Artist: Death
Album: Scream Bloody Gore
Year: 1987
Chronological position: Debut album
Genre: Death metal
Expectations before listening: Lots of ear-bleeding after listening

Prior to this I had heard close to no death metal at all. Batty posted a Nile song for the soundtrack in his Cave, and I half enjoyed it. There was some oriental music at the beginning, and then a zombie, maybe mummy, jumped out and rasped up my ears using a cheese grate. It felt alright.

Alright, so my friend and I have this pack system I mentioned yesterday, and for the first death metal album we chose Scream Bloody Gore by Death. After listening, I don't think it was all that bad. Sure, there were screams, shouts and growls, but I can get past that, and there was some hard drumming, but no blastbeats. The worst thing here was undoubtedly the lyrics, depictions of people being murdered, especially by zombies, in graphical ways. I'm not ashamed to say I felt a bit sick to my stomach when reading the lyrics. Anyway, there were some pretty good riffs on the album. Yet I don't want to rate it, as I have heard very little death metal and have close to nothing to compare it to. Avoid this if you have regurgitation issues or have previously had a heart attack.

Artist: Venom
Album: Black Metal
Year: 1982
Chronological position: Sophomore album
Genre: Speed metal
Expectations before listening: If not ear-bleeding, at least some aches

“Venom is not black metal, poser!” I know, and I warned you that I (or we) would push the definitions a tiny bit. We thought this would fit in under the black metal tag because of the fact that it's a giant middle finger to religious people, the murky production that would inspire virtually every following black metal band, and the title that gave name to the subgenre.

Anyway, the album. Trollheart, when you reviewed Reign in Blood, you said you'd rather listen to that than Venom, and what exactly did you mean by that? This is just cheap and simple rock and roll. The vocals aren't screechy and sharp like the stereotypical black metal shriek, I think cigarette-blemished shouting (see: Motörhead) is a better descriptor. This is, musically, pretty good. You know, listenable.

Artist: Helloween
Album: The Time of the Oath
Year: 1996
Chronological position: Seventh album
Genre: Power metal
Expectations before listening: Disappointment. Nothing compares to Keeper of the Seven Keys

Power metal is the favourite metal subgenre if both my friend and I, and we both praise the hell out of Keeper of the Seven Keys. I also had the impression that this was one of Helloween's greatest efforts, so it was only natural that we chose this one for our first power metal album.

Were my expectations fulfilled? Well, I expected disappointment, so yes. This is a good album, alright, but not even close to being in the same league as Keeper. I think part of what spoils it for me is the fact that Michael Kiske is gone. Andi Deris is not, in any way, a worthy replacement. He sings alright, but his voice isn't as high and powerful. Also, the vocals aren't harmonized the same way as on the Keeper albums. Tear. Still, it felt good returning to the "light side of metal" after Death and Venom.

Rating? 3/5.

Eh, as you listen to more and more death metal I imagine you'll get kind of jaded to the lyrics. They're all basically the same thing: murder, gore, death, etc. After a while it all kind of turns into old hat and isn't very shocking anymore.

If you want some lyrics which are actually interesting then I would suggest Morbid Angel's Formulas Fatal to the Flesh. Their first few albums were heavy on the Satanism, but by FFtF they had pretty much ditched the Satan and replaced it with bizarre, creepy lyrics that were a combination of Sumerian mythology and Lovecraft.

I don't know how you'd feel about the music though honestly. They were kind of obtuse musically by that point, and could require multiple listens to let everything set in. But even though that kind of technical death metal isn't generally my thing they used it to create some truly unsettling atmosphere that's pretty unique. I highly suggest you listen to it in a dark room.

Artist: Van Halen
Album: Van Halen
Year: 1978
Chronological posision: Debut album
Genre: Hard rock
Expectations before listening: Some good hard rock full of hooks

Uhm, well, I'm not sure whether this can really pass as metal, and we were aware when selecting it, but it'll have to do. Wikipedia and Unknown Soldier both say it's metal, anyway.

Either way, and even if it's not metal, it's a pretty damn good album. Some great, cheesy fun, and yes, it's full of hooks, which means my expectations were fulfilled. I can see lots of 80s' hair bands ripping this off, and based on the reviews I read, this was hugely influential (especially the guitars), so I'm sure they did. I have a feeling that “Running With the Devil” and “Ain't Talking 'Bout Love” both will be stuck in my head for the next week. Lastly, I'll just say that these guys' guitarist sure knows how to solo!

4.5/5

Ah, a horror metal album of sorts? And while we're on the subject of Lovecraft, I reserved a collection of his short stories on the local library, I'm renting it tomorrow.

Artist: Mötley Crüe
Album: Too Fast for Love
Year: 1981
Chronological posision: Debut album
Genre: Heavy metal/glam metal
Expectations before listening: Infectious and hook-laden rock, like a heavier Van Halen maybe

The opinions on glam metal are hugely divided. Many claim that it's not “true metal”, and others just can't stand the cheese. One of the reasons grunge is so highly regarded is the fact that it killed off the whole 80s' glam metal thing. Then there's the people who CAN stand the cheese, which I learned to do at the very beginning. Back to the true metal thing: I think the phrase "true metal" is mainly used by fans of genres like power metal, black metal, death metal etc., where you can look like a man from the far past (you know, vikings) and still be accepted. Glam metal, however, is made from hairspray and makeup, which some say don't belong in metal, unless it's corpse paint, of course. Glam metal also tends to get dismissed as “simply hard rock” for not being fast, dark or heavy enough, or what have you. Anyway, objectively, I think glam metal is considered a subgenre of metal.

But the more I listen, the more I lose concept of where the line between hard rock and metal goes. The opening track, “Live Wire”, was fast and aggressive enough, but the rest is just... cowbell and hairspray. So again, is this really metal? I'm not sure. Still, I liked it. I generally avoid hair metal, but it's good in small doses.

3.889/5

See the thing is these people who dismiss glam metal are looking at metal from a 2014 perspective after extreme forms of metal have been around for almost 3 decades.

Try looking at that Motley Crue album from a 1982 perspective when it was one of the heaviest mixes of 70s Metal, Glam Rock & Punk Rock around at that time and tell me it's not a metal album.

Plus the glam metal of 1981/82 was very different to the glam metal of 1988/89. And it was dying long before Grunge came along. Blame late 80s bands like RHCP, Faith No More & Jane's Addiction for the real downfall of hair metal.

Totally. Early Crue, WASP, Twisted Sister, etc was a legitimately new take on what Urban already said, and was basically about taking that whole concept of rock'n'roll excess to its logical conclusion. Whereas later stuff like Poison was just a self-parody cash-in. Sorta like the difference between Nirvana and Tad vs Candlebox and Creed. Or I guess Pearl Jam vs Creed would be a better metaphor.

Not really. These are the lyrics to that song I posted. They're more about creating that same basic feeling of Satanic metal while cutting out the cheesy, Hollywood elements.

Then what's with Motörhead being classified by many as simply "hard rock"? :confused:

Motorhead came out around 1976 with the whole punk thing going on around them and out lived all those bands when punk died because although they were popular with the punk audience they didn't get too close.

By the time the NWOBHM started in late 1979 Motorhead had already had a lot of success in the British charts and didn't really need to tie themselves into that scene either.

By staying clear of them they've probably prolonged their career, but as far as Lemmy is concerned they're just a Rock n Roll band.

Artist: Metallica
Album: Ride the Lightning
Year: 1984
Chronological posision: Sophomore album
Genre: Thrash metal
Expectations before listening: Some sort of intermediate between Kill 'Em All and Master of Puppets

Oh yes, Metallica. I really think this is the band for me, but I guess I shouldn't speak before having heard this album, which is considered by many to be their best effort ever (when it's not Master of Puppets, of course). Also, apparently this album marks their first of like, twenty changes in musical direction. How many albums have they released? Alright, eight then.

My damn, this is good! I think I love everything about it. The interludes, the riffs, the vocals, and the lyrics. Especially the lyrics, they're brilliant and go together so well with the music. For instance, there's "Fade to Black", with the suicidal lyrics accompanied by a rather slow ballad-ish instrumentation, and "Ride the Lightning", in which a man dreams about being executed with the electrical chair, which has an overall aggressive feel (though it doesn't feel too brutal) to go with the lyrics. In the end, I'll just say that I really wish I had listened to this sooner.

5/5

RtL is probably my fav Metallica album. I don't listen to nearly as much thrash as I used to, so Master of Puppets and And Justice for All get a lot less play these days, but Kill 'Em All, with its musical links to the NWOBHM which I love more and more every day, and Ride the Lightning, being so diverse, still get played to death. Or at least Ride the Lightning would if my copy weren't so ****ed.

Why don't you think this album is metal? Personally I'd say it was one of the most metal albums of its time. I mean you couldn't get more metal than Eddie Van Halen on guitar. Also worth remembering is that Van Halen being an American band had a distinctive take on metal compared to a lot of their UK counterparts, which means that US metal bands sounded very different to their UK counterparts.

As Urban said they were formed in 1976 and hard rock was a more accurate moniker for most heavy bands than heavy metal. The heavy metal label really only became the dominant label post 1980. Since then Motorhead have usually been labelled as both.

