My beef with (some) Christian Metal.

Everyone has their pet peeves... I guess i don't like a lot of clone bands, just like ult doesn't like a bunch of cuss words on albums.

Being "overanalytical" is what creates the interesting discussions around here vs. "band x rules!!!!" or "band x stinks!!!".

I find it very interesting to hear what people think about this and what their experiences are.

Fat Freddy wrote:

Quote :

The first Barren Cross had some Maiden worship, but they evolved into their own sound.

Maiden were definitely an influence....Mike's vox were definitely Bruce Dickinson-ian, and the very up front, prominent bass playing seemed very much like Steve Harris' as well. However, the band's guitar sound was totally '80s L.A. metal.

Iron Maiden never dressed quite as funny as BC did on the original ROCK FOR THE KING album cover either.

No, but Bruce wore some crazy stuff in the 80's LOL!!!! Yes, the guitar sounds weren't quite Maiden, but there was a HUGE influence on that album. I remember when a high school buddy lent it to me and my first tough was "MAIDEN!!!". The main lick from Goin' Nowhere is very close to Two Minutes To Midnight. Mike was VERY influenced by Bruce as was Jim by Steve Harris (even down to his "click" on some of the tracks). Fortunately they evolved and released the AWESOME Atomic Arena!!!!!!!!! Great band!!!!!!!!!

I always felt Stryper had the most "original" sound of the first Christian Metal bands - of course, you could heard their influence in the music, especially on IGWT which has a HUGE Styx influence on the vocal harmonies.

Like Manny said, back in the day everyone was a 'Christian' version of someone else, except Stryper - they were just Stryper and it;s probably a big reason they were as big as they were. These days, I just look at it as music (like Manny). But, back in the day it was HUGE deal to the be "christian version of x"

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

I think all this "clone" stuff is being a tad overanalytical. I used to do the same thing, deride bands for "lack of originality", etc. In the end, it still comes down to "if you don't like it, don't listen to it". If one AC/DC is enough for you, then cool. If you can't get enough of what you love, there are other bands to feed the beast with.

Like I said, in this day and age, with Heavy Metal being 40 years old, true, absolute originality is hard to come by. As long as a band is good at what they do and are enjoying it, someone else will enjoy it too.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Being "overanalytical" is what creates the interesting discussions around here vs. "band x rules!!!!" or "band x stinks!!!".

I find it very interesting to hear what people think about this and what their experiences are.

Oh I wasn't putting anyone down...just expressing a thought.

I grew up with the whole white metal scene, and I bought as many albums I could get my mittens on. I loved just about all the bands I heard. Then followed a period when I, for whatever reason, felt that many of the Christian metal bands didn't live up to the standards of the secular scene. They just weren't cool enough, sort of. So when I transferred my collection from LP's to CD's, I was less eager to rebuy the Christian bands. Then internet came about, and I started to rebuy as many of the old "classics" as could, and found that what I like is what I like. Be it Torn Flesh or One Bad Pig, if it moved me in any way, I no longer cared if said band was considered uncool. Today I own close to 1000 Christian metal CD's, and they take up approx 1/3 - 1/4 of my collection. There is a lot of variety, and very few of these bands are what I'd consider clone bands. A lot of them are innovative also, imo.

By biggest problem with the scene was how so many of these bands "folded" or changed when metal was considered uncool.

Fat Freddy wrote:

Joe wrote:

I have to say that my biggest beef is that there is a genre called "Christian" metal. What does that really mean? If it is just based on lyrical content, then we should have "political" metal or "sci-fi" metal or whatever other theme you can think of. I honestly think this whole term was created to try and downgrade the quality of the music to all the "tr00 metalheadz"

Hear, hear.

As I've said many a time before around this forum (sing it with me if you know the words, kids!): I personally couldn't care less if a band is singing about God, Satan, Buddha, Captain Kirk, or the Teletubbies. If they're a good band, they're a good band. If they suck, they suck.

