listen to Pentagram more than Sabbath, oh no he di'nt!) and then got into Manilla Road in the end of the nineties because the internet made obscure things less so, why should my chronology be the same? because I wouldn't "get" the music in some funny essentialist way? I can't help it, it's a funny relic, but this strange fright of "posers", the ones "dirty" and not "proper", the ones that are "shallow" is really not a sign of maturity for me. I like to play with it as well now and then, but when you try to build a authoritative "this is how the world is son" version of "heavy metal - the only proper way" you just stand there a bit weird in my eyes. waving the banner, fine - starting to compile specific "do's and don't list" for everyone else in all fucking seriousness, weird dude. postulating final truths about malleable forms of cultural expressions is not the kind of stuff I want to spend my life on, nor do I wnat it to be the only card to bet a feeling of "identity" or "personal integrityandwhatnot" on, in all seriousness. by all love for what I call metal, I'm not an essentialist. and I don't expect others to conform to some single canon way of being metal. that being said I have no problem saying I listen to true metal. might be a bit different from yours though.

NOW I'm looking forward to responses

tomas · Post by **tomas** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:37 pm

@Fils du metal:
I didn't just jump into metal listening to Lord Ryur

Like I said in another post, I started listening to all the famous bands 14 years ago (Metallica, Slayer, ...). Some of those things were not my cup of tea (for example: Accept). And gradually, I started becoming interested in obscure metal.
And I didn't get to know those obscure bands by going to google and typing in 'rare metal' or 'obscure cult metal'. I got to know obscure bands by reading reviews, participating on this forum and having discussions about bands, downloading and buying, reading interviews, talking about metal with some of my older friends, buying a record because the cover looked cool, ...

'pataphysicien · Post by **'pataphysicien** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:43 pm

tomas wrote:@Fils du metal:
I didn't just jump into metal listening to Lord Ryur
Like I said in another post, I started listening to all the famous bands 14 years ago (Metallica, Slayer, ...). Some of those things were not my cup of tea (for example: Accept). And gradually, I started becoming interested in obscure metal.

one side of me gets it and is in that mindset as well, the other side is wondering why on earth someone would have to justify himself there. even if it's in a humourous way.

MEXDefenderOfSteel · Post by **MEXDefenderOfSteel** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:49 pm

wtf!i tried posting like an hour ago n it didnt go through!

anyways

1.im 20, and im just starting "my journey" through obscure metal,i mean im still learning a lot, and if i dont own the record then is PATHETIC to keep screaming "obscure" bands names out loud when i dont even have a singel record of them (lots of internet kids do this,and theres no value in this at least for my eyes) i prefer having just 30 original records,than a hundred of random songs in my "i tunes library"(and i repeat i have dowloaded 3 bands now from Poisonoise,2 of them already known by me)

2.I cant stand dowloading music, i have this feeling of "emptiness",plus,isnt this about beng patient,money comes n goes,i have lost plenty of opportunities in buying what i want...i do prefer reading the book step by step than going straight to the end of it

MassOfKthulu · Post by **MassOfKthulu** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:55 pm

I went
13-15 y.o. -Metallica Slayer
15-18 Thrash/Death/Doom/'normal US' metal (Riot,Gargoyle,Helstar,Omen)
18-30 gave up on thrash/death,started collecting vinyl and started trying to complete my knowledge of US and Euro metal (to the extend that it can completed from books,internet,research on lists etc)
This is normal to me.this was before the internet.
today's youngsters jumping straight on the mp3 demo scene and being 17 year olds full of obscure nwobhm demos on mp3s simply blows for me.i have a lot of rare vinyl,a ton of tapes and 300gigabytes of mp3s,i know all worlds of metal formats,and they all have their use.
thing is,if you let the 'i just downloaded the last brad pitt movie and the last lost episode' attitude corrode you,you're done with metal,ur just a downloader.

Vinny Black · Post by **Vinny Black** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:00 pm

Either way you're an arrogant asshole.

Ha-ha-ha, I wonder if such verbalization ever took place in, for instance, ancient Greece...
-Hey Plato, drop dead!!
To add to the actual topic: From the start it's really just a feeling, so...Go figure!

ION BRITTON · Post by **ION BRITTON** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:06 pm

'pataphysicien wrote: again though I fail to see the point in holding on to basics as a concept. why could someone not legitimately love Pentagram without having heard Sabbath? I doubt that that particular case happens so often, but the point stands. if the guy, having listened only to Pentagram, tries to convince you that he knows more than you and you happen to have listened not only to Pentagram, but (behold!) also Sabbath, there you go: stupid of him to claim that. but how do you measure love for or understanding of music? do you need to know the lyrics by heart, do you need to know what the dudes listened to, where they lived, what their mothers dogs maiden name was? is there an essence buried in recordings? that model of communication is so far from reality I can't believe it. each connection to, say, a record is special and individual. doesn't mean we can't talk about it to each other, but it does mean that there are infinite ways to decode music, or any kind of "text" for that matter.

