Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

WACKEN proves metal is universalist

WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 07, 2008, 02:26:05 PM


Age, gender, nationality and social class mean nothing to the cult of metal. If you can make the horns, you can live the dream, as residents of Wacken displayed last week.

Wacken: Death Metal Lives

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 08, 2008, 03:46:16 AM
Oh god, I read that article on Spiegel. That festival was and continues to be an embarrassment for metal.

Burzum was right that Metal should probably not be played live. It completely ruins the art of Metal.

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 08, 2008, 03:54:48 AM

Burzum was right that Metal should probably not be played live. It completely ruins the art of Metal.

I don't know - the aesthetic of the live arena can play critical a part as well when executed properly...I'm thinking of seeing Slayer back in '85, Morbid Angel or Deicide in 90/91...that type of situation. Of course with regard to most metal, particularly of the newer, ever more vacuous variety and it's hipster followers, I suspect that statement is pretty accurate. 




 

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 08, 2008, 07:48:15 AM
Wacken Open Air has been commercial for quite a while now. Although it's a fact, it still is a good means to see some of the best bands live (carcass this year, and emperor two years ago). The rest is neglectible. Drunk people too drunk to enjoy the music. I think more than half won't remember they were there, as the delerium already set in during the first day...  A pity, but effectively in enduring the crappy bands though (krypteria, nightwish, sonata arctica and the likes).

Cigno


Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 15, 2008, 02:07:57 AM
Burzum was right that Metal should probably not be played live. It completely ruins the art of Metal.

Do you honestly think this?

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 17, 2008, 04:00:24 AM
Live shows are entertainment, not art.

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 17, 2008, 06:59:19 AM
Live shows are entertainment, not art.

So... there was no musical art until recording and playback devices were invented?

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 17, 2008, 07:25:44 AM
There was no way of getting the music apart from live.  The art is in the music.  If you already have the music then there is no other reason to go to a concert unless you want to see the musicians (celebrity worship) or hop around in a sweaty violent mass of people.  Honestly, give me a respectable reason why you would want to go to a concert and not just listen to an album.  I mean maybe the atmosphere and setting of a live concert could somehow add to the music, but I see nothing of the sort in metal concerts, a bunch of loud smelly drunk people jumping around and beating the shit out of each other, at the very most that could be considered "fun" by some people (never by me) but art is not about fun; if you go to concerts for fun, thats fine, a little entertainment is not a bad thing, but don't pretend that it somehow adds any artistic value to the music.

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 17, 2008, 04:17:46 PM
Sure some concerts are more entertainment, it depends to who your going... but there are live performances that do add artistic value to the music. You see music in it's purest form, with it's imperfections and alterations projecting the musicians current emotions. This has nothing to do with celebrity worship or beating the crap out of each other and sorts.

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 19, 2008, 05:28:54 AM
Some of the bands do have a sense and credubility to their works. most, I will agree, do need some work. metal is a art, no matter what. it is the most unique music that I've ever heard.
I think we need burzum and other ancient metal acts to stand back up in the world of the hessian culture.

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 19, 2008, 04:49:58 PM
Live shows add an extra dimension to the music that you can't get from speakers on your computer. There's is a different atmosphere that enhances the music. It's analogous to how some black metal bands would sound better if you heard them in a forest or in the mountains. Your surroundings are very important. Also, having the music completely engulf you, like in a show, is also preferable. Now, not all shows have a good atmosphere. As most have pointed out, there are a bunch of drunk retards at live shows. Surely not all shows are overrun by these people. Personally, I've only been to a few shows, since I live in a pretty remote area, and it is quite a surreal feeling. No other experience is quite like hearing your favorite band play live.

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
August 22, 2008, 04:46:59 AM
There was no way of getting the music apart from live.  The art is in the music.  If you already have the music then there is no other reason to go to a concert unless you want to see the musicians (celebrity worship) or hop around in a sweaty violent mass of people.  Honestly, give me a respectable reason why you would want to go to a concert and not just listen to an album.  I mean maybe the atmosphere and setting of a live concert could somehow add to the music, but I see nothing of the sort in metal concerts, a bunch of loud smelly drunk people jumping around and beating the shit out of each other, at the very most that could be considered "fun" by some people (never by me) but art is not about fun; if you go to concerts for fun, thats fine, a little entertainment is not a bad thing, but don't pretend that it somehow adds any artistic value to the music.

When I was younger, I used to go to a good amount of Metal shows. I would only go when the bands I enjoyed were playing. And while I never liked the, "metal" crowd, I still ended up leaving with some satisfaction. Looking back, I think the only thing I really enjoyed from these shows was the idea of seeing the band playing live instead of actually appreciating the music. It was like watching a movie, or a play. I was attracted to the entertainment aspect of the event. It had absolutely nothing to do with the artistic element in the music.

And now, being almost in my thirties, I can see it from an outside perspective and understand why I didn't enjoy it. The sound was too loud, the instruments weren't clear, and the crowd around you yelled moronic and indecipherable nonsense. And on top of that, you ended up going home smelling of smoke, weed, and the body odor of everyone around you. There wasn't much of a deep introspection of the music happening there because of these distractions. Another reason for this was because the music became a springboard for pomposity. The players became rock stars in front of your eyes, and the music took a backseat to the band flexing their egos and to the crowd feeding it. It all became disingenuous.

So I very much agree with the post I quoted. Metal shows have no interest to me at all at this point.

My two cents
August 22, 2008, 06:33:57 PM
For the sake of necroposting (my hobby) I have to chip in two cents:

I like going to see and support the good metal bands.

Invariably, I have to sit through someone's universalist rockstar dreams beforehand as local bands play. I like the idea of bands getting ahead. Somehow, however, concerts are usually a side route around recording a demo and having people realize it's good, kind of like socialization can be. "You have to hear them live, they don't come out on tape," can be true (bad production) but usually it's an excuse that means you can't enjoy this band unless you're stoned, drunk and distracted.

Then again, I feel all of rock music is a sham. The more I learned, the more I realized it was based on European popular music, not African tribal cults. Then I learned about how all the early acts were assembled explicitly as products, and how cynical the people behind them were. Then I saw how rock, jazz, blues, etc. are based around the same few ideas because they make good products: you can repeat the same structure, add formula to make it "unique," and hordes of uninformed people buy it. Rock concerts are even dumber than metal concerts.

Would I go to see, say, Averse Sefira or Demilich? Of course. Seeing the music reproduced live is a thrill. But at those shows, somehow, most people are mostly sober and paying attention. There's not much moshing. The music itself is the focus. I still don't like the rockstar aspect -- although frontmen such as Antti Bowman effectively slay it by being completely disinterested -- but there are some advantages to it.

I admit enjoying the basic aspects of performance. People come together, this loud music appears, and then energy gets synchronized to the patterns of the music. It is fascinating. It may even be awesome on psychedelics, although memory suffers. When I think of concerts that have blown me away however it's older stuff, like Slayer or Sepultura or Deicide or Suffocation.

I think, however, that every one in this thread should treat themselves to a live performance of one of the classical greats, like a Brahms or Schumann or Beethoven or Bruckner, not one of the trendy modern-classical-soundtrack artists that stupid metalheads like to bloviate on metal boards about. It adds another dimension to the performance, which does include recognition of the composer, but as a human being and not some plastic god.

Re: WACKEN proves metal is universalist
September 04, 2008, 06:50:25 PM
I believe Metal can be played live. However, it is not party music, as certain music groups try to prove.