Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.12.2014 at 13:10

Written by Ganondox on 11.12.2014 at 08:31

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 09.12.2014 at 02:04

I Always find it funny that people want to exclude Death from polls like this since most of Death's albums aren't death metal at all. Only their first two/three were truly death metal and the third one was already mediocre death metal compared to its contemporaries.

Well I guess that just means most people realize progressive metal is better than death metal.

Death's first two are vastly superior to anything they did afterwards and especially when compared to that piece of **** called The Sound Of Perseverance.

I agree with your 2 posts. Their first two are impressive, Spiritual Healing is ok, Human is a step up again but not like the first two and after that it went downhill. I have all Death albums but only listen to Scream Blody Gore, Leprosy and Human occasionally.

Scream Bloody Gore is simply one of the bests.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.12.2014 at 13:10

Written by Ganondox on 11.12.2014 at 08:31

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 09.12.2014 at 02:04

I Always find it funny that people want to exclude Death from polls like this since most of Death's albums aren't death metal at all. Only their first two/three were truly death metal and the third one was already mediocre death metal compared to its contemporaries.

Well I guess that just means most people realize progressive metal is better than death metal.

Death's first two are vastly superior to anything they did afterwards and especially when compared to that piece of **** called The Sound Of Perseverance.

The Sound Of Perseverance is WAY better than their early material, not that their early material is bad. There is a reason it's the 12th highest rated album on the site, so regardless of whether you personally like the album, you can't really say it's a piece of shit.

Written by deadone on 12.12.2014 at 07:27

Written by Ganondox on 12.12.2014 at 07:11


The Sound Of Perseverance is WAY better than their early material, not that their early material is bad. There is a reason it's the 12th highest rated album on the site, so regardless of whether you personally like the album, you can't really say it's a piece of shit.

People here also dig Agalloch, Insomnium and Judas Priest's Painkiller.

On a serious note, I hate Chuck Schuldiner's vocals with a vengeance. The albums after Leprosy sound awful to my ears due to those irritating vocals and ever gutless production. And something about the sound in Leprosy puts me off that too - it gives me a headache everytime even though I like the music.

About the only album of theirs I can enjoy is Scream Bloody Gore and I find that to be an average affair for the most part (despite it's massive influence).

In any case most Death albums are as Death Metal as Load and Reload are Thrash Metal.

Quote:
Well I guess that just means most people realize progressive metal is better than death metal.

Just means most people don't like Death Metal. It's far more abrasive and far less accessible than progressive stuff.

Agalloch is amazing, incredibly unique band with a beautiful sound. Insommiuim isn't unique, but still a very good melodeath band. And while it's not my person favorite Judas Priest album, Painkiller is still a great album, and there is no real reason to disparage it. I'm more of the impression that you just hate good music. I really don't why you direct so many comments towards me as it's pretty clear we have like 180 tastes in metal, you like groove and death, I like symphonic and progressive.

I really do not see how Death's later material isn't death metal except from people who hate creativity. Sure, the vocals are higher pitched, but so what? Spirit Crusher for one doesn't sound anything like thrash metal, nor much like progressive metal, sounds much more like death metal. I think we people need to argue that Death's later material is progressive thrash rather than technical death is when genre classifications has gone to far.

Is death metal less accessible than progressive metal? For the most part, though I wouldn't say Death's latter material is really any more accessible than their early material. Does that mean death metal is musically superior to progressive metal? Only is you say "singing" in monotone is superior to singing a melody. Anyway, that comment on progressive metal being better wasn't serious, but while you are free to prefer whatever music you like, you'd be hard pressed to argue death metal is musically superior to progressive metal except by your own tastes. The point I was making was that the comment on Death not being death metal and whatnot is ridiculous and self-defeating.

Anyway, this is way off topic, this isn't a Death hate thread, it's a best death metal artist thread.

Quote:

Written by deadone on 12.12.2014 at 08:13

Written by Ganondox on 12.12.2014 at 08:01

I really do not see how Death's later material isn't death metal except from people who hate creativity.

