Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 



Reply to topic
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
ze_mau
Metal newbie

Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 2:17 pm
Posts: 34
Location: Brazil
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:33 pm 
 

There´s a locked topic here on "Glam Metal" , but what I´d like to approach is , what where the actual reasons why Glam and Thrash (and basically , all other real metal styles) NEVER got along ?

I don´t consider Glam part of what real metal was . There are some few good bands on this field , but the music was , for the most part , "pop infused Hard Rock" . I think Glam has always been pretty much THE OPPOSITE of Metal has always been for the most part . It´s too "happy" , too "naive" , TOO alienated (in a bad sense) and of course , it´s sell out Rock from the beggining . I find it hard for someone to be equally a fan of both Thrash and Glam with the same passion .



[url]There´s a locked topic here on "Glam Metal" , but what I´d like to approach is , what where the actual reasons why Glam and Thrash (and basically , all other real metal styles) NEVER got along ?

I don´t consider Glam part of what real metal was . There are some few good bands on this field , but the music was , for the most part , "pop infused Hard Rock" . I think Glam has always been pretty much THE OPPOSITE of Metal has always been for the most part . It´s too "happy" , too "naive" , TOO alienated (in a bad sense) and of course , it´s sell out Rock from the beggining . I find it hard for someone to be equally a fan of both Thrash and Glam with the same passion .



Youtube: show

Top
 Profile  
Zelkiiro
Pounding the world with a fish of steel

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:30 pm
Posts: 6002
Location: Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:41 pm 
 

Glam metal bands were all about playing up appearances and playing fairly safe heavy metal while thrash metal bands were (allegedly) all about furthering the genre's capabilities. It was a classic style vs. substance brawl (again, allegedly). It just so happens that most glam metal bands who followed the big trends are now time capsules, so it's easy to laugh at them while ignoring how silly many thrash metal bands also were at the time.
_________________
I write anime reviews. They're good for your health!
My Most Recent Review: Your Lie in April!
Coming Up Next:
801 T.T.S. Airbats
After That: Battle Angel Alita and Violet Evergarden

Top
 Profile  
TrooperEd
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 6:18 pm
Posts: 1759
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:42 pm 
 

The whole thing more or less started with Lars Ulrich holding his dick talking shit. Someone really should have Nathan Galed his ass back in 1984.
_________________
gasmask_colostomy wrote:
TrooperEd (who mentions Motorhead twice, so he clearly has other fish to fry)


Frying other fish and false metal since 2004!

Top
 Profile  
Oxenkiller
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:42 am
Posts: 1997
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:48 pm 
 

Thrash fans were people who felt alienated from the mainstream of 80's pop culture; the sugar coated pastel shaded pop-happy go lucky whitewashed attitude of the time. Thrash metal spoke to the sense of alienation and rage that the glam bands didn't get, and which (as an aside) a lot of modern hard rock/metal bands try to exploit but utterly fail at.

I think part of the problem was when some of these bands tried to pass themselves off as "metal." That is, trying to pretend they were something they were not. Bon Jovi was labeled as "metal" but they had more in common with Garth Brooks, musically speaking, than they did with Iron Maiden or Metallica. I think if some of these bands had just labeled themselves as what they were- mainstream rock n' roll, instead of trying to pass themselves off as metal- they wouldn't have registered anywhere on the consciousness of the thrashers- they would have just been ignored.

There were, certainly, some thrash bands that made it a point of hating on "poser" glam bands and put a lot of effort into slagging them off- Exodus for example were well known for this- and that certainly didn't help things either.

Top
 Profile  
MawBTS
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 2:16 am
Posts: 703
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:08 pm 
 

Quote:
There´s a locked topic here on "Glam Metal" , but what I´d like to approach is , what where the actual reasons why Glam and Thrash (and basically , all other real metal styles) NEVER got along ?


Sometimes music isn't defined by what it is, but by what it isn't. Punk was a reaction against self-indulgent 70s rock, gangsta rap was a reaction against "safe" commercial hip-hop, and thrash to an extent was formed around an opposition to glam metal.

