‹‹ Back to the Melodic metal forum Pages: 1 2 [3]
Posts: 84  
Users visited: 186  
Search this topic:  


The original post

Posted by on 22.05.2012 at 18:51
The great After Forever are no more. Bal-Sagoth are never going to release an album again (probably). Therion and Epica are but pale shadows of what they used to be and Nightwish's latest album might as well have been called Imaginaerum: Nightwish On Autopilot. On top of that, Xandria's latest and quite boring album is being hailed by many as some sort of savior of the genre. As a huge fan of symphonic metal and it's sub genres (symphonic power, death etc) I am worried. It seems that too many bands nowadays use symphonic elements not because they add much to the music, but to disguise the fact that they are just not very good metal bands. Anyone - and I mean that literally - can add a Carmina Burana ooh! aah! choir to the chorus of their frustratingly simplistic four chord song or attach some pointless violin melodies (if you can call them that) to their mediocre riffs. This takes no effort and far too many bands are doing it. In addition to that, most former great symphonic metal bands have either called it quits (the wise choice) or have gone downhill big time. I don't think anyone in their right mind would consider "Imaginaerum" or "Requiem For The Indifferent" to be in the same category of greatness as "Oceanborn" or "The Phantom Agony". So, what are your thoughts on this? Has symphonic metal become a cliche and if so, are there any bands out there who can bring dignity back to one of the most epic genres of music to ever exist?



Page 3 of 3

Angelic Storm
Melodious

Posts: 6656
From: UK

  06.07.2012 at 20:38
Written by Troy Killjoy on 06.07.2012 at 18:47

The thread wasn't set up to debate whether or not other genres have cliches - it was to specify whether or not symphonic metal had joined the likes of other established genres in terms of becoming a "tired out" sound. Cal (account deleted) is a big fan of symphonic metal and wanted to see what others thought of his opinion, it's not like he was trying to separate this problem from other genres.


I was merely agreeing with a point that had already been made in this thread. I did not divert the topic to include other genres, as it had already been diverted before I posted anything. I don't know why you waited for my post to highlight this...

As for whether symphonic metal itself has become "tired out", I'm not sure I can really give a truly informed opinion on that, as I'm not really much of a fan of that genre... I hear a lot of generic-ness in the genre, but then again, as I'm not a fan, I haven't really delved deeper into the genre to see if it's just the more mainstream symphonic bands that are generic, or whether the genre as a whole is the same...
Troy Killjoy
perfunctionist

Posts: 18673
From: Canada

  07.07.2012 at 06:40
Had nothing to do with me waiting on your post to mention that. It was the combination of posts diverting off topic and discussing other genres' stereotypes and cliches. I felt it necessary at that point to remind users that this thread was designed to discuss the theory of symphonic metal becoming a cliche rather than to compare the cliches of symphonic metal with the cliches of other genres. You can create a "genre cliche" thread for that discussion if you wish.

As for the topic, I agree with those who believe symphonic metal has become stale. I think with the exception of some lesser known bands (that I haven't ever bothered to listen to) the mainstream whole of symphonic metal has either been simply repeating itself or completely moving on from the origins of the sound to something completely different. Typically this "evolution" leads to pop music. Or at least pop-influenced metal.
----
Prettier than BloodTears.
BlueMobius
Ronin

Posts: 1251

Age: 27
From: USA

  07.07.2012 at 07:50
Written by Troy Killjoy on 07.07.2012 at 06:40

Had nothing to do with me waiting on your post to mention that. It was the combination of posts diverting off topic and discussing other genres' stereotypes and cliches.


I think it's perfectly OK to mention that other genres have cliches when you are making the point that, yeah, symphonic metal is cliched too and so what all metal is. I think that's perfectly on topic and relevant to the discussion of whether or not symphonic metal being cliched is necessarily that big of a deal.
TrollandDie

Posts: 272

Age: 19
From: Ireland

  11.07.2012 at 01:57
Overall I feel like it's moving into more avant-garde and extreme genres; Sigh and Fleshgod Apocalypse are good examples of this. It's adding weight to many of these groups' catalogues. To the more melodic side of things I feel it's not used properly by many bands, but not overused. If they executed it slightly better I wouldn't have a problem.

With regards to stuff like Nightwish or Epica: meh..... I think it's okay for the moment. I don't see a huge saturation (at least as much as more conventional genres such as thrash) but I feel like it's more of a stylisation to begin with, not a properly founded genre. Different forms of metal are affected by it and I feel that it's like technical metal: when done right it will turn heads, no matter how many wannabes jump on the bandwagon.
----
Hello, my name is Mr......Snrub and I think it would be a capital idea to invest the money back in the nuclear plant.
Anomalya

Posts: 1
From: New Zealand
  18.07.2012 at 13:18
Hmm...I am also a fan of many metal sub-genres, including symphonic power metal bands such as Nightwish and Epica, I don't think they are a cliche', but then I don't live in Europe or America. Metal fans are very clearly a minority where I live, and there are few metal fans here that would even know what symphonic metal is. Most metal fans here haven't moved beyond mainstream metal bands and metalcore bands. But what metal genre doesn't have it's own cliche's? Not many - four or five guys with long hair thrashing about and growling their displeasure at social conformity are far more of a cliche, but I still love it. I also think Imaginaerum is a great album, I was surprised to find out it was so unpopular. Still it doesn't affect my opinion of that album or make me want to conform to the most popular choice. Or any other album I happen to enjoy that isn't popular. So I guess that makes me crazy by your definition, I've got no problem with that.
Sybilline

Posts: 1
From: Philippines
  01.08.2012 at 09:56
Good point... I have noticed that myself, but I still like it. I just think "Oh I like this band more than I like this..." They are still good, though sometimes I think the keyboard/orchestra is doing too much of the work.
AngelofDeth
Cyborg Raptor

Posts: 968

Age: 24
From: USA

  01.06.2013 at 23:09
Completely agree with this. It seems that other bands are noticing how popular symphonic metal is and are trying to jump on the bandwagon and instead of adding to the genre of sympho metal are mostly just mimicing it. Xandria obviously comes to mind in being a Nightwish copy and also Shade Empire copying Dimmu/Fleshgod. There first albums got them into the industry but those bands latest have really propelled there career by copying symphonic elements of other bands and others are starting to take notice and doing the same.

I love symphonic metal and I do enjoy Xandria's and Shade's latest but to me they mostly just stave my appetite until the original sympho bands release something. Unfortunately as mentioned the big bands are fading in quality so sympho is becoming a stale genre, with people jumping on the bandwagon and half-assing their symphonic elements.

I find Folk Metal to have the exact same problem right now concerning copy-bands emerging and the big bands fading. These 2 genres are bound to crash and burn any time now...
----
pewpew.. gotcha
Metal_Elle

Posts: 56

Age: 30
From: France

  13.06.2013 at 17:25
For me, there are still some great symphonic bands. Kamelot used some orchestrations and this is not to make something commercial...I think symphonic metal is not dead. Maybe the symphony has been to much used in metal and today most of metalheads are looking for something more direct, "in your face"...And that's why symphonic metal bands are too underrated nowadays...Anyway, I've loved the last Xandria's album. It's very good. But the taste is something very personal and intimate...So, please, be objective and not subjective when you judge and album : that's not because you don't like an album that others won't appreciate it.
Jordan_Heliosaga

Posts: 17

Age: 28
From: USA

  29.09.2014 at 04:27
The original post on this thread hit the nail on the head in my opinion. A lot of symphonic metal bands seem to have become overly dependent on the bombast element and keyboard orchestration of the music which sometiemes makes the genre seem really insincere and void of emotive elements. In some instances, even when the orchestrations are beautiful and melodic it makes me feel like I'm listening to a soundtrack and not a metal band.

This is part of what formed my band, Heliosaga. The keys take a backseat to the guitars. Take a listen. I hope you like it.


----
Like female-fronted power metal? Check out Heliosaga.
heliosaga.com
https://www.facebook.com/Heliosaga
Ganondox

Posts: 386

Age: 18
From: USA

  29.09.2014 at 08:49
Written by Susan on 23.05.2012 at 19:20



Idea #2: The genre IS actually morphing, so much so that the quality bands get labels like "prog" or "power" instead of just "symphonic."



I'm going with this, I wouldn't say the new bands lack quality, they just play a different style of music, legitimizing symphonic metal as it's own genre rather than just power metal with female vocalists and slightly more keyboards and whatnot. If anything, I'd say this means it's now LESS of a cliche. I mean, I could make the same argument saying death metal has been crap since Death broke up because it's no longer like a heavier version of thrash. The new stuff appeals to different people, it has more of a pop than classical focus, but that doesn't mean it's horrible, it does what it does.
deadone
Mainstream Poser

Posts: 3946
From: Australia

  29.09.2014 at 09:34
Written by Ganondox on 29.09.2014 at 08:49


I'm going with this, I wouldn't say the new bands lack quality, they just play a different style of music, legitimizing symphonic metal as it's own genre rather than just power metal with female vocalists and slightly more keyboards and whatnot.



I'd call it pop with guitars personally...
Ganondox

Posts: 386

Age: 18
From: USA

  29.09.2014 at 11:01
Written by deadone on 29.09.2014 at 09:34

Written by Ganondox on 29.09.2014 at 08:49


I'm going with this, I wouldn't say the new bands lack quality, they just play a different style of music, legitimizing symphonic metal as it's own genre rather than just power metal with female vocalists and slightly more keyboards and whatnot.



I'd call it pop with guitars personally...


Pop with guitars:
deadone
Mainstream Poser

Posts: 3946
From: Australia

  Today at 02:36
Written by Ganondox on 29.09.2014 at 11:01


Pop with guitars:



Pop with distorted guitars then.


Really the likes of Epica etc are so far away from Metal. Same applies to most of the "Flower Metal" stuff.


Metal is by definition dischordant, aggressive, raw, anti-social. Even the Glam guys maintained a harder edge (though a lot of them played hard rock).
Ganondox

Posts: 386

Age: 18
From: USA

  Today at 03:01
Written by deadone on Today at 02:36

Written by Ganondox on 29.09.2014 at 11:01


Pop with guitars:



Pop with distorted guitars then.


Really the likes of Epica etc are so far away from Metal. Same applies to most of the "Flower Metal" stuff.


Metal is by definition dischordant, aggressive, raw, anti-social. Even the Glam guys maintained a harder edge (though a lot of them played hard rock).


Pop with distorted guitars:


Epica is pretty clearly metal, there is big difference between pop metal and just pop with distorted guitars. By definition, metal is just rock music with THICK distorted guitars and an emphatic beat. The combination is usually interpreted as being aggressive, but it depends on the context and the person listening to it. Anyway, I for one find modern symphonic metal to sound way more aggressive than glam metal, I don't hear any edge in glam whatsoever. I actually hear more edge in the hard rock leaning glam metal than in the more purely metal stuff.
deadone
Mainstream Poser

Posts: 3946
From: Australia

  Today at 03:12
Written by Ganondox on Today at 03:01


Epica is pretty clearly metal, there is big difference between pop metal and just pop with distorted guitars. By definition, metal is just rock music with THICK distorted guitars and an emphatic beat. The combination is usually interpreted as being aggressive, but it depends on the context and the person listening to it. Anyway, I for one find modern symphonic metal to sound way more aggressive than glam metal, I don't hear any edge in glam whatsoever. I actually hear more edge in the hard rock leaning glam metal than in the more purely metal stuff.


I hear no aggression in most symphonic metal.