Doesn't sound anything like Death Metal. And I like creativity in Death Metal - Atheist, Pestilence and Edge of Sanity are some of my fave bands so lay off the patronising remarks. I also liked Death n Roll which was seen as quite an affront by most DM purists.

Quote:
I think we people need to argue that Death's later material is progressive thrash rather than technical death is when genre classifications has gone to far.

They are prog thrash not prog death. And even the Thrash bits were getting few and far between.


[quote[Is death metal less accessible than progressive metal? For the most part, though I wouldn't say Death's latter material is really any more accessible than their early material.

More accessible:
1. Music less aggresive
2. Polished sound
3. More melodic
4. More mainstream sounding

Quote:

Does that mean death metal is musically superior to progressive metal?

Never said that.

Quote:
Only is you say "singing" in monotone is superior to singing a melody.

Never said that.

Quote:
you'd be hard pressed to argue death metal is musically superior to progressive metal except by your own tastes.

Never said that.

Quote:
The point I was making was that the comment on Death not being death metal and whatnot is ridiculous and self-defeating.

Death was Death Metal and then moved on to other genres.

Quote:
it's a best death metal artist thread.

And Death ain't it IMO.

1. I actually find Death's later material to be more aggressive.
2. Well, you said the production was worse.
3. Yes, it is, that is true.
4. No, it's not. It's not mainstream sounding at all.

And yes, Death is the best death metal band.

Written by Ganondox on 12.12.2014 at 08:59

And yes, Death is the best death metal band.

But Death is EXCLUDED.

Written by Koen Smits on 12.12.2014 at 10:33

Written by Ganondox on 12.12.2014 at 08:59

And yes, Death is the best death metal band.

But Death is EXCLUDED.

Which is is why I picked Bolt Thrower for the thread.

Written by deadone on 12.12.2014 at 11:17

Written by Ganondox on 12.12.2014 at 08:59


1. I actually find Death's later material to be more aggressive.

I don't. It's also not as abrasive.

Quote:

2. Well, you said the production was worse.

Worse as in more polished and removing the balls out of the sound and especially the guitars. Lots of people like it, I don't.

It's personal opinion. I also like Pig Destroyer's Bookburner's sound because it actually guts the sound much like Death. For me it worked for Pig Destroyer. For me it didn't work on Death.

Quote:
4. No, it's not. It's not mainstream sounding at all.

Compared to Scream Bloody Gore or Leprosy or indeed most of the Floridan Death Metal and general Death Metal scene it is more mainstream sounding.

Compared to a lot of more faster, abrasive thrash it's mainstream.

Indeed strip the vocals and it's progressive metal - look ay Control Denied which is Death with clean vocals

Quote:
And yes, Death is the best death metal band.

I didn't take you for a lover of their first three death metal albums. Hell I didn't take you for a death metal fan at all.

Personally I prefer Edge of Sanity, Carcass, Bolt Thrower, Gorefest, Entombed, Atheist, Morbid Angel, Pestilence, Malevolent Creation, Kataklysm (2 albums), Bloodbath, Autopsy, Vader, the one DM Fear Factory album, Illdisposed, Immolation, some Decapitated, now Job For A Cowboy, Cattle Decapitation, Aborted, Ghoul, Frightmare, some Grave, some Unleashed, occasional Napalm Death DM stuff, Morgoth, Morta Skuld, My Dying Bride's As The Flower Withers, Cannibal Corpse, occassionally Deicide etc etc etc all a lot more than 90% of Death's output.

1. There is more to aggression to just having abrasive production, though I personally find a more polished production to sound more aggressive as each beat is more emphasized. I find it more aggressive for the partly reason I find mathcore more aggressive than grindcore, more technical rhythms resulting in a more chaotic sound and there is generally so much more going on. I also find the vocals more aggressive.
4. No, it's not. Earlier Death uses more typical metal structures, while the latter material uses more progressive structures, which are far less mainstream. Longer, more complex songs is not mainstream at all. How abrasive and fast something are are some of the most superficial factors in categorizing something's sound. I think the fact that Cannibal Corpse has WAY more mainstream popularity than Death is all that needs to be said about Death's latter material having a more mainstream sound.

"Indeed strip the vocals and it's progressive metal - look ay Control Denied which is Death with clean vocals" I have heard Controlled Denied, and there is a larger difference between Controlled Denied and later Death than just the clean vocals. Control Denied is precisely why latter Death is death metal.

I actually do like Death's first two albums, though Spiritual Healing is more meh. I just like their latter albums more. And no, I'm not a death metal fan, I thought that was perfectly clear, I just like some death metal. I will say the thing that annoys me the most about death metal fans (not saying that most death metal fans do this or anyone specific, just it sometimes comes up) is when they act like their music is the most extreme around (it isn't) and then act like their musical tastes are superior on that virtue.

Written by deadone on 15.12.2014 at 00:06

Written by Ganondox on 13.12.2014 at 06:38

1. There is more to aggression to just having abrasive production, though I personally find a more polished production to sound more aggressive as each beat is more emphasized. I find it more aggressive for the partly reason I find mathcore more aggressive than grindcore, more technical rhythms resulting in a more chaotic sound and there is generally so much more going on. I also find the vocals more aggressive.

Fine as that's your preference.

Quote:
4. No, it's not. Earlier Death uses more typical metal structures, while the latter material uses more progressive structures, which are far less mainstream. Longer, more complex songs is not mainstream at all.

Polished, more melodic and toned down heaviness makes it instantly moer mainstream/accessible than primitive, raw/badly produced stuff without melody.

Quote:

How abrasive and fast something are are some of the most superficial factors in categorizing something's sound.

Funny cause those are two key elements defining a lot of metal sbugenres - Doom, Black, Thrash/Speed etc etc.

Quote:

I think the fact that Cannibal Corpse has WAY more mainstream popularity than Death is all that needs to be said about Death's latter material having a more mainstream sound.

Cannibal Corpse initially was a gimmick. Death has been dead for 13 years so modern comparisons are moot.

If anything over the years I've noticed more people get into Death than Cannibal Corpse. Death seems to be one of those "gateway" bands into more extreme stuff.

Quote:
"Indeed strip the vocals and it's progressive metal - look ay Control Denied which is Death with clean vocals" I have heard Controlled Denied, and there is a larger difference between Controlled Denied and later Death than just the clean vocals. Control Denied is precisely why latter Death is death metal.

Hilarious. That's like saying Load/Reload is Thrash cause Lulu is not.

Stuff like Symbolic is at best melodic DM. Most of it is more proggy thrash. Sound of Perserverence transcends both Thrash and Death Metal - extreme progressive like Opeth, albeit a different take on the genre.

Quote:
I actually do like Death's first two albums, though Spiritual Healing is more meh. I just like their latter albums more. And no, I'm not a death metal fan, I thought that was perfectly clear, I just like some death metal.

So your comments that "Death is best Death Metal band" is actually the equivalent of me saying "Cradle of Filth are the best Black Metal band."

Quote:
I will say the thing that annoys me the most about death metal fans (not saying that most death metal fans do this or anyone specific, just it sometimes comes up) is when they act like their music is the most extreme around (it isn't) and then act like their musical tastes are superior on that virtue.

I never did any of that.

Extremity is an irrelevance IMO and I listen to more mainstream crap than most people on this board. I get more joy out of Hellyeah or Metallica's Load than I do out of 99% of extreme stuff.

But Death's later period stuff is no longer death metal. Not a criticism either. It's like Pestilence transcended death metal on Spheres. The end result is awesome but it's no longer DM. The only difference is I like Spheres and don't like Death.

"Polished, more melodic and toned down heaviness makes it instantly moer mainstream/accessible than primitive, raw/badly produced stuff without melody." No, it doesn't. That's only holds ceteris paribus, which does not apply hear as there are many things about later Death which are less accessible than older Death. And old Death definitely has melody, just not as much as The Sound of Perseverance, and the heaviness isn't toned down on later Death releases.

How is it NOT death metal, other than sound like Control Denied?

"Most of it is more proggy thrash." I'm not hearing that at all. It's only thrash as much as early Death is thrash.

"extreme progressive like Opeth" This is not mutually exclusive to Death metal. I'd say Death's later material much closer to tech-death than it is to Opeth.

"So your comments that "Death is best Death Metal band" is actually the equivalent of me saying "Cradle of Filth are the best Black Metal band."" No, as Cradle of Filth is nowhere near analogous to Death. And I did say I like early Death, I just like Spiritual Healing less, and the latter albums more as I like progressive metal more than plain-old death metal.

"I never did any of that." Never said you did.

Seriously? Could you two at least trim the quote chains?

It's not popcorn but I'm literally eating Doritos while reading that

Quote:

Written by deadone on 16.12.2014 at 00:51

Written by Ganondox on 15.12.2014 at 11:34


"Polished, more melodic and toned down heaviness makes it instantly moer mainstream/accessible than primitive, raw/badly produced stuff without melody." No, it doesn't. That's only holds ceteris paribus, which does not apply hear as there are many things about later Death which are less accessible than older Death. And old Death definitely has melody, just not as much as The Sound of Perseverance, and the heaviness isn't toned down on later Death releases.

Shit yeah it's more accessible. People dig "melodic, polished stuff." Look at the top 200 here or what the biggest selling names in the genre are.

Quote:
How is it NOT death metal, other than sound like Control Denied?

Death Metal has guttural vocals (later Death has thrashy rasps), Death metal is not melodic (latter Death is), death metal is generally more raw, more rythmic etc (later Death is the opposite).

[quote[
"Most of it is more proggy thrash." I'm not hearing that at all. It's only thrash as much as early Death is thrash.

I'm hearing melodic death at most on stuff like Symbolic. SoP sounds like toned down tech Thrash.

Quote:
"extreme progressive like Opeth" This is not mutually exclusive to Death metal. I'd say Death's later material much closer to tech-death than it is to Opeth.

Closer but that doesn't make it death metal.

Quote:

"I never did any of that." Never said you did.

Sorry but you have a tendency to misrepresent what people say.

Techthrash is not a genre, techdeath is.

Written by Ganondox on 16.12.2014 at 03:26

Techthrash is not a genre, techdeath is.

Meshuggah, Coroner, Watchtower, Vektor, Toxik, Aspid and so on would disagree.

Arguments about Death are so 2010, get with the times people

Anyway, my pick for best death metal band ever is Disembowelment, although I feel like Immolation are worth mentioning here too, by virtue of being the best death metal band that actually has more than one album.

Written by Ganondox on 16.12.2014 at 03:26



Techthrash is not a genre, techdeath is.

Techthrash/techno thrash is a genre. And has been around since the mid-Eighties, so even before there was such a thing as techdeath.

Between deadone v ganondox quote chain madness here and jooe v ganondox's prolonged off-topic in School of Rock v Spinal Tap ready to just start deleting posts left and right.

take it to tells, ffs, and leave the rest of us out of it.

we don't care about random extended-dance remix arguments.



and Bolt Thrower wins. Not only for forging their own sound and pretty much improving release to release, but also calling it quits while on top rather than churning out a sub-par album to cash in on the name.

Written by deadone on 16.12.2014 at 15:04


Always respected Bolt Thrower for not releasing another subpar album after the brilliant Those Once Loyal.

I love Bolt Thrower but they had too many mediocre albums to be my most favourite DM band. Mercernary and Honour,Valor, Pride are particularly average sounding at best.

No one with any output is beyond mediocrity or missteps. Admittedly, I own all their output except those two albums.

Written by [user id=101272] on 16.12.2014 at 03:35

Written by Ganondox on 16.12.2014 at 03:26

Techthrash is not a genre, techdeath is.

Meshuggah, Coroner, Watchtower, Vektor, Toxik, Aspid and so on would disagree.

It's a style, not a genre, at least not a widely recognized one. There is a difference. Anyway, do any of those bands actually identify as "techthrash"? Pretty sure most of them would just call themselves metal. At this point it's all subjective as there is no universal standard.

Anyway, enough with this off topic, more on the off topic about how Bolt Thrower is awesome.

