cool metal heads
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Anonymous
Yeah, I guess. I mean, I don't know what you'd like to call them if not metal.
Anonymous
Do I consider Metallica metal. Pfft.
... That's like asking if the Pope is catholic.
... That's like asking if the Pope is catholic.
Metallica helped define and inform wide swaths of modern metal. This is a silly question. If a band predates the subcategorization ad infinitum that modern metal fans insist on using to describe their individual bands, they're just "metal."
Incidentally, the two most annoying music fandom trends to me are (1) the entire subcategorization fetish that exists mainly within the metal community, and (2) the catch-all "alternative" genre.
For the former, the word "genre" should describe a wide group of loosely associated bands, and then use goddamn adjectives to describe the individual bands' sounds to someone like an adult. Any coked-out reject with a guitar and a finger twitch can be described as the best band in a genre consisting of that one band, when you add twelve qualifiers to the name of the genre.
For the latter, music is continually reinventing itself. Of course there are always going to be bands with an unorthodox style. They're not an alternative to anything but the same stale sounds of the older bands. Most music dubbed "alternative" should just be categorized as "rock" or "metal" with at most one qualifier in front of it. "Alternative" is a lazy genre classification for those unable to make a(n ultimately meaningless) decision about what genre to classify a band as, or for fans who like to feel different but the band is too mainstream to be considered indie or underground.
Most of this wasn't directed at you, by the way, just a general rant I've been meaning to let out.
Incidentally, the two most annoying music fandom trends to me are (1) the entire subcategorization fetish that exists mainly within the metal community, and (2) the catch-all "alternative" genre.
For the former, the word "genre" should describe a wide group of loosely associated bands, and then use goddamn adjectives to describe the individual bands' sounds to someone like an adult. Any coked-out reject with a guitar and a finger twitch can be described as the best band in a genre consisting of that one band, when you add twelve qualifiers to the name of the genre.
For the latter, music is continually reinventing itself. Of course there are always going to be bands with an unorthodox style. They're not an alternative to anything but the same stale sounds of the older bands. Most music dubbed "alternative" should just be categorized as "rock" or "metal" with at most one qualifier in front of it. "Alternative" is a lazy genre classification for those unable to make a(n ultimately meaningless) decision about what genre to classify a band as, or for fans who like to feel different but the band is too mainstream to be considered indie or underground.
Most of this wasn't directed at you, by the way, just a general rant I've been meaning to let out.
mjs211 said:Metallica helped define and inform wide swaths of modern metal. This is a silly question. If a band predates the subcategorization ad infinitum that modern metal fans insist on using to describe their individual bands, they're just "metal."
Incidentally, the two most annoying music fandom trends to me are (1) the entire subcategorization fetish that exists mainly within the metal community, and (2) the catch-all "alternative" genre.
For the former, the word "genre" should describe a wide group of loosely associated bands, and then use goddamn adjectives to describe the individual bands' sounds to someone like an adult. Any coked-out reject with a guitar and a finger twitch can be described as the best band in a genre consisting of that one band, when you add twelve qualifiers to the name of the genre.
For the latter, music is continually reinventing itself. Of course there are always going to be bands with an unorthodox style. They're not an alternative to anything but the same stale sounds of the older bands. Most music dubbed "alternative" should just be categorized as "rock" or "metal" with at most one qualifier in front of it. "Alternative" is a lazy genre classification for those unable to make a(n ultimately meaningless) decision about what genre to classify a band as, or for fans who like to feel different but the band is too mainstream to be considered indie or underground.
Most of this wasn't directed at you, by the way, just a general rant I've been meaning to let out.
1. their are a lot of subcategory's in metal.
2. it sounds as if you are into bands like pink floyd and the like.
(the truth is if metilica had to be a modern day band i highly doubt this band would make it into metal the genera)
lol
its okay man let it all out
Incidentally, the two most annoying music fandom trends to me are (1) the entire subcategorization fetish that exists mainly within the metal community, and (2) the catch-all "alternative" genre.
For the former, the word "genre" should describe a wide group of loosely associated bands, and then use goddamn adjectives to describe the individual bands' sounds to someone like an adult. Any coked-out reject with a guitar and a finger twitch can be described as the best band in a genre consisting of that one band, when you add twelve qualifiers to the name of the genre.
