Slipknot

Metallic Blaze wrote:

manny, grunge is a legitamate genre. It's a mixture of metal and alternative and later it morphed into nu metal.

That whole overview is kinda simplistic.

Nu Metal had more to do with coming out of bands like Faith No More, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Jane's Addiction, Kings X, Rage Against The Machine etc. then any Seattle Bands.

Funny how a flippant word Mark Arm cadged from the 80's Australian Garage/Post-Punk scene would become a term of genre that people abide by. Grunge is no sound or style of music it's a stupid blanket term perpetuated by the media for a whole lotta different bands whose only connection is that they came from the same place at the same time.

rattpoison wrote:

Metallic Blaze wrote:

manny, grunge is a legitamate genre. It's a mixture of metal and alternative and later it morphed into nu metal.

That whole overview is kinda simplistic.

Nu Metal had more to do with coming out of bands like Faith No More, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Jane's Addiction, Kings X, Rage Against The Machine etc. then any Seattle Bands.

Funny how a flippant word Mark Arm cadged from the 80's Australian Garage/Post-Punk scene would become a term of genre that people abide by. Grunge is no sound or style of music it's a stupid blanket term perpetuated by the media for a whole lotta different bands whose only connection is that they came from the same place at the same time.

Well said rattpoison.

Well, I guess we can agree to disagree on that one then.

That's okay with me.

It's not a big deal at all. But I do consider grunge to be a true genre in and of itself.

Most Seattle bands sounded like 70's rock downtuned a step, step and a half, and sometimes two.

mY take is that "grunge" applied more to image than flavor of music ? I'm just a drummer, so anything profround coming from my lips is a random selection occurrance a few times per decade and I might have already used my issue already ?

Yeah, to me 'grunge' was more than just an image. There is a distinct sound associated with it for sure. An unmistakeable sound. You can hear it from Alice in Chains all the way to Nirvana.

It was a new sound. And it needed a new name. Thus it got one. Regardless of who named it. That didn't matter. What mattered is that it caught on. With everyone. It's a legitimate genre. Even in hindsight - it's plain to see.

But yeah ... if you don't agree, that's okay with me. It doesn't matter anyway. It is what it is.

Metallic Blaze wrote:

Yeah, to me 'grunge' was more than just an image. There is a distinct sound associated with it for sure. An unmistakeable sound. You can hear it from Alice in Chains all the way to Nirvana.

It was a new sound. And it needed a new name. Thus it got one. Regardless of who named it. That didn't matter. What mattered is that it caught on. With everyone. It's a legitimate genre. Even in hindsight - it's plain to see.

But yeah ... if you don't agree, that's okay with me. It doesn't matter anyway. It is what it is.

That's cool, anyway here's more thoughts........

It was hardly a new sound imo, it wasn't any different to what was happening in the respective American and Australian rock undergrounds in the previous part of the 80's. And just who are the Stooges and Black Sabbath anyway!

It exposed those obscured sounds to the mainstream audience for the first time. Nirvana may have seemed new to people who hadn't heard Husker Du or the Replacements or Mudhoney may have seemed new to people who hadn't heard the Scientists or feedtime to give but two examples.

And another thing looking at those examples and my main contention of the "Grunge" blanket label is how completely different are those bands and the musical head spaces they were coming from. What did Mother Love Bone have to do with Nirvana, Screaming Trees and Alice In Chains, Blood Circus and Soundgarden, Tad and Pearl Jam, Green River and the Melvins etc etc etc.

Despite the incestuous nature of the scene all those bands were pushing in all different directions musically, which is what made it great.

rattpoison wrote:

.

What did Mother Love Bone have to do with Nirvana, Screaming Trees and Alice In Chains, Blood Circus and Soundgarden, Tad and Pearl Jam, Green River and the Melvins etc etc etc.
[/quote]

That's true I think, although I admit I bought into the hype back into the Lalapaloooza days. In retrospect all that turned out to be an neo-mainstream, or an "Alternative" mainstream if you will. The biggest thing these bands had in common was that they weren't Queensryche, Priest, or Motley Crue. That being said though, there were many influential bands that came out of that era, and I think they turned out to be a bigger influence on 90's hard rock (in the Usa at least) than the 80's mainstream bands did. I suspect that is what M.Blaze is getting at there.

Yeah, that is pretty much what I was saying in a nutshell. I'm glad someone understood my point.

SAHB Healer wrote:

That being said though, there were many influential bands that came out of that era, and I think they turned out to be a bigger influence on 90's hard rock (in the Usa at least) than the 80's mainstream bands did. I suspect that is what M.Blaze is getting at there.

Seattle bands influence on 90's hard rock i agree. But MB was saying Grunge morphed into Nu Metal which i always thought as being derivative of Los Angeles bands of the same time frame as the Seattle bands, bands like Faith No More, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Jane's Addiction, Rage Against The Machine etc.

rattpoison wrote:

SAHB Healer wrote:

That being said though, there were many influential bands that came out of that era, and I think they turned out to be a bigger influence on 90's hard rock (in the Usa at least) than the 80's mainstream bands did. I suspect that is what M.Blaze is getting at there.

Seattle bands influence on 90's hard rock i agree. But MB was saying Grunge morphed into Nu Metal which i always thought as being derivative of Los Angeles bands of the same time frame as the Seattle bands, bands like Faith No More, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Jane's Addiction, Rage Against The Machine etc.

But I agree with you. Those bands did have a HUGE impact on what later became known as nu metal, but grunge kinda merged with that whole scene. That's what happened. Those two scenes had a head on collision, and nu metal rose up from it's ashes.

Musically, Slipknot is okay. Some stuff sounds pretty rockin.

I'm just turned off by their fans from which I've seen noticeable trends. ( I know these are kinda stereotypes, but c'mon! There are other stereotypes that are arguably just more bad@$$)

- They wear industrial clothing and apparel in addition to a slipknot T-shirt. (probalby in an attempt to look like Marlin Manson or Trent Reznor)

- They are between the ages of 12- 16 (or younger, see below).

- Are exceedingly pale in complection as they stay inside a whole bunch.

- Are either very tall and lanky, or exceedingly overweight. (not excelling at any high school, or junior high sports may be an attributing factor to this).

- Also wear eyeliner and other goth like makeup (probably in an attempt to look goth.)

Basically if 90% of the kids clothes look like they are from Hot Topic, it might be a slipknot fan.







I don't mind that the lyrics are angsty, it's just relatively "kid" ish type of juvenile angst.

I mean, at least the angsty lyrics of thrash involve a$$kickery, this new stuff just seems to spin it's wheels in a rut then not do anything about it.

The first time i saw slipknot was at mayhem fest awhile ago, and the last time i saw them was at a local radio station hosting bands at an arena. (All that remains, the used, klutch, slipknot and Korn attended.) I like many other metal bands and diffrent types of metal. The only thing i really hate out of music genre is Country and Rap, i refuse to listen to them.

The only good song ever written by this band is people = s***