The Chick Factor in Metal

[nailz]

I wouldn't say Ac/Dc is average. That's rediculious. Just because there is simplicity in something doesn't mean it's not amazing. Sometimes, the simplist things .. getting back to basics if you will.. can be the best kind of music. I have never seen Ac/Dc live, so thier stage presence didn't affect my enjoyment of their music. Quite the oppisite really. I love thier work because it's so... simple. In your world of Dream Theaters, and your Liquid Tensions, and your Blind Guardian (ANATO), and your Symphony X's...even Tool.. keep all the complexities.

I don't want to have to sit down and analize 2/15 2/14 3/8 beats and switching between them when I sit down and put on a CD. I personally get no enjoyment out of that. I would only assume that the majority of music enthusists (I would like to think I'm one of them) put on music to enjoy it because it's good music. Sure, I like complex bands. I'm not shunning them as bad music. Persoanlly, I think all the afformentioned bands (with the exception of dream theater .. just accept it, I think they're horrible musicians working together to create horrible music, I know damn well I'm wrong, so don't try and prove it to me.) are all incredibly talented. I also enjoy works of a more simple nature just as much, be it your Ac/Dc's or Freternia's, or early Blind Guardian, or hell... Sarah McGlauchl..whatever her name is.

Talent != Complexity. Talent = Sounds good.

[Flint the Dwarf]

AC/DC sucks.

Anyway, I agree that if people enjoy music without analyzing it, that's perfectly fine. As for me, I don't have to analyze complex music, I just know that it is and I'm fine with that. It gives me something to think about after I get used to it. There are two kinds of talent when dealing with music, and you both (Nailz and S_A)seem to be only admitting there's one kind. One kind is playing something complex and that is physically hard for people to play; that's talent. The other is conforming to the general populace's tastes; that is talent despite what you may think. I don't think a lot of those prog bands could conform for the life of them, but half the bands Nailz listens to do it like it's second nature.

Nailz doesn't understand complexities, so he goes for what he does understand. Simplicities. It takes just as much talent to play something simple that millions of people can enjoy as it does to play something complex that thousands of people can really appreciate. It's just a different kind of talent.

[Otohiko]

for Flint.

And a short at Nailz, who apparently doesn't realize that Mr. Fripp I've mentioned... consistently through 100's of posts... is behind some of the world's best simple but subtle guitar lines. For instance, the main "endless sustain" guitar theme in Bowie's 'Heroes'. Or my favorite song ever, Sylvian's 'Wave'. Don't tell me that's prog complexity!

[Set_Abominae]

You see, I can't just let people have a taste in music. It annoys me that there could possibly be no one with bad taste in music. I have dedicated my life to proving that some music utterly sucks and some music is wonderful, indefinitely.

You could call this being elitist and I won't mind.

I also realize that there are different kinds of talent, though I don't recognize 'appealing to the mainstream' as talent, as a monkey could do it. Talent is something not everyone can do, that's what makes it special. Becuase of this, I can only come to the conclusion that some bands have to bad and some have to good and some are just alright. Then I started to think what would qualify as talent in rock/metal. I came up with this.

Talent in rock/metal is made up of three parts:

1. Originality
2. Innovation
3. Instrumental virtuosity

Most people can't argue with the first but they feel the last is too elitist but here's my reasoning on it. Instrumentals are tools for making music. Just like any tool, you must be profficient in it's use in order to properly use it to its fullest potential. Take a forklift for example. If you aren't familiar with every facet of that piece of machinery, yuo really shouldn't be allowed to operate it. I feel the same way about instruments. Unless you are truly apt at playing an instrument, then you have no right to play it.

[nailz]

AC/DC sucks.

You're just mad cause I insulted dream theater.

There are two kinds of talent when dealing with music, and you both (Nailz and S_A)seem to be only admitting there's one kind. One kind is playing something complex and that is physically hard for people to play; that's talent. The other is conforming to the general populace's tastes; that is talent despite what you may think.

