First thought: Opeth.
First thought: Opeth.
Metallica
Similar opinion. My issue isn't the quality of Metallica's music, which while certainly not as strong is often times still quite good. I just consider them an 80s band more than anything else. I take the question to be referring to bands from the 90's on.Metallica
That was my initial gut reaction. But as I thought through it, I don't really view what they've done in the last 20 years as very good or groundbreaking in any way, shape, or form. To me, there was a serious dropoff in quality after the Black album, and one really solid album in the last 20 years doesn't earn them "best" by any standards.
Honestly, I would have to go with DT. They obviously have not had as huge an influence on the metal scene as a more mainstream metal band. But the sheer volume and quality of music they've put out in the past 20 years destroys what anybody else has done.
Iron MaidenYou do know how long Maiden has been around, right?
I don't consider there to be a best anything when it comes to music, really, but my favorite is Pain of Salvation.
And they've been playing the last 20 years. That was my gut reaction like he asked. If it's strictly bands that just came out the last 20 years, I'd pick, DT, Opeth & Tool.Iron MaidenYou do know how long Maiden has been around, right?
Also my gut reaction is Nevermore, followed by Strapping Young Lad.
DT and Opeth never register to me as just "metal". But that's just me being a prog-snob.
That was my assumption, King.
That was my assumption, King.
You read me like a book. :laugh:
That was my assumption, King.
You read me like a book. :laugh:
And I read you like a porno.
No Meshuggah? I am disappoint.
I seriously considered themNo Meshuggah? I am disappoint.
They're great, but I doubt people automatically think of them when asked for the BEST metal band.
No Meshuggah? I am disappoint.
They're great, but I doubt people automatically think of them when asked for the BEST metal band.
Ghost Reveries and Watershed are flawless records.
Imagine an orgy between Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, and Thin Lizzy
Ghost Reveries and Watershed are flawless records.
Imagine an orgy between Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, and Thin Lizzy
Well, now I know to never ever listen to this band.Ghost Reveries and Watershed are flawless records.
I wouldn't call them flawless, but they're both good albums, GR being fantastic.
Imagine an orgy between Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, and Thin Lizzy
Well, now I know to never ever listen to this band.
I know.At least you're not in denial.
lol
lol
First thought: Opeth.
Here's some that I think have made a real impact;
Tool
Death
Dream Theater
In Flames
Opeth
Pantera
Here's some that I think have made a real impact;
Tool
Death
Dream Theater
In Flames
Opeth
Pantera
I completely agree with all of these.
Except Death.
Influential =/= best
:facepalm: snip
(https://i44.tinypic.com/10nxl5d.jpg)No Meshuggah? I am disappoint.
They're great, but I doubt people automatically think of them when asked for the BEST metal band.
I know I sure as hell don't.
10 years = Avenged Sevenfold
:facepalm: snip
I know who can take Darkes7's place and create the Sinister Six of Failure now!
Listening to a TWLSF song now, actually, but not seeing anything really mindblowing, though it isn't bad. Singer sounds kind of nasally though, like a worse Daniel Gildenlol.
I'd also like to mention in the songs I heard that I heard none of the bands you mentioned in describing them 7th Son. And you fail more because of your opinions of those other bands than your love of TWLSF.
Does anyone actually know what Thin Lizzy sounds like?
Does anyone actually know what Thin Lizzy sounds like?Us old fogey's do.
Does anyone actually know what Thin Lizzy sounds like?
ThisDoes anyone actually know what Thin Lizzy sounds like?
Yes, they sound fucking amazing!!!! :metal
The Lord Weird Slough Feg. Not as popular as the other bands mentioned in this thread, but they don't have a single bad album.
I'm surprised you've never heard of them TAC!The Lord Weird Slough Feg. Not as popular as the other bands mentioned in this thread, but they don't have a single bad album.
Never f##king heard of them.. but I just checked a couple of youtube clips, albeit through my phone, but this will need more investigating..thanks for the recommendation.
