Early Black Metal - what were the bands?

daniel · Post by **daniel** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:14 pm

I'll add Manowar. Bridge of Death is obviously black metal.

Buried By Time and Dust · Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:33 pm

What did Blasphemy (Can) release in 1984?Their first material was from '89 or not?

MetalizeR wrote:Black Shepherd (Bel) from 1983, Sargatanas (Mex) from 1986, Blasphemy (Can) from 1984, Acid (Bel) from 1980... to name a few.

Black Axe · Post by **Black Axe** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:33 pm

daniel wrote:I'll add Manowar. Bridge of Death is obviously black metal.

Hell, we missed the obvious, Black Sabbath.

And obviously, Hell.

nightsblood · Post by **nightsblood** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:51 pm

Daniel's already hit upon the central problem with 80s black metal; it's completely a lyrics-based genre. Thus any band, playing any style of heavy metal, is black metal as long as they have evil, satanic lyrics. The only question is whether the band has to consistently sing about nothing but satan, or can they do a song here and there and still fit in the genre?
This genre is ironic in a way b/c the other great example of a lyrical metal genre is White Metal, which lumps bands as dissimilar as Stryper and Mortification together simply because they both sing about Jesus.
Black Metal, as a distinct musical style, didn't really evolve until the Norwegian scene; they took the satanic imagery from earlier bands, but finally gave the evil theme a unique musical style. And that style seems to owe more to Bathory's 2nd (and maybe 3rd) albums than to anything Venom recorded, at least IMO.
Regarding the list:
-I didn't see NME 'unholy death' mentioned, but maybe I missed it?
-Same for Sacrifice 'crest of black' (Japan).
-If you want to include early Running Wild (which never sounded dark or evil at all to me) then early Iron Angel might also qualify.
-If you're gonna include bands that occasionally used the evil imagery or were widely considered to have a satanic streak, you have to consider including things like Motley Crue's 'Shout at the Devil'. Sounds ridiculous at first, but hey, there's a big whopping pentagram on a black cover with song titles like 'shout at the devil', 'god bless the children of the beast', and 'helter skelter', plus the backwards message chanting "jesus is satan" hidden in the grooves. The lyrics were rather ambivalent in their evilness, but Crue were considered pretty dark and wicked at the time by fans and concerned parents alike. Sure, they weren't the least bit serious about being satanic, but neither was Venom! So how do you include the essential Cronos and company while excluding Vince Neil and his glam posing posse?

Problems like this are why I don't like defining a band just by their lyrical content.
[/b]

Black Axe · Post by **Black Axe** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:03 pm

Helter Skelter, now you're just being ridiculously silly

nightsblood · Post by **nightsblood** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:13 pm

Black Axe wrote:Helter Skelter, now you're just being ridiculously silly

Yeah, the actually lyrics aren't evil or anything, but the song title has always invoked evil imagery, even when the Beatles did it, due to the Manson family connection. It highlights the problem: how evil do you have to be in order to qualify as black metal?
Can you use the imagery without the lyrics and qualify?
Are evil-sounding song titles with vague, ambivalent lyrics good enough?
Or do you need completely blasphemous lyrics a la Venom? And do you need them in every song? More than half? Minimum of three per album?

Black Axe · Post by **Black Axe** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:14 pm

You are just being ridiculously silly.

FuneralCircle · Post by **FuneralCircle** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:37 pm

Norwegian scene?

Nah, they just wanted to attempt their own BATHORY (and maybe SARCOFAGO), but to me it was all BATHORY and VENOM's doing.

I'd rather listen to the black metal of the 80s than the real 2nd wave black metal which I guess is BLACK METAL. If Mercyful Fate, Venom and Bathory are indeed black metal, then black metal is the best genre in the world.

Xecutioner · Post by **Xecutioner** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:41 pm

Buried By Time and Dust wrote:What did Blasphemy (Can) release in 1984?Their first material was from '89 or not?

MetalizeR wrote:Black Shepherd (Bel) from 1983, Sargatanas (Mex) from 1986, Blasphemy (Can) from 1984, Acid (Bel) from 1980... to name a few.

Yeah, Black Shepherd didn't release anything until 1985, and what did Sargatanas released in 1986?