That said, it was mostly theatrical. Musically, they both come from a common source (NWOBHM), and often sounded pretty similar.

Listen this omnipresent NWOBHM riff - it's been used in thousands of glam songs, and also thousands of thrash songs. Paul Baloff might have been all "fuck the normies" but thrash wasn't THAT big a leap from glam. Which isn't to imply Slayer sounds anything like Poison, but the space in the middle got awfully blurry at times.

Quote:
Glam metal bands were all about playing up appearances and playing fairly safe heavy metal while thrash metal bands were (allegedly) all about furthering the genre's capabilities.


I'd rather listen to "The Headless Children" than Sacred Reich or ten billion fake-retro pizza thrash bands. It's not fair to compare glam metal's worst moments with thrash metal's best.

Quote:
Someone really should have Nathan Galed his ass back in 1984.


jesus, be more funny next time

Top
 Profile  
HamburgerBoy
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 1826
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:34 pm 
 

According to Ron McGovney, Metallica's early days as Leather Charm were basically indistinguishable from Motley Crue and the rest. I know Gary Holt semi-recently admitted that he and others were fans of some of the glam bands, mentioning Ratt iirc, and that the hate was more for show/distinction. Slayer of course wore makeup and had a much campier/light-hearted approach to their occult themes initially, although they were never any less heavy than Iron Maiden, as far as I'm aware. Thrash was on the periphery of social acceptability in 1983, in terms of both music and lyrics, so it's only natural that they adopted a kind of anti-establishment ethos within the rock genre's strata as well.

Top
 Profile  
ze_mau
Metal newbie

Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 2:17 pm
Posts: 34
Location: Brazil
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:58 pm 
 

Oxenkiller wrote:
I think part of the problem was when some of these bands tried to pass themselves off as "metal." That is, trying to pretend they were something they were not. Bon Jovi was labeled as "metal" but they had more in common with Garth Brooks, musically speaking, than they did with Iron Maiden or Metallica. I think if some of these bands had just labeled themselves as what they were- mainstream rock n' roll, instead of trying to pass themselves off as metal- they wouldn't have registered anywhere on the consciousness of the thrashers- they would have just been ignored.



I agree . and the term "Glam """Metal"""" or "Hair """Metal"""" is still something that bothers me to this day . Most Glam bands , specially on the late days of the style (namely , 1991) didn´t have a molecule of Metal on teir sound . I mean , stuff like Trixter , Nelson , Kix , and other shit like that .

If Grunge did something useful was to COMPLETELY kill this style of commercial bullcrap forever .

Top
 Profile  
jimbies
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 2:52 pm
Posts: 834
Location: Ontario, Canada
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:20 pm 
 

TrooperEd wrote:
The whole thing more or less started with Lars Ulrich holding his dick talking shit. Someone really should have Nathan Galed his ass back in 1984.


This is horrible.

Top
 Profile  
MrMcThrasher II
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:01 pm
Posts: 1277
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:10 am 
 

Mildly on/off topic but Whitesnake should definitely be on here.

Just making my feelings known.
_________________
Murtal wrote:
In flames became MeloDICK Death Metal

TheDefiniteArticle wrote:
Also hopefully they take it as a sign they're not meant to make more albums.

Top
 Profile  
BastardHead
Magic Mike

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 7:53 pm
Posts: 8726
Location: Elgin, Illinois
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:11 am 
 

KingPoser wrote:
The whole thing more or less started with Lars Ulrich holding his dick talking shit. Someone really should have Nathan Galed his ass back in 1984.


"Lars talked a bunch of shit about Motley Crue while building an identity for his soon-to-be-biggest-metal-band-ever so really somebody should have just murdered him."

