Can thrash metal get really generic as a subgenre of metal?

[WildRanger]

Thrash metal might be the most popular style of metal among metalheads then and now. Although I dig some classic thrash stuff I think thrash metal as a subgenre of metal, can be very limited musically: most thrash bands lack originality in their music(they tend to sound exactly like early Metallica or Slayer), most thrash metal music doesn't sound creative and musically diverse.

What do you think?

[jammindude]

WildRanger, I'm one of your few supporters.   Most of the time, I think you ask questions that *should* be questioned.   I enjoy the discussion they spark.   I enjoy healthy debate.

But this is one that really deserves a very generic and canned answer.    YES. 

For as much as I *loved* thrash in its classic era, there really never was anywhere for it to go.   You can still make really cool music and great riffs, but by its very nature you can't really do anything "different".      It's like when newer bands borrow AC/DC.   Sure, some of them do it better than others, but there's really nothing new for that style of music to give to anyone.

[Crow]

Literally every genre of music can get generic.
Thread over.

[Elite]

Literally every genre of music can get generic.
Thread over.

Lol. Yes.

[Adami]

This isn't twitter.


And yes. Obviously. Everything can get generic.

[Train of Naught]

For as much as I *loved* thrash in its classic era, there really never was anywhere for it to go.   You can still make really cool music and great riffs, but by its very nature you can't really do anything "different".      It's like when newer bands borrow AC/DC.   Sure, some of them do it better than others, but there's really nothing new for that style of music to give to anyone.

Not true, you can always expand on a genre. For example, you may not like Vektor (took a pretty damn long time to grow on me), but they definitely 'reinvented' thrash metal in a way, especially with the latest album.

Which brings me back to the obvious answer to this ridiculous question. Like others mentioned, yes, thrash metal can get generic, it can also not. Surprised?

[425]

Literally every genre of music can get generic.
Thread over.

Well, yes.

Additionally, it seems like some thrash purists have very limited definitions of what is even allowed to constitute thrash. I'm talking people who say Master of Puppets isn't thrash. It is extremely true if you allow those people to define the style, because there's only so much you can do with "here's some fast staccato riffs and double bass and someone who can't really sing shouting."

[jammindude]

For as much as I *loved* thrash in its classic era, there really never was anywhere for it to go.   You can still make really cool music and great riffs, but by its very nature you can't really do anything "different".      It's like when newer bands borrow AC/DC.   Sure, some of them do it better than others, but there's really nothing new for that style of music to give to anyone.

Not true, you can always expand on a genre. For example, you may not like Vektor (took a pretty damn long time to grow on me), but they definitely 'reinvented' thrash metal in a way, especially with the latest album.

Which brings me back to the obvious answer to this ridiculous question. Like others mentioned, yes, thrash metal can get generic, it can also not. Surprised?

I do not know anyone who considers Vector to be a "thrash metal album", nor do I know anyone at all who considers Haken a "thrash metal band" so.....no.   

[425]

He's referring to the thrash band Vektor with a "K", not the Haken album Vector with a "C".

[Train of Naught]

For as much as I *loved* thrash in its classic era, there really never was anywhere for it to go.   You can still make really cool music and great riffs, but by its very nature you can't really do anything "different".      It's like when newer bands borrow AC/DC.   Sure, some of them do it better than others, but there's really nothing new for that style of music to give to anyone.

Not true, you can always expand on a genre. For example, you may not like Vektor (took a pretty damn long time to grow on me), but they definitely 'reinvented' thrash metal in a way, especially with the latest album.

Which brings me back to the obvious answer to this ridiculous question. Like others mentioned, yes, thrash metal can get generic, it can also not. Surprised?

I do not know anyone who considers Vector to be a "thrash metal album", nor do I know anyone at all who considers Haken a "thrash metal band" so.....no.

[jammindude]

He's referring to the thrash band Vektor with a "K", not the Haken album Vector with a "C".

 

Never heard of them.   I'll go on a search.

[bosk1]

Thrash metal might be the most popular style of metal among metalheads then and now.

No.

Literally every genre of music can get generic.
Thread over.

Pretty much this. 

For me personally, I have a mixed reaction.  I guess I can't really consider myself a thrash "fan."  I was around when it was beginning, but I didn't ever really like early thrash.  The sweet spot for me was when some of the bigger bands got a bit more polished before going fully commercial.  The appeal of thrash for me is basically limited to Metallica's run from Lightning through the Black album, Megadeth from Rust onward, some '90s Flotsam and Jetsam with some of their newer stuff mixed in, and some '90s Testament.  I also remember liking some Death Angel that I heard, but I couldn't tell you what songs.  Otherwise, as a genre, I don't really care for it too much.  But that said, I do really like the influence it had on the modern metal that I listen to.  The speed, power, and heaviness, combined with progressive and/or symphonic elements really makes for an appealing mix, for my tastes.  So even though I may have fairly narrow purely thrash interests, I am a huge fan of the overall heaviness that has continued and helped form other subgenres.

[cramx3]

Thrash metal might be the most popular style of metal among metalheads then and now.

No.

I think this is a better wildranger question, what genre of metal is the most popular?  I actually think it could be thrash but maybe classic metal.  I'm not really sure.  Nu metal was hugely popular for awhile but that fade died.  Thrash still lives on since most of those bands from the 80s who made it popular are still around and still hugely popular. 

As for the OP, sure, every genre can become generic.  In fact, I'd say what makes a genre generic is what defines the genre and when it changes, is when a new genre is formed.

[pg1067]

Thrash metal might be the most popular style of metal among metalheads then and now.

You're right.  It might be.  Or it might not be.

Also, which "metalheads" are you referring to?  And when exactly is "then"?

What do you think?

I think that this post would make a lot more sense if you had simply said, "what does everyone think of the current state of trash metal?" and had then proceeded to state your own opinions about particular bands, rather than make vague and generic statements.

[WildRanger]

I think this is a better wildranger question, what genre of metal is the most popular?  I actually think it could be thrash but maybe classic metal.  I'm not really sure.

Which big trio is more popular: Black Sabbath, Judas Priest and Iron Maiden (classic metal) vs. Metallica, Megadeth and Slayer (thrash)?

[Crow]

Depends on who you ask

You have this annoying tendency to assume everything you experience is the exact same thing everyone else experiences and I think you need to understand that other people aren't you and don't share your thoughts and opinions

[WildRanger]

You have this annoying tendency to assume everything you experience is the exact same thing everyone else experiences and I think you need to understand that other people aren't you and don't share your thoughts and opinions

You're not right, because I state my view and ask others to state their views.

[The Walrus]

Literally every genre of music can get generic.
Thread over.

This...

Plus the thread title asks if it CAN... like if it's even remotely a possibility. 2 seconds of critical thinking would void the need to make this silly thread

[Crow]

You have this annoying tendency to assume everything you experience is the exact same thing everyone else experiences and I think you need to understand that other people aren't you and don't share your thoughts and opinions

You're not right, because I state my view and ask others to state their views.

Literally your last post was implying that one group was more popular than the other based on your opinions and experiences

[425]

I think this is a better wildranger question, what genre of metal is the most popular?  I actually think it could be thrash but maybe classic metal.  I'm not really sure.

Which big trio is more popular: Black Sabbath, Judas Priest and Iron Maiden (classic metal) vs. Metallica, Megadeth and Slayer (thrash)?

Of those six bands, Metallica is the probably biggest, but all three of the first trio are probably bigger than Megadeth and Slayer.

Moreover, Metallica's most popular album (and the reason why they are the biggest of these bands) is not thrash. And according to some thrash fans, only their first album plus some isolated songs are thrash.

[Stadler]

Depends on who you ask

You have this annoying tendency to assume everything you experience is the exact same thing everyone else experiences and I think you need to understand that other people aren't you and don't share your thoughts and opinions

Yeah, you're kind of right, but in this case, I think we can ease up a bit.  There are ways of making general assumptions, and more objective statements.   I object to most of this subjectively, but I can look at it objectively.  To me, subjectively, "thrash" is fucking noise, and only when Metallica started playing real music - i.e. The Black Album - did they stake their claim as one of the greats.  Megadeth is okay, Anthrax is minor league and Slayer is a fucking joke.   I'm being a shade facetious, but look at it this way:   

The Big Four of thrash can all appear on a bill, and there is a clear pecking order (meaning, Metallica is a stadium act, the other three aren't even arena acts, at least as headliners.  MAYBE Megadeth.)   Other than  Metallica (Ride, Master, Black), and MAYBE Slayer (Reign In Blood), none have a classic record per se, and certainly none besides Metallica have a record that is classic OUTSIDE their genre.   I have a better shot than Slayer of ever being in the Rock Hall (I know it means nothing, but I'm using that as a sort of an objective stand in for critical and/or wide popular acclaim).   

The Big Four of traditional metal?     Short of a one-off festival like a Live Aid or a Cal Jam, between Purple, Sabbath, Maiden and Priest, who's the opener on that show?   All four have or do tour stadia, all four are in or are in consideration for the RnRHoF, all four have at least one album that is a classic OUTSIDE their genre...   all four have a song that has trancended even the more general "metal" or "hard rock" boundaries.   Even your girlfriend knows Paranoid, Smoke and Living After Midnight.   I'm thinking she might not be all that up on "Antisocial" or "Symphony of Destruction" or "Raining Blood".

[Adami]

Yea, take Metallica out of that, and Sabbath, Priest and Maiden are way bigger (both in and out of the metal community) than Megadeth and Slayer.

Megadeth and Slayer are huge in the thrash community. Beyond that they are generally considered rather niche.

[Nekov]

I think the only way to resolve this matter is with a poll

[jammindude]

BTW....I'm listening to Vektor's Outer Isolation right now.   I have to say that I'm extremely impressed.   It is one of the best examples I've heard of doing thrash right.   I did say in the beginning that "some do it better than others" and that it was still possible to craft great songs and great riffs.     But, I don't see how it does anything drastically different with the genre.     Actually, it just sounds like a really fantastic Atheist album...and that is a HUGE compliment.   

[King Puppies and the Acid Guppies]

BTW....I'm listening to Vektor's Outer Isolation right now.   I have to say that I'm extremely impressed.   It is one of the best examples I've heard of doing thrash right.   I did say in the beginning that "some do it better than others" and that it was still possible to craft great songs and great riffs.     But, I don't see how it does anything drastically different with the genre.     Actually, it just sounds like a really fantastic Atheist album...and that is a HUGE compliment.

Their newest album Terminal Redux is even better.

[bl5150]

Unfortunately I have never really enjoyed the style of vocal that Vektor use , but I appreciate what they do musically.

[pg1067]

I think this is a better wildranger question, what genre of metal is the most popular?  I actually think it could be thrash but maybe classic metal.  I'm not really sure.

Which big trio is more popular: Black Sabbath, Judas Priest and Iron Maiden (classic metal) vs. Metallica, Megadeth and Slayer (thrash)?

Of those six bands, Metallica is the probably biggest, but all three of the first trio are probably bigger than Megadeth and Slayer.

I think the question is whether the combo of Sabbath, Priest and Maiden is more or less "popular" than the combo of Metallica, Megadeth and Slayer.

I'm not sure how that could possibly me measured in any meaningful way, but I think that, although Metallica is arguably the most popular of the six bands mentioned, the "classic metal" combo is "more popular" than the thrash combo.

The Big Four of traditional metal?     Short of a one-off festival like a Live Aid or a Cal Jam, between Purple, Sabbath, Maiden and Priest, who's the opener on that show?   All four have or do tour stadia, all four are in or are in consideration for the RnRHoF, all four have at least one album that is a classic OUTSIDE their genre...   all four have a song that has trancended even the more general "metal" or "hard rock" boundaries.   Even your girlfriend knows Paranoid, Smoke and Living After Midnight.   I'm thinking she might not be all that up on "Antisocial" or "Symphony of Destruction" or "Raining Blood".

I'm a bit more of a thrash fan than you, but I certainly don't go deep and far prefer "classic metal" bands.  I love Metallica up through AJFA and tolerate the Black Album.  I love a couple Anthrax albums (Spreading the Disease and Among the Living), but you're right that they never moved beyond the "minor leagues."  I hate Megadeth and only like a couple Slayer songs (musically, but not vocally).  That said...

The opener of a Purple/Sabbath/Maiden/Priest is unquestionably either Maiden or Priest.  How to decide between the two I don't know; nor do I know which of Purple or Sabbath would headline.

Also, I'm wondering which Maiden and Priest albums are "classic OUTSIDE their genre" and which Maiden and Priest songs have "transcended . . . the more general 'metal' or 'hard rock' boundaries."  I hear Maiden songs fairly frequently at hockey games, but they're there precisely because they're metal songs and hard hitting (played for the same reason that they play Seek and Destroy).  Priest had a song in a car commercial a few years ago, but again, it was there precisely because it was a metal song.

My wife probably knows Paranoid (although not likely by name), but I seriously doubt she knows Living After Midnight.  She might know Breaking the Law and definitely knows at least half a dozen Metallica songs by name (and maybe a few others not by name).  If LAM is your example of a Priest song that transcended metal boundaries, maybe it did so 35+ years ago, but I'd lay good money that, with the possible exception of two guys who are in their 40s, none of the 15 or so people in my office are familiar with that song.  I also think Peace Sells is at least as "transcendent" as any Maiden song.

[cramx3]

Run to the Hills is probably the most transcendent IM song. 

ALso, from recent touring, I'd put those classic bands at:

Black Sabbath, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Deep Purple.

The Deep Purple / Judas Priest tour look like it didn't sell anywhere close to as well as the recent IM or BS concert at the same local venue for me. 

[Train of Naught]

BTW....I'm listening to Vektor's Outer Isolation right now.   I have to say that I'm extremely impressed.   It is one of the best examples I've heard of doing thrash right.   I did say in the beginning that "some do it better than others" and that it was still possible to craft great songs and great riffs.     But, I don't see how it does anything drastically different with the genre.     Actually, it just sounds like a really fantastic Atheist album...and that is a HUGE compliment.

Glad you dig them man, I really think they deserve more love. But I should've been more specific, I'm mostly talking about their latest album (like Puppies mentioned) Terminal Redux. It's still very much a thrash album, but the vocals make it very different and also that album has a lot of sci-fi influences in the music. Sounds like an epic space metal album!

[Stadler]

I think this is a better wildranger question, what genre of metal is the most popular?  I actually think it could be thrash but maybe classic metal.  I'm not really sure.

Which big trio is more popular: Black Sabbath, Judas Priest and Iron Maiden (classic metal) vs. Metallica, Megadeth and Slayer (thrash)?

Of those six bands, Metallica is the probably biggest, but all three of the first trio are probably bigger than Megadeth and Slayer.

I think the question is whether the combo of Sabbath, Priest and Maiden is more or less "popular" than the combo of Metallica, Megadeth and Slayer.

I'm not sure how that could possibly me measured in any meaningful way, but I think that, although Metallica is arguably the most popular of the six bands mentioned, the "classic metal" combo is "more popular" than the thrash combo.

The Big Four of traditional metal?     Short of a one-off festival like a Live Aid or a Cal Jam, between Purple, Sabbath, Maiden and Priest, who's the opener on that show?   All four have or do tour stadia, all four are in or are in consideration for the RnRHoF, all four have at least one album that is a classic OUTSIDE their genre...   all four have a song that has trancended even the more general "metal" or "hard rock" boundaries.   Even your girlfriend knows Paranoid, Smoke and Living After Midnight.   I'm thinking she might not be all that up on "Antisocial" or "Symphony of Destruction" or "Raining Blood".

I'm a bit more of a thrash fan than you, but I certainly don't go deep and far prefer "classic metal" bands.  I love Metallica up through AJFA and tolerate the Black Album.  I love a couple Anthrax albums (Spreading the Disease and Among the Living), but you're right that they never moved beyond the "minor leagues."  I hate Megadeth and only like a couple Slayer songs (musically, but not vocally).  That said...

The opener of a Purple/Sabbath/Maiden/Priest is unquestionably either Maiden or Priest.  How to decide between the two I don't know; nor do I know which of Purple or Sabbath would headline.

Also, I'm wondering which Maiden and Priest albums are "classic OUTSIDE their genre" and which Maiden and Priest songs have "transcended . . . the more general 'metal' or 'hard rock' boundaries."  I hear Maiden songs fairly frequently at hockey games, but they're there precisely because they're metal songs and hard hitting (played for the same reason that they play Seek and Destroy).  Priest had a song in a car commercial a few years ago, but again, it was there precisely because it was a metal song.

My wife probably knows Paranoid (although not likely by name), but I seriously doubt she knows Living After Midnight.  She might know Breaking the Law and definitely knows at least half a dozen Metallica songs by name (and maybe a few others not by name).  If LAM is your example of a Priest song that transcended metal boundaries, maybe it did so 35+ years ago, but I'd lay good money that, with the possible exception of two guys who are in their 40s, none of the 15 or so people in my office are familiar with that song.  I also think Peace Sells is at least as "transcendent" as any Maiden song.

You don't think "You've Got Another Thing Comin'" isn't a crossover hit?   And if you're old enough - like me! - to remember when hard rock acts got played on MTV, you remember Rob standing in the middle of a train track while he was heading out to the highway...     

I would give everything you say fair shake and concede that we're arguing which apple tastes better (i.e. impossible) but I will take exception to the very last sentence.  Not on your life.  No f-----g way.  Over The Trooper?  Run To The Hills?   Flight of Icarus?   I don't think I buy that.

[bosk1]

The other thing that makes the comparison complete nonsense is cherry picking 3 bands from "trash metal" and "classic metal" genres and comparing their relative popularity.  The truth of the matter is that while Metallica, and to a much lesser extent, the rest of the "big 4" helped make thrash popular, and while it is also true that Metallica is HUGE and has had incredible longevity, the popularity of thrash as a whole does not come close to the popularity of "classic metal," no matter how you define it.  Let's expand the "big 4" to the "big 5" and include Testament.  Outside of those 5 bands, there really isn't another thrash band that hit it huge and had sustained success on that level.  But how many "classic metal" bands have had WAY more success, and done it over just as long a time period?  Many, many more.  It isn't really even a comparison.

[Stadler]

The other thing that makes the comparison complete nonsense is cherry picking 3 bands from "trash metal" and "classic metal" genres and comparing their relative popularity.  The truth of the matter is that while Metallica, and to a much lesser extent, the rest of the "big 4" helped make thrash popular, and while it is also true that Metallica is HUGE and has had incredible longevity, the popularity of thrash as a whole does not come close to the popularity of "classic metal," no matter how you define it.  Let's expand the "big 4" to the "big 5" and include Testament.  Outside of those 5 bands, there really isn't another thrash band that hit it huge and had sustained success on that level.  But how many "classic metal" bands have had WAY more success, and done it over just as long a time period?  Many, many more.  It isn't really even a comparison.

But that's kind of implicit in my point; you can't really say "Big Four" in Metal, but you CAN in thrash.  I guess Testament is there, too, as is Overkill, but we're running out of big name thrash acts pretty quickly.  And it's for that reason that I made the post I did.

[bosk1]

I know.  I'm not disagreeing with you.  I'm disagreeing with one of the premises of this thread. 

[jammindude]

And let's not forget that Metallica did not enter the stratosphere of "all time greatest heavy metal bands" until they discontinued being a thrash band. 

The first four albums are the template of thrash.   The Black Album is *not* thrash at all.   The fastest song on that album is Through the Never, and that's "uptempo" at best.   

[bosk1]

I disagree with a good many points in that post, but it doesn't really matter.  We don't need to quibble over definitions of "thrash" or when Meticallica was or was not a thrash band to recognize that trying to compare 3 thrash bands to 3 "classic metal" bands is silly.