Critics

[Stiffy]

Metal fans are the hardest to please. The music is technical, demanding, and intelligent so it comes as no surprise that fans would be tough critics compared to any other genre of music. However, I feel like a lot of bands get the shaft because of over thinking. Sometimes (especially as a writer) I feel like we as fans can over think or over compare albums. Take the new Fear Factory review for example. There are a lot of mixed opinions, naturally, but when are we over doing it and not taking albums for what they are? Should we always expect a band to keep up with what we considered their glory days? Is it that they aren't creating what they were? Or is it that the nostalgia just isn't there? Another thing is even when a band does hold true to their sound they get shit because they never progress. It's like we as fans always are looking for the finest points and my complex is that I feel sometimes we over do it to the point were we miss out on just enjoying albums. I try not to do this. At least lately I've tried not to. I've also anticipated albums and wanted them to be something they weren't. But does that mean they aren't good? Am I making any sense with this ramble?

Just wanted some opinions on the subject as it has been a topic I think about a lot. I get to the point sometimes where I think metal fans are egotistical and so self-absorbed that they lose site of why they even like the music.

[spychocyco]

As I've gotten older, I've begun to feel more and more that's the case.

I'm not sure that I've ever met a casual metal fan. I've met people who prefer other kinds of music that might casually listen to the more popular metal, but I don't think I've ever met someone who was truly a metal fan that left the music behind when he/she turned off the stereo. That's a good thing, but it also has its bad points. There's a very personal connection, which is good, but often a very violent backlash when that person feels let down or disappointed.

I went through my phase of being that stereotypical metal fan that always had to be into the heaviest, most obscure band I could find (which, where I'm from and in pre-Internet days was usually far from the heaviest, most obscure band to be found). If one of the preppy kids in my high school showed up wearing that band's shirt, I'd retire mine and usually get all pretentious about it -- "yeah, I used to like them, but then my tastes became more refined."

As I've gotten older, widened my musical tastes and been disappointed at some point by just about every band that I've ever been a fan of, I've also mellowed a little with that kind of thinking. A crappy record or two won't keep me from listening to that band again if they put out something I enjoy. The attitude that they disappointed me so they never deserve my attention again doesn't make sense to me.

One thing that bothers me about metal fans is the fact that, at the first sniff of success a band gets, many of them tend to turn their back. I'm not talking about the Metallicas of the world that completely changed their sound in an attempt to appeal to non-metal fans. I'm talking about bands who really haven't changed their sound a whole lot, but have just hit a lucky streak or caught a little attention. In a lot of cases, even, "success" is a relative term. I find it hilarious when I hear someone saying a band "sold out" because they hit 50,000 records sold this time out as opposed to the 15 or 20k they were getting previously. But, it happens.

These days, I don't worry about it so much. I'm still critical in what I listen to, and there's still a lot of crap out there, but if I don't like it, I don't listen to it. And if I do like it, I don't give a shit who agrees or disagrees with me. I'm closing in on 40, and I just don't feel like I've got anything to prove to anyone anymore. My ears have been destroyed by about 30 years of metal, and I don't feel the need to be more metal than the next guy out there anymore. These days, if I like it, I listen to it, and that's that.

[gabaghoul]

I find that I'm disappointed when a band loses its way or changes dramatically from what I enjoyed so much in the first place but I try not to be an elitist shit about it (except for Metallica).

for example, I haven;t been thrilled about In Flames and Soilwork's last albums but they;re still good bands and I still think they have good stuff in them.

The new FF isn't the end all be all, it's frankly nothing really new for them - although had they done more melodic thrashy riffs like the opener of Fear Catalyst it'd be a true progression - but it still sounds fucking great and harkens back to what I loved about Demanufacture in the first place. so I am happy about that.

is it as daring or impressive as any of the albums I listed in my top 10 for 09? no. but they don't deserve to be castigated for that either, they are what they are and I'm glad they're back to doing it at the best of their ability again.

Rambling YAY

[Stiffy]

Glad to hear you guys seem to understand. My older age seems to be the reasoning for a lot of this as well. Some times it seems that the critics will never be happy. Can't remember the last time a record by any band got completely praised across the board. I like a little debate about the music and I like to hear others opinions, but there are times when that line gets crossed and I feel the fans think they know more than they really do. It's a paradox. A Catch 22 at times.

[Biff_Tannen]

Its just nostalgia when it comes to dismissing bands that you used to love. Because more than likely, the first album you ever heard of a givin band will always be your favorite, and any deviation from that sound (or a weaker version of it... ie; death magnetic) and we as metal fans tend to take it as a pesonal betrayal !

I don't think there is a right or wrong within this topic, but I think it helps to recognize why we do this, so that maybe we can look at bands in a new light, and enjoy their newer/experimental stuff.

For example, I love,love,LOVE old Enslaved.... Frost was the first album I ever heard of theirs, then the follow up, Eld, was just as good, if not better. Now, except for Grutle's vocals, they sound like a completely different band. BUT, I absolutely love post Eld/Blodhemn Enslaved just as much as the old shit. I just don't really think of them as the same band, or judge their newer works by the old criteria. Im sure it helps that Enslaved actually pulled off this massive stylistic shift, instead of falling flat on their face.... but, you get the point.

Exact same situation with Ulver.

[gordeth]

I think metal fans identify with the music a lot more than most other genres. So, it's inevitable that they will tend to be overly critical of what they consider to be a part of themselves. Also, a lot of fans seem to be very close-minded, which makes the problem even worse. I find it kind of ironic that there are so many close-minded people in a scene that supposedly represents freethinking and rebellion.

[Biff_Tannen]

I think metal fans identify with the music a lot more than most other genres. So, it's inevitable that they will tend to be overly critical of what they consider to be a part of themselves. Also, a lot of fans seem to be very close-minded, which makes the problem even worse. I find it kind of ironic that there are so many close-minded people in a scene that supposedly represents freethinking and rebellion.

The only close minded metal fans I've ever met were those into gore grind/brutal death metal. That shit attracts all the morons. I fucking HATE that kind of stuff, and it's fans. If its not br00tal, and has pig vocals, they won't listen to it.
Also, Pantera fans are EXTREMELY moronic and closeminded in general.

[Stiffy]

The nostalgia comment is really the core of it all I feel. I love albums by bands that most consider their worst moment, and thats all because of the time in my life when I heard it.

[Cynicgods]

I understand where you're coming from, Stiffer. I do think Fear Factory's new record is their best work after Obsolete but it just doesn't match the songwriting of their first two albums. It's not a matter of nostalgia for me, as an example I can mention bands that felt a need for a stylistic change in their music but their later works are just as vital as their prior material i.e. Opeth, Katatonia, Primordial, Enslaved, Ulver, Borknagar, Sentenced, etc. There also exist old workhorses such as Bolt Thrower, Unleashed or Dismember that always stay within the confines of their chosen sound but never release a bad album. FF didn't change their sound in an interesting fashion. They just sold out because Roadrunner was pressuring them to do so, just like Machine Head did. Take a look at the label's roster and you'll be able to see where their priorities lie. Mechanize seems to come from the heart, it does seem genuine. The main problem I have with it is that songwriting has taken a massive dip, it doesn't hold a candle to their previous output. It sounds like Divine Heresy material with Burton's half-assed singing (he's MUCH better than what is shown in Mechanize) and amazing Hoglan drumming (which is nothing new, really. Everything this machine does is golden). But that is just one person's opinion. I never take reviews at face value. If you love it and think it's just as good as Demanufacture, hey, more power to you. I never criticize the person reviewing it, I just mention my opinion on the matter. Don't let the bastards get to you, you're a good reviewer.

[Stiffy]

I didn't post this because of the Fear Factory. It's just a prime example. I've thought this way for a long time and I figured most of you on here did as well. Or I was looking for your input anyway. Other examples would be Swallow the Sun. I've heard mix reviews on that one (people still comparing new material with a fucking debut thats over 5 years old) and I really like that as well. Some times I just feel an album can get pushed aside because it's too heavily compared to a previous work. But then again it should be I assume. LOL! I don't know Im confusing myself. Got sand in my vagina this week. LOL!

[Cynicgods]

I didn't post this because of the Fear Factory. It's just a prime example. I've thought this way for a long time and I figured most of you on here did as well. Or I was looking for your input anyway. Other examples would be Swallow the Sun. I've heard mix reviews on that one (people still comparing new material with a fucking debut thats over 5 years old) and I really like that as well. Some times I just feel an album can get pushed aside because it's too heavily compared to a previous work. But then again it should be I assume. LOL! I don't know Im confusing myself. Got sand in my vagina this week. LOL!

It's not nostalgia nor familiarity with the older stuff for me, it's just comparing records objectively. Some bands always release quality stuff while others lose their way. Everyone has their own opinion and some people just can't accept change. I can, but as a metal fan, I'm very passionate about the music and after listening to it for 16 years, I know exactly what I like.

Oh and if you think some metal fans are self-absorbed, pretentious pricks, you should have a chat with indie hipsters or oldschool proggers. Me? I enjoy every second of any conversation I can have with those fuckers. So much fun to burst bubbles or to lure them with invented band names (which of course they heard before the band members knew what instrument they were going to pick up ).

[gordeth]

If a band totally changes their style, then I can see how comparisons to their earlier albums can be pointless. But, if a band's newer albums are just a weaker version of what they did before, it's impossible to avoid comparison. If they could make something so good years ago, why couldn't they build on that and be even better now? That's what frustrates me about Swallow the Sun.

