X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL10]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 14:01:35 PDT
From:         James Hedberg <hedberg@INFERENCE.COM>
Subject:      Re: Metal Lists (fwd)
X-To:         Music Discussion <allmusic@auvm.american.edu>

> From: "Michael H. Bloom" <MHB%MITVMA.BITNET@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: Metal Lists (fwd)
> In-Reply-To:  Message of Fri,
>               10 Apr 1992 10:33:30 PDT from <hedberg@INFERENCE.COM>
>
> On Fri, 10 Apr 1992 10:33:30 PDT James Hedberg said:
> >Forwarded message:
> >

> >What catagorizes "Metal"?  Is it just distortion & a heavy beat?

I don't think this question ever really got answered - not that you
have to answer my quistions.

Here's my definition of "Metal"

	1.	"Metal" cannot have keyboards

		for some reason keyboards always change the musical
		style "metal" becomes "hard rock" or something else as
		soon as the keyboard "filler" comes in

	2.	"Metal" must be LOUD

		acoustic music cannot be "metal", "metal" did not
		exist before electric guitar & _modern_ drums

	3.	"Metal" cannot have too much tonality

		those wierd jazz scales and stuff without names are
		definatly out

	4.	"Metal" must have solos

		drums, guitar & bass "go fer it dude"



> I had a vastly different conception of what roots were.
> mentioned do everything metal is supposed to do, except boost your
 testosterone

Yeah, the testosterone thing is important, but I think of that as more
of a gauge of the quality of the music not identifying the style.


> >I've always thought of Hendrix starting this style - is that a point
> >of general agreement?
>
> No, I'm not going to agree. I think the first genuine heavy metal
band was the Yarbirds.

I guess I'll have to plead ignorance.  I'm not that familiar with the
Yarbirds thing.  Clapton, Page, Jeff Beck wasn't it?  Anyone see them live?

And now that you mention it I remember hearing Jimi saying what an
influence they were on his music.

> but I think of the dual guitar thing as important-- it frees one
> guitarist to concentrate on pure sound shaping

So, "Metal" is pure sound shaping?

> I would also mention the Move, whose loud pop
> songs kept getting louder and more strident.

So, "Metal" is pure sound shaping in a loud, strident pop format?

> And Zappa was always metal, even when the Mothers were a soul band.

Yeah! Zappa in those leather pants in the 70's.  A man ahead of his
time!  I would agree _Apostrophe_ has some tunes that would fit my
"Metal" criteria above.



>
> >I thought seeing _Yes_ mentioned was a little unusual as well.  I sure
> >don't think of _Yes_ as doing anything "Metal".

**See above (keyboards)

> Well shit, what do you want metal to do??? I want POWER, I want IMAGINATION, I
> want SPIFFY GUITAR LICKS!!! And while I grant you the current Yes tends to be
> oriented toward selling sequencers to hobbits, the group as of _The Yes Album_
> or _Fragile_ was hot shit. The guitar parts are quite elaborate and played
 with
> a ferocity that, while not as showy as Ritchie Blackmore, still packs a
 wallop.
> The lyrics, when they're not overly foppish (a continual problem with Yes),
 are
> high-grade fantasy-- these guys had the whole galaxy to play with.

Too upscale to be "metal", too much arranging, too much tonality.
"Metal" has to be garage band copiable!!


>
> Nowadays metal is more populist; with the exception of yer Metallicas and
> Queensryches and Voivods, it lacks that galactic scope. I'd rather listen to
> old Yes than state-of-the-art Guns'n'Roses any day.

Agreed!


> >
> >METAL DEATH TO ALL WHO RULES APPOSE!!!
>
> This reminds me of a John Cage text:
>
> I HAVE NOTHING TO SAY AND I AM SAYING IT AND THIS IS POETRY
>
> which Cage then rearranged into several different, equally grammatical and
> equally meaningless, sentences. As a composer, he was a topnotch poet.
>

Thanks -- I think (4:33)

-Headbanger

(Oh where, oh where has my little scooter gone.  Oh where, oh where
can he/she/it be)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU