Is metal the biggest bottomless pit in the history of music?
 

I've been a metalhead for three decades and still the deeper I dig into the genre the more I realise it just goes on forever and ever. I'm sure it's in part because I have a predisposition to the genre but it seems more than any other genre even crappy bands can still be really good and fun to listen to. And it seems like every country in the world produces at least some quality metal. Whether it's mainstream or super deviant and obscure doesn't even matter to me.

:jailed:

Crappy metal forever!!!

Who knows, because where does the bottomless pit end? If you take any musical genre you could pretty much apply that statement to it, you could keep digging into any major genre and still find great music. Whether metal is the biggest bottomless pit in the history of music or not is impossible to answer, it could be electronica or folk music for all we know.

I love folk music and have for years but crappy folk music is no fun to listen to.

Dark ambient is the best hope. Needs another two decades though. Plus, brain dead electronica bores. Metal just gets better with stupidity. Bang your head!

Exactly it. Crappy metal isn't fun to listen to in general. Crappy 'anything' isn't fun to listen to in general; if you feel that way, it obviously means you have a soft spot for the genre in the first place, and therefore you'll likely be able to fathom anything bad it offers. It's not really a bigger bottomless pit than folk, drone and/or punk... They all produce quality albums to this day and a fair amount of garbage. As for your comment on countries: Good folk comes from all over the world (hence its genre name, folk meaning 'music of the common people'). Good punk is likewise everywhere because everybody can be cathartic (yes I generalized punk to catharsis, get over it).

Genres are only bottomless pits because theoretically people will continue making music that falls under their stylistic boundaries forever. If tomorrow making metal music suddenly became illegal, then it would no longer be bottomless. And seeing as it's been around about - what, 50 years at the most? Whereas genres like jazz, folk and rock have been active for so much longer and continually release just as much worthwhile material. The biggest bottomless pits lie in the genres that have been established the longest, and are still filled with ingenious thought. Jazz would probably be my number one stop (and let's just forget that Kenny G and his disciples even exist, as they are not jazz).

Coltrane died over 40 years ago and there hasn't been any important evolution in the genre since. Metal on the other hand has branched off into black metal and grindcore and so on.

The anger died in the 80's.

Yeah, but the sound is not distinctive enough to really tie it together.

Of course it will seem that way if you aren't looking. The only reason you find it's the case with metal is because you're really into it. I dig the sentiment man I just don't think it's limited to any one genre.

...

Just for the record, over the last fifteen years I've spent a lot more time listening to free jazz than to metal.

Well... is the fusion of Jazz and Metal significant? I personally find that when you listen to more genres, and more obscure genres, you realize how big of a myth that 'genre' really is. I don't see how you can say nothing in Jazz is significant as almost everything that wants to distinguish or evolve from typical rock or metal(which really is just louder more distorted rock) tends to borrow from Jazz staples. I mean, prog for example, the form of music built entirely to significantly change rock/metal, owes just as much to jazz as it does metal.

Jazz is the most strongly accumulative genre around. Just if straight Jazz doesn't have any blatant mainstream figures it doesn't mean the evolutions simply in it's integrations in helping music evolve are not significant.

Like the stuff Zorn has done?

Yes, I would consider Torture Garden incredibly significant to both metal, and jazz. But don't assume just because I have Zorn in my avatar doesn't mean I'm speaking of him in particular.

Jazz and Metal are "bottomless" for the same reason. They integrate other genres. I mean, Metal would have died in the 80s if it didn't integrate classical and punk, and probably dead now if it didn't integrate a myriad of other genres. World musics(ie. folk), jazz, classical, etc.

Free jazz is a style that developed in the 1960s. So what? Over the last 40 years jazz has definitely moved in different directions. Look at acid jazz, nu jazz, and more recently jazz-punk and hardcore styles.

I honestly don't know how to tackle a response like this. Coltrane was most definitely not the final stepping stone of jazz; yes, he brought it to unbelievable heights of spirituality, but even after his death, Miles Davis helped branched jazz out further. Free Improv artists started taking their jazz undertones and putting them up for display. Avant-garde jazz artists continued to expand their horizons, rivaling modern-classical composers for complexity of arrangements.