My point about glam was that even as a virtually non-metal genre it can sound grittier and harder than symphonic metal (Guns N Roses, WASP, Skid Row are all ballsy "edgier" stuff).

Modern symphonic metal in my mind has a Eurovision Song Contest vibe about it - sugary, overproduced, poppy, hollow sounding, cliched. A lot of power metal has actually gone that way too - e.g. new Helloween spends a fair bit of time being a pop rock album.

In many ways I'd describe both symphonic and flower metal as metal for people who don't like metal.
Ganondox

Posts: 386

Age: 18
From: USA

  Today at 03:19
Written by deadone on Today at 03:12

Written by Ganondox on Today at 03:01


Epica is pretty clearly metal, there is big difference between pop metal and just pop with distorted guitars. By definition, metal is just rock music with THICK distorted guitars and an emphatic beat. The combination is usually interpreted as being aggressive, but it depends on the context and the person listening to it. Anyway, I for one find modern symphonic metal to sound way more aggressive than glam metal, I don't hear any edge in glam whatsoever. I actually hear more edge in the hard rock leaning glam metal than in the more purely metal stuff.


I hear no aggression in most symphonic metal.

My point about glam was that even as a virtually non-metal genre it can sound grittier and harder than symphonic metal (Guns N Roses, WASP, Skid Row are all ballsy "edgier" stuff).

Modern symphonic metal in my mind has a Eurovision Song Contest vibe about it - sugary, overproduced, poppy, hollow sounding, cliched. A lot of power metal has actually gone that way too - e.g. new Helloween spends a fair bit of time being a pop rock album.


"I hear no aggression in most symphonic metal. "

Seriously? Epica uses freaking thrash riffs and death growls. I wasn't even looking for an aggressive song, I just picked a random song by them. If you are going to say symphonic metal lacks aggression, at least pick something like Within Temptation,

I wouldn't call WASP or Guns N' Roses glam (heavy metal and hard rock respectively), and Skid Row was only glam on one album. This is what I consider glam metal to be:

Light melodic riffs, but more riff driven than hard rock is.
deadone
Mainstream Poser

Posts: 3946
From: Australia

  Today at 03:29
Written by Ganondox on Today at 03:19

Written by deadone on Today at 03:12

Written by Ganondox on Today at 03:01


Epica is pretty clearly metal, there is big difference between pop metal and just pop with distorted guitars. By definition, metal is just rock music with THICK distorted guitars and an emphatic beat. The combination is usually interpreted as being aggressive, but it depends on the context and the person listening to it. Anyway, I for one find modern symphonic metal to sound way more aggressive than glam metal, I don't hear any edge in glam whatsoever. I actually hear more edge in the hard rock leaning glam metal than in the more purely metal stuff.


I hear no aggression in most symphonic metal.

My point about glam was that even as a virtually non-metal genre it can sound grittier and harder than symphonic metal (Guns N Roses, WASP, Skid Row are all ballsy "edgier" stuff).

Modern symphonic metal in my mind has a Eurovision Song Contest vibe about it - sugary, overproduced, poppy, hollow sounding, cliched. A lot of power metal has actually gone that way too - e.g. new Helloween spends a fair bit of time being a pop rock album.


"I hear no aggression in most symphonic metal. "



The verses are aggressive - I'll give you that. The chorus's are Eurovision pop. The song confirms a lot of my opinions on the genre: sugary, overproduced, poppy, hollow sounding, cliched.


I actually thought they sounded like this:




From what I've heard of Nightwish and Within Temptation they're mainly along the gutless ones. Some Nightwish songs are nice.



