MetalMusicArchives.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home >Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements >Suggest new bands/artists to MMA
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - AC/DC and sub-genres issues (alt. metal+hard rock)
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedAC/DC and sub-genres issues (alt. metal+hard rock)

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
Message
Windhawk View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 184
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 4:21am
...I'll let the finer points be. But it should be pretty obvious that separating hard rock from heavy metal is a pretty difficult task at this point I'd think ;-)
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: 29 Mar 2010
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 473
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 4:25am
Originally posted by Windhawk Windhawk wrote:

"THE first is on the cover of the album "Hapshash and the Coloured Coat, featuring the Human Host and the Heavy Metal Kids", which was released in 1967."

I'd like to see a source that cites that this was meant as a descriptive feature for the music rather than a cool tag for an album.
 
You probably won't, because the music isn't even vaguely metal - although on the right medication, it's certainly heavy - and I would guess that there is a connection to Burroughs here. This is probably the only connection. I've read that article before that you cite, and while it's interesting, it makes all kinds of generalisms without tying them in particularly well.
 
It's the first usage I know of in relation to music, although it may not predate the Hendrix citation, of which I've heard, but never seen documented evidence, and it ties in with Spooky Tooth's story nicely, as they are certainly one of the seminal bands on the heavy metal genre - and, as noted, played with Hendrix before he recorded anything with his own band.
 
The fact that they used the label first, and produced such heavy music, while influencing such important acts should not go unnoted, IMO - and it's almost NEVER mentioned in metal histories, indeed, ST tend to get overlooked - which is surely tantmount to a crime given their impact?


Edited by Certif1ed - 31 Mar 2010 at 4:33am
Back to Top
Colt View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 6668000
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 4:39am
I support an inclusive policy.
 
Both the Metal Archives and BNR (to name just 2) have similar policies. This has already been pointed out in this thread.
 
For example: AC/DC were Metal, we wouldn't, however, classify them as that now, that's all.
 
God damn, their concerts were filled to the rafters by metalheads...I know I was one of them!
 
This applies to many other crossover Heavy Metal/Hard Rock bands and in my opinion we should have a category that reflects this.
 
 
 
Back to Top
Metalbaswee View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator/Retired Admin

Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 5:09am
Originally posted by Colt Colt wrote:

I support an inclusive policy.
 
Both the Metal Archives and BNR (to name just 2) have similar policies. This has already been pointed out in this thread.
 
For example: AC/DC were Metal, we wouldn't, however, classify them as that now, that's all.
 
God damn, their concerts were filled to the rafters by metalheads...I know I was one of them!
 
This applies to many other crossover Heavy Metal/Hard Rock bands and in my opinion we should have a category that reflects this.
 
 
 


Why not just a Crossover-Rock Genre? You can dump all those bands in there.


Back to Top
Colt View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 6668000
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 5:21am
Originally posted by Metalbaswee Metalbaswee wrote:

Originally posted by Colt Colt wrote:

I support an inclusive policy.
 
Both the Metal Archives and BNR (to name just 2) have similar policies. This has already been pointed out in this thread.
 
For example: AC/DC were Metal, we wouldn't, however, classify them as that now, that's all.
 
God damn, their concerts were filled to the rafters by metalheads...I know I was one of them!
 
This applies to many other crossover Heavy Metal/Hard Rock bands and in my opinion we should have a category that reflects this.
 
 
 


Why not just a Crossover-Rock Genre? You can dump all those bands in there.
 
 
"Dump" might not be the most suitable word to use Wink
Back to Top
Raff View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1006
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 6:22am
Originally posted by Certif1ed Certif1ed wrote:

Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

  Many people perceive stuff like Back in Black as heavy metal, even if we (the experts) think it's not. The dividing line between hard rock and classic heavy metal is VERY thin, unlike the one between 'traditional' prog and the newer subgenres, or 'real' prog and prog-related.
 
 
Hey - I'm an expert, and I say BiB is a metal album.
 
You wanna disagree for 27 pages until you cave in?


Not on your life - I'll defer to your superior expertiseWink, especially when, to all intents and purposes, we agree with each otherLOL!
Back to Top
Raff View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1006
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 6:38am
Originally posted by Windhawk Windhawk wrote:

I can't track back the source of the BOC description as thinking man's heavy metal. They were described that way in the early 80's, when I started listening to them, and may date back to sometime in the 70's. It's quoted so many times in reference to that band online that tracking the origin of that one is next to impossible. It's been around for longer than the Heavy Metal movie they contributed songs too though, but how much longer is hard to tell without doing rather extensive research I think. Raff might have some pointers there - as I'm only 38 she has been around a few more years than me.


