Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Music => Topic started by: EUOL on December 12, 2003, 05:36:43 PM
-
SE and my discussion about the origins of the genre has got me thinking. Really, what's the difference between metal and hard rock? I mean, is it just in the attitude? What separates Metallica from, say, Foo Fighters (whom I've often heard refered to as 'Hard Rock')?
-
And then what separates metal from industrial? My husband claims it's distortion that makes industrial, but I don't think it's that easy.
I would say metal is ... heavier on guitars?
-
My only practical knowledge of Industrial comes from NIN. Though I avoid Trent Resnor whenever possible, I have (unfortunately) been forced to listen to some NIN. Therefore, I view Industrial as a kind of evil techno/rock mix.
-
NIN, (according to industrial fans) is not in any way a good sample of what industrial music is like. It is mainstream also (gasp horror) and is considered by to be about as industrial as something like the Spin Doctors would be considered hard rock.
Try some Chemlab or some Pop Will Eat Itself, both of which I have been very impressed with. My husband's favorite band is Sister Machine Gun, which is ok, but is not musical enough for me (I need music that I can sing along with). You might like some of it, I think PWEI is brilliant music. Could easily lend you some CDs since I married into a whole lot of music...
But techno/rock is a good description of it I think. But it's not necessarily evil, it's just dear Trent that's evil.
-
what about Rob Zombie? Is he industrial?
I've always thought of Industrial as like the heavy metal of techno.
-
No, Rob Zombie is just heavy metal.
-
so what's the definition then? he's got lots of programmed repetitive sequences featured, it's much more beat driven than say, Megadeath or Metallica. What's the definition of industrial?
-
Not Rob Zombie.
Here's what allmusic.com has to say about it. I respect their opinons on almost all things musical.
The most abrasive and aggressive fusion of rock and electronic music, industrial was initially a blend of avant-garde electronics experiments (tape music, musique concrète, white noise, synthesizers, sequencers, etc.) and punk provocation. As industrial evolved, its avant-garde influences became far less important than its pounding, relentless, jackhammer beats, which helped transform it into a darker alternative to the hedonism of mainstream dance music.
Industrial's trademark sound was harsh and menacing, but its rage was subordinate to the intentionally mechanical, numbingly repetitive qualities of the music, which fit the lyrics' themes of alienation and dehumanization quite well. In the early '90s, Ministry and Nine Inch Nails took their variations on industrial to wider alt-rock and metal audiences, but a substantial number of industrial artists chose to remain underground. The first group of industrial bands; England's Throbbing Gristle and Cabaret Voltaire, and Germany's Einsturzende Neubauten; were initially as much about beyond-edgy performance art as they were music. The second generation of industrial artists; including Skinny Puppy, Front 242, and Nitzer Ebb; added pummeling dance beats to their predecessors' confrontational sounds, for a substyle often referred to as electronic body music (centered aroundlabels like Wax Trax). Meanwhile, bands like Ministry and KMFDM added metal-guitar riffs, which helped Ministry break through to a wider audience in the late '80s and early '90s; similarly, Nine Inch Nails' Trent Reznor added more traditional song structures, and made his own persona the focal point, giving the music a rare human presence and becoming a star in the process. This more widely appealing strain of industrial continued to influence alternative metal throughout the '90s. Still, after industrial metal began to fade, a near-exclusively electronic form of industrial dance continued to thrive as an uncompromisingly underground style, with many artists coming from the U.S. and Germany.
Part of it is the 'underground' quality, which is why a lot of industrial fans deny NIN. Much the same as the way punk fanatics will deny anything that has gone mainstream.
Contrastingly, this is what they say about heavy metal
Of all rock & roll's myriad forms, heavy metal is the most extreme in terms of volume, machismo, and theatricality. There are numerous stylistic variations on heavy metal's core sound, but they're all tied together by a reliance on loud, distorted guitars (usually playing repeated riffs) and simple, pounding rhythms. Heavy metal has been controversial nearly throughout its existence; critics traditionally dismissed the music as riddled with over-the-top adolescent theatrics, and conservative groups have often protested what they perceive as evil lyrical content. Still, despite, or perhaps because of, those difficulties, heavy metal has become one of the most consistently popular forms of rock music ever created, able to adapt to the times yet keep its core appeal intact. For all its status as America's rebellion soundtrack of choice, heavy metal was largely a British creation. The first seeds of heavy metal were sown in the British blues movement of the '60s, specifically among bands who found it hard to adjust to the natural swing of American blues. The rhythms became more squared-off, and the amplified electric instruments became more important, especially with the innovations of artists like the Kinks, the Who, Jimi Hendrix, Cream, and the Jeff Beck Group. Arguably the first true metal band, however, was Led Zeppelin.