also 'obscure' and 'basics' change. only because bands were less known or appreciated in the past doesn't mean their not semi-household names with the "kids" today. (why is it always the "kids" btw?) goes for a lot of what still fares for 'obscure' and 'cult' metal. which of course detracts nothing from the music. sometimes I get the feeling that people are so obsessed with their own version of fandom, the scene idealized, past and present, the proper way to listen to music, even the fucking order in which you're supposed to develop opinions (fucking hell am I dreaming?) that it's just beyond them to concede to each his own. sometimes "different" is not "worse", y'know? obsessing over it will just make you bitter. random example: only beacuse an older guy was into Maiden (whom I for example have no real connection to, wow sacrilege! plus I listen to Pentagram more than Sabbath, oh no he di'nt!) and then got into Manilla Road in the end of the nineties because the internet made obscure things less so, why should my chronology be the same? because I wouldn't "get" the music in some funny essentialist way? I can't help it, it's a funny relic, but this strange fright of "posers", the ones "dirty" and not "proper", the ones that are "shallow" is really not a sign of maturity for me. I like to play with it as well now and then, but when you try to build a authoritative "this is how the world is son" version of "heavy metal - the only proper way" you just stand there a bit weird in my eyes. waving the banner, fine - starting to compile specific "do's and don't list" for everyone else in all fucking seriousness, weird dude. postulating final truths about malleable forms of cultural expressions is not the kind of stuff I want to spend my life on, nor do I wnat it to be the only card to bet a feeling of "identity" or "personal integrityandwhatnot" on, in all seriousness. by all love for what I call metal, I'm not an essentialist. and I don't expect others to conform to some single canon way of being metal. that being said I have no problem saying I listen to true metal. might be a bit different from yours though.

Oh god, i don't know where to start from...

To cut it short...mathetically, anything is possible. You may listen to Cirith Ungol before anything else and love them and Maiden can be a band you discovered after 10 years of intense metal research. I'm talking based on what i've experienced so far (i'm fucking repeating myself 'cause i see that my posts are not interpreted the way i'd like to): How many people (ok, let's not insult the ''kids'') you know that are worhipping Pentagram without having heard a single note of Black Sabbath? I don't know anyone, young or old. How many people you know who entered the world of Heavy Metal because the first band they listened was MAnilla Road and their Open the gates LP? I don't know anyone.

My point is that in order to understand and appreciate (attention: not necessarily love) certain bands, you ''should'' have listened to some others first. Not necessarily all of them, but some of them definitely. A bit tired to elaborate further more on this, hope will do some other time. Call me essentialist or immature or whatever, but that's what i believe 100%.

About the chronological order thing...i understand what you're saying, but let's not start talking as if Maiden were contemporary with Elvis Presley and MAnilla Road the band of a totally different day and age...

MEXDefenderOfSteel · Post by **MEXDefenderOfSteel** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:14 pm

agreed with ION, i would personally feel dumb claiming to love Bulldozer or AtWar, without having a single notion of whats Motorhead or Venom...i have always thought that if you yell to the world "im the shit,the metal master" n you dont have a clue in Deep Purple,Zeppelin or Sabbath(not saying you have to like them..) then your so full of shit...geez we are such "essentalists" dude

'pataphysicien · Post by **'pataphysicien** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:55 pm

ION BRITTON wrote:
'pataphysicien wrote: again though I fail to see the point in holding on to basics as a concept. why could someone not legitimately love Pentagram without having heard Sabbath? I doubt that that particular case happens so often, but the point stands. if the guy, having listened only to Pentagram, tries to convince you that he knows more than you and you happen to have listened not only to Pentagram, but (behold!) also Sabbath, there you go: stupid of him to claim that. but how do you measure love for or understanding of music? do you need to know the lyrics by heart, do you need to know what the dudes listened to, where they lived, what their mothers dogs maiden name was? is there an essence buried in recordings? that model of communication is so far from reality I can't believe it. each connection to, say, a record is special and individual. doesn't mean we can't talk about it to each other, but it does mean that there are infinite ways to decode music, or any kind of "text" for that matter.