Sorry your arena fantasies are so frequently shit on, it must be hard to be such a tool.
_________________
Lair of the Bastard: LATEST REVIEWS: Dragonauta - CabraMacabra, Pious Levus - Beast of the Foulest Depths
The Outer RIM - Uatism: The dogs bark in street slang

Top
 Profile  
Zurbum
Mallcore Kid

Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:42 am
Posts: 8
Location: Italy
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 5:44 am 
 

Just a few days ago someone on Youtube uploaded a clip of early Slayer playing Motley Crue songs, among the others...

Top
 Profile  
Empyreal
The Final Frontier

Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:58 pm
Posts: 26147
Location: Where the dead rule the night
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:31 am 
 

BastardHead wrote:
KingPoser wrote:
The whole thing more or less started with Lars Ulrich holding his dick talking shit. Someone really should have Nathan Galed his ass back in 1984.


"Lars talked a bunch of shit about Motley Crue while building an identity for his soon-to-be-biggest-metal-band-ever so really somebody should have just murdered him."

Sorry your arena fantasies are so frequently shit on, it must be hard to be such a tool.


I think TrooperEd is some kind of basement dweller who never goes outside or experiences anything in the world to know that saying these things is reprehensible and insane.
_________________
Cinema Freaks latest reviews: The Open House

Top
 Profile  
TrooperEd
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 6:18 pm
Posts: 1759
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:30 pm 
 

BastardHead wrote:
KingPoser wrote:
The whole thing more or less started with Lars Ulrich holding his dick talking shit. Someone really should have Nathan Galed his ass back in 1984.


"Lars talked a bunch of shit about Motley Crue while building an identity for his soon-to-be-biggest-metal-band-ever so really somebody should have just murdered him."

Sorry your arena fantasies are so frequently shit on, it must be hard to be such a tool.


Well, Jesus when you oversimplify it like that and make it seem like that's the only reason I'd ask for that, as opposed to the thousands of other reasons he would give us over the decades.

Also, there are ways to build identity for a band without slander.

Honestly, I think that's where the entire "true metal-false metal" dichotomy started. What's hilarious is as much as some of those hair bands actually did suck, they almost universally appear more authentic than spoiled rich tennis player's son ever did.
_________________
gasmask_colostomy wrote:
TrooperEd (who mentions Motorhead twice, so he clearly has other fish to fry)


Frying other fish and false metal since 2004!

Top
 Profile  
Ezadara
Metal newbie

Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:32 pm
Posts: 42
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 1:14 pm 
 

TrooperEd wrote:
Well, Jesus when you oversimplify it like that and make it seem like that's the only reason I'd ask for that, as opposed to the thousands of other reasons he would give us over the decades.

... I feel like the better defence would have been to acknowledge it as unnecessary hyperbole instead of doubling down on the crazy stupid thing you said.
_________________
Mortal command me while you can, for surely art thou damned...

Top
 Profile  
TrooperEd
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 6:18 pm
Posts: 1759
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 1:26 pm 
 

Ezadara wrote:
TrooperEd wrote:
Well, Jesus when you oversimplify it like that and make it seem like that's the only reason I'd ask for that, as opposed to the thousands of other reasons he would give us over the decades.

... I feel like the better defence would have been to acknowledge it as unnecessary hyperbole instead of doubling down on the crazy stupid thing you said.


I thought I was doing both tbh.
_________________
gasmask_colostomy wrote:
TrooperEd (who mentions Motorhead twice, so he clearly has other fish to fry)


Frying other fish and false metal since 2004!

Top
 Profile  
Ace_Rimmer
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:30 am
Posts: 320
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:52 pm 
 

Are you 12?

Top
 Profile  
Wilytank
Not a Flying Toy

Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:21 am
Posts: 4947
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:27 pm 
 

BastardHead wrote:
KingPoser wrote:
The whole thing more or less started with Lars Ulrich holding his dick talking shit. Someone really should have Nathan Galed his ass back in 1984.


"Lars talked a bunch of shit about Motley Crue while building an identity for his soon-to-be-biggest-metal-band-ever so really somebody should have just murdered him."