Iron Maiden
Bruce Dickinson
In my opinion, Accident of Birth and Chemical Wedding are the best two metal albums to come out in the last two decades and Tyrrany of Souls isn't too shabby itself.
I know that the topic is "metal band" but, he had the same line-up on these two albums and their output was simply amazing. Quality above quantity.
Does anyone actually know what Thin Lizzy sounds like?Anyone that likes good music does.
Meshuggah- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J4Ye7nRT0s
Bruce Dickinson
In my opinion, Accident of Birth and Chemical Wedding are the best two metal albums to come out in the last two decades and Tyrrany of Souls isn't too shabby itself.
I know that the topic is "metal band" but, he had the same line-up on these two albums and their output was simply amazing. Quality above quantity.
I agree that CW is, Accident has a little too much filler for my liking. Don't forget that every Bruce album pre-Tribe of Gypsies were pretty average. From my perspective anyway. Accident - CW - TOS is a brilliant 3 album run.
Meshuggah- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J4Ye7nRT0s
Linkin Park(https://img840.imageshack.us/img840/64/pensivecatisnotsureabou.jpg) (https://img840.imageshack.us/i/pensivecatisnotsureabou.jpg/)
>implying Linkin Park is metal>Implying Linkin Park is good
No I wasn't>implying Linkin Park is metal>Implying Linkin Park is good
Tool is another good choiceNo I wasn't>implying Linkin Park is metal>Implying Linkin Park is good
Ah, then in that case I replace my "No I wasn't" with "This"Tool is another good choiceNo I wasn't>implying Linkin Park is metal>Implying Linkin Park is good
Not you, the person that mentioned LP in the first place.
I think you're greatly exaggerating their influence. And adding to the genre? Their metal sections are pretty damn by the books in comparison to other metal bands. I can see why you want to pick them because of those bands you mentioned but I mean Opeth actually has made some genuinely great metal and Mastodon right now (at least Crack The Skye) is writing the type of riffs that Dream Theater has the capacity to do but just won't. They're being way more creative with the genre now than Dream Theater has in a very, very long time.
It actually makes me sad when I look forward to their next album, because they've reached their zenith. Everything else will be compared to CTS forever unless by some miracle they make a better album, which would be the greatest achievement in metal history as far as I'm concerned.Replace this with Blood Mountain and I might agree.
I think you're greatly exaggerating their influence.
I still don't see how being influential has anything to do with being 'the best', or even quality in general.
I still don't see how being influential has anything to do with being 'the best', or even quality in general.It doesn't, I was just commenting on a comments made earlier.
Bruce Dickinson
In my opinion, Accident of Birth and Chemical Wedding are the best two metal albums to come out in the last two decades and Tyrrany of Souls isn't too shabby itself.
I know that the topic is "metal band" but, he had the same line-up on these two albums and their output was simply amazing. Quality above quantity.
I agree that CW is, Accident has a little too much filler for my liking. Don't forget that every Bruce album pre-Tribe of Gypsies were pretty average. From my perspective anyway. Accident - CW - TOS is a brilliant 3 album run.
I think that there's some good stuff on Balls to Picasso(laughing in the hiding bush, tears of the dragon) but, the over all production of the album makes it suffer. It could be argued that it's also a ToG album also, though. And the first three tracks on Skunkworks are really great songs but, that album gets a lot of slack because it's so much different.
The first solo album......meh....not very good at all.
I really like the Halford albums as well. In my opinion, Roy Z makes any project that he's a part of that much better by his presence alone lol...
It depends how you look at what can be considered "greatest". Ace of Spades regularly comes up as one of the best metal songs ever in lists like the ones you mentioned, and that is mostly to do with its legacy and recoginition, not necessarily its quality. I still think it's a good song in and of itself, but a major consideration of its ranking, as indeed will be with most lists, is that legacy/recognition factor.I still don't see how being influential has anything to do with being 'the best', or even quality in general.
I agree.
