Heavy Metal music - new guard vs old guard

[amp316]

disolitude said:

amp316 said:

Your listing for the pioneers is so wrong on many levels. Only Black Sabbath should be there along with others like Iron Butterfly and Deep Purple which you didn't list. Iron Maiden, Metallica, Iron Maiden, etc. should be in a group 2 that doesn't exist on your list before your "transitional period" which consists of junk like Korn. My favorite metal would be from the Black Sabbath period and from the 2nd period after that which you include in the "pioneers". I also like some early death metal like Obituary and Cannibal Corpse. Everything from Korn on is crap.

Calling everything post Korn crap is very close minded. I don't know if you are a musician or not...but if you listen to some of these modern bands and you hear of what they are doing musically, you wouldn't be calling them crap. It takes a lot of creativity to put a disco beat in to a metal riff...like Korn did on got the life, or to construct some of the downtuned riffs with high pitched harmonics that slipknot does.

I made 3 groupse because metal was on the rise since its birth in late 60's...hence group 1. Sure you had different genres of metal...but they mostly all shared the same fanbase.  

Then in the early 90s it started to lose its self. New influnces were necessary to keep it alive and relevant...hence the transitional period. The fans of this music are very different from fans of old school metal.

Then post 2000 the old sound returned with the new influences provided by bands like Korn...hence group 3.

 

I have been in three different bands if that is something that really has to be told to you in order to look as though I am not completely clueless in your eyes. 

IMO putting a disco beat to anything already makes it non-metal as far as I'm concerned.  You can call it Nu-Metal or whatever you want, but it is not metal.  Also, putting a guitar riff to a disco beat doesn't take any more talent than putting a guitar riff to drums.  Please do not call me close minded.  I listen to more genres of music than most people.  I just happen to like the good things from every genre and modern metal is not very good in my eyes.

You putting everything from the birth of metal up until the 80's is completely wrong.  I don't know how old you are but a lot of that music didn't have the same fan base.  Deep Purple was too light for many Iron Maiden fans which in turn was to light for many Metallica fans.  Also, different types of metal did not have the same fan base.  Someone that listened to Dream Theater was not likely to listen to Motorhead.  Putting everything from Cream until Metallica in the same catagory diminishes the music's worth.  There you go.  Do you think that some that listens to Metallica normally listens to Cream?  Putting all of this in the same group is close minded if you want to call me that name.

Obviously everything from 1990 on deserves two groups though in your eyes.  Maybe it does, but you are ignoring a huge chunk of musical history by making everything from the origins of metal to speed metal in the same group.