Sorry your arena fantasies are so frequently shit on, it must be hard to be such a tool.


I mean, hey! Why stop with Metallica? Why not murder the members of Anthrax, Tankard, and Razor too? How dare these people bad mouth these glam artists who just want to make bad, soulless music for money! By the way, Cold Lake is Celtic Frost's best album amirite?
_________________
Lane wrote:
Kamelot could be tad more interesting if their name was Kameltoe and their lyrics more raunchy.

Last.fm

Top
 Profile  
HamburgerBoy
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 1826
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:08 pm 
 

TrooperEd wrote:
Well, Jesus when you oversimplify it like that and make it seem like that's the only reason I'd ask for that, as opposed to the thousands of other reasons he would give us over the decades.

Also, there are ways to build identity for a band without slander.

Honestly, I think that's where the entire "true metal-false metal" dichotomy started. What's hilarious is as much as some of those hair bands actually did suck, they almost universally appear more authentic than spoiled rich tennis player's son ever did.


What's the full story on this Ulrich/Motley Crue thing? All I can find is Ulrich saying "Fuck Motley Crue" to the band in 1982. I kind of doubt that was a necessary step towards establishing the "Fuck posers/false metal" ethos of Exodus, Manowar, Overkill, etc. I mean, the last straw that got Dennis Stratton fired from Iron Maiden was when Smallwood caught him listening to Asia or something like that. Every music scene ever has probably experienced the true vs false dichotomy, in part because the in-crowd/out-crowd effect is a part of humanity's tribal nature.

Don't see what him being a "spoiled rich tennis player's son" has to do with it. Obviously he was lucky to be able to be able to travel to America to play tennis with two generations of tennis champions in his background, but to work that into getting a feature on a compilation album, creating a band from the ground up, deeply involved in both the writing and business aspects to ultimately create the most successful and one of the most influential metal bands of all time takes a lot of work and skill. I think it was all McGovney's parents' money that funded the band in their early years anyways, with the No Life Til Leather tape being successful enough to eventually lead to them becoming household names. It's not like the band was bankrolled to stardom like certain pop singers are. Even if you want to shit on their inconsistency, their music, or whatever else, they're basically the posterchild of self-made success in music, which came to define metal in general as an international form of music that could find its niche anywhere.

Top
 Profile  
GTog
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:35 pm
Posts: 808
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:16 pm 
 

I remember metal in the early 80s having a bit of an identity crisis. You had bands that on the one hand reveled in being underground musically, but on the other hand also really really wanted recording contracts. Add on to that a gooey layer of MTV, and you get the image oriented rock that everybody came to call glam. They took the makeup and flashy clothes of 70s art rock so it played well on TV, and added some heavy metal riffs so it sounded like the kind of thing fans were hearing in clubs.

It was a safe compromise, in other words. You borrowed from the edgier heavy metal but still sold albums.
_________________
Metalheads never get old. We just become legendary.

Top
 Profile  
Shadoeking
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 10:34 am
Posts: 1467
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:34 pm 
 

MawBTS wrote:
I'd rather listen to "The Headless Children" than Sacred Reich or ten billion fake-retro pizza thrash bands. It's not fair to compare glam metal's worst moments with thrash metal's best.


So would just about anybody I suspect. "The Headless Children" is fucking awesome.
_________________
http://metallattorney.blogspot.com

Top
 Profile  
TrooperEd
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 6:18 pm
Posts: 1759
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:41 pm 
 

Wilytank wrote:
I mean, hey! Why stop with Metallica? Why not murder the members of Anthrax, Tankard, and Razor too? How dare these people bad mouth these glam artists who just want to make bad, soulless music for money! By the way, Cold Lake is Celtic Frost's best album amirite?


Razor and Tankard never sued the fans of a file sharing company, among other things.


Also, a devil's advocate argument I've heard a few times: The glam bands never hid the fact that they were playing commercially accessible music for money. How is that dishonest?
_________________
gasmask_colostomy wrote:
TrooperEd (who mentions Motorhead twice, so he clearly has other fish to fry)


Frying other fish and false metal since 2004!