As for glam, it was more a scene than a sound. Guns N Roses, Skid Row and WASP were all part of that scene. Even Motley Crue played more hard rock in their heyday than metal but they still got called Glam Metal.
Ganondox

Posts: 386

Age: 18
From: USA

  Today at 03:39
Written by deadone on Today at 03:29

Written by Ganondox on Today at 03:19

Written by deadone on Today at 03:12

Written by Ganondox on Today at 03:01


Epica is pretty clearly metal, there is big difference between pop metal and just pop with distorted guitars. By definition, metal is just rock music with THICK distorted guitars and an emphatic beat. The combination is usually interpreted as being aggressive, but it depends on the context and the person listening to it. Anyway, I for one find modern symphonic metal to sound way more aggressive than glam metal, I don't hear any edge in glam whatsoever. I actually hear more edge in the hard rock leaning glam metal than in the more purely metal stuff.


I hear no aggression in most symphonic metal.

My point about glam was that even as a virtually non-metal genre it can sound grittier and harder than symphonic metal (Guns N Roses, WASP, Skid Row are all ballsy "edgier" stuff).

Modern symphonic metal in my mind has a Eurovision Song Contest vibe about it - sugary, overproduced, poppy, hollow sounding, cliched. A lot of power metal has actually gone that way too - e.g. new Helloween spends a fair bit of time being a pop rock album.


"I hear no aggression in most symphonic metal. "



The verses are aggressive - I'll give you that. The chorus's are Eurovision pop. The song confirms a lot of my opinions on the genre: sugary, overproduced, poppy, hollow sounding, cliched.


I actually thought they sounded like this:




From what I've heard of Nightwish and Within Temptation they're mainly along the gutless ones. Some Nightwish songs are nice.



As for glam, it was more a scene than a sound. Guns N Roses, Skid Row and WASP were all part of that scene. Even Motley Crue played more hard rock in their heyday than metal but they still got called Glam Metal.


There is metal riffing and drumwork in the chorus as well, it's just less apparent, you probably won't notice it unless you are specifically looking for it. As for the other song, you can call it gutless if you want, but I maintain it's still significantly more aggressive than glam metal, even most traditional heavy metal. Definitely metal.

I use glam metal to refer to the sound of bands like Poison and Bon Jovi (before they went pure hard rock), and hair metal to refer to the scene. Not sure if I can count Twisted Sister as hair metal though, they dressed like girls, but in a different manner.
deadone
Mainstream Poser

Posts: 3946
From: Australia

  Today at 04:09
Written by Ganondox on Today at 03:39



There is metal riffing and drumwork in the chorus as well, it's just less apparent, you probably won't notice it unless you are specifically looking for it.


If you have to "look for" metal bits it's not metal. I hear bits in Dave Matthews Band that remind me of metal but it sure as hell is not metal (Don't Drink The Water has such tension and anger that most metal bands never achieve).


Quote:
As for the other song, you can call it gutless if you want, but I maintain it's still significantly more aggressive than glam metal, even most traditional heavy metal. Definitely metal.


No idea what heavy metal you're listening to.

And compared to most things metal since 1983, that Epica song is gutless pop both stylistically and vibe wise.


Quote:
I use glam metal to refer to the sound of bands like Poison and Bon Jovi (before they went pure hard rock), and hair metal to refer to the scene. Not sure if I can count Twisted Sister as hair metal though, they dressed like girls, but in a different manner.



You can use whatever classification you want, but there are generally accepted conventions.

And in the past scene was important - hence grunge, glam or NWOBHM none of which had a well defined sound. This was the case especially before the genres became fully defined.
Ganondox

Posts: 386

Age: 18
From: USA

  Today at 04:18
Written by deadone on Today at 04:09

Written by Ganondox on Today at 03:39



There is metal riffing and drumwork in the chorus as well, it's just less apparent, you probably won't notice it unless you are specifically looking for it.


If you have to "look for" metal bits it's not metal. I hear bits in Dave Matthews Band that remind me of metal but it sure as hell is not metal (Don't Drink The Water has such tension and anger that most metal bands never achieve).


Quote:
As for the other song, you can call it gutless if you want, but I maintain it's still significantly more aggressive than glam metal, even most traditional heavy metal. Definitely metal.


No idea what heavy metal you're listening to.

And compared to most things metal since 1983, that Epica song is gutless pop both stylistically and vibe wise.


Quote:
I use glam metal to refer to the sound of bands like Poison and Bon Jovi (before they went pure hard rock), and hair metal to refer to the scene. Not sure if I can count Twisted Sister as hair metal though, they dressed like girls, but in a different manner.



You can use whatever classification you want, but there are generally accepted conventions.

And in the past scene was important - hence grunge, glam or NWOBHM none of which had a well defined sound. This was the case especially before the genres became fully defined.


1. You don't need to look for metal in the song, only in the chorus because the symphonic elements are drowning it out. The song doesn't stop being metal, it would be insane to think the song isn't metal just because it has a lighter chorus.
2. No, the real question is what type of pop are you listening to. It's got obvious metal riffing and whatnot, so it's metal. Pop and metal aren't mutually exclusive.
3. The convention I use is the standard, as much as there is a standard. All music calls glam pop metal, but it still stands that there is a clear musical genre associated with the scene even if not all the bands in the scene had said sound.
deadone
Mainstream Poser

Posts: 3946
From: Australia

  Today at 05:02
Written by Ganondox on Today at 04:18


1. You don't need to look for metal in the song, only in the chorus because the symphonic elements are drowning it out. The song doesn't stop being metal, it would be insane to think the song isn't metal just because it has a lighter chorus.


I agreed the verse is metal. The chorus is not.

Quote:
2. No, the real question is what type of pop are you listening to. It's got obvious metal riffing and whatnot, so it's metal. Pop and metal aren't mutually exclusive.


Man I'll crank stuff like Lady Gaga and Dido every one in a while or when the wife takes control of the stereo. And I do have a soft spot for watching that Eurovision drivel that so many symphonic/power metal bands seem to be aspiring to soundwise.



Quote:
3. The convention I use is the standard, as much as there is a standard. All music calls glam pop metal, but it still stands that there is a clear musical genre associated with the scene even if not all the bands in the scene had said sound.



Convention you use is not standard - Skid Row, Guns N Roses and WASP are all universally regared as part of glam scene.
Ganondox

Posts: 386

Age: 18
From: USA

  Today at 06:32
Written by deadone on Today at 05:02

Written by Ganondox on Today at 04:18


1. You don't need to look for metal in the song, only in the chorus because the symphonic elements are drowning it out. The song doesn't stop being metal, it would be insane to think the song isn't metal just because it has a lighter chorus.


I agreed the verse is metal. The chorus is not.

Quote:
2. No, the real question is what type of pop are you listening to. It's got obvious metal riffing and whatnot, so it's metal. Pop and metal aren't mutually exclusive.


Man I'll crank stuff like Lady Gaga and Dido every one in a while or when the wife takes control of the stereo. And I do have a soft spot for watching that Eurovision drivel that so many symphonic/power metal bands seem to be aspiring to soundwise.



Quote:
3. The convention I use is the standard, as much as there is a standard. All music calls glam pop metal, but it still stands that there is a clear musical genre associated with the scene even if not all the bands in the scene had said sound.



Convention you use is not standard - Skid Row, Guns N Roses and WASP are all universally regared as part of glam scene.


1. If the song is metal, the chorus is metal, it's pointless to make such a distinction as the song is meant to be regarded as a whole, not overanalyzed into parts which cannot exist on their own. You can probably find parts that are way less metal in most metal songs.
2. I don't know Dido, but Lady Gaga doesn't sound anything like symphonic metal, though she is one of the better current pop stars. Eurovision I can see some similarities with, the essential difference being the lack of metal in Eurovision songs, which makes a pretty big difference.
3. I wouldn't say they are universally regarded as part of the glam scene, I've seen Guns N' Roses separated from it a lot, and grouped with the scene like once or twice, but regardless, the convention I use is standard when making the distinction between the scene and the sound, and the distinction often needs to be made, like when describing the difference between Skid Rows first album and later material, or how Guns N' Roses shook hard rock up with their more aggressive sound. Regardless, the fact stands that their are heavier and lighter glam and symphonic bands, whether or not Guns N' Roses is glam does not change the fact Poison is undeniably glam, and most symphonic metal is still heavier than they are.
deadone
Mainstream Poser

Posts: 3946
From: Australia

  Today at 07:49
Written by Ganondox on Today at 06:32

1. If the song is metal, the chorus is metal, it's pointless to make such a distinction as the song is meant to be regarded as a whole, not overanalyzed into parts which cannot exist on their own. You can probably find parts that are way less metal in most metal songs.