For the latter, music is continually reinventing itself. Of course there are always going to be bands with an unorthodox style. They're not an alternative to anything but the same stale sounds of the older bands. Most music dubbed "alternative" should just be categorized as "rock" or "metal" with at most one qualifier in front of it. "Alternative" is a lazy genre classification for those unable to make a(n ultimately meaningless) decision about what genre to classify a band as, or for fans who like to feel different but the band is too mainstream to be considered indie or underground.
Most of this wasn't directed at you, by the way, just a general rant I've been meaning to let out.
1. their are a lot of subcategory's in metal.
2. it sounds as if you are into bands like pink floyd and the like.
(the truth is if metilica had to be a modern day band i highly doubt this band would make it into metal the genera)
lol
its okay man let it all out
TLIFD said:1. their are a lot of subcategory's in metal.
2. it sounds as if you are into bands like pink floyd and the like.
(the truth is if metilica had to be a modern day band i highly doubt this band would make it into metal the genera)
lol
its okay man let it all out
Categorization is an abstract concept. There are exactly as many subgenres as you want there to be.
2. it sounds as if you are into bands like pink floyd and the like.
(the truth is if metilica had to be a modern day band i highly doubt this band would make it into metal the genera)
lol
its okay man let it all out
Categorization is an abstract concept. There are exactly as many subgenres as you want there to be.
TLIFD said:[quote-257114-mjs211]Metallica helped define and inform wide swaths of modern metal. This is a silly question. If a band predates the subcategorization ad infinitum that modern metal fans insist on using to describe their individual bands, they're just "metal."
Incidentally, the two most annoying music fandom trends to me are (1) the entire subcategorization fetish that exists mainly within the metal community, and (2) the catch-all "alternative" genre.
For the former, the word "genre" should describe a wide group of loosely associated bands, and then use goddamn adjectives to describe the individual bands' sounds to someone like an adult. Any coked-out reject with a guitar and a finger twitch can be described as the best band in a genre consisting of that one band, when you add twelve qualifiers to the name of the genre.
For the latter, music is continually reinventing itself. Of course there are always going to be bands with an unorthodox style. They're not an alternative to anything but the same stale sounds of the older bands. Most music dubbed "alternative" should just be categorized as "rock" or "metal" with at most one qualifier in front of it. "Alternative" is a lazy genre classification for those unable to make a(n ultimately meaningless) decision about what genre to classify a band as, or for fans who like to feel different but the band is too mainstream to be considered indie or underground.
Most of this wasn't directed at you, by the way, just a general rant I've been meaning to let out.
1. their are a lot of subcategory's in metal.
2. it sounds as if you are into bands like pink floyd and the like.
(the truth is if metilica had to be a modern day band i highly doubt this band would make it into metal the genera)
lol
its okay man let it all out
[/quote] maybe you're right, maybe metallica would never make it in todays industry, but we have to give them credit. They built up an entire generation of metalheads. For a while they were the spokesmen of the genre and they did it pretty fucking impressively if I say so myself.
Incidentally, the two most annoying music fandom trends to me are (1) the entire subcategorization fetish that exists mainly within the metal community, and (2) the catch-all "alternative" genre.
For the former, the word "genre" should describe a wide group of loosely associated bands, and then use goddamn adjectives to describe the individual bands' sounds to someone like an adult. Any coked-out reject with a guitar and a finger twitch can be described as the best band in a genre consisting of that one band, when you add twelve qualifiers to the name of the genre.
For the latter, music is continually reinventing itself. Of course there are always going to be bands with an unorthodox style. They're not an alternative to anything but the same stale sounds of the older bands. Most music dubbed "alternative" should just be categorized as "rock" or "metal" with at most one qualifier in front of it. "Alternative" is a lazy genre classification for those unable to make a(n ultimately meaningless) decision about what genre to classify a band as, or for fans who like to feel different but the band is too mainstream to be considered indie or underground.
Most of this wasn't directed at you, by the way, just a general rant I've been meaning to let out.
1. their are a lot of subcategory's in metal.
2. it sounds as if you are into bands like pink floyd and the like.
(the truth is if metilica had to be a modern day band i highly doubt this band would make it into metal the genera)
lol
its okay man let it all out
[/quote] maybe you're right, maybe metallica would never make it in todays industry, but we have to give them credit. They built up an entire generation of metalheads. For a while they were the spokesmen of the genre and they did it pretty fucking impressively if I say so myself.