Top
 Profile  
Warty_basaloid
Metal newbie

Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:32 am
Posts: 366
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:05 am 
 

At the time you had hardcore punk, speed and thrash, proto death, why would anybody like bands that are closer to Aerosmith? Not hard, fast, heavy, aggressive and underground enough. Even older bands like Iron Maiden or AC/DC ate most of these glam bands for breakfast. As Whitesnake was mentioned, they were ok, Guns n Roses, if that's glam, but OK for what they are. Hell, even Scorpions, ballads and all, beats most if the glam stuff, at least what I've heard, which admittedly isn't that much. Not even sure what glam bands there are. I tried Motley Cru but apart from a few of the faster early tracks, which still feel lightweight when compared to Venom or Motörhead, they just don't cut it.

Top
 Profile  
caspian
Wanderer of the Wastes

Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:29 pm
Posts: 6680
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:09 am 
 

It pleases me that there's only a minority here arguing for the historical rehabilitation of glam. It was a shit ass genre that thrash proceeded to stomp all over and it deserves only to be relegated to the junkyard of music, nothing more.
_________________
https://strangercountry.bandcamp.com/al ... the-chebar new album! Power shoegaze? Dream-doom???

Top
 Profile  
Ace_Rimmer
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:30 am
Posts: 320
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:52 am 
 

Did thrash do anything to glam? Seemed like they both tailed off around the same time when alt rock took over and Metallica, Anthrax, and Megadeth left thrash behind

Top
 Profile  
thrashinbatman
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:31 pm
Posts: 858
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:12 am 
 

caspian wrote:
It pleases me that there's only a minority here arguing for the historical rehabilitation of glam. It was a shit ass genre that thrash proceeded to stomp all over and it deserves only to be relegated to the junkyard of music, nothing more.

Glam is fucking awesome and I'd rather listen to almost any old glam band than another shitty-ass retro pizza-thrash band.

Top
 Profile  
Oxenkiller
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:42 am
Posts: 1997
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 8:53 pm 
 

^Uh, not me.

Although, don't get me wrong. There are plenty of half-assed mediocre as heck thrash bands out there.

And one or two glam rock bands that actually did something right, at least once in a while (for example, "Shout at the Devil" is a great album and I WOULD probably listen to that over some modern mediocre half-assed thrash band.) Dokken and Ratt had some good tunes, and if you go back to the early Van Halen stuff- where a lot of that sound originated, heck they were great! But then you get stuff like Slaughter, Warrant, Jetboy, Winger, Tesla- those bands were not even close to as good as Van Halen were.

I don't know if thrash killed glam, or even if grunge did; that's the more popular opinion, but really I think glam just burned itself out with too many cookie cutter bands that weren't really that good to begin with. Same thing that happens to a lot of music styles that get popular: The ideas run out, you have a bunch of second rate copycats flooding the scene, some of the original bands maybe try to evolve but ultimately, something else comes along that sounds fresh and people flock to it (whether it is grunge, death metal, pop-punk, late 90's ska punk, or whatever.)

Top
 Profile  
metalistkrieg
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 5:02 pm
Posts: 523
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:54 pm 
 

Let's be honest here, one of the main reasons why thrash dudes hated on glam was because the latter got all the chicks. There weren't many female thrash fans back in the day. The pussy envy was real af.

Top
 Profile  
MrMcThrasher II
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:01 pm
Posts: 1277
Location: United States
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:16 pm 
 

metalistkrieg wrote:
Let's be honest here, one of the main reasons why thrash dudes hated on glam was because the latter got all the chicks. There weren't many female thrash fans back in the day. The pussy envy was real af.

I'd definitely like to see the mental gymnastics performed to reach this pretty stupid conclusion.
_________________
Murtal wrote:
In flames became MeloDICK Death Metal

TheDefiniteArticle wrote:
Also hopefully they take it as a sign they're not meant to make more albums.