I think I read somewhere that on the true fathers of metal, American and British papers tend to disagree; the former usually claim it's Led Zeppelin, while the latter sticks to Black Sabbath. Is that because the two bands influenced different types of metal? That is, Led Zeppelin inspired mostly American Bands, while British bands took more influence from Black Sabbath?

I'll be absent for the next few days. Roxy is sending me to prison camp for scrobbling (and liking) Van Halen. Don't worry, there'll be some sort of update later this week.

There's Wi-Fi here, though. Just means I won't write in my journal and that I'll limit my forum lurking.

Finally, I'm back in Journalland. School sent me to a youth hostel, which resembled the Overlook Hotel just a tiny bit, where I was forced to sleep for two nights. Of course, there was snow, and lots of it. That means skiing. Let me clear up these things:

• Not all Norwegians love skiing
• For many, skiing is only tradition
• Most Norwegians are only averagely skilled at skiing

I don't really like skiing. I prefer walking, by far. Also, I don't like snow, at least not lots of it.
Imagine a great, green valley. Tall mountains surround you at all sides, and at your left flows a river. It's a beautiful scene. Then imagine the same valley with the same mountains and the same river, except someone shat snow on it all, like two meters. No matter which way you turn, there's snow, and there's no escaping it. Also, it's cold, so you have to put on forty layers of clothes, which after a while makes you hot as balls. Then you proceed to take some of the clothes off, which in turn makes you cold as frozen balls.

Then, of course, there are the downsides of sharing a room with someone. You start hating them just a little bit more for every day that passes. Soon, you're so fed up with all the "your mom" jokes and farting contests that you just want to curl up in fetal position under a blanket.
From staying at the "Overlook Hotel", I've acquired:

• Traumas from the dirty floors/walls/toilets/everythings
  
• Sunburns, though mostly on my nose (I look like Rudolph)
• A hatred for snow
  

But frankly, it wasn't all that bad, yet I will not cover the (roughly) 90% of it that I liked. It's not fun to write about, you know?

The fact that most Norwegians have actually been skiing kind of reinforces whatever stereotype you're referring to (over here in America your country is so irrelevant that we don't have any stereotypes for you, like Uzbekistan or Lichtenstein).

According to our stereotypes you're obese.

:p: You did a Batlord on the Batlord.

That's what happens when you eat food other than herring and sheep heads.

It's not metal, though

Eating all the food so that African children have to eat their own tears is metal as ****.

“Hyped, commercialized, excessively marketed pop punk aimed at kids like me, but scene of course”. If I randomly came up to you and said that, would you think of Green Day, or would you think of Blink-182 and then Green Day?

There are some very mixed opinions on the band. I'd say there are three types of people:

• Those who would say “yeah, American Idiot's pretty good”
• Those who would say “Hah, they suck ass, go listen to some proper music, like Bon Jovi”
• Those who would say “Their first two/three/four albums are amazing, but I want to buy a thousand copies of everything that comes after just so I can burn them all

Unfortunately, I'm among the latter, but I can only afford one copy of each album. Anyway, the problem isn't that I dislike cheese. Cheese can be fun. My problem is with cheese trying to be serious, thus coming off as pretentious. Therefore, I gave 21st Century Breakdown a 2/5 review. Then there's Kerplunk. It's got the hooks and angsty lyrics of pop punk, but compared to everything that came after, it's unpolished and independent, so you don't get the feeling that they're doing it all for the money, you know? Even if you don't like Green Day, and not even their earlier releases, I hope you can understand why I like this...



better than this.



Sure, the latter is okay, but it seems pretentious to me; I can't listen to it and take it seriously, know what I'm saying?

Hm. I really don't know what to think of Green Day.
I liked the old, more punky n experimental stuff, when I was young,
but I haven't really listened to them for a long while.

Then there was this American Idiot thing,
and yeah... the lyrics sucked, the music was actually ok.
But your first example is fine :)
And I think there's no person alive who wouldn't understand why this is better than the second ...thing

Briks, you've got a nice point there.
I am not a huge fan, but I liked some of the Green Day songs.
Though I see the change in style a bit, I haven't got any real preferences.
Not very educated in that genre, to be honest!

Cowboys from Hell is dull. Their attempt at thrash that only succeeds about half the time (though the title track and "Cemetary Gates" are phenomenal. Vulgar Display of Power is better, but I still only care some of the time. I've never listened to any of their albums past Far Beyond Driven, so I can't know, but right now it's the only Pantera album I care about. It's just so much heavier and more pissed off than anything they'd done before. I think all the success they'd had kind of gave them the confidence to just go for the jugular like they might not have before. The improved song consistency doesn't hurt either. And even if it's not quite the best song on the album "25 Years" will always have a piece of my heart for expressing the feelings toward a father that I've always had bottled inside. Can't listen to that song without getting emotional.

Pantera one of the best metal bands ever and can't wait until they pop up in my journal and Far Beyond Driven is a great album btw.

Well, it seems they just don't appeal that much to me.

Despite the fact that I use some Coldplay albums for calming down the screaming cockaties of my sister, I am not a fan of their album Mylo Xyloto either.
Paradise was quite overplayed. In general, compared with the earlier Coldplay works the album is somehow revolutionary.
At any rate, I disliked the synth there even if I am enjoying electronica usually.

Yeah, I like some of the electronica you play in plug.dj, but the synth on Mylo Xyloto was nearly headache-inducing

First,

I'd like to give some information about the section. First off, we are now three friends running the metal club, though I don't think that will impact any of you reading this. It's still only me writing the reviews, anyway. Secondly, we decided to add doom metal, and we're considering to do some hard rock, too, since it's so related to the metal genre. We also considered merging black and death metal into one chunk, “extreme metal”, but I'm not so sure about whether we'll actually do it or not. For now, they're separate.

Either way, we have selected some new albums:

Black metal: Bathory – S/T
Death metal: Amon Amarth – Twilight of the Thunder God
Doom metal: Candlemass – Epicus Doomicus Metallicus
Fusion metal: Dream Theater – Images and Words
Glam metal: Bon Jovi – Slippery When Wet
Hard rock: Aerosmith – Toys in the Attic
Heavy metal: Ozzy Osbourne – Blizzard of Ozz
Power metal: Blind Guardian – Somewhere Far Beyond
Thrash metal: Slayer – Reign in Blood

I decided to start with:


Artist: Candlemass
Album: Epicus Doomicus Metallicus
Year: 1986
Chronological position: Debut album
Genre: Doom metal
Expectations before listening: A doom classic

Heck be damned, Candlemass. These guys play some of the most powerful, mighty music I have ever heard. I started off with Nightfall, an album Batty indirectly recommended to me. It was love at first listen, therefore, Epicus Doomicus Metallicus being selected for our first doom metal album was no problem for me.

Even though the album has only six tracks, is manages to last for 42 minutes since the tracks are all fairly long, yet not a minute is boring. Everything from the acoustic intro starting it off, to the operatic female voice finishing it, is amazing. This is a beautifully sad, dark and haunting album and I love it. Also, because of this and past experiences, I think I'm mostly a fan of the epic brand of metal. Pantera didn't really do much for me, I am a Metallica guy rather than a Megadeth fan, I praise Keeper of the Seven Keys to death, and Sabbath Bloody Sabbath is my favourite Sabbath album.

5/5

**** yeah. One of my all time favs right there. After Slayer they were pretty much my gateway into extreme metal. Filthy and ugly but surprisingly accessible too. If you don't fall in love with "Necromancy" and "Raise the Dead" then there's something wrong with you.



Then I would highly suggest viking metal-era Bathory. Nothing like the black metal days at all. Pure epic, doomy heaviness. Quite possibly the most epic thing ever put to record of any genre.

Actually I put on some viking-era Bathory today, and I thought it was pretty good. I'll check it out further.

Well, despite recently saying that one or two sections were enough for me, I'm now opening another one. This time it's about doom metal, a genre I decided to delve further into after hearing some Candlemass. Carpe Mortem and Batty recommended seven bands in the “What Are You listening To V.III Metal!” thread, and I decided that it was enough for a whole new section. Well, it might get short-lived, but if I like this, I'll probably check out some more bands and write about them. In fact, I'm starting off with one that wasn't recommended, but still caught my interest:



Artist: Witchfinder General
Album: Death Penalty
Year: 1982
Chronological position: Debut album
Genre: Traditional doom metal/NWOBHM

Before listening:

I have not heard much about this band, other than that Wikipedia says it was a major influence on the doom metal scene, and that it was part of the late New Wave of British Heavy Metal. Based on the NWOBHM part, I suppose that this album will have a little more raw production than the other doom I've heard so far, and because of the year it was released, I assume that it will not sound as developed as Candlemass, but more like Black Sabbath.

After listening:

I don't know all that many NWOBHM bands, but this sounds like NWOBHM to me. The production is pretty raw, but even though it's unpolished it's not grinding on my ears. The vocalist doesn't seem to have a great range, but still pulls it off, reminding me of Vince Neil or Ozzy Osbourne. The latter is appropriate, because these guys surely have been listening to a lot of Sabbath. The music isn't as slow as I expected; I thought it would sound sort of like the title track on Black Sabbath's self-titled. The lyrics aren't as doomy and depressing as I thought, either. Instead, they're about sex, drugs and witch burnings. I quite liked this, and I'll probably listen to it again.


4/5