I love Black Sabbath. I love Tony Iommi. But I rage my face off every time Sabbath tops a "Greatest Metal Bands" list and Iommi tops a "Greatest Metal Guitarists" list. Yeah, they influenced everyone who followed them and were incredibly important to the formation of the genre. But that sure as shit doesn't make them the best. There are countless metal bands that formed in their wake, and thanks to Sabbath opening the door for them, are much better bands. Yet Sabbath still tops those lists, because people can't make the distinction between influence and quality for some bizarre reason. It's really quite a simple concept.
I think you're greatly exaggerating their influence. And adding to the genre? Their metal sections are pretty damn by the books in comparison to other metal bands. I can see why you want to pick them because of those bands you mentioned but I mean Opeth actually has made some genuinely great metal and Mastodon right now (at least Crack The Skye) is writing the type of riffs that Dream Theater has the capacity to do but just won't. They're being way more creative with the genre now than Dream Theater has in a very, very long time.
I still don't see how being influential has anything to do with being 'the best', or even quality in general.
I agree.
I love Black Sabbath. I love Tony Iommi. But I rage my face off every time Sabbath tops a "Greatest Metal Bands" list and Iommi tops a "Greatest Metal Guitarists" list. Yeah, they influenced everyone who followed them and were incredibly important to the formation of the genre. But that sure as shit doesn't make them the best. There are countless metal bands that formed in their wake, and thanks to Sabbath opening the door for them, are much better bands. Yet Sabbath still tops those lists, because people can't make the distinction between influence and quality for some bizarre reason. It's really quite a simple concept.
I still don't see how being influential has anything to do with being 'the best', or even quality in general.
I agree.
I love Black Sabbath. I love Tony Iommi. But I rage my face off every time Sabbath tops a "Greatest Metal Bands" list and Iommi tops a "Greatest Metal Guitarists" list. Yeah, they influenced everyone who followed them and were incredibly important to the formation of the genre. But that sure as shit doesn't make them the best. There are countless metal bands that formed in their wake, and thanks to Sabbath opening the door for them, are much better bands. Yet Sabbath still tops those lists, because people can't make the distinction between influence and quality for some bizarre reason. It's really quite a simple concept.
Beginning with Vol. 4, they started to experiment in super interesting ways while maintaining an astronomically high quality throughout.BS were experimenting before they'd even released an album. They just started pushing it a bit harder after MOR. Their sound was never really in a settled state.
So think what you want about them and their influence, for better or worse. At the end of the day, though, they were the only ones really holding the torch when everything crumbled.
Dream Theater
Why do so many people assume that anyone who loves an older, influential band only loves them because they feel they need to "respect teh classics!"?
1) First you say you get mad when people call Sabbath a 'great' band then you say you get mad when people call Sabbath the 'best' band. There is an important distinction to be made. 'Great' implies influence, popularity, reputation, etc. 'Best' implies sheer quality; best discography, songs, etc.
So if you do not think Sabbath has the best discography or songs, then I understand. But there is no arguing Sabbath's greatness.
2) If I have made a mistake, forgive me, but you seem to be doing an unjust disservice to Sabbath's quality. Beyond the songs everyone knows - "Paranoid", "War Pigs", "Sweet Leef", Iron Man", etc. - they are actually a very eclectic band. Beginning with Vol. 4, they started to experiment in super interesting ways while maintaining an astronomically high quality throughout.
Why do so many people assume that anyone who loves an older, influential band only loves them because they feel they need to "respect teh classics!"?
...Because, in most of the lists I referred to (usually in music magazines, etc.) there's usually a small blurb about the band in question and why the editors feel they deserve that spot on the list. More often than not, the blurb goes on and on about influence and usually neglects to mention actual quality of the music. I'm just calling it like I see it. If the blurb said something like "Sabbath's meaty guitar riffs, inventive basslines, stellar drumming and soaring vocals combine to create a truly unique and enjoyable experience for metal listeners", I'd be cool with it. But whenever I pick up a music magazine that has such a list, and Sabbath tops it, it usually starts off by saying something like "The wide-ranging influence of this British quartet is undeniable. Universally accepted as the first true metal band, Sabbath is responsible for opening doors for every other band to walk through."