I feel the same way, I don't like the label really, nor do I care what their singing about for the most part. But when the whole things just waxing on and on and on and on and on about the same thing, it gets boring quick. Which is one of the main reasons I can barely stand Stryper.

DeathCult wrote:

Fat Freddy wrote:

Joe wrote:

I have to say that my biggest beef is that there is a genre called "Christian" metal. What does that really mean? If it is just based on lyrical content, then we should have "political" metal or "sci-fi" metal or whatever other theme you can think of. I honestly think this whole term was created to try and downgrade the quality of the music to all the "tr00 metalheadz"

Hear, hear.

As I've said many a time before around this forum (sing it with me if you know the words, kids!): I personally couldn't care less if a band is singing about God, Satan, Buddha, Captain Kirk, or the Teletubbies. If they're a good band, they're a good band. If they suck, they suck.

I feel the same way, I don't like the label really, nor do I care what their singing about for the most part. But when the whole things just waxing on and on and on and on and on about the same thing, it gets boring quick. Which is one of the main reasons I can barely stand Stryper.

and they dress like bumble bees

manny wrote:

DeathCult wrote:

Fat Freddy wrote:

Joe wrote:

I have to say that my biggest beef is that there is a genre called "Christian" metal. What does that really mean? If it is just based on lyrical content, then we should have "political" metal or "sci-fi" metal or whatever other theme you can think of. I honestly think this whole term was created to try and downgrade the quality of the music to all the "tr00 metalheadz"

Hear, hear.

As I've said many a time before around this forum (sing it with me if you know the words, kids!): I personally couldn't care less if a band is singing about God, Satan, Buddha, Captain Kirk, or the Teletubbies. If they're a good band, they're a good band. If they suck, they suck.

I feel the same way, I don't like the label really, nor do I care what their singing about for the most part. But when the whole things just waxing on and on and on and on and on about the same thing, it gets boring quick. Which is one of the main reasons I can barely stand Stryper.

and they dress like bumble bees

If I ever got hit with one of those bibles, that'd be the last you'd hear of his buzzing ass. Seriously though, I just can't take 60 minutes of rockin' it for Jesus! By the same standard though, I find myself quite bored with alot of other bands I used to love when I was younger "satan, satan, SAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTTTTAAAAANNNNNN!!" Alright, I get it evil and darkness, yeesh.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Being "overanalytical" is what creates the interesting discussions around here vs. "band x rules!!!!" or "band x stinks!!!".

I find it very interesting to hear what people think about this and what their experiences are.

Exactly.

I remember growing up I only had Christian rock CD's. Then I borrowed my friend's Iron Maiden Somewhere in Time tape. It opened me up to listening to music other than "Christian music". I love both. I agree that some Christian bands sound like "this" band and had little to no originality. But there are some bands in the Christian scene that were great - Believer, Tourniquet, and some others that were very talented and were writing music that was technical and tight.

Just my 2 cents.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Being "overanalytical" is what creates the interesting discussions around here vs. "band x rules!!!!" or "band x stinks!!!".

I find it very interesting to hear what people think about this and what their experiences are.

That's one of the reasons I started this thread. I wanted to know whether I really WAS overly sensitive or not to this stuff. Apparently, I'm not the only one, but I'm in the minority.

But here's the thing, even though the majority disagreed with me, it DIDN'T degenerate into a 'u suck!', 'no u!', 'ur ghey!', 'no ur ghey!' type of argument. Instead, everyone acted like adults and politely disagreed, logically stated their arguments, and then wished me well.

This is why I prefer this board over all of the other music boards, because everyone here acts a bit more mature.

Angelcake Adonisus Fox wrote:

But here's the thing, even though the majority disagreed with me, it DIDN'T degenerate into a 'u suck!', 'no u!', 'ur ghey!', 'no ur ghey!' type of argument. Instead, everyone acted like adults and politely disagreed, logically stated their arguments, and then wished me well.

This is why I prefer this board over all of the other music boards, because everyone here acts a bit more mature.

you caught us on an off day