Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Thrash versus Thrash Metal

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 07:45:36 PM
Quote

Except for Orion.

I think MOP was a decision point -- go prog or go metal. They tried prog, couldn't quite figure out the fusion, and so made AJFA and then gave up and became a hard rock band.

I call thrash "thrash" because it is an entirely separate genre.

DRI is fusion music; metal like Metallica is speed metal, parallel to other forms like heavy metal, doom metal, black metal, death metal.

"Thrash metal" implies a hybrid, and the two can't coexist, so we got a grindcore fusion (death metal) instead.


I think the two can definitely exist. Look at Nuclear Assault for example, they are a pretty even hybrid (even as in, they have about equal influence from each) of thrashcore and speed metal. You look at another band like Overkill or Overthrow and it is still metal, but not speed metal, and incorporates alot of thrashcore into the sound.

To see what I'm getting at, listen to Overthrow - Infection Overthrow, then Exciter - Heavy Metal Maniac, then just about anything by COC or DRI

Raise_the_Dead

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 09:41:13 PM
Quote
Testament is a Master of Puppets rip-off, and Master of Puppets nailed mediocrity and nothing else. It's sub-par thrash metal (or speed metal, if you insist on calling it that) that goes absolutely nowhere.


If MoP is sub-par, then I am interested in hearing what you consider good in the genre...

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 09:46:19 PM
Obviously me calling it sub-par is down to personal opinion.

Classics of the genre, in my opinion include:

Aggression - The Full Treatment
Infernal Majesty - None Shall Defy
Dark Angel - Darkness Descends
Destruction - Infernal Overkill

thats not all of them by the way, just what springs to mind first

Raise_the_Dead

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 10:08:40 PM
Quote
Obviously me calling it sub-par is down to personal opinion.

Classics of the genre, in my opinion include:

Aggression - The Full Treatment
Infernal Majesty - None Shall Defy
Dark Angel - Darkness Descends
Destruction - Infernal Overkill

thats not all of them by the way, just what springs to mind first


I've only heard the last two on that list, and I would say that MoP > both of them combined.  However, that's not to say that Darkness Descends (which at times sounds more like ambient music than metal) and Infernal Overkill are not great albums in their own right.

Oh, and I believe you forgot to mention Hell Awaits ;D

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 10:22:48 PM
Quote

I've only heard the last two on that list, and I would say that MoP > both of them combined.  However, that's not to say that Darkness Descends (which at times sounds more like ambient music than metal) and Infernal Overkill are not great albums in their own right.

Oh, and I believe you forgot to mention Hell Awaits ;D


Well my view on MoP:

Battery and Disposable Heroes were competent thrash, but pretty generic. Disposable Heroes was far too long as well.

The Thing That Should Not Be, useless, plodding piece of crap that goes nowhere.

Welcome Home (Sanitarium) - no place on a thrash metal album (or any metal album)

Leper Messiah - good in parts, in other parts, it had the same failings as The Thing...

Damage Inc. - competent thrash metal, but generic


I'm interested though, how do you think Darkness Descends is ambient in parts?

Oh, and I only really like Show No Mercy by Slayer. I recognise Hell Awaits and Reign In Blood as new and innovative at the time, but these days they are just boring to me.

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 10:43:13 PM
Quote
Disposable Heroes was far too long as well.

The Thing That Should Not Be, useless, plodding piece of crap that goes nowhere.

Welcome Home (Sanitarium) - no place on a thrash metal album (or any metal album)

Damage Inc. - competent thrash metal, but generic


I agree on these, which was a surprise to me. I haven't listened to MOP in years, and I can see there might be a reason why. It plods, and it's very obvious.

Orion kicks ass however.

The first Metallica album may be the most solid, but I like Ride the Lightning the most. A good mix of ambition and proven formula.

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 10:49:59 PM
Kill 'Em All accomplished everything it set out to do, but the problem is that what it set out to do is not the greatest of objectives. It's a fun album, but that's all it is. Good for a few listens every now and then when you're in an easy-going mood or at a party or something.

Ride the Lightning is a far more 'serious' album, but it just doesn't appeal to me.

Master of Puppets I don't like for the reasons I outlined in my last post :D

Raise_the_Dead

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 11:04:13 PM
As a whole I don't think any of Metallica's classic material is any more plodding, directionless, useless, etc. than anything else I've heard in the genre (save a few bands).  However, sometimes you wonder if they really needed to repeat the verse or chorus a third time in just about every single song.

Quote
Welcome Home (Sanitarium) - no place on a thrash metal album (or any metal album)


I think it's one of the best songs because it's one of the only ones that breaks out of the plodding structural format that ASBO mentioned.  I also find the theme of insanity (which is also present in Kreator's Pleasure to Kill) interesting and reflective of the era in which the musicians lived.

Quote
I'm interested though, how do you think Darkness Descends is ambient in parts?


Most speed metal brings you down to earth; when listening to this album I find myself up in the clouds.  It's difficult to describe, but the music is so consistent, even repetitive, and pummeling, that it drives itself into your skull.  That could be said of lots of bands obviously, but I find that album to have its own atmosphere, which coincidentally, is very similar to that on Hell Awaits, even though the sound / production style is different.  Listening to it is a lot like listening to Burzum, Havohej, and early Suffocation (in my experience, of course).

EDIT: Come to think of it, maybe Dark Angel made better use of repetition than Metallica did...

Quote
Orion kicks ass however.
 
The first Metallica album may be the most solid, but I like Ride the Lightning the most. A good mix of ambition and proven formula.


I agree with all of this.

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 09, 2008, 11:48:04 PM
I really dont like Dark Angel. just play as fast as you can and brag about how many riffs you have on an album. right. thats deep.

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 11, 2008, 10:39:27 AM
Quote
I really dont like Dark Angel. just play as fast as you can and brag about how many riffs you have on an album. right. thats deep.

That was a marketing tact for simply one of their albums. I'd recommend listening to Leave Scars, one hell of an album. It has the aggression of Kreator's Endless Pain and the death metal abrasiveness, as well as the clarity, of Hell Awaits. Interestingly enough, one of the songs sounds like "Kill Again."

Trauco

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 11, 2008, 11:20:37 AM
Quote
That was a marketing tact for simply one of their albums.


I think the marketing tactic was for "Time does not Heal", where they blatantly put the info on the duration of the album and the number of riffs on the cover and the liner notes of the re-edition.

Trauco

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 11, 2008, 12:35:02 PM
Quote
Most speed metal brings you down to earth; when listening to this album I find myself up in the clouds.  It's difficult to describe, but the music is so consistent, even repetitive, and pummeling, that it drives itself into your skull.  That could be said of lots of bands obviously, but I find that album to have its own atmosphere, which coincidentally, is very similar to that on Hell Awaits, even though the sound / production style is different.  Listening to it is a lot like listening to Burzum, Havohej, and early Suffocation (in my experience, of course).

EDIT: Come to think of it, maybe Dark Angel made better use of repetition than Metallica did...


When re-listening to the album, I can see your point. The production is made for instruments to collide into each other and certain riffs are not exactly made to fit with its corresponding background drum patterns (like the verses on "Hunger of the Undead"), which makes them sound "hypnotic" in the same way of Discharge's HNSNSN.

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 11, 2008, 03:03:03 PM
Quote

Testament is a Master of Puppets rip-off, and Master of Puppets nailed mediocrity and nothing else. It's sub-par thrash metal (or speed metal, if you insist on calling it that) that goes absolutely nowhere. I'm actually nearly inclined to agree with UltraBoris on M-A and his idea that MoP was just Ulrich's accomplishment of his mission: laying waste to Metallica and metal for whatever reason.

When I read the review for the first time I was angry at him but as time time was going on, I started to realize that he is right.

Back on the topic, I would also like to see Slayer over Metallica. And BTW, from those old school bands that are Speed/thrash I still prefer Motorhead althought they are far from being speed and/or thrash

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 11, 2008, 04:06:47 PM
Quote
That was a marketing tact for simply one of their albums. I'd recommend listening to Leave Scars, one hell of an album. It has the aggression of Kreator's Endless Pain and the death metal abrasiveness, as well as the clarity, of Hell Awaits. Interestingly enough, one of the songs sounds like "Kill Again."


everyone keeps telling me to listen to that album. ive heard "Darkness Descends" and "Time Does Not Heal". both were boring overhyped garbage. i dont have a desire to hear any more of their music.

Re: Thrash versus Thrash Metal
June 30, 2008, 08:33:07 PM
To a lot of us speed metal sounds overblown, if not overhyped. It's too "rock."