I dunno, maybe I'm just misinterpreting. But to me, that definitely sounds like a case of "RESPECT TEH CLASSICS" in place of respecting the actual music on terms of quality.
So think what you want about them and their influence, for better or worse. At the end of the day, though, they were the only ones really holding the torch when everything crumbled.
I just can't buy into that last sentence. I'd be kidding myself if I wanted to believe that Dream Theater influenced anyone outside of a handful of select bands, let alone change the course of an entire genre.
Yeah they used to fuse technicality and metal in a very interesting direction but they hadn't really made an attempt at a truer metal song until "The Glass Prison" and aside from that song they haven't done anything of merit with that combo since. Very few of their metal riffs from that point have honestly wowed me to the point where I thought they were pushing new ground.I'm not really concerned with what they've done recently. There's plenty of interesting progressive metal coming from them from WDADU-SFAM.
If you want to talk about how they were instrumental in bringing technicality to the stage to elevate metal there are a lot of technical death metal bands my roommate has shown me that demonstrate more technical and theoretical approach to pure metal than Dream Theater has. Granted they're not my cup of tea and DT is much more tasteful in their approach but they are by no means close to the technical limit you're saying they pioneered compared to some other bands whose sole aim is to see how far they can push music theory.But I'm guessing Dream Theater were doing it first. The most progressive metal got before Dream Theater was Queensryche and Fates Warning. And while Mike's humbly given both those bands true credit for forming the genre, neither came anywhere near the progressiveness DT reached with Images and Words.
Why do so many people assume that anyone who loves an older, influential band only loves them because they feel they need to "respect teh classics!"?
...Because, in most of the lists I referred to (usually in music magazines, etc.) there's usually a small blurb about the band in question and why the editors feel they deserve that spot on the list. More often than not, the blurb goes on and on about influence and usually neglects to mention actual quality of the music. I'm just calling it like I see it. If the blurb said something like "Sabbath's meaty guitar riffs, inventive basslines, stellar drumming and soaring vocals combine to create a truly unique and enjoyable experience for metal listeners", I'd be cool with it. But whenever I pick up a music magazine that has such a list, and Sabbath tops it, it usually starts off by saying something like "The wide-ranging influence of this British quartet is undeniable. Universally accepted as the first true metal band, Sabbath is responsible for opening doors for every other band to walk through."
I dunno, maybe I'm just misinterpreting. But to me, that definitely sounds like a case of "RESPECT TEH CLASSICS" in place of respecting the actual music on terms of quality.
I seem to remember having this exact conversation with someone here before.
If they're only doing a small blurb for each band then it makes sense to me that a magazine is going to use that space to mention how influential they are. If their "best bands" list is nothing but classics then, yeah, I'd say you're on the money. But if it's a mix and they just mention how influential the influential bands are then I wouldn't look into it too much.
Without Dream Theater, there'd probably be no Symphony X, Shadow Gallery, Pain of Salvation, Ayreon, Vaden Plas
I just can't buy into that last sentence. I'd be kidding myself if I wanted to believe that Dream Theater influenced anyone outside of a handful of select bands, let alone change the course of an entire genre. Yeah they used to fuse technicality and metal in a very interesting direction but they hadn't really made an attempt at a truer metal song until "The Glass Prison" and aside from that song they haven't done anything of merit with that combo since. Very few of their metal riffs from that point have honestly wowed me to the point where I thought they were pushing new ground. If you want to talk about how they were instrumental in bringing technicality to the stage to elevate metal there are a lot of technical death metal bands my roommate has shown me that demonstrate more technical and theoretical approach to pure metal than Dream Theater has. Granted they're not my cup of tea and DT is much more tasteful in their approach but they are by no means close to the technical limit you're saying they pioneered compared to some other bands whose sole aim is to see how far they can push music theory.Okay, I wasn't going to get into this discussion, since I like little metal from the last decade, but now I'm a little too interested.
