Obviously you're a very shallow thinker ... and immature in your responses.

Let me help you along. The root is when it takes a quantum leap and becomes a different species. Do you really think heavy metal existed before Sabbath? And do you think Slayer took a quantum leap to a different species from Sabbath and Priest?

Your accusation is like I'm saying Lucy was bipedal, therefore human. Slayer is like a different race, whereas Sabbath was like a different species. Understand now?

Since you're the expert in the definition of "original", why don't you set the parameters for us?

So much stuff coming out everyday. Metal just keeps growing and evolving in many different ways, just 'cause you can't be bothered to look around doesn't mean it's not there. Just the plain proposition of the OP is so blinded, there are waterfalls of music waiting for you at command, all you have to do is look, it's all right at your fingertips. I assure you, you'll find originality, the problem is now the industry is so vast, genres are subjugating and recreating new things at an alarming speed that is hard for anything to catch a glimpse of a trend now let alone a genre defining release.

These are different times, I think the internet made the world smaller in many ways, a great tool to take advantage of IMHO. I can't profess to know what's going on with the metal industry or music in general but there has to be a sort of shift in all of it. Production must be at an all time high, there's so much music and now more than ever the availability of it it's even more gargantuan than the music itself. Youtube, social media, places like this forum. The myths are all broken, we have it all, just swim man!

i'd definitely say that sabbath is a lot closer to zeppelin, than portal is to sabbath

your taxonomy analogy is flawed in that biology defines clear places to draw lines, whereas no such things exist on the boundaries of musical genres.
i'll defend sabbath's place as "the first heavy metal band", but they didn't really take a particularly giant leap from their predecessors to get there

It's just an extremely ridiculous assertion to make, and one that relies too heavily on semantics in its interpretation. Of course there is still original music being made, even in metal. To use the word "fresh" instead in an attempt to hand-wave that away is absurd.

Perhaps I'm having difficulty understanding where you're coming from but I'm not sure if being open minded to the idea that there's still good music being made is elitist. If anything, being closed minded to that idea and tying the worth of music to its pop-culture appeal seems elitist to me (in the most traditional fashion of "oh, it's more popular thus it's better").

Nothing wrong with that either. I hope you and your friend's band find success. I guess I was referring to sacrificing integrity for a buck. I also think that now is a great time for cutting out the middle man. Self produced music gives the artist more control....and music is way easier to self produce these days. But yeah...I'm over the whole "rock is dead" debate.

this is fucking lovable.

I didn't say that at all.

What I said is that when something has been done enough, and given it all, it becomes a part of the past and people who stick to it are usually small subcultures who feed off nostalgia. It loses meaning to that culture. That happens to all art because, er, time and culture move.

Of course there's all sorts of music being made, it's just that something is happening with rock and metal, and denying it won't change much.

I have a question:

How much are these originality/are-rock-and-metal-dead debates informed by the state and change of the industry itself?

This might be wishful thinking on my part, but is it possible that the seeming invisibility of new, good, innovative music (I am in the camp who find the idea of there being a dearth of it or of rock and metal as we know them being on the decline to be absurd) is due to newer artists not finding much worth in a traditional, major-label-led industry which is often not financially sustainable by itself for said artists and is, in some cases, creatively bankrupt? Unless their goal is to be the next star to meteorically rise in to the mass consciousness of the nation or even that of the world, I don't see how most of them could find that kind of exposure and all of the associated trade-offs appealing.

I think the music industry itself is changing with the advent of the Internet, if anything. These days, you're probably never going to be the next Sabbath, or Metallica, or whoever--at least in terms of the crowds you can draw and how significant your place in history is going to be--but you're okay with that because you can actually retain a healthier cut of the profits, which pays the bills and, if you're lucky, helps fund your next effort, the pressing of some CD copies, maybe a few shirts...

And your material is...whatever you want to put out. Being that your presence can be seen/felt/heard in some corner of the Internet, so too will your more moderately-sized, but dedicated fan base. It's never been a better time to be the pejoratively-referenced "bed room band", and a win-win for you as long as you don't have an immense craving for super-stardom.

No more innovators? Pfft! They're there. Trust me. You just can't always rely on a label news letter to find them, these days.

Yes i find original KICK ASS METAL with savage riffing and sharp effective riffing all the time. Heavy Metal has been in a golden age since May 24th, 2012 with the Abnormality debut album featuring Death Metal GODDESS Mallika Sundramurthy, i discovered this golden age by reading a few choice print edtions, metal will always have sincere original artist with original enough content, there are tons and tons of avant-garde classical and avant-garde metal for metal fanatics to enjoy, as well as modern metal savage classics. I always read the best metal magazines print media in heavy metal, no webzine is worth reading actually, unless they had a print edition back in 1983----1991, the original stuff is easy to find, but what happens with every metal god, is they have the desire also to try there hands at being rock stars, the sell-out pulling-A-Metallica thing that happens after a metal bands 5 album or so..!! Every year there are 25 to 30 albums that are part of the gold standard in heavy metal, they exist, just you have to do the work in finding them yourself, since the metal media, has just average/safe and no good taste in heavy metal. Heavy Metal does not need new bands, heavy metal needs the next Laurent Ramadier, and the likes to put this era best bands in the best heavy metal magazines. Heavy Metal will never die, as long as it does not want to fold into the Hard Rock/Dad Rock/Butt Rock/AOR genre. As far as metal aesthetics i will never give up on the neo-classical shred side of thing ala, Testament/ Megadeth. Metal will survive all posers and sell-outs, ala Metallica. There are 900% percent more posers in metal than what we had back in 1982/1983/1984/1985/1986!!! As far as my top 700 albums i find them evenly over metal's history from 1980-2017-current!!!

I feel like this is the exact same thing all those rock critics were saying when punk tried to take over British rock or when Alternative tried to take over metal. It didn't last very long.

With that being said,



Spot. Fucking. On. This is what I've been trying to express with my "true metal needs to be mainstream." In the early to mid 80s Metallica may not have been selling out large venues but the mainstream knew about them.

Have you ever wondered that what if the next wave of metal's evolution isn't something you might not like? What the kids listen, may not be your taste but still within the confines of metal. Metalcore and Deathcore were different skins for metal in their era but there's a disconnect between the people who listen to them and the people who listen to Judas Priest. Heck, I know people who listen to Priest but can't stand Death at all.

On second thought I think I should have used the term " non derivative " . I'll be sure to check out the recommendations some have posted in this thread , however I'm still currently of the opinion that it's not easy to find non derivative metal music in this day and age .

Of course this applies to all sorts of artistic productions IMHO , but that's a topic unto itself .

So your definition of "truly original metal" is basically based on the reality of music in a pre-internet era that will most likely never occur again. Now of course there won't be as huge game changers are there was back in the 70's or 80's because, as Don Anderson from Agalloch said, metal is an accelerated genre. In the era of internet that we are living in right now, musicians have access to tons and tons of music (and other forms of art) to take influence from, and there are far more bands now then there was back in the 70's (I'm talking exponentially more), all of them pushing the genres they play within further and further.

Not to mention the fact that even with that... there are still truly creative and unique bands out there. Like Agalloch were...

Of course we will. Listen to some more obscure stuff like NYN, plenty of interesting ideas out there.

Have you ever considered that just because it's moving in a forward direction doesn't mean automatically mean it's a good direction?

The future is electrified classical music. Mandolins, cellos, an entire percussion line. All electrified, distorted, operas with grunting vocals.

Depends on how set in your ways you are. If you're the stubborn old-head type of metal head, then yes, you may convince yourself that metal will never be "original" again. However, you if delve into the multi-facet genre that is metal and explore numerous avenues, you'll find there's a lot of original and fresh music out there.

I'm not trying to patronize or being condescending, either, I just feel that a lot of people have convinced themselves that we'll never see the next Slayer, Death, Necrophagist, etc. While there are bands that people might not love, there are certainly bands that are being looked to as a source of musical inspiration in their sound (Virvum, Fallujah, Sutrah, etc.) Times change, and obviously it becomes harder and harder to innovate, but there are certainly cats out there trying to make noise yet!

Although i can understand the sentiment behind the OP question, i find it very confusing.

Every music made can be traced back to something that was done before.

If you're looking for something created out of the vacuum without any ancestor form then it will never happen.

The whole history of metal from Sabbath to nowadays was made by the bands that came after picking up on something that was previously made and expanding on it by incorporating new sounds and their own personal views into the music.

A more recent example can be Gojira in the way they used Progressive, Death and Groove together to form something that sounds unique and original, but it also traces back to stuff made prior to them.

I bet there are lots of new stuff, unkown to me, being made that fits into the molds of what Gojira did, they simply happen to be the most successful example.

A more recent band, Jinjer (yes i know they don't fit in the MA world) are pretty innovative in the way they picked up on what Gojira and Meshuggah were doing and mixed it with metalcore. From my POV they have what it takes to become a huge band as well, will they? no idea.

Well I got around to listening to that Usurpress song the other day and while my mind wasn't blown , I must admit that it sounds pretty original . The thing is I still haven't heard any new heavy metal songs that are totally non derivative in the sonic sense , like Black Sabbath probably was way back when .

Come to think of it , I should have titled this thread " Will we ever hear non derivative metal again ? " but I digress .

Will we ever heard non-derivative anything ever? No, because everything is a derivation of something else in some degree.

This thread is dumb.

Genres rarely come out of the nowhere...the only historically significant one I can think of is digital/electronic music in the 60s (Xenakis, IIRC which might not be quite accurate)

sabbath may be the first ever heavy metal band, but they weren't a huge leap from their contemporaries any more than stuff like portal or deathspell omega were from theirs

music is always derivative, and that's not a bad thing - if something sounded utterly different from anything that came before, nobody would like it

Astronoid is the closest thing to "original" that I've heard in a while.

Sure but I bet that ( to use an example ) the first few metal albums to come out were " non derivative " in the sense that they couldn't easily be labeled as derivations of other genres , at least not by their non music expert fanbase , and that they truly blew lots of people's minds .