Avenger · Post by **Avenger** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:42 pm

daniel wrote:I don't see how lyrical subject can create a separate subgenre, I don't think any of those bands are black metal. The '2nd wave' of BM is the only music I count as BM. Musically Venom, Running Wild and Mercyful Fate have nothing in common, neither does the 2nd wave of BM have anything in common with those bands musically.

I agree.

None of these bands fit into the sub-genre categorization of what's considered "Black Metal" by today’s standards.

My vote for this thread goes to it being the most confusing.

MetalizeR · Post by **MetalizeR** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:18 pm

Xecutioner wrote:
Buried By Time and Dust wrote:What did Blasphemy (Can) release in 1984?Their first material was from '89 or not?

MetalizeR wrote:Black Shepherd (Bel) from 1983, Sargatanas (Mex) from 1986, Blasphemy (Can) from 1984, Acid (Bel) from 1980... to name a few.
Yeah, Black Shepherd didn't release anything until 1985, and what did Sargatanas released in 1986?

my bad

omen of hate · Post by **omen of hate** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 11:32 pm

Avenger wrote:
daniel wrote:I don't see how lyrical subject can create a separate subgenre, I don't think any of those bands are black metal. The '2nd wave' of BM is the only music I count as BM. Musically Venom, Running Wild and Mercyful Fate have nothing in common, neither does the 2nd wave of BM have anything in common with those bands musically.
I agree.

None of these bands fit into the sub-genre categorization of what's considered "Black Metal" by today’s standards.

My vote for this thread goes to it being the most confusing.

I agree too. Strange and stupid thread. It seems that all bands that have satanic/occult lyrics are now labelled "early black metal"

Nathaniel · Post by **Nathaniel** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 11:38 pm

nightsblood wrote:Daniel's already hit upon the central problem with 80s black metal; it's completely a lyrics-based genre. Thus any band, playing any style of heavy metal, is black metal as long as they have evil, satanic lyrics. The only question is whether the band has to consistently sing about nothing but satan, or can they do a song here and there and still fit in the genre?
This genre is ironic in a way b/c the other great example of a lyrical metal genre is White Metal, which lumps bands as dissimilar as Stryper and Mortification together simply because they both sing about Jesus.
Black Metal, as a distinct musical style, didn't really evolve until the Norwegian scene; they took the satanic imagery from earlier bands, but finally gave the evil theme a unique musical style. And that style seems to owe more to Bathory's 2nd (and maybe 3rd) albums than to anything Venom recorded, at least IMO.
Regarding the list:
-I didn't see NME 'unholy death' mentioned, but maybe I missed it?
-Same for Sacrifice 'crest of black' (Japan).
-If you want to include early Running Wild (which never sounded dark or evil at all to me) then early Iron Angel might also qualify.
-If you're gonna include bands that occasionally used the evil imagery or were widely considered to have a satanic streak, you have to consider including things like Motley Crue's 'Shout at the Devil'. Sounds ridiculous at first, but hey, there's a big whopping pentagram on a black cover with song titles like 'shout at the devil', 'god bless the children of the beast', and 'helter skelter', plus the backwards message chanting "jesus is satan" hidden in the grooves. The lyrics were rather ambivalent in their evilness, but Crue were considered pretty dark and wicked at the time by fans and concerned parents alike. Sure, they weren't the least bit serious about being satanic, but neither was Venom! So how do you include the essential Cronos and company while excluding Vince Neil and his glam posing posse? Problems like this are why I don't like defining a band just by their lyrical content.
[/b]

Totally agree on that one!

FuneralCircle · Post by **FuneralCircle** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 11:50 pm

Really, I would argue that BATHORY was the first black metal band, how were they not? Of course SODOM and SARCOFAGO contributed as well, it's really a confusing mess.

Ah fuck it, anyone up for reviving the far more interesting White Metal thread?

omen of hate · Post by **omen of hate** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 11:59 pm

FuneralCircle wrote:Really, I would argue that BATHORY was the first black metal band, how were they not? Of course SODOM and SARCOFAGO contributed as well, it's really a confusing mess.

No, ACDC comes first. Angus Young is clearly using satanic imagery on "Highway to Hell" front-cover.