Without Dream Theater, there'd probably be no Symphony X, Shadow Gallery, Pain of Salvation, Ayreon, Vaden Plas
:lol
What a fatal tragedy.
This just got me thinking about a Mastodon/DT co-headlining tour :omg:
Without Dream Theater, there'd probably be no Symphony X, Shadow Gallery, Pain of Salvation, Ayreon, Vaden Plas
Without Dream Theater, there'd probably be no Symphony X, Shadow Gallery, Pain of Salvation, Ayreon, Vaden Plas.
I don't think they were SIGNIFICANTLY influenced by Dream Theate at all. I can here neoclassical guitar influence, maybe even some Pantera. But nope, not really any DT. Care to elaborate on these glaring implications of influence?They've toured with them several times. They've been spotted at Dream Theater shows in New Jersey. Them moving from generic metal to progressive metal almost directly correlates with Dream Theater's success. And, oh yeah, they kind of sound like them, too! ;D
Yeah that's a pretty weak argument. I think the move to their style of progressive metal was inevitable, as it's a natural progression looking at their discography. I'm sure they picked up a few pointers from DT (perhaps the incorporation of odd time signatures, I've give you that). But as a whole the bands aren't that similar at all. Looking at The Divine Wings of Tragedy (album)....I can't really any DT stuff to compare it to. The title track put against say A Change of Seasons. Yeah, they are both progressive metal and epic in length. But the approach is completely different.I don't think they were SIGNIFICANTLY influenced by Dream Theate at all. I can here neoclassical guitar influence, maybe even some Pantera. But nope, not really any DT. Care to elaborate on these glaring implications of influence?They've toured with them several times. They've been spotted at Dream Theater shows in New Jersey. Them moving from generic metal to progressive metal almost directly correlates with Dream Theater's success. And, oh yeah, they kind of sound like them, too! ;D
You're a nutcase if you think Symphony X weren't influenced by Dream Theater.
Whether Dream Theater influenced any of those bands directly is beyond the point, though. The point is, if it weren't for Dream Theater making progressive music (relatively) cool again, I wonder if bands like Shadow Gallery, Pain of Salvation, and Symphony X would even have had nice creative outlets like "Inside Out" willing to fund their music.
I love Symphony X but come on now. Listen to The Death of Balance. If you can't hear DT and even a particular song, you need a cat scan or something.That's one song :lol Not really strong enough for the whole argument. But that song I can definitely see the similarity (in particular the main riff is like The Mirror).
Dude, Symphony X is most definitely influenced by Dream Theater. I mean hell, they are pretty much friends with each other now and days. Mike Portnoy showed up to their concerts, they tour together, both part of the early progressive metal scene.So DT influenced SX just because they are friends within the same music scene, and they go to each others concerts? yahuh. ::)
Dude, Symphony X is most definitely influenced by Dream Theater. I mean hell, they are pretty much friends with each other now and days. Mike Portnoy showed up to their concerts, they tour together, both part of the early progressive metal scene.Naturally there will be some influence...but would Symphony X exist without Dream Theater? I think it probably would. Like I said, the main influences I hear on their style is the neoclassical virtuoso's of the 80s and Pantera-esque riffs and drums. Maybe the presence of DT allowed them to gain more popularity than they would have, but no way DT is the main influence on SX. I just can't see it.
