When is it no longer metal?

So, I figured this would be a good place to have this discussion. Metal as all know has many sounds and sub-genres but I've been thinking when does it go so far from it's root that is it even metal anymore? This is obviously purely subjective but I figured it would be interesting. Some bands and sub-genres that come to mind is Nightwish/Symphonic "metal", ambient black "metal". There is a ton more and I bet you guys can name more. But what I noticed is that they focus on things that to me they don't have alot of roots in metal. It seems to me they don't really focus on the riffs they focus on either the "atmosphere" or the symphonic/keyboard parts and the bombastic vocals.

So what are you guys thoughts?

Also, I was watching one of Varg Vikernes video and he was talking about his influences and he basically said he really wasn't into metal music at all.. I'll post the video so you can watch it.

Who?

A person can call it whatever they like. Sub-genres and labels are silly (IMHO)

A magnet sticks to steel and iron, but not to gold, silver, aluminum, copper, or brass ? Iron and steel are heavier, but the others are far more valuable.

In the end it is all metal.

I really like James B.'s analogy. It makes sense and I agree with it. But, for purposes of discussion and to answer the question that choosemetal asked, I have to say it's harder for us because the "Metal" in question is not tangible. It's a sound, of course. Imho, sub genres and descriptors are necessary b/c there are so many different types under the umbrella. Too many sub genres and descriptors is where it gets silly. This one's a tough one. Like you said, it's "subjective" so I would imagine it's no longer Metal when a band who was once a Metal band puts out an album that doesn't contain any recognizable elements or roots of Metal music (guitars, solos, thunderous drums, wailing vocals, etc.). If the next Maiden album is mellow ambient instrumentals then it's no longer Metal.

What further complicates the question, and I feel this applies also to the discussion of Metal bands in the 70's, is the bands themselves don't stay in the same spot but move underneath the umbrella. A band like Priest is a good example as all albums are Metal but Sin After Sin, Turbo, Painkiller, and Nostradamus are all very different albums. The proponents of a band always point to the bands heaviest track and cry "tell me this isn't Metal" and the detractors point to the bands weakest track or current offerings and say "no way." I have also read and had discussions with people who average out the bands albums and songs or some who even believe that once a Metal band then always a Metal band.

Good question, choosemetal. I just hope this doesn't get us all crazy.

When it's just noise with little to no melody it's more hardcore (punk) than metal. Hardcore punk with screaming. Heavy metal to me has always been a little more sophisticated.

When a band cuts their hair, quits wearing leather n spikes and stops singing about killing posers and eating their livers, they are no longer tr00!!!

Fat Freddy wrote:

When a band cuts their hair, quits wearing leather n spikes and stops singing about killing posers and eating their livers, they are no longer tr00!!!

A.K.A. Load and Re-Load.

Fat Freddy wrote:

When a band cuts their hair, quits wearing leather n spikes and stops singing about killing posers and eating their livers, they are no longer tr00!!!

The Sentinel sense is tingling. I feel a Killen reference about to happen.

Some people who start out metal like Fursy Teyssier



But end up completely different



I don't really give a stuff, musicians should feel free to make the music that they want to make and not feel constrained by a label or what fans expect. So long as they don't end up country, that's just f*cking unacceptable!

Heavy metal has various essential elements - distortion, a higher level of technical skill with instruments, unique/difficult vocal styles (guttural to operatic), lyrical themes (fantasy, battle, sexual prowess, mysticism, bacchanalian delights, the nature of good & evil, "rocking") and once these elements go missing the "metalness" of a song begins to be diluted or lost.  Obviously this is a continuum from AOR/hard rock to extreme metal so there's a lot of variation but all genres of metal shares these elements to a lesser or greater degree.

If a majority of a band's output features these elements then they are somewhere on this continuum and are considered a metal band.

the sentinel wrote:

I feel a Killen reference about to happen.

Bah. Killen ist the most high ultra tr00 band ever. They made one ultra clazzic LP (only vinyls is real) and then disappeared, leaving only legends and a good looking tr00 mettle corpse.

Witchfinder wrote:

a higher level of technical skill with instruments,

You absolutely sure about that one!

Boris2008 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

a higher level of technical skill with instruments,

You absolutely sure about that one!

Although i am a huge fan of thrash, i never could digest that early raw sound. Awfullly bad.