I believe that in my BOC bio that particular phrase was mentioned, though I'll have to check. Anyway, this is something I've seen applied to at least another very famous band - Rush - and definitely on account of the lyrical aspect. Remember that BOC, in the early years of their career, had connections with the New York underground scene via Patti Smith (who was Allen Lanier's partner for a number of times) and her guitarist Lenny Kaye, later to become an influential rock writer. Unlike Black Sabbath or Judas Priest, who both came from a heavily industrialized area like Birmingham, and a working-class background, BOC had an intellectual aura about them, supported by their esoteric, often impenetrable lyrics that went way beyond the clich�s of the genre (especially as it developed in the early Eighties).

As regards the song "Heavy Metal: The Black and the Silver", it takes its title from the movie, since most of the songs on Fire of Unknown Origin were originally meant to be part of the soundtrack - though eventually only "Veteran of the Psychic Wars" made it on the soundtrack's final version.
Back to Top
m@x View Drop Down
Forum Admin Group
Forum Admin Group
Avatar
Co-founder, Admin & Webmaster

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Location: Québec, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 947
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 6:55am
Thanks for all sharing thoughts and references.

Now, may I suggest something like Crossover-Rock, but I would prefer (for now) something that is also related to the timeline of the progression of the genre as a whole .

So, I ask you , Metalheads MMA collabs, should this sub-genres organization work ?

  1. Proto-Metal, listing here the bands (even if Hard-Rock a time) we want and that cover the progression of the genre as the Trad. HM and NWoBHM
  2. Traditionnal (or Classic) Heavy Metal (inclusive of the NWoBHM)
We need to take decisions now LOL 

Rawks


Back to Top
Raff View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1006
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 7:00am
M@x, speaking personally, I disagree with some of the terminology. Proto-Metal might do, but I would definitely oppose Crossover-Rock (which, in my opinion, means something quite different). Traditional HM is also a tad too vague for my tastes, but I've seen it used on other sites, so I suppose there's nothing too wrong with it. 
Back to Top
Windhawk View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 184
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 7:09am
Proto metal won't suit the later bands exploring the classic hard rock sound (if such a thing exists), and crossover...well...you see how many different notions that one has at PA...

Proto metal is a nice description if we want to add in bands exclusive of hard rock traits prior to the early 80's only.

I'd go for traditional hard rock, and outlining the very close kinship it has with traditional heavy metal - in particular with regards to the development of the metal genre.
Back to Top
Metalbaswee View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator/Retired Admin

Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 7:09am
I like the idea Thumbs Up


Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: 29 Mar 2010
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 473
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 7:36am
I think that "Traditional Metal" should be separated from NWoBHM, if only because of the huge proliferation of very different sounding bands that arose during the "New Wave" - which also were not all British!
 
"Proto Metal" is a great way to catch early acts that are clearly more hard rock than metal, but nonetheless influential on the development of metal - a lot of the NWoBHM could be considered "Hard Rock" by today's standards, but at the time, according to Kerrang! magazine (and what better authority could you have, since it was, to the best of my knowledge, the first purely Heavy Metal magazine) there were many, many acts that were considered heavy metal back then who would be sneered at now.
 
Thin Lizzy, for example, have only rare moments of "true" metal - but how could they possibly be excluded?
 
Saxon played a kind of heavy rock and roll - but with songs like "Heavy Metal Thunder" and "Denim and Leather", and their "metal" Sheffield Steel background, leaving them out would be unthinkable... to me, at least!
 
Between 1971 and 1979 there are a lot of acts which were to have a huge influence on metal - and many played a few songs which had that distinct metal sound - UFO and The Scorpions are first to spring to mind.
 
Other German acts like Eloy and Jeronimo played stuff which definitely had that metal edge - I hear a lot of Jeronimo in Priest's debut album, for instance. Even as far afield as Australia, bands like Buffalo produced music which is a bit more than simply Proto metal - and not really what you might call "traditional".
 
In the hard rock camp, it's impossible to escape the influences of bands like The Pink Fairies and The Groundhogs - listen to "Kings of Oblivion" by the former ("City Kids" ended up on Motorhead's debut pretty much unchanged) and "Split" by the latter ("Cherry Red" is kinda grinding and metallic - and the hogs were one of Motorhead's main influences, according to a radio interview I once heard between Tommy Vance and Lemmy).
 