As Conan said, jazz-punk, nu-jazz... All of them are recent deviations from the regular jazz sound into something new. Innovation did not halt on Coltrane's death.

Grindcore and black metal are essentially meldings of standard metal and other genres - they're not distinctively metal. A LOT of grindcore sounds like a rational altercation between metal and hardcore punk/powerviolence. In that case, punk is JUST as innovative as metal, because it too has branched into something different.

You're being awfully difficult, aren't you? This just isn't true; while punk as a 'lifestyle' has become a complete joke (**** bands like Choking Victim, Leftover Crack, Star ****ing Hipsters, absolute disgraces to the term 'punk'), several of the famed punk artists of the 80s still release music; in fact, in their old age they tend to be more inventive, experimenting with wider arrangements of people, paving the way for new expression. Their anger most certainly has not died. Much like any other genre, it's become stagnated due to an overwhelming increase in terrible copycat bands, but that happens in EVERY genre, even metal.

How can folk music not be distinct? It IS the most distinct genre ever, if anything, as its sole purpose is to be the music of the people. Yes, each culture/subculture will have its own flares that they put into their folk traditions, but the sounds overlap so often, it's not even funny. Much of the Western folk I've heard borrows greatly from Eastern folk, especially in the southern countries (at least from personal experience).

In folk, you have people ALL over the world, taking what is generally the same idea and injecting their own thoughts into them. Obviously there are exceptions (any folk from Africa that I've heard is far more angular), but the general consensus from my hearings is that there is a very obvious similarity.

In contrast, I've heard power metal from 10-15 different countries. Virtually no change in structure or approach exists; the notes are different, but there is virtually no originality injected into said craft. So what if tomorrow a Nigerian power metal band is created? If they don't offer anything original to the genre, then it's not even worth mentioning that they're there.

You seem to have that kind of concern:

Who cares if people in two different countries do it if they don't do anything different from one another. Maybe that means metal is everywhere, but it doesn't mean that it's a 'bottomless pit', because being a bottomless pit requires constant reinvention. Not just copycatting.

I think a post of that stature deserves a round of applause.

:clap:

you clearly haven't been listening to the right things if you think this

How can something be the biggest bottomless pit?

well if you've got a bunch of bottomless pits, even if they've all got infinite depth, they could concievably vary in width, making the one with the biggest width the biggest; significant because if you've got a bottomless hole that is only 1 foot across, much less stuff is going to fall in than if it is 50 feet across

(duh)

Zorn just always hooks up with the right people, like that Boredoms guy. Although, I do think very highly of Masada.




Good point.


I also scoff at the bands you mentioned so we have something in common. What new stuff by 80's era punk (or post punk) do you recommend? As for your last statement about copycat bands, the thing is with metal, I still like the copycat bands! And it's not just because I'm more forgiving with metal (or is it?).

I knew someone was going to say that. Thing is all bottomless pits would still occupy the same infinite amount of negative space regardless of how wide their openings are. So there. :p:

I want to start this post by saying I love metal. So don't get off thinking I'm anti-metal or anything, lol.

Anyway, while metal might be a bottomless pit its mostly because there's tons of generic bands ripping exactly the same sound off without any real change. This isn't a bad thing because I listen to tons of bands that rip one another off in this way. Now as said earlier in this thread I know more about metal than other genres of music, but either way, it still seems to be bottomless because there's tons of one man black metal projects being recorded in a bathroom or whatever. Now, its crappy some of the time, no doubt. At the same time though you listen to it because its so much like other acts in the genre that you do join. Unfortunately in some aspects metals become an extremely stagnant genre.

I would say that that's the case, not to disrespect you of course, because everybody enjoys copycat bands from time to time. I know of some hip-hop heads who've listened to the stuff so much (or just respect it so much) that they've developed a sort of 'immunity' to anything generic that lies within the genre's boundaries. Not that they go out of their way to listen to Soulja Boi, but more often than not they'll jam to any hip-hop you throw on. The aesthetic of the genre has sort of become something they like on contact. I'm not that way with a genre yet, but give me time and I assume that'll end up happening to me and free jazz, or whatever I listen to constantly these days.