Umm yeah. People are naturally influenced by their friends believe it or not. Especially if your friend laid down the foundations for progressive metal.Dude, Symphony X is most definitely influenced by Dream Theater. I mean hell, they are pretty much friends with each other now and days. Mike Portnoy showed up to their concerts, they tour together, both part of the early progressive metal scene.So DT influenced SX just because they are friends within the same music scene, and they go to each others concerts? yahuh. ::)
In that case it's totally justified to say that Dream Theater were in turn influenced by Symphony X. Would you accept that?Umm yeah. People are naturally influenced by their friends believe it or not. Especially if your friend laid down the foundations for progressive metal.Dude, Symphony X is most definitely influenced by Dream Theater. I mean hell, they are pretty much friends with each other now and days. Mike Portnoy showed up to their concerts, they tour together, both part of the early progressive metal scene.So DT influenced SX just because they are friends within the same music scene, and they go to each others concerts? yahuh. ::)
Yes.In that case it's totally justified to say that Dream Theater were in turn influenced by Symphony X. Would you accept that?Umm yeah. People are naturally influenced by their friends believe it or not. Especially if your friend laid down the foundations for progressive metal.Dude, Symphony X is most definitely influenced by Dream Theater. I mean hell, they are pretty much friends with each other now and days. Mike Portnoy showed up to their concerts, they tour together, both part of the early progressive metal scene.So DT influenced SX just because they are friends within the same music scene, and they go to each others concerts? yahuh. ::)
How did Dream Theater arrive at their prog metal style? They tried mixing together prog and metal. Plenty of other bands did this (and to an extent, still do), and aren't at all influenced by Dream Theater.
I read through some of the messages in this
edit: I bet the people saying "x sounds like Dream Theater" are just people who first discovered progressive metal through Dream Theater, same way when someone new discovers Metallica they think loads of other metal also sounds like Metallica.
You are giving DT way too much credit.
In this thread, people think being influenced means becoming a carbon-copy of the influencer. Sheesh.In this thread, people think Dream Theater forming a few years earlier automatically means they influenced later bands. Sheesh.
And weren't, at all, as influential as Dream Theater. Or weren't as progressive.Dream Theater were only particularly influential to the carbon-copy bands. Most (better) prog metal bands took influence from the entire prog scene, and music beyond. Dream Theater aren't even THAT progressive by todays standards.
Regardless of whether bands are trying to directly replicate their sound or not, being there at all, with something of an audience, doing something that most relatively popular metal bands in the nineties weren't doing, i.e. proudly displaying technicality, means there's a higher chance it was them, alongside a nostalgia for older bands, that inspired the shift in trends. All a musician has to do is hear them and like what they're doing and wish there was more of something like that today (read: not necessarily exactly the same thing) and it starts things rolling. I'm not saying they're the sole band that caused this, but I'm saying I wouldn't write off the chance they were one of the bands, especially when, as I said, I used to see a lot of bands namedrop them for making them appreciate that sort of thing.In this thread, people think being influenced means becoming a carbon-copy of the influencer. Sheesh.In this thread, people think Dream Theater forming a few years earlier automatically means they influenced later bands. Sheesh.
Dream Theater's influence sure is serious business huhIt derailed the entire topic.
Dream Theater were only particularly influential to the carbon-copy bands. Most (better) prog metal bands took influence from the entire prog scene, and music beyond. Dream Theater aren't even THAT progressive by todays standards.
But saying stuff like "without DT x wouldn't exist" doesn't make any sense either, because if DT wouldn't have made that breakthrough for the progressive-metal scene, someone else would have.
There's nothing to argue about. That's an absolute fact.
Disturbed are the greatest metal band of the last twenty years.They have referred themselves as the "gods of metal" on stage before, if I remember correctly. They are null and void.
There, argue about that for a while. Jesus.
There's nothing to argue about. That's an absolute fact.
I agree entirely.
Wasn't that just the name of the tour?
:facepalm:Dream Theater were only particularly influential to the carbon-copy bands. Most (better) prog metal bands took influence from the entire prog scene, and music beyond. Dream Theater aren't even THAT progressive by todays standards.
That's like saying Metallica were only influential to their carbon-copy bands, when they were influential to bands like Dream Theater, too.
Dream Theater's influence sure is serious business huhIt derailed the entire topic.
Linkin Park because it sold more. Even though you might not call it metal, to my knowledge nu metal is a subgenre of metal.