Metal didn't just suddenly spring into being--there were all kinds of hard rock and blues rock bands that led to its eventual genesis as we know it. We put a definition on the genre and marked Black Sabbath's debut as the first album to meet all those qualifications, but Black Sabbath weren't setting out to create a new genre. They were just the next step in the direction rock music was taking at the time.

Yep. Sabbath, like so many innovations, was accidental - if not for Iommi's finger accident that led to his unique guitar style, we might find it much harder to distinguish between them and other borderline bands like Zeppelin or Purple and whatnot. Who knows. It was all circumstance that led to this very unique, dark, heavy style that essentially inspired a genre.

It also doesn't help that when bands try to expand their sound into creating something different they end up labeled outside of metal and with a somewhat bad connotation associated with them.

One of the main reasons i find myself more in sync with the term extreme music fan rather than metal fan these days.

At some point people need to either start opening their minds to new heavy music or simply close a page in metal history and look to some new extreme music genre for innovation.

My exact thought when I saw this thread.

There's plenty of directions and fusions that metal hasn't explored before and the idea that we'll never hear anything original again just seems silly. Whenever I hear people say this I always think of the (probably apocryphal) anecdote about the US Patent Office considering closing in 1899 because "everything that could be invented has been invented."

There’s expanding your style and sound to grow creatively and artistically, and then there’s changing your identity to a derivative of something already established that’s more popular and has mainstream appeal.

Guess which of the two has happened far more often. It’s perfectly reasonable to be suspicious and even cynical.

With so many derivative metal bands around today, it makes sense why people may feel that innovation within the confines of the genre is no longer possible. I may get lambasted for this notion, but back in the late 80's and early 90's, I think there was a cultural tide that forced musicians push the envelop that no longer exists to the same extent. This may have been a result of those kids growing up in a time where the "guitar god" was still firmly instilled in the Western musical zeitgeist. The average guitarist would have had more motivation to master their instrument, simply because of the perceived reward from doing so. Additionally, there was not nearly as much metal in existence, so they didn't have the ability to fall back on what had already been done. This is just a theory though.

With that said, I think there is a huge amount of room for innovation in metal, and WITHOUT fusing it with other genres. When bands strive for originality by simply fusing two or more unrelated styles, more than likely it will just sound like unoriginal renditions of said styles duct taped together. Not to say it can't be done, but that's not some kind of magical key to originality. Where metal is going to flourish in the future is in the realm of unique composition, and interesting riffs. Simple as that. There are so many riffs that have not been written yet. There are so many ways of putting a song together that haven't been done yet. A visionary composer is what will take metal to the next level. Not some new fusion, or gimmicky instrument, or some unusual production.

Meshugga didn't expand into anything remotely close to popular and yet still found themselves outside.
Jinjer has a really unique sound that incorporates a bunch of metal elements, also out.
The same can be said about some other bands.

I meant pushing into the extremes which is far the opposite of incorporating mainstream elements to seek approval.

Those derivatives with mainstream components find themselves being catalogued as metal far more often than the bands who look for the extremes to expand the music they create.

So I listened to some Astronoid and vintage Sabbath the other day and ( at the risk of repeating myself ) I'd like to rephrase my original statements ...


In other words there sure as hell is " original " metal out there and even the very first metal songs out there are " derivative " in some sense , for example Fairies Wear Boots , which sounds like a ramped up dirty blues song ( to me at least ) .


That said I must still say that I'm not hearing much originality on the part of newer bands within my personal favorite subgenres , namely thrash/speed/traditional metal .

I might have overlooked a few though , so I'll stand corrected if someone corrects me .

Keep looking then. It's out there.

It's definitely possible. I'm not a clairvoyant, so I cannot say for sure

I was listening to some Antiquus the other day and that has to be one of the most unique newer bands.

Arrayan Path have been cranking out some fiercely original shit for the last few years, nothing like them I can think of.

The last The Chasm album had wildly cool, fresh arrangements and riffs.

Johnny Touch is a newer band that was real quirky and fresh sounding.

Not sure if you've heard or care about any of this stuff but yeah, I mean it's dumb to think there's nothing new at all out there. Music will always repeat itself sometimes but it's not like there's some dead-end point where nothing else even a little unique comes out again. People always pontificate on this topic as if their viewpoint, what they grew up with, was the last vanguard of unique music and now it's all over. But it takes time to mine fresh, original stuff out from all the other stuff. There's also so much more music out there and so much more access to it, so that doesn't help.

I'm usually on the "everything has been done" bandwagon but stuff like this following clip really is new:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_trJI9lh4aI

I don't know what we're calling it yet - is it djent? buggered if I know tbh. This sort of thing is probably what we're expecting when we say original... you can hear its influences through it, but the entire package isn't a style I'd ever heard until maybe a couple years ago. And I've been around a fair bit of metal. I dunno, maybe this sort of stuff doesn't count for you guys.

..and that was exactly the point at which it should have ended. Can't believe this is still going on.

I mean it's different strokes for different folks . This thread is obviously not a shining example of intellectually stimulating discussion ( ) , but I'm of the opinion that it's good to have some lighthearted/dumb ( as you say ) threads from time to time .


Can I get some heavy metal amens for that ?