I don't really like the argument that metal requires a higher level of skill. While it's true that a decent level of proficiency is usually required, it's not as though there aren't musicians playing other types of music who are just as talented, if not more so.

So really, a statement like that comes across as too elitist for my liking. Metal isn't necessarily better or worse than any other genre, it's simply different.

Citanul wrote:

I don't really like the argument that metal requires a higher level of skill.  While it's true that a decent level of proficiency is usually required, it's not as though there aren't musicians playing other types of music who are just as talented, if not more so.

So really, a statement like that comes across as too elitist for my liking.  Metal isn't necessarily better or worse than any other genre, it's simply different.

Many types of metal bands in various sub-genres embrace proficiency with instruments. That's not to say that non-metal bands aren't proficient or that it's exclusive to metal. It's simply a very common feature of metal songs that differentiate metal from other genres. There are obviously plenty of non-technical metal bands and very technical non-metal bands.

Somewhere around here...

Witchfinder wrote:

Citanul wrote:

I don't really like the argument that metal requires a higher level of skill.  While it's true that a decent level of proficiency is usually required, it's not as though there aren't musicians playing other types of music who are just as talented, if not more so.

So really, a statement like that comes across as too elitist for my liking.  Metal isn't necessarily better or worse than any other genre, it's simply different.

Many types of metal bands in various sub-genres embrace proficiency with instruments.  That's not to say that non-metal bands aren't proficient or that it's exclusive to metal.  It's simply a very common feature of metal songs that differentiate metal from other genres.  There are obviously plenty of non-technical metal bands and very technical non-metal bands.  
 

That's true, but it's not a defining feature of metal. Metal isn't metal because it requires a high level of skill to play, metal is metal because it contains certain elements. These elements may require a high level of skill, but the requirement to have that high level of skill is a consequence of those elements having come to define metal and not actually part of the definition itself.

Citanul wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Citanul wrote:

I don't really like the argument that metal requires a higher level of skill.  While it's true that a decent level of proficiency is usually required, it's not as though there aren't musicians playing other types of music who are just as talented, if not more so.

So really, a statement like that comes across as too elitist for my liking.  Metal isn't necessarily better or worse than any other genre, it's simply different.

Many types of metal bands in various sub-genres embrace proficiency with instruments.  That's not to say that non-metal bands aren't proficient or that it's exclusive to metal.  It's simply a very common feature of metal songs that differentiate metal from other genres.  There are obviously plenty of non-technical metal bands and very technical non-metal bands.  
 

That's true, but it's not a defining feature of metal.  Metal isn't metal because it requires a high level of skill to play, metal is metal because it contains certain elements.  These elements may require a high level of skill, but the requirement to have that high level of skill is a consequence of those elements having come to define metal and not actually part of the definition itself.

I didn't say ONLY proficiency means a band/song is metal, I actually said what you are saying that metal is composed of elements.  You might argue that proficiency is not an element but I would disagree with that and my evidence would be the near universality of difficult/complex soloing in the majority of metal.  As you'll note, I also said this is a continuum with these various elements being more or less prevalent depending on the artist. There a plenty of metal bands that aren't proficient at all,  -see the first Venom album - but they are the exception and not the rule.

Let's take Venom for example - they could barely play in time early on in their career but they had all the other elements to the nth degree.  Later on they became much better musicians, but their lack of skill initially didn't hurt them.  So yes, you can have a low level of skill and still be considered metal, but you better have those other elements locked down.

The older I get, the more I start to think that Hard Rock and Heavy Metal are all one genre with different band playing different style. Is Nightwish metal? Hell yeah! Metallica? Yeah, still Metal. Aerosmith? Hard rock. AC/DC? Hard Rock. Iron Maiden? Metal. Cheap Trick? Hard Rock. Venom? Metal. Ghost? Hard Rock. I like what James said - it's all Metal. But, you have throw in the "hard rock" type bands into the mix. It's all music to me.

You could put all those bands at the same music festival (and many others on that spectrum) and call it a metal festival and it would sell out.... wait, that happens in Europe every summer \m/

In my experience... when you take the heavy & add melody, it's metal. When you take heavy and add aggression, it's core. If it's something that's not even heavy.... then it's probably hard rock. Whether it's aggressive or melodic.

To paraphrase Potter Stewart, I know it when I hear it.