# Acclimation, Heavy Metal, and 20th Century Music



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

This title is about as good as I could do to summarize the stuff I want to opine about. We all grow up listening to certain music, and that music generally ends up sounding good or pleasant throughout our whole life, or at least we understand it well enough. But new music requires that you become acclimated to the new things in the new music. Sometimes you can't figure out what there is to be enjoyed in a new style of music until you listen to it a bit and start understanding its idiom.

I started listening to classical music pretty heavily about 10 months or so ago. Before that I was very into metal, prog, rock, and anything in between, old and new. Progressive music became my favorite kind because of the deviations from the norm, the long and complex structures, and the general technicality and musicality required of it. At some point I was randomly curious about classical music, because my idea of it was that it was complex, interesting, and had a lot of little details and nuggets out of every passage which is the kind of thing that I like in music.

Ok, so I started out listening to Mozart, Bach, Beethoven and such, and at first I could not really understand what I was listening to. I found it boring, hard to follow, and I just didn't have a context to place the sounds I was listening to in. They didn't fit anywhere in my head of the genres I knew, so I just didn't know what to make of it. Mahler's 2nd symphony was my breakaway piece that I first truly loved, then other really tuneful great pieces like Eroica, Bruckner's 8th, Schubert's 9nth, then gradually I started to like pretty much everything else in between once certain pieces got through to me.

I'm going somewhere with this, I promise. Ok, now 20th century music is something that also totally confused me. I already had common practice stuff, and even the stuff in between (Wagner, Debussy), sounding good to my ears. But 20th century stuff (Trying to avoid the word atonal. Non-tonal?) really was unlike anything else I had ever heard before. Once again, I could compare it to nothing, and it just seemed very difficult. But I kept listening, and while I don't quite love it (yet) I feel much more acclimated to it than I was before, and there are experiences I have from listening to this music that I've never gotten from another style, and I find these experience enjoyable. I can only imagine that if I listen to it more, it will reveal itself more and more to me.

This leads me to my ultimate point. I'm also a big fan of really heavy metal and prog metal that uses screams, growls, and all that. People often rebuke this kind of stuff as trash, and devoid of artistic merit. I posit that of all contemporary genres of music, that metal, death metal, prog metal, black metal, viking metal, you name it, are the genres that are most exploratory, most complex musically, and most forward looking today. Things like jazz and blues might compete, but they're all but extinct as contemporary genres. Now finally, my really really ultimate point, is that not only would fans of only common practice, pre-20th century music balk at metal music with growls, but even those who fully embrace the (what I see as) craziness of 20th century music would also balk at this music.

My hypothesis is that it's all a matter of acclimation. When people say they don't hear 20th century music as noise but as beautiful, harmonic, lyrical music full of drama, I think the same thing when people say screaming/growling music is just noise. I don't hear it that way, I hear rhythmic and harmonic complexity, and the timbre of the growls is something I'm used to, and is actually inherently rhythmically lyrical since it's actual words being growled, and our human brains like to latch on to that lyrical rhythm.

Sorry for the very long post, but I wanted to get my hypothesis in context, and I'd like to know what you guys think. I invite especially those who hate this kind of music, and I'd be interested to know why you hate it.


----------



## Proms Fanatic (Nov 23, 2014)

As you allude to in your opening paragraph, we are creatures of habit and we tend to like more of the same that we're already used to. In any walk of life, you have to make a concerted effort to try new, unknown things. After all, if a human 10,000 years ago was living successfully doing the things they were doing, they'd need a really good reason to try something new that might end up resulting in their death.

I grew up listening to generic chart pop music, then my tastes broadened in two ways; I listened to a lot of trance/house and indie/rock music. I had listened to bits of classical music at university but only really got into it after I left.

With Classical Music I used to detest "modern" works (like many people seem to do) but I went to a concert by Daniel Barenboim and the Berlin Staatskapelle where he conducted Schoenberg's Variations for Orchestra. Prior to the work he spent ~20 minutes explaining what the work was all about. This really opened my eyes as to the richness of the music and how much effort composers put into their work. Ever since then my tastes have been slowly migrating forwards in time away from Classical and Romantic to more 20th Century and Contemporary works.

At university, most of my friends were heavy/thrash metal fans so I went to a few gigs. I certainly wouldn't call myself a trash metal fan but I can appreciate why people like, particularly in a live setting.

Both experiences seem to demonstrate to me that if you understand what the artist is trying to convey and you make an effort to at least appreciate the music, you can become acclimatised to it and start enjoying it more.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

My main problem with harsh vocals is not the harshness itself, but rather that they are usually boring and lacking in musical substance. The rhythms (in my experience) aren't usually very interesting, and both pitch and timbre tend not to vary very much. Distorted guitar sounds harsh and aggressive as well, and often fans of harsh vocals make the point that since the guitar is distorted it makes sense for the vocals to be "distorted" as well. But the difference is that distorted guitar has always a definite pitch, unlike growls/screams. So you cannot create "melodies" in the normal sense of the word with such vocal style. Or even in a quite wide sense of the word - totally unsingable bruutal death metal riffs are "melodic" in a sense the vocals of such genre are not.

The most interesting harsh vocals I have heard were on Psycroptic's The Scepter of the Ancients album. The vocalist mixes very high screeches and low growls plus all sorts of weird sounds.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Dim7 said:


> My main problem with harsh vocals is not the harshness itself, but rather that they are usually boring and lacking in musical substance. The rhythms (in my experience) aren't usually very interesting, and both pitch and timbre tend not to vary very much. Distorted guitar sounds harsh and aggressive as well, and often fans of harsh vocals make the point that since the guitar is distorted it makes sense for the vocals to be "distorted" as well. But the difference is that distorted guitar has always a definite pitch, unlike growls/screams. So you cannot create "melodies" in the normal sense of the word with such vocal style. Or even in a quite wide sense of the word - totally unsingable bruutal death metal riffs are "melodic" in a sense the vocals of such genre are not.
> 
> The most interesting harsh vocals I have heard were on Psycroptic's The Scepter of the Ancients album. The vocalist mixes very high screeches and low growls plus all sorts of weird sounds.


I think the way to look at the harsh vocals is as more of a timbrally percussive effect that adds atmosphere to the music, and as I mentioned, a rhythmically lyrical aspect. Generally, in the metal music I like, the guitars are doing such complicated riffs, that THEY are the focus of the melodic listening, and it would in fact be impossible to sing over them, they're just too fast and unorthodox. So growls are the perfect method to add that human lyrical element without having to bother with trying to find a vocal line that can follow such complex music.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Dream Theater is incredible and the symphonic nature of their instrumentation and vocals with deep lyrics showcases the possibilities of what heavy metal can do on an intellectual and emotional level.

Harsh vocals... well we have Berg's Lulu for sure!


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Albert7 said:


> Dream Theater is incredible and the symphonic nature of their instrumentation and vocals with deep lyrics showcases the possibilities of what heavy metal can do on an intellectual and emotional level.
> 
> Harsh vocals... well we have Berg's Lulu for sure!


I'm not even talking about Dream Theater, even though they are my favorite band. Dream Theater has no harsh vocals, I think most classical people could see the merit in it pretty quickly, at least I'd hope. I'm talking about things like Opeth, Between the Buried and Me, Meshuggah, Arch Enemy, Necrophagist, etc. Actual growling bands, that, to me, have a lot of musical merit. At least to my ears. And all of them for different reasons, there's different cool things about them.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Dedalus said:


> Generally, in the metal music I like, the guitars are doing such complicated riffs, that THEY are the focus of the melodic listening, and it would in fact be impossible to sing over them, they're just too fast and unorthodox.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Dim7 said:


>


I take your point. So perhaps it's not impossible, some bands make it work. Still, I stand firm on the idea that the growled vocals are more of a percussive and rhythmically lyrical sound that adds a certain kind of ambiance that traditional singing just doesn't bring. It brings something different, and if one is acclimated to it, something really cool and visceral.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

I've listened and played it since I was a kid, and I've listened the old stuff and a good deal of new things, technical death metal, djent, war metal and other sub genres with funny names. So don't think I have problems of acclimation, and especially for the new stuff certainly I would never put the genre on the same level with classical music or jazz. I hear too much clichès, too much preoccupation with the display of speed and technique, too much superficial melodrama. The paradox is that some of those guys who sounds like they have studied (like Nick Llerandi) sounds like they don't know exactly what to do with their knowledge and throw everything together so that the result sounds at once academic and congested.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

norman bates said:


> The paradox is that some of those guys who sounds like they have studied (like Nick Llerandi) sounds like they don't know exactly what to do with their knowledge and throw everything together so that the result sounds at once academic and congested.


