|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:03 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
| I think the Wikipedia article also credits the Beatles with being at least one of the originators of heavy metal sound with "Helter Skelter"... |
Yeah. It shows that real musicians don't limit themselves to listening and playing one genre of music.
As a matter of fact, some of the most legendary blues recordings of the 20's and 30's were songs that were written specifically for the recording session and were never played again by the artist after that. Sure, there were blues musicians who made a living playing the blues, but the vast majority of professional African American musicians (some of them which are now blues legends because of songs they played once in the studio) weren't discovered sitting on their porch playing the blues. These were professional musicians who took pride in the number and variety of songs in their repertoir. They made a living playing country, blue grass, and big band numbers. The blues musicians enjoyed playing these numbers, and made most of their money playing those songs because those were the most popular music in the 20's and 30's, those were the songs what people at dance parties wanted to hear. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
potblackettle
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
"I think the Wikipedia article also credits the Beatles with being at least one of the originators of heavy metal sound with "Helter Skelter"..."
Nice Rteacher, I didn't even think of Helter Skelter... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
own_king
Joined: 17 Apr 2004
Location: here
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah, but the Beatles version of Helter Skelter is hardly Heavy Metal or even Hard Rock. The only reason it got lumped in there is because M�tley Cr�e covered it on their Shout at the Devil album c. 1983. It's actually quite a forgettable track with so many other hits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
potblackettle
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Yeah, but the Beatles version of Helter Skelter is hardly Heavy Metal or even Hard Rock. The only reason it got lumped in there is because M�tley Cr�e covered it on their Shout at the Devil album c. 1983. It's actually quite a forgettable track with so many other hits."
Um... forgettable? A Beatles song? There are millions of people who would disagree. And actually Helter Skelter and She's So Heavy are classed as proto-heavy metal because of the guitar sound... Also largely because of the distorted sound and the "aggression" of the music. Revolution is also mentioned... although technically I would consider "She's So Heavy" to be the most "metal". There are also other music critics/historians who class some of the Zombies music as early metal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roch
Joined: 24 Apr 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stumptown wrote: |
| I'd have to say Black Sabbath. Their first album came out in 1968. Just look at what everyone else like The Who, Hendrix, The Doors, Cream was doing at that time. They had nowhere near the doom laden riffs that the self titled 1968 album had or 1969's Paranoid which kicked even more ass. |
No offense, but you are not hip to the History of Metal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
own_king
Joined: 17 Apr 2004
Location: here
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| potblackettle wrote: |
"Yeah, but the Beatles version of Helter Skelter is hardly Heavy Metal or even Hard Rock. The only reason it got lumped in there is because M�tley Cr�e covered it on their Shout at the Devil album c. 1983. It's actually quite a forgettable track with so many other hits."
Um... forgettable? A Beatles song? There are millions of people who would disagree. |
Yes, quite forgettable - at least in the context of that album, by M�tley Cr�e, especially with songs like Looks That Kill, Too Young to Fall in Love, Knock 'Em Dead, Kid, and the title track Shout At the Devil. At any rate, nothing by the Beatles qualifies as Heavy Metal. You gotta be kidding. Do you want throw in Check Berry because of his great guitar riffs? How far back do you really want to go? I think even Beethoven had a piece, that sounded great in a G'n'R power ballad. I suppose he is Heavy Metal too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kato
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Location: Tejas
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| omg, please stop talking about Motley Crue... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kato wrote: |
| omg, please stop talking about Motley Crue... |
Okay...What about Extreme, Poison, or Scorpions?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Location: $eoul
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, Own King is right. There has to be a dividing line. The question is...when, at what point, did bluesy riff-rock become something different, something deliberately brutal and heavy? The answer of course is Deep Purple In Rock.
I agree Sabbath's first album is also a turning point - big, scary, doomy riffs. But even that doesn't compare to the brutality of Deep Purple In Rock. Indeed, to this day, not much does. With all the technology and effects available to musicians these days, none of them can come up with something as frighteningly brutal as Ritchie Blackmore's solo in 'Child in Time'. It's almost too much.
Stumptown - your dates are a bit wrong, I feel. Sabbath's debut was not in the 60s and 'Paranoid' was absolutely in the 70s.
Folks are quite right to cite 'I want you (she's so heavy)' - a totally metal riff and absolutely brilliant song generally. Re Helter Skelter: I say it's too sloppy to be Metal. Surely a Punk song, 10 years ahead of its time. The similarities between the late 60s groups and the Punk groups of the late 70s are so similar. Some of the nastiest noise I've ever heard came from 60s Acid-bands. Some punk groups were tame in comparison. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SPINOZA wrote: |
Yes, Own King is right. There has to be a dividing line. The question is...when, at what point, did bluesy riff-rock become something different, something deliberately brutal and heavy? The answer of course is Deep Purple In Rock.
I agree Sabbath's first album is also a turning point - big, scary, doomy riffs. But even that doesn't compare to the brutality of Deep Purple In Rock. Indeed, to this day, not much does. With all the technology and effects available to musicians these days, none of them can come up with something as frighteningly brutal as Ritchie Blackmore's solo in 'Child in Time'. It's almost too much.
Stumptown - your dates are a bit wrong, I feel. Sabbath's debut was not in the 60s and 'Paranoid' was absolutely in the 70s.