In these latter cases, the differences between, say "Phenomenon" by UFO and "Split" are fairly clear - there is quite a sharp divide between Schenker's clear-cut diatonic chord progressions and diatonic-edged soloing and McPhee's strong blues base, giving some fairly strong guidelines for "Traditional Metal" (UFO) and "Proto Metal" (Groundhogs).
 
I think that using particular bands as yardsticks will help tremendously - there may be better examples... but I think that NWoBHM is an interest area that people will want to explore in depth, so should be separate.
Back to Top
Raff View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1006
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 7:38am
Originally posted by Windhawk Windhawk wrote:



I'd go for traditional hard rock, and outlining the very close kinship it has with traditional heavy metal - in particular with regards to the development of the metal genre.


This is exactly what I had in mind, and I'll very gladly lend a hand in dealing with the subgenre if it gets implemented. I got into metal by way of classic hard rock (as many of my generation did), and it still counts as one of my favourite musical genres.

Edit: I fully second Cert's above post. The NWoBHM should definitely be a separate genre, as it is on other websites. We should beware of putting too many bands in a 'traditional HM' sections, which would very soon cease to be any kind of accurate description, and turn into a glorified 'dumping ground'.


Edited by Raff - 31 Mar 2010 at 7:48am
Back to Top
Colt View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 6668000
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 7:55am
^ Approve
Back to Top
m@x View Drop Down
Forum Admin Group
Forum Admin Group
Avatar
Co-founder, Admin & Webmaster

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Location: Québec, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 947
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 8:18am
Big smile

MMA Metal Subgenres sub-genres reorganization and guidelines for adding albums/artists.

  • Proto-Metal 
    Influential albums on the development of metal. 
    Note: Artist can added even if not all their discography fits in the site. Only the albums of a specific bands can be labeled as Proto-Metal, the rest can be labeled as Other and it won't be listed anywhere on the site, exept in the artist disco (we even can't allow review from theses if it's what we want)

  • NWoBHM

    The New Wave of British Heavy Metal (frequently abbreviated as NWOBHM) was a heavy metal movement that started in the late 1970s, in Britain, and achieved international attention by the early 1980s. Sometimes compared to Beatlemania,[1] the era developed as a reaction in part to the decline of early heavy metal bands such as Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath.[2] NWOBHM bands toned down the blues influences of earlier acts, incorporated elements of punk, increased the tempo, and adopted a "tougher" sound, taking a harder approach to its music.[2] It was a scene directed almost exclusively at heavy metal fans. The era is considered to be a major foundation stone for the extreme metal genres with acts such as the American band Metallica citing NWOBHM bands like Saxon, Mot�rhead, Diamond Head, and Iron Maiden as a major influence on their musical style.[2][3]

  • Traditional Metal

  • Alternative Metal (inclusive of Nu Metal tagged bands but we must be careful on the selection of artists)

Now let's plan the reorg Ouch and the re-writing/edit of the the sub-genres definitions too.





Edited by m@x - 31 Mar 2010 at 12:24pm
Back to Top
Metalbaswee View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator/Retired Admin

Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 8:26am
Cool, even more work!Wacko Tongue


Back to Top
m@x View Drop Down
Forum Admin Group
Forum Admin Group
Avatar
Co-founder, Admin & Webmaster

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Location: Québec, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 947
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 8:29am
Other question, should we order the sub-genres list on the left bar "chronologically" or in a particular order ?
Back to Top
Pekka View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Location: Helsinki
Status: Offline
Points: 1356
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 8:36am
Alphabetical order is the best option I think, it looks great now.
<- Click on this!
Back to Top
Metalbaswee View Drop Down
MMA Special Collaborator
MMA Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator/Retired Admin

Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 8:37am
Originally posted by Pekka Pekka wrote:

Alphabetical order is the best option I think, it looks great now.

agreed.


Back to Top
m@x View Drop Down
Forum Admin Group
Forum Admin Group
Avatar
Co-founder, Admin & Webmaster

Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Location: Québec, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 947
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 8:39am
IMPORTANT

Artists can added even if not all their discography fits in the site. Only the albums of a specific bands can be labeled as an MMA sub-genres, the rest can be labeled as Other and it won't be listed anywhere on the site, exept in the artist disco (we even can't allow review from theses if it's what we want)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.16
Copyright ©2001-2013 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.