Yeah, to me the "complexity" of technical death metal and prog metal seems very superficial and uninspired. Like let's throw a strange time signature here.... Exotic scalar run here... Random tempo change. Everything stops abruptly... fast guitar soloing. Then it all ends on a riff that's not related to anything at all. I'm more impressed by catchy verse-chorus pop music frankly.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Dim7 said:


> Yeah, to me the "complexity" of technical death metal and prog metal seems very superficial and uninspired. Like let's throw a strange time signature here.... Exotic scalar run here... Random tempo change. Everything stops abruptly... fast guitar soloing. Then it all ends on a riff that's not related to anything at all. I'm more impressed by catchy verse-chorus pop music frankly.


So it's fair to say that you guys don't think it's a matter of acclimation, but the music is actually inferior? I obviously disagree with the stuff you said about technical death metal & ect., but it's fair enough if you think those things.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Dedalus said:


> So it's fair to say that you guys don't think it's a matter of acclimation, but the music is actually inferior? I obviously disagree with the stuff you said about technical death metal & ect., but it's fair enough if you think those things.


my main problem is well expressed in the last post of Dim7. 
Anyway I'm curious to know what are some of the most interesting pieces you have in mind.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Opeth, Ghost of Perdition





 Periphery, Frak the gods





 Between the Buried and me, this one is a playlist, if you're feeling adventurous listen through at least the first few tracks, truly some of the most beautiful music I've ever heard


----------



## Chipomarc (Jul 18, 2015)

That sounds like the stuff that John Cusack forbid Jack Black to play inside his record shop in the movie High Fidelity.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

In my early teens, I listened to the late '60s top 40 charts. By the start of the '70s, I had gotten into buying albums and I liked the heavy, hard and psychedelic bands, especially if they used a lot of electronics and were what we used to call underground, which meant roughly experimental, art or avant garde. The light fluffy pop bands from the radio bored me. That has pretty much remained constant throughout my life; hence, many metal and prog bands appeal to me to a certain degree, while the light, primarily vocal pop artists rarely ever do. I concur with Proms Fanatic that metal in live settings (club atmosphere, not concert) has a certain appeal. Like Dim7 says, I find that most rock vocals are pretty boring. Luckily, most of the time the vocals are difficult to make out  I find the beat, the rhythm, the drumming—that incessant pounding—to really get on my nerves pretty quickly, though. Perhaps it's that I've been listening to rock for quite a few decades, but somehow, despite the countless derivative sub-genres, it ends up mostly being just a variation on a theme for me. I like some good kickass rock every once in a while, but after about an album, my head is screaming for classical.


----------



## Lord Lance (Nov 4, 2013)

Dedalus said:


> So it's fair to say that you guys don't think it's a matter of acclimation, but the music is actually inferior? I obviously disagree with the stuff you said about technical death metal & ect., but it's fair enough if you think those things.


Wrong audience, man. Metalheads should go elsewhere.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Lord Lance said:


> Wrong audience, man. Metalheads should go elsewhere.


This is the non-classical section here LOL. Metalheads are hanging out here just fine.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

There are vocalists who mix screeches with growls, and grunts with croaks. But yea, I wouldn't go to this if wide dynamics is what I'm looking for. 

This kind of music is really about something else... maybe some kind of painful reconciliation that what you think you are is quite hopeless and will inevitably turn to dust. I don't know about anyone else, but every time I listen to metal it's always used as some kind of catharsis. Not really an intellectual stimulus.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

brotagonist said:


> Like Dim7 says, I find that most rock vocals are pretty boring. Luckily, most of the time the vocals are difficult to make out


Well just to be clear I didn't say "most rock vocals are pretty boring" (in fact I vastly prefer rock/pop vocals to opera style singing). I was specificially talking about harsh vocals, and not just the slightly "gritty" kind, but the the kind of unmelodic screaming and growling you find in extreme forms of metal like death metal and black metal.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Dim7 said:


> ...I vastly prefer rock/pop vocals to opera style singing...


That's acclimation  While I've usually cringed, when the texts in most of my rock music were decipherable, I also had a problem with operatic singing. I used to describe it as shrieking, but I have now become acclimatized and it is apparent to my ears that these singers really know how to sing-and not just yell into a microphone.

If you're interested in developing a taste for 'real' singing, I'd suggest that you listen to Lieder with texts by poets you're interested in.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

brotagonist said:


> That's acclimation  While I've usually cringed, when the texts in most of my rock music were decipherable, I also had a problem with operatic singing. I used to describe it as shrieking, but I have now become acclimatized and it is apparent to my ears that these singers really know how to sing-and not just yell into a microphone.


they don't know how to sing more than pop/rock singers. They learn to use the operatic style, which is a style devoleped in a era when microphones didn't exist and so they had to have volume at the expense of naturalness.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

brotagonist said:


> That's acclimation  While I've usually cringed, when the texts in most of my rock music were decipherable, I also had a problem with operatic singing. I used to describe it as shrieking, but I have now become acclimatized and it is apparent to my ears that these singers really know how to sing-and not just yell into a microphone.
> 
> If you're interested in developing a taste for 'real' singing, I'd suggest that you listen to Lieder with texts by poets you're interested in.


Trust me, I've tried to like it. I have become increasingly tolerant of it, but seem to be stuck there. Pop/rock vocals not only sound more natural and better, but also more "individual". To a degree it probably is so because I'm not as familiar with "operatic" vocals, but I don't think it is merely that. On the classical side singing technique is much more formalized and also the technical restraints of volume restrict individuality IMO.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Dim7 said:


> On the classical side singing technique is much more formalized and also the technical restraints of volume restrict individuality IMO.


Classical singing _is_ more formalized and _that_ is what makes it singing, as distinguished from merely belting out lyrics _with individuality_  No offence. I understand that it just doesn't work for you. It didn't for me, for a long while, either.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Blake said:


> There are vocalists who mix screeches with growls, and grunts with croaks. But yea, I wouldn't go to this if wide dynamics is what I'm looking for.
> 
> This kind of music is really about something else... maybe some kind of painful reconciliation that what you think you are is quite hopeless and will inevitably turn to dust. I don't know about anyone else, but every time I listen to metal it's always used as some kind of catharsis. Not really an intellectual stimulus.


This is basically the old "metal is all about hate, nihilism, and sadness". A lot of metal does deal with dark even morbid topics, but it's not like listening to that should actually make you sad or hateful. Think about horror films where we see people getting hacked to pieces for our entertainment, or about art that depicts horrible things. Not only this, but a lot of metal is in fact not about dark topics at all, the content of the lyrics aren't what make the genre, it's the music.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

norman bates said:


> they don't know how to sing more than pop/rock singers. They learn to use the operatic style, which is a style devoleped in a era when microphones didn't exist and so they had to have volume at the expense of naturalness.


I was also not used to the operatic style of singing at first, but I've since come to like it. But I think you're implicitly committing the naturalistic fallacy, by saying they have to have volume at the "expense" of naturalness, as if being natural is innately good. In neither styles are the singers trying to be natural, but to sound the best and most fitting for their style.


----------



## Chipomarc (Jul 18, 2015)

I've heard that those Heavy Metal types are all on marijuana, and never take out content insurance when they rent a apartment


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Dedalus said:


> I was also not used to the operatic style of singing at first, but I've since come to like it. But I think you're implicitly committing the naturalistic fallacy, by saying they have to have volume at the "expense" of naturalness*, as if being natural is innately good.*


Yes I think it's good because I see a singer like an actor, and the richness and uniqueness of every person (something that for me has more value than incredible range and perfect pitch) get lost when one is trying to use the operatic style. But don't get me wrong, I think that Maria Callas was a astonishing singer, I can appreciate that too. But I'm glad that there are also Iris DeMent or Rosa Balistreri.



Dedalus said:


> In neither styles are the singers trying to be natural, but to sound the best and most fitting for their style.


is this not natural singing for you?


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

norman bates said:


> Yes I think it's good because I see a singer like an actor, and the richness and uniqueness of every person (something that for me has more value than incredible range and perfect pitch) get lost when one is trying to use the operatic style. But don't get me wrong, I think that Maria Callas was a astonishing singer, I can appreciate that too. But I'm glad that there are also Iris DeMent or Rosa Balistreri.
> 
> is this not natural singing for you?


I'm just saying that stating something is natural does not in any way imply that it is good. Computers are manmade and great, cancer is natural and terrible. There is nothing natural about the instruments used in an orchestra. Something can sound natural and terrible as well as sound unnatural and beautiful

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Dedalus said:


> I'm just saying that stating something is natural does not in any way apply that it is good. Computers are manmade and great, cancer is natural and terrible. There is nothing natural about the instruments used in an orchestra. Something can sound natural and terrible as well as sound unnatural and beautiful


I absolutely agree with everything in this post. I don't think that everything is natural is great. And there are obviously natural voices that I find terrible for many reasons. I'm just contesting the idea that a formalized approach to singing is better exactly because it removes individuality, as Brotagonist has said few posts ago.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Dedalus said:


> This is basically the old "metal is all about hate, nihilism, and sadness". A lot of metal does deal with dark even morbid topics, but it's not like listening to that should actually make you sad or hateful. Think about horror films where we see people getting hacked to pieces for our entertainment, or about art that depicts horrible things. Not only this, but a lot of metal is in fact not about dark topics at all, the content of the lyrics aren't what make the genre, it's the music.


You're deluding yourself in believing that what one consumes does not impact the mind, body and spirit. We are what we consume-think of the destructive influence the media wields over our society. The masses have been brainwashed into believing the dehumanizing lie that is consumerism and they love nothing more than to consume trash.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Morimur said:


> You're deluding yourself in believing that what one consumes does not impact the mind, body and spirit. We are what we consume-think of the destructive influence the media wields over our society. The masses have been brainwashed into believing the dehumanizing lie that is consumerism and they love nothing more than to consume trash.


Back in the 80's and 90's there was a big scare about violent video games causing violence in children. Well it turns out all these kids grew up just fine, and ever study suggests that playing violent video games doesn't result in any violent tendencies. I think the evidence suggests that we are able to appreciate things without them slowly creeping into our subconscious and affecting our behavior. Personal anecdote: Metalheads (including myself) tend to be rather thoughtful and peaceful compared to the general population.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Dedalus said:


> Back in the 80's and 90's there was a big scare about violent video games causing violence in children. Well it turns out all these kids grew up just fine, and ever study suggests that playing violent video games doesn't result in any violent tendencies. I think the evidence suggests that we are able to appreciate things without them slowly creeping into our subconscious and affecting our behavior. Personal anecdote: Metalheads (including myself) tend to be rather thoughtful and peaceful compared to the general population.


I think the evidence suggest the exact opposite and you'd have to be willfully blind not see it. One can't even go to a mall without worrying about being shot at by one of the many sociopaths our 'peaceful' society keeps churning out en masse.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Morimur said:


> I think the evidence suggest the exact opposite and you'd have to be willfully blind not see it. One can't even go to a mall without worrying about being shot at by one of the many sociopaths our 'peaceful' society keeps churning out en mass.


Well the general trend of history is and continues to be toward being more civilized and more peaceful. Sure random shootings happen by crazy people, but in general, the world is objectively safer than it was hundreds of years ago, despite whatever pop culture you think is controlling our minds.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Dedalus said:


> Well the general trend of history is and continues to be toward being more civilized and more peaceful. Sure random shootings happen by crazy people, but in general, the world is objectively safer than it was hundreds of years ago, despite whatever pop culture you think is controlling our minds.


This is quite true, and the decline in the rates of all sorts of violence over the past centuries is truly startling (except for deaths in wars, which seem to be holding steady). The subject has been thoroughly explored in Pinker's _The Better Angels of our Nature: Why Violence has Declined_.

http://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels...=1-1&keywords=the+better+angels+of+our+nature

Naturally reading the daily papers or watching TV news may give a different impression.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Dedalus said:


> This is basically the old "metal is all about hate, nihilism, and sadness". *A lot of metal does deal with dark even morbid topics, but it's not like listening to that should actually make you sad or hateful. Think about horror films where we see people getting hacked to pieces for our entertainment, or about art that depicts horrible things.* Not only this, but a lot of metal is in fact not about dark topics at all, the content of the lyrics aren't what make the genre, it's the music.


This only applies if you're consciously detached from what you're experiencing. That would be great, but it's not the case for most people. Many consume, and are consumed.

Metal in general is primarily an outpouring of aggression. Whatever else is tied to it is really irrelevant to the core of what it is. Like I've said, I still listen to it... but I've realized our relationship. Again, it's quite a catharsis in my life.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I read your entire opening post. I've also heard drummer Dave Kerman state the same opinion about metal being the most forward looking or progressive music genre, and I'm sure he knows what he's talking about. Unlike modern classical music that gets better with more listening, it just never clicked for me concerning metal. I don't enjoy the death growls and low tuned guitars, and even if some of the rhythm sections are extremely accomplished, it's just not my cuppa tea. I like funk and groove underneath whatever progressive music I'm listening to. But I grew up in the 60s & 70s listening to drummers like Bill Bruford and Ian Paice. And all kinds of soul music.

Ken, I never heard of Steven Pinker, but I'll check my library for the book. Seems to me there's an awful lot of violence in today's world. Nobody was shooting school kids when I was growing up. And the Mexican drug cartels have killed more people than some wars. And there's been a huge amount of violence on the African continent over the past several decades. And there's Bush War I and Bush War II (I'm lifting a lyric from Michael Franti's song We Don't Stop). But hey, mostly other people do the killing, so it's an abstraction for most of us. And the horrific violence and cruelty done to animals in order to produce our food supply is disgusting. I'd really like to learn to become a vegetarian. And speaking of that, there was a vegan hardcore metal band from my town called Earth Crisis.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

KenOC said:


> This is quite true, and the decline in the rates of all sorts of violence over the past centuries is truly startling (except for deaths in wars, which seem to be holding steady). The subject has been thoroughly explored in Pinker's _The Better Angels of our Nature: Why Violence has Declined_.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels...=1-1&keywords=the+better+angels+of+our+nature
> 
> Naturally reading the daily papers or watching TV news may give a different impression.


Yep, I've read (or listened on audio book) to this wonderful book, The Better Angels of our Nature by Stephen Pinker, and I'd recommend it to everybody, it's a great read. This is pretty much what I was talking about with society becoming objectively more peaceful and less violent. As you alluded to, the reason people THINK the world is so violent now is because of news outlets that are constantly putting every bad and shocking thing on front page and on primetime and talking it over. It really is the news venues that give us the impression that bad things are happening all the time--which they are, but the world is huge, we have 7 billion people, so of course there is always something bad happening somewhere, and bad things make for good headlines.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Blake said:


> This only applies if you're consciously detached from what you're experiencing. That would be great, but it's not the case for most people. Many consume, and are consumed.
> 
> Metal in general is primarily an outpouring of aggression. Whatever else is tied to it is really irrelevant to the core of what it is. Like I've said, I still listen to it... but I've realized our relationship. Again, it's quite a catharsis in my life.


I disagree that metal is "primarily an outpouring of aggression". I think that's an oversimplification at best. Metal genres are far and wide, and some deal with the dark and morbid, and others don't. When I listen to it, it has nothing to do with catharsis, in fact, it's pretty much the same as when I listen to any other music. I'm listening to the rhythms, the melodies, the vocals, etc., and these sound pleasant, at least to my ears. A lot of death growling metal bands do concept albums, telling stories. I love stories, that's why I love opera. Many of these stories are dark, but isn't The Ring cycle kind of dark? Is the Ring Cycle just some outpouring of aggression and catharsis? It ends with the immolation of the land of the gods, and is really dark when you think about it. Very much not a happy ending.


----------



## Lucifer Saudade (May 19, 2015)

I think the guys who're comparing Metal to classical and Jazz, and how metal is only "superficially complex" and doesn't have any real academic value are missing the whole point.

Metal is a POP genre. It's meant for people to just enjoy the damn music, not study it - though metal has been naturally growing in complexity over the decades. People are dancing and moshing in concerts, not pondering about the musical theory behind it.

As a pop genre, it is quiet complex as a pure auditory experience, and has it's own elements to offer, just as pop and Rap and Blues have theirs. It's also a more or less underground movement where musicians are anxious to improve their technical skills and push the genre ahead. A genre that started out just like Rock has... but while Rock was dwindling in the 80's, Metal has gone about establishing itself as forward looking genre.

I'm not sure about it's relevancy today, it seems that it's growth curve is finally slowing down. But even so, a 50 year run is not bad at all.

And about the whole, Metal is about releasing your aggression and being angry and angsty and for purely cathartic purposes - funny point. When I'm ACTUALLY feeling depressed and angry metal just makes me feel worse. It CAN be a release from anger in a pure way, but more often then not when I'm feeling like ****, I usually opt for happy pop songs rather then Death metal.

It's when I'm feeling happy and energetic that I love listening to metal. I'm smiling from ear to ear and grooving to fast and aggressive rhythm, relishing in the adrenaline. Perhaps it's us active adrenaline junkies who respond to Metal the best, it's like driving a fast car or lifting weights. I just like the RHYTHM and the aggressiveness which I view as intensely stimulating rather then some convoluted dystopian emotional release or Satan worshiping or whatever.

When I listen to an old classic like Master of Puppets it's honestly quiet boring after hearing it so many times and it's relative simplicity compared to Classical. BUT when you really *FEEL* the music in your bones and actually move your body to it and you're in the mood for some energetic thrashing, it's f****** ecstatic. Perhaps it's neanderthalic and caveman-like on my part, but hey, It's just pure fun and that's what I like about my music


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

starthrower said:


> ...Nobody was shooting school kids when I was growing up.


Actually they were. School massacres have been around for a long time, all over the world. The worst in the US was in 1927, when a school board official (!) blew up an elementary school with 44 deaths.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Lucifer Saudade said:


> And about the whole, Metal is about releasing your aggression and being angry and angsty and for purely cathartic purposes - funny point. When I'm ACTUALLY feeling depressed and angry metal just makes me feel worse. It CAN be a release from anger in a pure way, but more often then not when I'm feeling like ****, I usually opt for happy pop songs rather then Death metal.
> 
> It's when I'm feeling happy and energetic that I love listening to metal. I'm smiling from ear to ear and grooving to fast and aggressive rhythm, relishing in the adrenaline. Perhaps it's us active adrenaline junkies who respond to Metal the best, it's like driving a fast car or lifting weights. I just like the RHYTHM and the aggressiveness which I view as intensely stimulating rather then some convoluted dystopian emotional release or Satan worshiping or whatever.


Everyone's got their groove, my friend. I usually listen to music that compliments my mood. And so, I don't reach for the Death or Black Metal collection when I'm feeling jolly.

But hey, who's keeping score?  Oh right, we all are, hah.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Dedalus said:


> I disagree that metal is "primarily an outpouring of aggression". I think that's an oversimplification at best. Metal genres are far and wide, and some deal with the dark and morbid, and others don't. When I listen to it, it has nothing to do with catharsis, in fact, it's pretty much the same as when I listen to any other music. I'm listening to the rhythms, the melodies, the vocals, etc., and these sound pleasant, at least to my ears. A lot of death growling metal bands do concept albums, telling stories. I love stories, that's why I love opera. Many of these stories are dark, but isn't The Ring cycle kind of dark? Is the Ring Cycle just some outpouring of aggression and catharsis? It ends with the immolation of the land of the gods, and is really dark when you think about it. Very much not a happy ending.


I used to carry this idea. You'll have to trust me here, but my Metal collection is quite extensive... And I've realized that I've always put it on when I'm feeing more aggressive emotions. Otherwise, I just don't care for it. Could just be me, but I think there is some universality in what I'm saying.

I don't think Gandhi would be jamming Emperor. Ey, who knows.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

KenOC said:


> Actually they were. School massacres have been around for a long time, all over the world. The worst in the US was in 1927, when a school board official (!) blew up an elementary school with 44 deaths.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster


Interesting! But I didn't grow up in the 20s. I did find Pinker's book at my library. I doubt I'll get through 800 pages, but I'll read some.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

starthrower said:


> Interesting! But I didn't grow up in the 20s.


Not sure when you grew up, but you can check here from about 1960 on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers_(school_massacres)

The US population has grown 78% since 1960, so we should expect the same percentage increase in school shootings compared with that time (all else being equal of course).


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Blake said:


> I used to carry this idea. You'll have to trust me here, but my Metal collection is quite extensive... And I've realized that I've always put it on when I'm feeing more aggressive emotions. Otherwise, I just don't care for it. Could just be me, but I think there is some universality in what I'm saying.
> 
> I don't think Gandhi would be jamming Emperor. Ey, who knows.


Frank Rosolino was a bop player who played romantic pieces like Stardust, and he shot his children.
It's a wrong assumption that violent music is listened only by violent people. Sure there's also that when Goya depicted the horrors of war and inquisition it wasn't because HE was a violent person if you know what I mean. Metallica playing One is basically the same thing.


----------



## Lucifer Saudade (May 19, 2015)

Blake said:


> Could just be me, but I think there is some universality in what I'm saying.


And you arrived to that conclusion based on.... what?

This is the guy who practically established Death Metal as a genre. Does he look particularly violent to you?









By the same token, we can say that most people would respond badly to "Atonal" classical music and thus it is universally rejected aside from a couple of freaks who have a screw lose.

I bet if you gave AC/DC to someone from the Victorian era it would be viewed as the apex of human barbarity and yet now no one would bat an eyelid if children were to listen to this.

People respond differently to even the most basic things. For some an activity such as boxing or extreme sports appears daunting and unpleasant, for others it's a great joy - and who's to say they are wrong? Didn't many of us love to tussle as kids?

As for Gandhi, there are probably many things besides Metal he would never have listened to... even your basic Led Zeppelin jam, or Tristan Murail... but here we are, flightily speculating again aren't we?

He may have lasted till the distortion kicked in. For some it's disruptive, for others jubilant and empowering.






Do you think every Metal musician is an angry miserable wreck who mounts the stage for the sole purpose of discharging their pent up aggression and animosity towards life? Some, maybe. But many are happy, well-adjusted individuals who just do what they love. And for some, it is a platform for speaking out against things and raise awareness on certain issues they are unhappy about - not necessarily a bad thing.

So yeah, if you're angry - Metal might be the music you turn to to express yourself and thus associate it with violence and despondency. And what music is better for that? Some people put on Kenny G to relax, for others it's just annoying. People differ in their response to sound, stimulus, ideas etc. And for some... Metal is just plain fun.






The kids seem to be enjoying themselves, anyway


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Lucifer Saudade said:


> And you arrived to that conclusion based on.... what?
> 
> This is the guy who practically established Death Metal as a genre. Does he look particularly violent to you?
> 
> View attachment 73008


Yeah, he's holding a puppy! No way he could possibly be a psycho!

I don't know what kind of person he is because I've never met him, and a photo isn't exactly the best way to judge a person's character.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Lucifer Saudade said:


> I think the guys who're comparing Metal to classical and Jazz, and how metal is only "superficially complex" and doesn't have any real academic value are missing the whole point.


I was talking about technical death metal, progressive metal etc. when I said that it was "supericially complex", not metal in general. I don't think I'm "missing the point". I enjoy some metal which is from a compositional standpoint pretty unsophisticated when compared to classical but that doesn't matter because it indeed isn't the point.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Lucifer Saudade said:


> And you arrived to that conclusion based on.... what?
> 
> This is the guy who practically established Death Metal as a genre. Does he look particularly violent to you?
> 
> ...


I love both those bands and songs, and loved the covers. Thanks for sharing! I've seen those kids in the second one do Pull Me Under by Dream Theater before, and that was pretty cool too.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Lucifer Saudade said:


> And you arrived to that conclusion based on.... what?
> 
> This is the guy who practically established Death Metal as a genre. Does he look particularly violent to you?
> 
> ...


Oh, what an adorable picture of Chuck. Of course I don't think metalheads are some kind of sick breed. Like I've said, I've been jamming the stuff for years. But it's such an obvious form of aggression that I don't know how anyone could argue against that.

Matter of fact, I think it's rather intelligent to let out one's bellicose side through music. It's a great channel.

That Selkies vid was pretty sweet, by the way.


----------



## Lucifer Saudade (May 19, 2015)

Blake said:


> Oh, what an adorable picture of Chuck. Of course I don't think metalheads are some kind of sick breed. Like I've said, I've been jamming the stuff for years. But it's such an obvious form of aggression that I don't know how anyone could argue against that.
> 
> Matter of fact, I think it's rather intelligent to let out one's bellicose side through music. It's a great channel.
> 
> That Selkies vid was pretty sweet, by the way.


I suppose we'll leave it at that. You obviously know your metal well enough, can't argue with that. Glad you enjoyed


----------