Totally agree.


Written by Ganondox on Today at 06:32

2. I don't know Dido, but Lady Gaga doesn't sound anything like symphonic metal, though she is one of the better current pop stars. Eurovision I can see some similarities with, the essential difference being the lack of metal in Eurovision songs, which makes a pretty big difference.


Of course Lady Gaga sounds a lot better and a lot more unique than most symphonic metal.

There's been a few songs in Eurovision that have actually had that same "underlying heavy guitars"



Quote:

3. I wouldn't say they are universally regarded as part of the glam scene, I've seen Guns N' Roses separated from it a lot, and grouped with the scene like once or twice,


I got into Guns N Roses in 1992. They were always labelled as part of glam scene.

I only saw them being separated out in the modern age when all of a sudden everything was being classified according to the exact sound they played. And that separation was only by some of the whatever fans they had on forums. The media generally just refers to them as Guns N Roses these days without ascribing any genre, other than the occassional reference to them as a rock band (meaningless in itself as even Metallica gets called a rock band).

I suspect this "precise categorisation" on internet plus universal accessibility to music has destroyed concept of geographic or trend scenes. Under these modern age principles, NWOBHM, glam and grunge don't really exist. Even Nu-metal becomes problematic.



Quote:
but regardless, the convention I use is standard when making the distinction between the scene and the sound, and the distinction often needs to be made, like when describing the difference between Skid Rows first album and later material, or how Guns N' Roses shook hard rock up with their more aggressive sound.


I've never seen this distinction of yours in the press.

As stated some fans do it.

But then Skid Row and Guns N Roses are so generally uncool in metal circles, one doesn't see much discussion on them. Skid Row's conversion to more harder edged stuff is well known, but even then "Slave To The Grind" was rooted in hard rock and had glam metal vibes all through it (ballads, lyrically, and overall sound).

Glam Metal was more than just Poison or Bon Jovi. The early glam was far more extreme too - be it Motley Crue's early stuff or W.A.S.P. or Twisted Sister or whatever. Increasing commercial viability brought forward the Poison's, Warrants, Bon Jovi just like commercial viability of Nu Metal led to Linkin Park or Trash Metal resulted in Black album, Countdown To Extinction etc.

And back to topic - the Nightwish and Within Temptations are the commercialised versions of what Therion started two decades ago. Hence the cliche and increasing pop orientation of many of these bands (check out new Within Temptation) and lesser affiliation with metal. Indeed a big chunk of European mainstream metal has gone down this path.
Ganondox

Posts: 386

Age: 18
From: USA

  Today at 10:41
Written by deadone on Today at 07:49

Written by Ganondox on Today at 06:32

1. If the song is metal, the chorus is metal, it's pointless to make such a distinction as the song is meant to be regarded as a whole, not overanalyzed into parts which cannot exist on their own. You can probably find parts that are way less metal in most metal songs.



Totally agree.


Written by Ganondox on Today at 06:32

2. I don't know Dido, but Lady Gaga doesn't sound anything like symphonic metal, though she is one of the better current pop stars. Eurovision I can see some similarities with, the essential difference being the lack of metal in Eurovision songs, which makes a pretty big difference.


Of course Lady Gaga sounds a lot better and a lot more unique than most symphonic metal.

There's been a few songs in Eurovision that have actually had that same "underlying heavy guitars"



Quote:

3. I wouldn't say they are universally regarded as part of the glam scene, I've seen Guns N' Roses separated from it a lot, and grouped with the scene like once or twice,


I got into Guns N Roses in 1992. They were always labelled as part of glam scene.

I only saw them being separated out in the modern age when all of a sudden everything was being classified according to the exact sound they played. And that separation was only by some of the whatever fans they had on forums. The media generally just refers to them as Guns N Roses these days without ascribing any genre, other than the occassional reference to them as a rock band (meaningless in itself as even Metallica gets called a rock band).

I suspect this "precise categorisation" on internet plus universal accessibility to music has destroyed concept of geographic or trend scenes. Under these modern age principles, NWOBHM, glam and grunge don't really exist. Even Nu-metal becomes problematic.



Quote:
but regardless, the convention I use is standard when making the distinction between the scene and the sound, and the distinction often needs to be made, like when describing the difference between Skid Rows first album and later material, or how Guns N' Roses shook hard rock up with their more aggressive sound.


I've never seen this distinction of yours in the press.

As stated some fans do it.

But then Skid Row and Guns N Roses are so generally uncool in metal circles, one doesn't see much discussion on them. Skid Row's conversion to more harder edged stuff is well known, but even then "Slave To The Grind" was rooted in hard rock and had glam metal vibes all through it (ballads, lyrically, and overall sound).

Glam Metal was more than just Poison or Bon Jovi. The early glam was far more extreme too - be it Motley Crue's early stuff or W.A.S.P. or Twisted Sister or whatever. Increasing commercial viability brought forward the Poison's, Warrants, Bon Jovi just like commercial viability of Nu Metal led to Linkin Park or Trash Metal resulted in Black album, Countdown To Extinction etc.

And back to topic - the Nightwish and Within Temptations are the commercialised versions of what Therion started two decades ago. Hence the cliche and increasing pop orientation of many of these bands (check out new Within Temptation) and lesser affiliation with metal. Indeed a big chunk of European mainstream metal has gone down this path.


Not going to argue with most of this, just saying that there is at least a loose sound associated with NWOBHM, grunge, glam, and nu metal, though NWOBHM doesn't really work as a genre. I'd consider Quiet Riot's Metal Health to be the first true glam album as something distinct from previous metal, but I'm not expert on the scene or the genre.

"I've never seen this distinction of yours in the press." That's because the press has a million different ways of dealing with any genre until they finally agree on something. The 80's are long gone, so glam is regarded as genre. While I do think the internet has changed the idea of geographic scenes because it lead to internet based scenes and easier flow of memetic information internationally, this talk of "precise categorization" is nonsense, I think you just don't understand how genres work and just obsess over the labels some people use. If anything dividing by regional scenes is more obsessive categorization. The fact is the broader metal scene is different now, and it's not a single united front, so the way of categorization also changed.

Taking influence from Therion and moving towards a poppier sound does not make the sound a cliche, that's just how things evolve. It's only a cliche if it DOESN'T evolve and is just a gimmick kept for tradition. Again, might as well say death metal is a cliche, I say there is more base to that. " Indeed a big chunk of European mainstream metal has gone down this path." Well, I like pop metal, so I'm not complaining. IMO European metal tends to be much better than American metal, pop or no pop. American bands tend to focus more on aggression, while Europeans bands focus more on melody and whatnot, and I find the latter much more interesting.

Advertise on Metal Storm
Pages: 1 2 [3]


Login or register to post here.



Similar topics

Forum Topic Similarity Started
Melodic metal forum Suncrown 4.5 13.10.2013 by Suncrown
Melodic metal forum ShadowIcon 4.5 22.09.2011 by aslanpeika
Melodic metal forum Favorite symphonic metal albums from 2012 4.5 03.10.2012 by Susan
Promotion and Ads Advent Sorrow - Australian Symphonic Black Metal 3 16.08.2012 by Xeravia
General metal forum Metal musicians who were, has been, and currently being prisoners 3 27.09.2009 by BestMetalstormer