Metal Reviews

To me it seems like symphonic BM comes out of black metal and shares a lot more than just the vocals. It's got differences but all genres change over time (ie Candlemass and Skepticism are both called doom metal). Except thrash metal olol

The black metal I know is resistant to change, indeed it actively disaproves of it.

so maybe if you looked into the black metal you don't know you might find some post 1998 metal that wasn't shit

In response to the original post I'd say it depends a great deal on how much you genuinly care for the artform. I'm a metalhead in what I would call its true form, I love its varying genres and wear all the colors with pride. I'm especially fond of death metal and both respect and cherish the past but I won't let that prevent a natural evolution to occur. Not like I could anyway, people are always going to continue to incorperate elements of a sound regardless of what a few naysayers may think or feel.

IIRC there are a few proverbs along the lines of(and forgive my inaccuracies) "To dwell on the past is to forfit the future". I believe this to be true in many aspects, and to condemn modern practices as less-than-worthy without a full appreciation and understanding of the natural reasons behind them is the lifeblood of ignorance. Growth and evolution are a necessity lest anything become stale and stagnate which then withers and dies, hence many genres eventual dry spells. Those who choose to carry on the torch do so not out of plagiarism but out of a genuine passion for the music and artists of ol' whilst seeking to offer their own twist on a tried and true artform.

As mentioned I am a metalhead and love all eras of metal both old & new. If I were to limit myself to one or the other would only be my loss, and have nothing to prove. I know I love the music and what anyone else thinks is of no importance. And in terms of looking to and appreciating the future, imagine what would happen if scientists and scholars had continued to teach that the world was flat, society would be far different and less developed. And the continued research and theories following the "Global Discoveries", which happened over the course of many mens lifetimes. They continued other mens work and added to it, which I find admirable and commendable. This year alone has seen some absolutely incredible releases completely deserving of praise from bands of every caliber, and I'd hate to think I'd be missing out if I was more close-minded./2cents

Yeah exactly, I try to steer clear of the genre police stuff as much as possible.

Start adding folk elements to BM and it becomes folk/black metal, or eventually it just beomes plain folk metal. Starting adding industrial elements it becomes industrial/black metal until it gets to the stage of all BM elements being eschewed and it just becomes industrial metal. Genre crossing is a common thing, and black metal is no different to any other type of music in this sense.

Symphonic BM to me clearly does exist, it's just that a lot of the bands given the tag (like latter day Dimmy, CoF) don't actually fit the parameters, so it's more a case of some of the biggest so-called examples of the style being erroneous rather than the whole thing being a fallacy.

So the whole grim, recorded in a basement, limited to 50 demotapes thing is somehow a much more "trve" form of the music?. I never understood that whole "black metal warrior" bullshit and the bands that spawn their entire existence around that aesthetic. Why would anyone want to listen to shitty Black Witchery when you could pop in De mysteriis dom Sathanas?

I don't understand what why people listen to Black Metal in general. But if you're going to call it black metal, at least have it sound like it.

I know!!, but I mean the genre as a whole is a self-parody. They advocate a "trve" mentality when the music by itself sounds like shit. I guess they laud a band who sticks to the select flock of 5 fans, I mean what else do you call the stream of bedroom demos, with their depictions of christ being fucked by a goatheaded entity,sold from the back of their cars at Profanatica gigs. Its shit, and they have the nerve to insult bands that rise beyond a cult following and face it become better then those tremolo picking n3cro shit bands. I mean look at all of the interviews from Christ Agony, Gontyna Kry, and all of the Polish NSBM (oxymoron) bands after Behemoth became famous. They took a shit on them because they ditched the 'trve' black metal aesthetic. I mean I can listen to some Sarcofago and still crack on newer Emperor. I don't see all of the hatred for the addition of melody.

I don't see where I said anything of the sort.
I never understood the whole "brooooohhh-brooh-brooohh-broooooh" "tap-tap-tap" "chugga chug chug" bullshit about raping dead kids and mutilating women with meathooks while jerking your pud in furrow-browed squinty-eyed confusion, personally; but apparently some do.
So what's your point?
BTW, I don't dig Black Witchery or their ilk... if that is what you consider to be underground, real Black Metal, than that would explain a lot.

Who said music with melody can't be enjoyed?
The issue is that "symphonic" Black Metal is a misnomer.

The way I see it the classic bands are the maintainers of the genre's sound where the underground bands are more willing to venture out and explore many more elements to add flavor to the music. Not saying the more classic bands aren't willing to experiment, it just seems like more of a common trend for the more notables to maintain a sound for a few or several albums then alter their sound slightly.

The classic bands are the ones we think of when we think of the genre. The underground bands can rise but in the case of black metal which we're talking about now I don't think they'll ever have the notoriety of the early/mid 90's bands. Bands like Deathspell Omega pop up and get quite a bit of credit, but they still just don't have what darkthrone, mayhem, and emperor and the likes have and to be honest won't have as many listeners, keeping them further in the underground.

Yeah, Br00tal death metal was another example of why I made this thread. But even more then that I guess my point in making this thread was trying to reach a middleground on up and coming bands in the underground releasing their material as opposed the quality of a genres starters. But I mean if someone seriously advocates bedroom black metal or lets use the more nominal term "underground" black metal somehow exceeds the quality of established bands, I'd like to read some good examples or reasons. Not to deride any of my "kvlt" fellow posters

I'm of the mind that a lot of Black Metal, is indeed shit. I listen to it once in a moon, but honestly prefer traditional / NWOBHM / Thrash.
The thing is, their are certain aspects of the genre that are undeniably honest and that comes out. The whole corpse-paint'd warrior thing is goofy, but I listen to music and couldn't care less about image.
Meh, there's something in this world for everybody, I guess.

aha yes, agreed but also I've never heard a compelling argument why Cradle of filth are not black metal either!!!!

The early Norwegian BM bands wanted to kidnap and murder Swedish Death musicians. It's not some new thing that BM bands have to be all hateful and stuff.

they shouldve got Opeth when they had the chance

Opeth rule. I love the story about when Akerfeldt and Ihsahn first met, and Ihsahn was all 'so, you are Satanists?' and Akerfeldt said 'nah, we're hippies!'

haven't heard of that one, Akerfeldt is one hell of a vocalist and writer though; I can admit this in spite of the fact Opeth blows

Opeth doesn't blow, but this thread does. Not to mention it's as nonsensical as fuck.

for once i agree with octavarius.....