The problem with these new punk bands is that the good ones who continue with the regular hardcore punk aesthetic generally sell so few copies that it's hard to find them. Although, there is a website I used to use where a guy was essentially known for uploading various stuff like that. Albeit it's not anything 'new' (aside from tackling new issues in their songs), so I guess you win out there, but their music is still worth hearing, so I wouldn't say their anger has yet died, so to speak.

Personally, when it comes to punk these days, I would much rather listen to hardcore-punk/'jazz' hybrids. It's more enjoyable for me because I prefer anger to come from the voice and the overall intensity of the performance, and not just the words. The japanese band Midori is probably my favorite example of this. You definitely pick up on the angry punk-esque vibe, but it's also fairly 'arty' and jazzy at times, and the musicianship is nuts. While some argue that it's not even 'punk' anymore, just a deviation of its raw energy, I like to think otherwise. It still comes off as the sound of anarchy with the passion that's put into it.

Win.

And Coltrane never ever worked with Miles Davis or Thelonious Monk or any other of the right people? Zorn's ability to assemble amazing musicians together is part of his contributions.

Metal is probably the most maligned genre outside of general pop music but many bands have been going for decades and can still fill arenas and sell their music, whatever the musical climate out there.

It's one of the most fan orientated genres out there and is one of the most enduring genres too.

Metal music is cliche ridden and laughable in many respects but it has a durability that HAS to be commended.

Yeah but some of the cliche laughable stuff is impossible to beat. I don't think anything can get me more stoked than a bad power metal song about slaying dragons with a wanky guitar solo.

I'm checking out their myspace and it sounds fantastic. I already go in for a lot of Japanese experimental, and other J-stuff from like Puffy and other pop stuff, old punk stuff (the vinyl comp my meat is your poison impressed me a lot when it came out) and naturally I like the black metal band Sigh.

Are you familiar with Miya Masaoka?


Coltrane jammed with anybody and everybody and took ideas off many as well. It was amazing for me to learn that not only did Ayler borrow from Coltrane but that Coltrane took a lot from Ayler. Modesty and humility add even more to Coltrane's legacy. It's like for him climbing Everest wasn't enough. When he got there he built a tower to take him even higher. I'm not trying to hate on Zorn but when people are TOO enthisiastic about him I suspect they've found a little fool's gold.


Amen.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Zorn does have his misses, and releases he very obviously spends very little time on. Sometimes I feel he does just release things to release things, and that gets a little annoying.

However, Masada, Naked City(and all Eye really did for Naked City is scream over it. He did a very excellent job, but I don't really think you can give him that much credit), Moonchild, The Art Of Memory(Even if it's just guitar solos with sax), The Big Gun Down, Magick, Spillane/Goddard, etc. I feel are indispensable works. A statement like this completely misses out on the brilliance presented in Zorn's better work. As for a lot of it being with other people(Patton, Kronos Quartet, etc.), I think Zorn's ability to bring out the best in who he works with is why he's great. Moonchild, for example, I think by far is one of Patton's best projects, and by far trumps anything Patton has done on his own. Why? Zorn knows how to get the best out of him, like most people he works with.

As for comparing him to Coltrane, I don't get that. I remember a thread a few days ago where people were arguing about Coltrane vs Zorn. Which I feel is kind of pointless because they're both legends for drastically different reasons.

Glad to see you like it. And no, I'm not familiar with Miya Masaoka. Anything of theirs you'd recommend in particular?

Amazon.com: Miya Masaoka: Songs, Albums, Pictures, Bios

All I have myself is what's available from amazon in MP3 format.

The first one there is over 50 minutes long and only 99 cents. I have it and think it's cool.

The best I have is Compositions/Improvisations.

I saw Compositions/Improvisations and it looks interesting, so I'll look into that, thanks.