Folks are quite right to cite 'I want you (she's so heavy)' - a totally metal riff and absolutely brilliant song generally. Re Helter Skelter: I say it's too sloppy to be Metal. Surely a Punk song, 10 years ahead of its time. The similarities between the late 60s groups and the Punk groups of the late 70s are so similar. Some of the nastiest noise I've ever heard came from 60s Acid-bands. Some punk groups were tame in comparison. |
What about Link Wray (the guy who made the power chord popular) and his musical piece Rumble, which was banned by many radiostations under the pretext that it would encourage teen violence? Just imagine how it would sound played with more gain or a little bit of fuzz (which he invented, by the way).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_Wray
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzbox |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Location: $eoul
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Gain" and "fuzz" are synonymous, HA, but it doesn't discredit your point. I'll give them a listen. But there's no persuading me....Deep Purple invented Heavy Metal. That's precisely what metal was - an invention. Metal - as is usually argued - did not evolve. It happened overnight - DPIR was recorded in days. Can you imagine hearing Bloodsucker, Living Wreck, Into the Fire, for the first time in 1970? It would've ripped your ear drums out and shoved them up your arse. That's what metal's all about - killing instruments and deliberately provoking the listener, extremity.
The strange thing is, none of DP's subsequent albums bear any relation to 'In Rock'. It was a stand-out album, a one-off noise fest "let's make the heaviest record ever" project. They were the first band to do this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
own_king
Joined: 17 Apr 2004
Location: here
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SPINOZA wrote: |
| Stumptown - your dates are a bit wrong, I feel. Sabbath's debut was not in the 60s and 'Paranoid' was absolutely in the 70s. |
That's right Spinoza, Black Sabbath's first album was released in 1970, a few months BEFORE Deep Purple in Rock. Black Sabbath's follow-up Paranoid also came out in 1970, a little after DPIR. All great CDs - but to say Black Sabbath is not as brutal and heavy as Deep Purple? Just listen to title track "Black Sabbath". It was about an experience Geezer Butler had one night where he saw a black figure standing at the end of his bed. The next morning, he noticed the occult book that Ozzy gave him had vanished (too many drugs). Ozzy's vocals in this song are more macabre and sinister than anything Deep Purple ever put out. I agree with you though that Ritchie Blackmore's solo in 'Child in Time' was outstanding, for that time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SPINOZA wrote: |
"Gain" and "fuzz" are synonymous, HA, but it doesn't discredit your point. I'll give them a listen. But there's no persuading me....Deep Purple invented Heavy Metal. That's precisely what metal was - an invention. Metal - as is usually argued - did not evolve. It happened overnight - DPIR was recorded in days. Can you imagine hearing Bloodsucker, Living Wreck, Into the Fire, for the first time in 1970? It would've ripped your ear drums out and shoved them up your arse. That's what metal's all about - killing instruments and deliberately provoking the listener, extremity.
The strange thing is, none of DP's subsequent albums bear any relation to 'In Rock'. It was a stand-out album, a one-off noise fest "let's make the heaviest record ever" project. They were the first band to do this. |
Yes and no. Gain is the ratio of the signal outpout to the signal input...in other words, the preamp is boosting the signal, thus that overdrive tone (in tube amps, overdrive is a production of boosting gain until the preamp tubes overheat (think Clapton in Bluesbreaker)). Fuzz, or fuzz-tone, is achieved by increasing the gain and the sustain (feedback), thus producing a very different tone than a simple gain boost.
Compare Angus Young's tone (guitar, ripcord, amp) to Jimmy Hendrix's (Fuzz Face stompbox) or James Iha's (Big Muff Pi stompbox) tone and you'll understand that a guitar played with pure gain tone sounds very different than one that run through a fuzzbox.
But, all this terminology can be confusing. For one, you can get a fuzz-tone with some distortion pedals, such as the Tube Screamer distortion pedal, which is meant to replicate the sound of overdriven preamp tubes with a solid state ams. You could say that although differences exist between gain, fuzz, overdrive, and distortion, the lines that seperate them can be rather hazy.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roch
Joined: 24 Apr 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:26 am Post subject: "Child in Time" |
|
|
| own_king wrote: |
| SPINOZA wrote: |
| Stumptown - your dates are a bit wrong, I feel. Sabbath's debut was not in the 60s and 'Paranoid' was absolutely in the 70s. |
That's right Spinoza, Black Sabbath's first album was released in 1970, a few months BEFORE Deep Purple in Rock. Black Sabbath's follow-up Paranoid also came out in 1970, a little after DPIR. All great CDs - but to say Black Sabbath is not as brutal and heavy as Deep Purple? Just listen to title track "Black Sabbath". It was about an experience Geezer Butler had one night where he saw a black figure standing at the end of his bed. The next morning, he noticed the occult book that Ozzy gave him had vanished (too many drugs). Ozzy's vocals in this song are more macabre and sinister than anything Deep Purple ever put out. I agree with you though that Ritchie Blackmore's solo in 'Child in Time' was outstanding, for that time. |
This tune rocks the World!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roch
Joined: 24 Apr 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| potblackettle wrote: |
"Yeah, but the Beatles version of Helter Skelter is hardly Heavy Metal or even Hard Rock. The only reason it got lumped in there is because M�tley Cr�e covered it on their Shout at the Devil album c. 1983. It's actually quite a forgettable track with so many other hits."
Um... forgettable? A Beatles song? There are millions of people who would disagree. And actually Helter Skelter and She's So Heavy are classed as proto-heavy metal because of the guitar sound... Also largely because of the distorted sound and the "aggression" of the music. Revolution is also mentioned... although technically I would consider "She's So Heavy" to be the most "metal". There are also other music critics/historians who class some of the Zombies music as early metal. |
Word! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