Thrashers like Metallica and Megadeth built rabid cult followings that pushed them into the mainstream around the same time that grunge wiped pop-metal off the charts. Mainstream metal in the '90s centered around a new hybrid called alternative metal, which (in its most commercially potent form) combined grinding thrash and grunge influences with hip-hop and industrial flourishes, though it broke with metal's past in downplaying the importance of memorable riffs. Meanwhile, the underground grew harsher and bleaker, producing two similar, thrash-derived styles known as death metal and black metal, which produced some of the most abrasive, intense, hyperspeed music and graphic shock tactics the metal world had yet witnessed.
-
eh. Sorry, the Ramones are still punk, even if they do get played a lot on alternative radio. You're saying that the ONLY thing separating Rob Zombie and NIN from industrial is the fact that they're popular, Which means technically (as in the technical nuances of the music) they're identical. It's like saying that Star Trek isn't SF because it's not written like Gernsback would have done it, or even Asimov.
-
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that NIN is industrial but it's not what industrial music is really like.
And Rob Zombie isn't industrial at all- it has nothing to do with his popularity.
-
On the whole Heavy metal is kind of like the Gangsta rap of Rock and Roll, its super hormone charged emotionally stunted, usless meaningless music. (which is not to say it isn't good, or even to say it doesn't have value on a visceral leval) It deals with themes a 14 or 15 year old boy's going to find intensely cool for no real reason other than to be intensly cool.
But I dont know if your examples are really that good.
Do you mean to describe Metaliica as the Metal band or the Foo Fighters?
In my mind neither are, although metallica has a little better claim to that title than FU.
And what about Grunge? It may be dead, but some examples like Nirvanna spawned a whole new generation of cover bands that arn't Rock or Metal, but something in between.
-
I have to agree with SE, fuzzy: the description you posted of Industrial music would include Rob Zombie, if taken literally.
And as for Jeffe's description of Metal, I have to disagree. It sounds too much like my mother-in-law's "it's not real music" argument.
-
Yeah, there are many many heavy metal bands that are INCREDIBLY talented and show it in their music. That's hardly a waste of time. I don't know why you think Metallica isn't heavy metal either, they essentially redefined the genre, but while that means they are different, it also means that at the core they're IN that genre. It's like saying the Beatles aren't rock because they changed what rock meant.
Also, you should note that your concept of 14 or 15 year old boys liking metal (implying that they're the primary target audience) is pretty off. Heavy metal listeners are more likely to also like concert music (classical, baroque, opera, etc) than most other types of music. Concert music listeners and heavy metal listeners have a huge crossover demographic, which is why it's actually surprising that something like S&M hasn't been done a LOT by now. I don't have numbers on the demographics, but I'd wager there are much more metal heads in their 20s and 30s than in their early teens (speaking proportionately, as well as total). THis is not to say that metal doesnt' appeal to young teens, but labeling that the primary market or demographic shows a misunderstanding of what heavy metal does both stylistically and technically.
-
I think it's the emphasis on the oppressive guitar beats that differentiates metal from hard rock. That's why I'd put Metallica in but Foo Fighters and Creed not in. However, by that distinction, certain songs would be metal when others wouldn't.
A good example would be Evanescence (part of what started this thread, as I was arguing with Sprig about Evanescane vs Foo Fighters.) Anyway, Evanescence has a couple songs on their album I'd call metal, but many I wouldn't. By the same token, many of the metallica balads wouldn't be metal--only their harder songs.