Playing what is familiar to people and not truely believing and loving what your doing is not talent. Anyone could do that. I agree with S_A's version of talent. That's fine. You're not going to catch me arguing that someone who can play drums like Mike Terrana, or can rip off a guitar solo like Michael Romeo is talentless would just be stupid, and I'd expect a bullet in my head.

I don't think a lot of those prog bands could conform for the life of them, but half the bands Nailz listens to do it like it's second nature.

Whatever you say. I'd rather a band play something that resembles familiarity than walks into a recording studio, shakes hands, jams (poorly) for 45 minuites, and rips out a CD calling it "complex." because thats excatly what it sounds like to me. Some bands just don't have talent. Be them Nu-Metal or Prog bands or Power Metal. Some bands DO have talent, be them Nu-Metal, Prog, or Power, whatever their style.

Unless you are truly apt at playing an instrument, then you have no right to play it.

Thats such total bull. How do you ever expect anyone to learn how to play? You can't just pick up and instrument and be graced with the abilities of Kenny G, you know.

And a short at Nailz, who apparently doesn't realize that Mr. Fripp I've mentioned... consistently through 100's of posts... is behind some of the world's best simple but subtle guitar lines

Who? I've seen you post about this Flap character, but as I have no idea who it is, and the name sounds stupid, I havent given it much thought.

[Vlad86]

You see, I can't just let people have a taste in music. It annoys me that there could possibly be no one with bad taste in music. I have dedicated my life to proving that some music utterly sucks and some music is wonderful, indefinitely.

How's the progress? Do you feel accomplished?

Please don't be the Siskel & Ebert of music.

I also realize that there are different kinds of talent, though I don't recognize 'appealing to the mainstream' as talent, as a monkey could do it. Talent is something not everyone can do, that's what makes it special. Becuase of this, I can only come to the conclusion that some bands have to bad and some have to good and some are just alright. Then I started to think what would qualify as talent in rock/metal. I came up with this.

Talent in rock/metal is made up of three parts:

1. Originality
2. Innovation
3. Instrumental virtuosity

Most people can't argue with the first but they feel the last is too elitist but here's my reasoning on it. Instrumentals are tools for making music. Just like any tool, you must be profficient in it's use in order to properly use it to its fullest potential. Take a forklift for example. If you aren't familiar with every facet of that piece of machinery, yuo really shouldn't be allowed to operate it. I feel the same way about instruments. Unless you are truly apt at playing an instrument, then you have no right to play it.

Unfortunately, once again, those depend on the individual.
To someone who has never heard anything like it, sure it'd be original to them
As much as you hate it, the musical tastes thing DOES play a big factor, though that doesn't mean they can't appreciate other music, they just don't like it.
People like what music sounds good to them, the only time someone has "good taste" or "bad taste" is when a group of individuals agree upon something. As in the group finds similar interests and dislikes.
If one was to venture from one of these groups into another, they'd find that they'd be the odd man out and have the bad taste in music.

Now the sizes of these groups varies, some may be huge and therefore considered "mainstream", while others are much, much smaller. That once again illustrates a difference in musical tastes.
It's like with movies where there may be a huge blockbuster, but not everyone thinks that its all that great, but those people in turn like other movies that were not as succesful, but those movies appeal to them. As in mainstream big movies like Lord of the Rings, and small-time "cult" movies like Army of Darkness and the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

As far as your forklift issue goes, that depends once again on the individual. There will be some that don't know much of anything about it except that it moves and it lifts. Then there are others that know every nook and crany about the machine and know exaclty how it will operate in varying conditions. But given time, even the basic know nothing will come to fully understand the machine. That is, the individual has gained "experience". How long have these "great" bands of yours been around? I'm sure quite longer than the genre of Nu-Metal itself.
Think of how Elvis was treated when he first came out. All the younger generations raved about him, while the older generations thought that he lacked talent and originality and was quit vulgar to music.
This proves that while great music that has existed before may be more complex, some people's tastes are looking for what's new. So, just because its new, doesn't mean its bad, it just means not everyone will like it.
Music is always constantly changing and there will be those that except the change, while others will refuse it. There's no true authority to say who is wrong or right. Music taste will vary from individual to individual, and there's nothing that can stop that.
One just needs to remember that what may be great to them, may not be great to everybody so don't delude yourself into thinking only your choice of music is the greatest form of music out there. It is only the greatest form of music to your tastes.

[Otohiko]

OKOK... before we get any further - I'm pretty much in the middle on this.

On one hand, I think anyone should be able to play and listen to whatever the hell they want to. This is why I've always been positive to reasonable fans of all kinds of music, even punk and pop.

On the other hand... and this is important...

I think people should listen to music for the right reasons. Don't go giving me this "Linkin' Park and Evanescence are forward-thinking bands that are going in the right direction for the 21st century". Like them? OK. Admit they're an accessible, relatable band with alright musical trappings, and then there is no problem.

But what part of them makes them more musically apt or forward-looking, or even better than, oh, say, Fripp which you oh-so-frantically dismissed? Or more musically interesting? I wouldn't accept them as outstandingly apt musically even with my moderate stance.

Why? Take Evanescence again. What's their music mainly composed of?
1) Decent vocals. Who doesn't have that? Female vocals. 50% of people in the world are female.
2) Rapping. How new is that? Even, how new is rap-rock? Not very. In fact, it's quite overused these days.
3) Slamming power chords. Oh. Well, I assure you, Mr. Fripp which Nailz so graciously dismissed, has been happily (or not-so-happily) slamming chords in big-time music since 1969. And even 35 years ago, I dare say he slammed some more bad-ass power chords than Evanescence would ever shake a stick at. And since then, rather than slamming the same power chords over and over, he seems to have found new ways of using them in music.
4) Some symphonic qualities (as, at least, Bring Me To Life seemed to suggest). Oh. Well, I assure you, Mr. Fripp which Nailz so graciously dismissed, has been doing symphonic-sounding stuff since 1969. And he's been finding cooler ways to use that since.

***

My suggestion is not that you stop liking your music. No, in fact, stick to what appeals best to you.

My suggestion is that you drop pretenses of innovation, musical skill or talent and listen to your music for what it is; and don't go around touting it for what it's not. The rock part of it, female vocals and epic/symphonic elements and all, hails back to the late 60's (and I dare say some people in the late 60's did that better). The rap part is maybe late 80's. The combo is like... 90's. And what year is it? Yep, we're getting close to mid-decade ladies and gentlemen.

***

So, two requests:

To elitists: stop denying people the right to play and listen to what they want.

To popularized-metal fans: stop pretending your music is anything beyond an accessible, fun, quite energetic but, alas, non-innovative set of power chords.

[Flint the Dwarf]

Nailz, I'm not bitter that you insult DT at every opportunity, but I really do dislike AC/DC.

Why? Take Evanescence again. What's their music mainly composed of?
1) Decent vocals. Who doesn't have that? Female vocals. 50% of people in the world are female.
2) Rapping. How new is that? Even, how new is rap-rock? Not very. In fact, it's quite overused these days.

Well, actually, she's got a great voice. She doesn't know how to use it as well as Tarja from Nightwish or many of the other lesser known metal bands but she does have a great voice (at least in my opinion, and many other people's opinions). And there's only slight rapping in one song, maybe two. Evanescence is actually very far from rap-rock.

But anyway, yeah, let people like whatever they like.

[Otohiko]

Indeed. BTW, as I said with LP - I'd like to apologize to any fans of Evanescence who were possibly offended. I don't have anything against their music, so long as there are no pretenses to them being the greatest band ever. If I find LP tolerable; I find Evanescence at least occasionally interesting. They're not great, but I think they make more effort than LP, even.

And that's words out of a jaded prog elitists for you.

[Set_Abominae]

Unfortunately, once again, those depend on the individual.
To someone who has never heard anything like it, sure it'd be original to them
As much as you hate it, the musical tastes thing DOES play a big factor, though that doesn't mean they can't appreciate other music, they just don't like it.
People like what music sounds good to them, the only time someone has "good taste" or "bad taste" is when a group of individuals agree upon something. As in the group finds similar interests and dislikes.
If one was to venture from one of these groups into another, they'd find that they'd be the odd man out and have the bad taste in music.

It's not really my fault that they choose not to listen to more variety of music. I'm still right in this. Sound, amazingly, has little to do with music. It's all about structure and composition. Because, someone could think that nails on a chalkboard is good music... but it's not. Like I said, take music theory and gain more of an understanding for and more appreciation for the complexities of music.

As for the group thing. No, absolutely not. Genres vary and had you said genres, I would agree with you. But you said "groups of people". Most people know little to nothing about music. They aren't really educated in music. They listen to music instead of appreciating it as an art form. I don't want to be condescending and say that they aren't sofisticated enough to make a decision on music but hell... they aren't.

Now the sizes of these groups varies, some may be huge and therefore considered "mainstream", while others are much, much smaller. That once again illustrates a difference in musical tastes.
It's like with movies where there may be a huge blockbuster, but not everyone thinks that its all that great, but those people in turn like other movies that were not as succesful, but those movies appeal to them. As in mainstream big movies like Lord of the Rings, and small-time "cult" movies like Army of Darkness and the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

No no no no nonononononononono... I am also an appreciator of film. I'm going to college for film. And the fact of the matter is, all genres of movie are judged the same. You don't have to have a taste for rape/revenge movies to know that Irreversible is a superb film. Movie genres only exist, just as genres exist in music, for organization... that's it. It really has nothing to do with taste. I'm not saying that people can't have taste. Rap isn't my thing but I still respect it as real and credible musical genre. But when speaking of bands in the same genre, they will be compared, contrasted, judged, and one will come up being better than the other.

As far as your forklift issue goes, that depends once again on the individual. There will be some that don't know much of anything about it except that it moves and it lifts. Then there are others that know every nook and crany about the machine and know exaclty how it will operate in varying conditions. But given time, even the basic know nothing will come to fully understand the machine. That is, the individual has gained "experience". How long have these "great" bands of yours been around? I'm sure quite longer than the genre of Nu-Metal itself.
Think of how Elvis was treated when he first came out. All the younger generations raved about him, while the older generations thought that he lacked talent and originality and was quit vulgar to music.
This proves that while great music that has existed before may be more complex, some people's tastes are looking for what's new. So, just because its new, doesn't mean its bad, it just means not everyone will like it.
Music is always constantly changing and there will be those that except the change, while others will refuse it. There's no true authority to say who is wrong or right. Music taste will vary from individual to individual, and there's nothing that can stop that.
One just needs to remember that what may be great to them, may not be great to everybody so don't delude yourself into thinking only your choice of music is the greatest form of music out there. It is only the greatest form of music to your tastes.

Once again, no! If you are only aware that a forklift moves and lifts, then you're skimming the surface. I can assure you, on a construction sight, there will be many that only know about the lifting and moving but one man that knows much more about the machine. That man, if the boss has any sense, will be the only one operating the forklift... because he is the best for the job.

The younger generation raved about Elvis because he was 'rebel', just as today's generation likes Linkin Park because they exploit the generation's angst. It's not hard to bond with an audience. It is hard to bond with an audience and still keep musical integrity and it's obvious that most people can't do that. Also, Elvis didn't even write his own stuff. Elvis had amazing stage presence, but as a musician he was average and as a song writer, he was devoid of talent. I respect Elvis for bringing rock n' roll to the mainstream. Beyond that, he's just all show.

I except change in music, as long as it isn't degenerating the previous form of music. This is why I despised most music from the ninties and most anything popular from the eighties. Keytars and power chords good music, they do not make.