I win.
nu-metal is a subgenre of hard rock, and not metal
JRPGs aren't a subgenre of RPGs, they're a subgenre of Microsoft Excel.JRPG's actually play like an RPG. Nu-metal does not sound like metal. Bad analogy.
Nu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
AGGRO-METAL!!!!!
:metal :metal :metal :metal :metal
Wasn't that just the name of the tour?
During shows I think the singer likes to make comments like "bow to your gods in metal." Or some crap.
Wasn't that just the name of the tour?
During shows I think the singer likes to make comments like "bow to your gods in metal." Or some crap.
I'd like to see video footage of this, because I find this damn near impossible to believe.
3. Symphony X aren't really "progressive metal." They never really have been. Yeah, there are elements of that here and there, but they are pretty much the poster children for symphonic metal. Yngwie took neo-classical-influenced metal to the extreme and put it on steriods in the '80s. SX, led by Romeo, took what Yngwie did and put it on steroids in the '90s, added in some nasty Pantera-esque guitar tone and extreme time signatures, and there you have it.I disagree with this point. Symphonic metal as it exists in its purest form is not at all like Symphony X. SX have taken elements of symphonic metal, power metal, neo-classical, and progressive metal as you said (although this in a greater ammount than you give them credit for), but they cannot be categorised as any one of these genres, and especially not as "the poster child" of any of them. tl;dr: lolno.
Dream Theater
I meant power metal. Sorry.I wouldn't want to pigeonhole them into the progressive metal genre either. I'd prefer to call them a combination of the two Progressive Power Metal (in the same way Opeth is Progressive Death Metal)
But I'm not necessarily trying to pigeonhole them into a specific subgenre either. That's overly artificial, not to mention pointless. But calling them progressive metal just seems odd to me when neither the band nor the majority of their fans would even for a moment consider them progressive metal.
I agree Symph X is not symphonic metal. They have times where the keys are playing some strings, but that's it. Hardly symphonic.They were back when they released V but not so much anymore IMO.
I'd call them Neo Classical Metal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
I dunno why everyone shits on Wikipedia like that considering if you're not retarded you can tell when someone has fucked with an entry or if information looks off. Plus there's a reason there are links to the sources.
Red Hot Chili Peppers is an American funk rock band formed in Los Angeles in 1983.
It's frustrating how many of these bands there are that are musically fantastic but offputting vocally in some way.I've said this tons of times, but this is just the way metal has gone in the past decade. I mean, obvious generalisation, but you're just not metal enough today unless you grunt, growl, scream or squeal like a pig.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
I dunno why everyone shits on Wikipedia like that considering if you're not retarded you can tell when someone has fucked with an entry or if information looks off. Plus there's a reason there are links to the sources.
When part of your (Not necessarily you, but sdn posted it) argument is a wikipedia link and it becomes obvious that wikipedia fails at genres (Funk Metal? Are you shitting me? And I thought Speed Metal was dumb.), it doesn't help your argument.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
I dunno why everyone shits on Wikipedia like that considering if you're not retarded you can tell when someone has fucked with an entry or if information looks off. Plus there's a reason there are links to the sources.
Because it's easier to attack the source than the argument.
When part of your (Not necessarily you, but sdn posted it) argument is a wikipedia link and it becomes obvious that wikipedia fails at genres (Funk Metal? Are you shitting me? And I thought Speed Metal was dumb.), it doesn't help your argument.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
I dunno why everyone shits on Wikipedia like that considering if you're not retarded you can tell when someone has fucked with an entry or if information looks off. Plus there's a reason there are links to the sources.
Because it's easier to attack the source than the argument.
Then how does "Funk Metal" come up when there is obviously no such thing?When part of your (Not necessarily you, but sdn posted it) argument is a wikipedia link and it becomes obvious that wikipedia fails at genres (Funk Metal? Are you shitting me? And I thought Speed Metal was dumb.), it doesn't help your argument.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
I dunno why everyone shits on Wikipedia like that considering if you're not retarded you can tell when someone has fucked with an entry or if information looks off. Plus there's a reason there are links to the sources.