also 'obscure' and 'basics' change. only because bands were less known or appreciated in the past doesn't mean their not semi-household names with the "kids" today. (why is it always the "kids" btw?) goes for a lot of what still fares for 'obscure' and 'cult' metal. which of course detracts nothing from the music. sometimes I get the feeling that people are so obsessed with their own version of fandom, the scene idealized, past and present, the proper way to listen to music, even the fucking order in which you're supposed to develop opinions (fucking hell am I dreaming?) that it's just beyond them to concede to each his own. sometimes "different" is not "worse", y'know? obsessing over it will just make you bitter. random example: only beacuse an older guy was into Maiden (whom I for example have no real connection to, wow sacrilege! plus I listen to Pentagram more than Sabbath, oh no he di'nt!) and then got into Manilla Road in the end of the nineties because the internet made obscure things less so, why should my chronology be the same? because I wouldn't "get" the music in some funny essentialist way? I can't help it, it's a funny relic, but this strange fright of "posers", the ones "dirty" and not "proper", the ones that are "shallow" is really not a sign of maturity for me. I like to play with it as well now and then, but when you try to build a authoritative "this is how the world is son" version of "heavy metal - the only proper way" you just stand there a bit weird in my eyes. waving the banner, fine - starting to compile specific "do's and don't list" for everyone else in all fucking seriousness, weird dude. postulating final truths about malleable forms of cultural expressions is not the kind of stuff I want to spend my life on, nor do I wnat it to be the only card to bet a feeling of "identity" or "personal integrityandwhatnot" on, in all seriousness. by all love for what I call metal, I'm not an essentialist. and I don't expect others to conform to some single canon way of being metal. that being said I have no problem saying I listen to true metal. might be a bit different from yours though.

ION BRITTON wrote:Oh god, i don't know where to start from...

To cut it short...mathetically, anything is possible. You may listen to Cirith Ungol before anything else and love them and Maiden can be a band you discovered after 10 years of intense metal research. I'm talking based on what i've experienced so far (i'm fucking repeating myself 'cause i see that my posts are not interpreted the way i'd like to): How many people (ok, let's not insult the ''kids'') you know that are worhipping Pentagram without having heard a single note of Black Sabbath? I don't know anyone, young or old. How many people you know who entered the world of Heavy Metal because the first band they listened was MAnilla Road and their Open the gates LP? I don't know anyone.
agreed absolutely. but what if you knew someone? and btw, sorry if the post came across at somewhat fierce. it was more meant to get reactions to a certain argument than and not to step on someones toes!

ION BRITTON wrote:My point is that in order to understand and appreciate (attention: not necessarily love) certain bands, you ''should'' have listened to some others first. Not necessarily all of them, but some of them definitely. A bit tired to elaborate further more on this, hope will do some other time. Call me essentialist or immature or whatever, but that's what i believe 100%.
I'd say "should" as well, but more because I'd suspect that he/she would also like those other bands. I'm just saying you're demanding a bit much if you want people to "understand and appreciate" certain bands, if that means that you expect their and your conclusions to end up matching. and I didn't call you anything and I don't plan to do so either

ION BRITTON wrote:About the chronological order thing...i understand what you're saying, but let's not start talking as if Maiden were contemporary with Elvis Presley and MAnilla Road the band of a totally different day and age...
by chronology I was only referring to the order of a fan being introduced to different bands. for me there is no absolute, right way there. I personally jump back and forth so often. in my own life though I like to see people being attentive to the histories of music. I certainly couldn't imagine not being that. but I won't tell others they're only half as good in their love and devotion to a certain band if they're not aware of the bands genealogy. there are always so many blind spots anyways, even for the "veterans".

@ mex: yelling "im the shit,the metal master" is never justified. unless one is ridiculously drunk while staggering to or from the stage. or maybe as the first thing you scream after opening the door to some jehovah's witnesses. or maybe some of the wandering encyclopedia dudes here could really pull it off on a t-shirt. I'd actually like a corrosseum shirt saying exactly that, unchanged spelling and I am seriously not joking or being condescending.

'pataphysicien · Post by **'pataphysicien** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:56 pm

^^I'm a quoting genius. I think I'll leave it that way though

GJ · Post by GJ » Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:57 pm

There are probably as many levels of being taken in by, or simply enjoying a good Heavy Metal tune as there are people finding that particular tune worthy of listening to. Still to a point I kind of agree with ION B. Sense of history has a point when it comes to really understand something. World war two wouldn't make much sense would you call it World War One. And being able to put things in a historical perspective does not take away your individual ability to experience a direct emotional impact of certain individuals' efforts in making Heavy Metal music, but it may add to the experience. Take Metal's No Sin by Slauter Xtroyes for example. Would this track mean the same to me if I would not know it was recorded by an American band in 1983? Would those completely insane jumps from relentless roaring to high-pitched screaming cause the same feelings of unease and complete fulfilment if I weren't aware what mainstream Heavy Metal were about at the same time? No, it probably would not, It would still be as great an emotional piece of music for sure and just as original. But had it been recorded in, say, 1986 it would not have had the same historical value as some of it's ingredients were used to a wider extent by then, albeit not mixed the same way (still hasn't happened).

Would I appreciate Iron Maiden as much without later having taken a look back in time and checking out early Wishbone Ash stuff (which I absolutely adore)? I don't think so. Still, to this day I hear Iron Maiden in Wishbone Ash and not the other way around, which may or may not piss the hard core of the Ash fans off, I guess. But I was ten years old when The Number of the Beast Was released upon the world and taking a lot of us now oldies for a lifetime ride of Heavy Metal. Wishbone Ash wasn't really an issue until I was seventeen or something and I can't do anything about this and I would be stupid trying to make excuses because of it.