[Stiffy]

Well I'll be reviewing that this weekend. Will be interested to hear peoples comments. It is a good record but it isn't great or anything. I didn't put it on my year end list. I need to spend more time with it though. Snow storm coming tomorrow. I'll get a case of beer and spin the shit out of it for a day.

[gordeth]

I'm excited about that storm. It better deliver. I don't have high hopes for the new Swallow the Sun, though. I thought their last two albums were fairly boring except for a couple songs. I might still pick up the new one if it's at least better than those two.

[K.Huckins]

I think metal fans identify with the music a lot more than most other genres. So, it's inevitable that they will tend to be overly critical of what they consider to be a part of themselves. Also, a lot of fans seem to be very close-minded, which makes the problem even worse. I find it kind of ironic that there are so many close-minded people in a scene that supposedly represents freethinking and rebellion.

The only close minded metal fans I've ever met were those into gore grind/brutal death metal. That shit attracts all the morons. I fucking HATE that kind of stuff, and it's fans. If its not br00tal, and has pig vocals, they won't listen to it.
Also, Pantera fans are EXTREMELY moronic and closeminded in general.

I've known a TON of black metal fans who only listen to stuff that was apparently recorded in a bathroom with all of the mics in a bucket of mud. Or they just stop liking a band once they have more than 14 fans.

[Stiffy]

Yeah well there are those types as well. LOL! There is a little bit of lofi black metal guy in all of us if you think about it.

[jk666]

I think my issue is that as I get older (and older) I have more musical history to compare to. When I listen to a new Maiden album I hear parts that sound like Powerslave and parts that sound like specific songs or riffs. I haven't been in a band for 30 years like those guys have so I have no idea how hard it is to not repeat yourself.

I especially hear it with bands that get back together after some time off. Like they consciously make songs form each era to try and recapture their old fans.

[Staylow]

Also, Pantera fans are EXTREMELY moronic and closeminded in general.

Pantera is one of my all time faves - top 5. I grew up listening to them, but I'm not one of THOSE fans, though I know exactly what you're referring to - I've met many of them. "Pantera fucking rules man." They have 5 favorite bands and don't give a shit about anything else - "it's OK man, but they're not Panera dude." Pantera, Metallica ("The old stuff only, dude."), Slayer, Arise/Chaos A.D./Roots-era Sepultura and one other random band.

As for the topic of the thread, my views have pretty much been stated by everyone else. I could go into a bit of detail, but I'm kinda lazy right now.

[timshel]

However, I feel like a lot of bands get the shaft because of over thinking. Sometimes (especially as a writer) I feel like we as fans can over think or over compare albums. Take the new Fear Factory review for example. There are a lot of mixed opinions, naturally, but when are we over doing it and not taking albums for what they are?

Hey, so screw the traditional approach, forget the over-analytical bullshit and be bold! Try to judge an album purely on its own terms and see if it works. You could become a refreshing voice in a sea of traditionalists!

But I'd only caution this: Remember that you're writing for an audience. And this audience can be divided into two groups: those that are familiar with the band you're reviewing and those that aren't. Members of the former group want to know if the band's current work has some of the same elements that attracted them to the band in the first place, while the latter group simply wants to know what the band sounds like. It's hard to address both groups equally, but finding the right balance in your writing seems to be one of the challenges in music criticism. But as long as you're fair and honest in your approach, I think you're doing a good job. There's always going to be someone who doesn't agree with you.

[vugelnox]

the older I get the less concerned I am with the "wisdom" of critics. I've heard more than enough metal in my lifetime to be able to discern the good from the bad and that which interests me to that which does not. That and the more jaded and cynical side of me has no interest in reading reviews of folks numerous years my junior and without a great deal of knowledge of the genre. It still surprises me a little every time I see a review of the new album by a long standing and widely known band only to have the reviewer start off with "this being my first exposure to so-and-so I can't speak for their history buuut..." and go from there. I might be a hard-to-please curmudgeon concerning metal and I'm fine with that but no matter I'm quite intolerant of the opinions of those who know little of what they speak.

That said I always appreciate a reviewer who is both articulate and able to draw from a large pool of knowledge pertaining to historical context of the band/genre and knowledge of music itself. Folks who are able to communicate their ideas in an intelligent manner and can provide a useful analysis of the album with ideally no hyperbole (the most glaring sign of a poor reviewer). I don't need to read all manners of witty metaphors and analogies to how evil and chaotic the new Portal album is or how epic the new Tyr album sounds. Its almost never amusing, provides zero context (do the guitars really sound like a dozen chainsaws caught in 30 feet of razorwire? I think not my friend) and quickly causes the eyes to glaze over.

Okay rant finished, back to work.