Because it's easier to attack the source than the argument.
Wikipedia doesn't invent genres.
Then how does "Funk Metal" come up when there is obviously no such thing?When part of your (Not necessarily you, but sdn posted it) argument is a wikipedia link and it becomes obvious that wikipedia fails at genres (Funk Metal? Are you shitting me? And I thought Speed Metal was dumb.), it doesn't help your argument.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
I dunno why everyone shits on Wikipedia like that considering if you're not retarded you can tell when someone has fucked with an entry or if information looks off. Plus there's a reason there are links to the sources.
Because it's easier to attack the source than the argument.
Wikipedia doesn't invent genres.
Funk metal is a semi-well established term. I've seen it used several times in several contexts in several places.I think Mr. Bungle first album is considered "funk metal"...but IMO it's more an avant-garde record.
That being said, it's still stupid.
Then how does "Funk Metal" come up when there is obviously no such thing?When part of your (Not necessarily you, but sdn posted it) argument is a wikipedia link and it becomes obvious that wikipedia fails at genres (Funk Metal? Are you shitting me? And I thought Speed Metal was dumb.), it doesn't help your argument.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_metalQuoteNu metal (or nü metal[4] or aggro-metal[5][6]) is a subgenre [7] of heavy metal.
:neverusethis:
lol @ wikipedia being a valid source
I dunno why everyone shits on Wikipedia like that considering if you're not retarded you can tell when someone has fucked with an entry or if information looks off. Plus there's a reason there are links to the sources.
Because it's easier to attack the source than the argument.
Wikipedia doesn't invent genres.
If it's "obviously no such thing" then how can they have a list of sources at the bottom of the page?
Because we all know there's an objective truth about genres.In a sense, yes. Genres exist to describe various qualities of a style of music. Whether one likes those qualities or not, the genre still exists.
Then how does "Funk Metal" come up when there is obviously no such thing?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hot_Chili_PeppersQuoteRed Hot Chili Peppers is an American funk rock band formed in Los Angeles in 1983.
lolwut? The 'rap rock' genre is a little odd, though.
*Checks sources*
*allmusic*
Maybe the sources are just... wrong? No offense, but I wouldn't trust allmusic's opinions on music even if I got a free blowjob for it.
Then how does "Funk Metal" come up when there is obviously no such thing?
Did you completely miss:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hot_Chili_PeppersQuoteRed Hot Chili Peppers is an American funk rock band formed in Los Angeles in 1983.
lolwut? The 'rap rock' genre is a little odd, though.
You know, where I checked your claim and it turns out you're not right?
There is a huge difference about being in the funk metal page and being listed in their own page as "funk metal"! They may only have elements of funk and metal and be listed there...Then how does "Funk Metal" come up when there is obviously no such thing?
Did you completely miss:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hot_Chili_PeppersQuoteRed Hot Chili Peppers is an American funk rock band formed in Los Angeles in 1983.
lolwut? The 'rap rock' genre is a little odd, though.
You know, where I checked your claim and it turns out you're not right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funk_Metal
It very clearly says RHCP is on there. I'm guessing you're referring to RHCP's page, right? Well, its wikipedia so I'm not surprised it lacks consistency. At first I didn't even know what you were talking about.
*Checks sources*
*allmusic*
Maybe the sources are just... wrong? No offense, but I wouldn't trust allmusic's opinions on music even if I got a free blowjob for it.
Which is fine, but you can't expect people to just take your word for it when you claim that a respected musical guide is wrong and you're right without any backing argument or source.
Back to the subject of Nu Metal, it looks like there was someone arguing the same thing you are in one of the old discussion pages. It's under Sources and Slant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nu_metal/Archive_5
It basically came down to "sources; site them."
Whether you are right or wrong, you are completely derailing the thread wiht this discussion. Can we get back on topic?Sorry, you're right. :loser: