Most important aspect of a Metal song to you (pick ONLY one)

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Awww, man. I gotta do math? Ugg.
1. vocal prowess 30%
2. quality of riffs 15%
3. quality of drumming 15%
4. quality of bass playing 5%
5. originality 2.5%
6. quality of lyrics 15%
7. quality of guitar solos 15%
8. production 2.5%

Dang dude, you got all "2.5" and stuff!?

tohostudios wrote:

1. vocal prowess 70%
2. quality of riffs 1%
3. quality of drumming 1%
4. quality of bass playing 1%
5. originality 5%
6. quality of lyrics 5%
7. quality of guitar solos 5%
8. production 12%

And by prowess I don't necessarily mean a singer has to have a technically great voice but he has to at least carry a tune.

Wow. Now that's extreme.

Can we add "Attitude" as a 9th aspect?

94% of Motorhead's music is based on that.

1. vocal prowess 23%
2. quality of riffs 23%
3. quality of drumming 10%
4. quality of bass playing 9%
5. originality 5%
6. quality of lyrics 5%
7. quality of guitar solos 20%
8. production 5%

Production and origionality are not high priorities, there are plenty of badly produced albums that I really enjoy and a copy cat doesnt' bother me much as long as their good at it and depending on how I feel about the subject matter, lyric quality is not a top priority. Guitars and vocals make metal for me and of course w/o a riff you really don't have much of a song. Though not a priority for a lot of people, to me a really mediocre song can be greatly inhanced by a solo. This was particularly obvious to me when listening to some demo CDs at Mardel. A lot of the music I passed up could have won me over if there were some decent guitar solos (or any at all).

1. vocal prowess 20% "Haha, I love singing! It's so easy!"
2. quality of riffs 20% If I forgot it the second it ended, there was no reason to play it.
3. quality of drumming 10% Anyone can play them, but few can RAWK them.
4. quality of bass playing 20% People who downplay the bass are stupid.
5. originality 10% Sorry, but I don't like all my bands to sound the same.
6. quality of lyrics 5% It's great if lyrics are really good, but if they suck I don't mind.
7. quality of guitar solos 10% To me a song isn't complete without one.
8. production 5% Doesn't bother me as long as it isn't god-awful.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Can we add "Attitude" as a 9th aspect?

94% of Motorhead's music is based on that.

You can start your own thread for that.

I don't think most of my favorites have much "attitude", or at least I rarely think of it in those terms.

A lot of rap and punk music has nothing but "attitude" and I can't stand it because it is not musical.

Riffs are important, but for me it's about the vocals. They don't have to be amazing singers (I listen to a lot of hardcore), just as long thier voices don't irritate me. Sometimes the sound of the drums can turn me off too, like if the kick drum is way louder than rest of the drums, or if the drums sound like they used garbage cans

Temple of Blood wrote:

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Can we add "Attitude" as a 9th aspect?

94% of Motorhead's music is based on that.

You can start your own thread for that.

I don't think most of my favorites have much "attitude", or at least I rarely think of it in those terms.

A lot of rap and punk music has nothing but "attitude" and I can't stand it because it is not musical.

Did you just say my boy here aint musical???

T-Roy wrote:

Did you just say my boy here aint musical???

I know he's your homey but I gotsta tell it skrate ...

1. vocal prowess 25%
2. quality of riffs 25%
3. quality of drumming 20%
4. quality of bass playing 5%
5. originality 0%
6. quality of lyrics 5%
7. quality of guitar solos 10%
8. production 10%

Impossible... any one thing by it's self is useless without the other parts. They're all equally important.

No quality of songwriting? This thing is rigged!

Fat Freddy wrote:

Tough question but I guess for me, it pretty much lives and dies by the vocals. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a song start and say "Hey, this sounds pretty good...." then the singer opens his (or her) mouth and it all turns to sheeeeit.

My thoughts exactly

Man, I can think of bands that vocally aren't very good but I really like them. Mustaine comes to mind and his voice really fits the music. Others can have great vocal prowess but the riffs aren't great so they slip in my listening opinion. I don't know how to measure.

Eyesore wrote:

No quality of songwriting? This thing is rigged!

That's a little too general, I think.

Can we define "riffs"?

To me there's a difference between a "riff" and a "hook". A "riff" is some "chugga, chugga" type thing that recurs throughout a song while a "hook" is the melody (usually in the chorus) that makes a song memorable.

By my definitions, "riffs" mean practically nothing but "hooks" mean almost as much as vocals.

Temple of Blood wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

1. vocal prowess 70%
2. quality of riffs 1%
3. quality of drumming 1%
4. quality of bass playing 1%
5. originality 5%
6. quality of lyrics 5%
7. quality of guitar solos 5%
8. production 12%

And by prowess I don't necessarily mean a singer has to have a technically great voice but he has to at least carry a tune.

Wow. Now that's extreme.

Actually, my most important element is "memorability" (i.e. "songwriting). I really don't care how great everything else is, if I can't sing along with a song after a few spins of it, I'm usually not interested. For me, much of the memorability beyond the actual songwriting is carried by the vocals. Vocalists who growl, scream or otherwise neglect melody basically ruin the memorability for me so of the elements listed that's why I place so much emphasis on vocals.

tohostudios wrote:

Can we define "riffs"?

To me there's a difference between a "riff" and a "hook". A "riff" is some "chugga, chugga" type thing that recurs throughout a song while a "hook" is the melody (usually in the chorus) that makes a song memorable.

By my definitions, "riffs" mean practically nothing but "hooks" mean almost as much as vocals.

Riff=guitar melody. That's pretty much it.

Quality of riffs.

Schbopo wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

Can we define "riffs"?

To me there's a difference between a "riff" and a "hook". A "riff" is some "chugga, chugga" type thing that recurs throughout a song while a "hook" is the melody (usually in the chorus) that makes a song memorable.

By my definitions, "riffs" mean practically nothing but "hooks" mean almost as much as vocals.

Riff=guitar melody. That's pretty much it.

Based on that definition I stand by my original evaluation. I'm more interested in the "hook" which may or may not be carried by the guitar.

1. vocal prowess 30%
2. quality of riffs 20%
3. quality of drumming 5%
4. quality of bass playing 5%
5. originality 5%
6. quality of lyrics 10%
7. quality of guitar solos 10%
8. production 15%

Schbopo wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

No quality of songwriting? This thing is rigged!

That's a little too general, I think.

Not really. Without that, the rest is pointless.

tohostudios wrote:

Based on that definition I stand by my original evaluation. I'm more interested in the "hook" which may or may not be carried by the guitar.

I totally agree. Obviously the most important thing is if the song sounds good or not. Each member could be a master of their respective instruments, but if they can't write a memorable song between them, then that counts for nothing.

abstract question, cannot answer, subject too complex