Written by deadone on 17.12.2014 at 05:21

Written by Ganondox on 17.12.2014 at 05:11


It's a style, not a genre, at least not a widely recognized one. There is a difference. Anyway, do any of those bands actually identify as "techthrash"? Pretty sure most of them would just call themselves metal. At this point it's all subjective as there is no universal standard.

I suspect most metal bands would call themselves just metal.

Technical thrash does have it's own sound. Try listening to some.

It's funny you've become such an authority on tech death v tech thrash given I remembered you posting this in the "Metal Supergenres" thread (emphasis is mine):

http://www.metalstorm.net/forum/topic.php?topic_id=51318&board_page=4

Written by Ganondox on 01.07.2014 at 13:26

I can tell the difference between normal death and thrash fine, but I don't really see any difference between techdeath and technical thrash, it's all just complex extreme stuff to me. At least I can tell the difference between djent, mathcore, and techdeath.

There is more to a genre then having it's own sound, it has to be agreed on as being a genre. Smashing two genres together does not automatically make a new genre. The point is Atheist, Revocation, Death, and whatnot are all clearly the same genre, so insisting it's techthrash rather than techdeath is pointless, it's all technical, fast, dark metal with screamed vocal. At that point the difference really doesn't matter. As for bands like Watchtower without an overt death metal influence, they are used called progressive metal or thrash metal. I didn't see any point in calling Death techthrash rather than techdeath then, and I don't know. This is way off topic and I'm so done with this conversation, genre wars are so freaking pointless. The only reason I moved to Bolt Thrower is because people like you insist various death metal subgenres aren't proper death metal.

Written by deadone on 17.12.2014 at 05:46

Written by Ganondox on 17.12.2014 at 05:35

This is way off topic and I'm so done with this conversation, genre wars are so freaking pointless.

Yet you always indulge in them and start them (not saying I don't).

Quote:
As for bands like Watchtower without an overt death metal influence, they are used called progressive metal or thrash metal.

Tech thrash predates tech death.

Quote:
The only reason I moved to Bolt Thrower is because people like you insist various death metal subgenres aren't proper death metal.

In case you hadn't noticed we've all been throwing "genre bender" bands ala Carcass, Edge of Sanity, Aborted and tech dceath ala Psycroptic and Cryptopsy.

The key is they're retained DM for most part.


EDY: You also never answered my question: do you actually listen to Death Metal?

Marcel started this one with the snide about Death.

"Tech thrash predates tech death." In the fact that bands mixed progressive and thrash metal, yes, the term technical thrash might as be older as used as an adjective, but in the widespread recognition as a distinctive genre, no, as techthrash still doesn't have widespread recognition as a distinctive.

Fine I'll go back to Cattle Decapitation, Bolt Thrower is still good though. Again, not a fan of death metal, so most the bands I like are genre bender and usually further away from death metal. Plenty of techdeath and melodeath I like more than Cattle Decap, but I'm not sure if I can pick a single one which would still qualify as death metal.

"EDY: You also never answered my question: do you actually listen to Death Metal?" Of course I listen to death metal, otherwise how would I be able to listen any favorite death metal bands? Do I listen to it regularly? Well, I probably at least incidentally listen to at least one death metal song a day, but I don't actively seek it out or otherwise actively listen to much of it. Unless you count melodeath as death metal, then I listen to plenty of it.

Written by deadone on 17.12.2014 at 06:26

Written by Ganondox on 17.12.2014 at 06:24

Again, not a fan of death metal,

Why vote then? I wouldn't vote on "best post/sludge/atmospheric metal" precisely cause I'm not a fan.

Why vote? Why not? Are only death metal fans allowed to have favorite death metal bands? No one said only people are general fans of the genre are allowed to vote? Just because I'm not a fan of genre in general doesn't mean I can't like some stuff in it.

Written by deadone on 17.12.2014 at 06:34

Written by Ganondox on 17.12.2014 at 06:28


Why vote? Why not? Are only death metal fans allowed to have favorite death metal bands? No one said only people are general fans of the genre are allowed to vote? Just because I'm not a fan of genre in general doesn't mean I can't like some stuff in it.

Sure. But I really get the feeling you don't really even listen to the stuff you claim ala Bolt Thrower. Your main interest seems to be genre definition - you do it with death and you're doing it with tech thrash.

It's not like "hey I really enjoy those massive riffs on Realms of Chaos". It's more "I think it's death/grind/ <insert genre> metal."

And it's your main point of discussion on extreme metal. Yet on alternative stuff (which is clearly your true love) you post a lot more about how much you enjoy the music (though genre definition creeps in).


EDIT: Oh and and if you're into Death Metal at any level, you're a Death Metal fan. How can you like a death metal band and then not be a fan by default?

Okay, fine, I like Bolt Thrower, but I'm not an active fan of them or anything, I've just heard some songs by them and thought "hey, this sounds good". I don't frequently seek out their songs, but I like what I hear. I legitimately like the music, while I like categorizing things (categorizing is fun, arguing to death about categorizations is dumb), I'm not saying I like the bands because I like slapping labels onto them, it's because I like the music. Anyway, would you say someone is a metal fan even if the like The Final Countdown, but nothing else really? I'm an active fan of In Flames and to a lesser degree some progdeath like Gojira, but I don't believe either would really count as death metal in a strict sense, so I didn't mention them.

Going to listen to the Malevolent Creation song now.

EDIT: Listening to it now, liking the massive riffs in it. The basslick at the end of the solo is sick. Not liking the monotonous chugging in the verses as much though, but it's only part of the song. I think what I like the most might be the cover art though, like really, what is the cool thing?

Written by deadone on 17.12.2014 at 07:09

Written by Ganondox on 17.12.2014 at 07:05


Okay, fine, I like Bolt Thrower, but I'm not an active fan of them or anything, I've just heard some songs by them and thought "hey, this sounds good". ./..Anyway, would you say someone is a metal fan even if the like The Final Countdown, but nothing else really?

When you say it like that, then I can see how someone can not be a fan of something whilst still casually liking it.

No idea about Gojira as to what subgenre they really are but there's definite death metal in there.

Quote:

Going to listen to the Malevolent Creation song now.

I'll be amazed if you like it. Early 1990s Florida Death Metal with a typical Scott Burns production job.

I really don't care that much about production either way (at least in riff oriented songs like this, I care more when say the vocals clash with the guitars or something like that), and considering I like Death's first two albums more than most death metal, I don't see why I would hate early 1990s Florida Death Metal.

At one point i was interested in this topic...

Written by deadone on 18.12.2014 at 00:59

Written by BitterCOld on 17.12.2014 at 22:32

At one point i was interested in this topic...

Does this help you get back into it?

Fucking awesome! After this we don't need to read this thread again...

If I have to chose one band it would be Nile.. Then Deicide,Cannibal Corpse,Hour of Penance,Death,Suffocation,Hate Eternal,Necrophagist..

I like the thing Fenriz said about Death in that Metal Evolution thing,
Something like *face palm* "Chuck, what the fuck are you doing?"
Anyways, my vote would go to Bolt Thrower or maybe Carcass.

It would have to be Cannibal Corpse. In one interview, they said that most probably they wouldn't be this popular in the Death Metal scene (at the top of it I might say) if Death would still be around.
After them I would say Obituary, Deicide, Massacre.

Written by ADIresiduos on 23.03.2015 at 22:19

It would have to be Cannibal Corpse. In one interview, they said that most probably they wouldn't be this popular in the Death Metal scene (at the top of it I might say) if Death would still be around.
After them I would say Obituary, Deicide, Massacre.

They might be one of the most popular but I honestly think they are far from the best.
They only got popular because of that politician guy saying their name on tv and all the controversy surrounding their album covers and songs.
Not to mention their spot on Ace Ventura.
I only enjoy Barnes era. What I've heard from Corpsegrinder era is pretty boring if you ask me.

Entombed
Morbid Angel
Obituary
asphyx
decapitated

Immolation
Bolt thrower
Morbid angel
Obituary
Carcass
Cannibal Corpse