Top
 Profile  
Warty_basaloid
Metal newbie

Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:32 am
Posts: 366
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 9:15 am 
 

Some seem to file WASP under glam, so maybe it wasn't all dog shit.

Top
 Profile  
metalistkrieg
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 5:02 pm
Posts: 523
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:15 pm 
 

MrMcThrasher II wrote:
metalistkrieg wrote:
Let's be honest here, one of the main reasons why thrash dudes hated on glam was because the latter got all the chicks. There weren't many female thrash fans back in the day. The pussy envy was real af.

I'd definitely like to see the mental gymnastics performed to reach this pretty stupid conclusion.

It's true though. Girls preferred guys who wore more makeup and used more hairspray than they did. They weren't lining up for thrashers in their sleeveless t-shirts and crusty af jeans.

Top
 Profile  
Zelkiiro
Pounding the world with a fish of steel

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:30 pm
Posts: 6002
Location: Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:23 pm 
 

It was also a big thing at the time that, because glam metal was at the forefront of the music scene, heavy metal as a whole began to gain the reputation of being "mom music." That should give you a good idea of the zeitgeist of the late 80s with regards to metal as a whole in the pop-culture sphere--you either appealed to smelly fat guys or you appealed to their moms.
_________________
I write anime reviews. They're good for your health!
My Most Recent Review: Your Lie in April!
Coming Up Next:
801 T.T.S. Airbats
After That: Battle Angel Alita and Violet Evergarden

Top
 Profile  
SweetLeaf95
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:19 am
Posts: 355
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:55 pm 
 

metalistkrieg: You beat me to it. I've always said "If I was a miserable neckbeard that couldn't relate to partying, sex, love, and just enjoying life in general, I'd probably hate on it as well". The reactions I get are amazing.

That said, I'm usually one of the 1% in this type of forum defending glam. I'll also say, to the original statement, I am that person that equally loves glam and thrash. Overkill, Megadeth, Kreator, and Metallica are just as important to me as Bon Jovi, Warrant, Wasp, and Motley Crue. There's mainly two things that always baffled me. 1) Glam metal goers seldom shit all over thrash metal goers, but the other way around is almost endless. Did Tom Keifer cast a stone at Chuck Billy? Did glam offend thrash at some point? Honestly if so please inform me. 2) People act like being a fan of glam was so rare. I remember reading a review here one time that said "yes, hardcore Whitesnake fans actually existed". Uh, no shit they did. Seeing that Whitesnake probably had more fans and made more money than 90% of the bands on here. Not saying numbers = quality, but don't act like glam acts like that were never big or important.

I will admit, some glam bands definitely don't really fit metal (see Great White, Firehouse, etc). But others are certainly had hard enough riffs and energy that match right up with Dio, Priest, and the likes. And regardless of the label, I like what I like.
_________________
"It's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase" - Deep Purple

Top
 Profile  
Ace_Rimmer
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:30 am
Posts: 320
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:58 pm 
 

I heard Gene Hoglan say the same thing about the glam guys getting all the chicks. I remember most of the girls in High School didn't get into Metallica until the S/T record in any event. Then Metallica was up there with Winger and Kixx to that crowd.

Top
 Profile  
Ace_Rimmer
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:30 am
Posts: 320
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:59 pm 
 

SweetLeaf95 wrote:
metalistkrieg: You beat me to it. I've always said "If I was a miserable neckbeard that couldn't relate to partying, sex, love, and just enjoying life in general, I'd probably hate on it as well". The reactions I get are amazing.