-
I don't have a problem with some songs by a band being metal and others not. In fact, that's what makes sense. You play some ballads, you play some metal, you play some punk, whatever. You could define a band being metal or not by the predominance (or lack thereof) of metal songs in their repretoir, or even by the songs that make them notable. Though I'm a fan of a third method: You're a metal band if you compose metal. That means you can be metal and punk and whatever else, all at the same time. Like mozart composed some opera, so he was an operettist (or whatever the handy term is). But he wasn't exclusively one, as he did much else.
-
Whatever, I think you guys are reading a little too much into some things I said and too little into others.
-
I dunno what you think we haven't read. You said metal was emotionally stunted and meaningless. You also implied that it's main appeal was to 14-15 year olds for vacuous reasons. You didn't say anything else about heavy metal itself. What else were we supposed to read into?
-
Well it is targeted at that age group, the whole industry claims it is so Im not sure why thats a debateable point at all. Sure a lot of folks who like other types of music also like heavy metal. With a few exceptions however heavy metal is not complex, I mean lets face it the average metal guitarist is no Segovia. That being said yes some players like Joe Satriani and bands like Metallica can trancend the medium to produce something more than mass produced pap. Talent never featured into my equation, and honestly Eric for every 1 Metallica there are 500 WhiteSnakes and Wingers and Warrents. But Metallica I think has become more mainstream, less Heavy Metal and more hard Rock in the last 20 years. When I think of them I think of more classic rock bands than anything else. When I think of Metal I think Kiss. Theatrical, visceral and not very smart.
I never claimed I didn't like it though, I just dont think it has a lot of musical value. Now theatrical value is a different story. Metal has got to be the most theatrical Rock style going live, big sets, pyrotechnics, and lots of crowd interaction.... Metal is theater on a grand scale.
I personally dont include Jimmy Hendrix, the Who and the Kinks as metal. Other people do.
Maybe the fault lies in the fact that there really is no such thing as metal, or that catagorizing music doesnt really work. I dont know.
-
1) Satriani isn't metal. No. He isn't.
2) Where are you getting statements that metal is targetted mainly to 14-15 year olds?
3) For ever segovia there are 500 Britney Spears. Yes, it is the same argument. 95% (at least) in any genre is crap, so the fact that there are more bad metal bands than good ones doesn't change the potential for the medium.
4) I don't know anyone who considers the Kinks metal. For one thing, there are only 3 or 4 of their songs than even come close, and they, as I said, only come close. Sure, the shredding of "You Really Got Me" is an influence later down the line, but more on punk than metal.
5) Your "when I think of metal" is a really bad road to go down. The average person would say "When I think of D&D I think of socially incapable dorks." They won't even understand other role playing unless you make the D&D comparison. Or "when I think of science fiction I think of nerds and ridiculous premises and crappy writing." Again, yeah, in 95% of the cases, sci fi is bad. But the same is true of romance, westerns, spy novels, crime fiction, and anything else. That doesn't mean ALL sf is bad, or that sf itself is bad.
edit: I thought about this, and by the terms EUOL and I talked about, yes, Satriani is metal. He's done a few songs that are definitely metal. However, most of his songs are not metal.
-
2. Every behind the music ever made about heavy metal bands. You know the ones with someone like Slash or Ozzie saying something to the effect of "our fans were like 14 and 15 year old guys and 18 year old chicks.
But they are all geeks ;D
"when I think of metal" would be a bad line to go down if the initial question hadn't been "Really, what's the difference between metal and hard rock? I mean, is it just in the attitude?" but since it seems to be asking what my opinion is, I answered using my opinion.
I will say however its interesting that every industry site I went to doesn't have a Heavy Metal Catagory anymore... heck they dont even have a classic rock catagory anymore.... creepy...
This raises an interesting issue however, does heavy metal even exist anymore according to the industry.
-
Metal rules. But the fact that my brand new PoD album hangs 2 minutes into song 6 sucks.
And it is interesting on the Metal/Classical crossover. Both me and Tom, a friend of mine, listen to both genres a lot. Though he likes the screamer songs (like a lot of Spineshank) while i don't. I always assumed i picked up classical from my parents putting Classical FM on the radio during long car journies, but maybe there is more to it.
-
I don't think so pre-deterministically, though I do think such a statistical similarity means some OTHER underlying similarity between the genres.