That said, I'm usually one of the 1% in this type of forum defending glam. I'll also say, to the original statement, I am that person that equally loves glam and thrash. Overkill, Megadeth, Kreator, and Metallica are just as important to me as Bon Jovi, Warrant, Wasp, and Motley Crue. There's mainly two things that always baffled me. 1) Glam metal goers seldom shit all over thrash metal goers, but the other way around is almost endless. Did Tom Keifer cast a stone at Chuck Billy? Did glam offend thrash at some point? Honestly if so please inform me. 2) People act like being a fan of glam was so rare. I remember reading a review here one time that said "yes, hardcore Whitesnake fans actually existed". Uh, no shit they did. Seeing that Whitesnake probably had more fans and made more money than 90% of the bands on here. Not saying numbers = quality, but don't act like glam acts like that were never big or important.

I will admit, some glam bands definitely don't really fit metal (see Great White, Firehouse, etc). But others are certainly had hard enough riffs and energy that match right up with Dio, Priest, and the likes. And regardless of the label, I like what I like.


I like a lot of rock that is a lot more mellow than the more metal glam bands so I'm not going to let the image stop me from liking a good riff.

Top
 Profile  
SweetLeaf95
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:19 am
Posts: 355
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:32 pm 
 

Exactly, just enjoy what you enjoy and let it be! Glam takes the hardest hit. And really, I don't know why metal fans feel the need to do this to everything; glam isn't the only one. It's one of my favorites, so I defend it the hardest, but I'll defend fucking "nu" metal and other stuff that every metal fan seems to hate so hard to the edge of the earth too! Don't like Linkin Park? K, great! No need for there to be rivalry like this. I tend to get an assload of backlash when I make statements like the one above, but all-in-all I'm just defending what I enjoy. I'll equally love Judas Priest, Van Halen, Slipknot, Testament, Cinderella, or fucking Blink182 all equally for different moods.
_________________
"It's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase" - Deep Purple

Top
 Profile  
PeteGas
Mallcore Kid

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 2:34 pm
Posts: 28
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:39 pm 
 

Oxenkiller wrote:
^Uh, not me.

Although, don't get me wrong. There are plenty of half-assed mediocre as heck thrash bands out there.

And one or two glam rock bands that actually did something right, at least once in a while (for example, "Shout at the Devil" is a great album and I WOULD probably listen to that over some modern mediocre half-assed thrash band.) Dokken and Ratt had some good tunes, and if you go back to the early Van Halen stuff- where a lot of that sound originated, heck they were great! But then you get stuff like Slaughter, Warrant, Jetboy, Winger, Tesla- those bands were not even close to as good as Van Halen were.

I don't know if thrash killed glam, or even if grunge did; that's the more popular opinion, but really I think glam just burned itself out with too many cookie cutter bands that weren't really that good to begin with. Same thing that happens to a lot of music styles that get popular: The ideas run out, you have a bunch of second rate copycats flooding the scene, some of the original bands maybe try to evolve but ultimately, something else comes along that sounds fresh and people flock to it (whether it is grunge, death metal, pop-punk, late 90's ska punk, or whatever.)



Just need to point out that Tesla was pretty awesome and doesn’t fit in with those other groups other than being a popular rock band in the late 80s.

Top
 Profile  
SweetLeaf95
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:19 am
Posts: 355
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:43 pm 
 

Hell yes! Great Radio Controversy is awesome!
_________________
"It's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase" - Deep Purple

Top
 Profile  
jimbies
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 2:52 pm
Posts: 834
Location: Ontario, Canada
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:03 pm 
 

There are numerous glam bands/albums that I really do love. I wasn't around during the time the feud was going on (I was born in 84, became a metal fan in 96). So I was listening to Dr. Feelgood during the same period as Ride The Lightning, and liked them both for different reasons.

Top
 Profile  
Oxenkiller
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:42 am
Posts: 1997
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:50 pm 
 

Yeah man, Tesla maybe took their music a little more serious than some of those bands at the time, but still- I'd still take early Van Halen over any of them; that was my main point.

Top
 Profile  
SweetLeaf95
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:19 am
Posts: 355
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 12:33 am 
 

Early Van Halen absolutely rules! I dig David Lee Roth's solo career too.
_________________
"It's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase" - Deep Purple

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

  Print view
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group