EarlGrey

Anyway, regarding black metal (which I adore)... I hope you consider bands like Emperor, Mayhem, Immortal, Satyricon, Bathory (hail to you brother Quorthon! I raise a glass in your name...) to be BLACK METAL bands, right? If not, then there's no point in discussing it... But if so, then you must also recognize the objective differences between the music of Venom and that of all these bands that EVERYONE considers black metal. Come on, Venom were great, seminal, but they were not a black metal band; they were a NEW WAVE OF ENGLISH HEAVY METAL band. This is absolutely undeniable. And it has nothing to do with the vocals. Here, everything is really different: the riffs, the speed, the solos, the Rock 'n' Roll flavor of the tracks... And I repeat that in this case, everyone agrees in considering the bands I listed earlier as BLACK METAL. Even important critics, with more years than you, etc., etc. I know very well that "black metal" belongs to Venom. But as I said some time ago, their contribution to black metal has been mainly iconographic (they invented the TERM, the attitude, the type of lyrics, the photos with skulls, maybe, but not the black metal MUSIC).

Holy fffffffuck!!!!! I just got 24 on an exam I was supposed to get 28 on, and I've been sleepless for two weeks... then I come here and find out you've moved on to political arguments without me... ugh.
Well, I won't reignite the controversy or else Giorrrrrrrgio will get hives (but why does it always happen that those who are the least informed, the most nonchalant, who "tend to avoid politics," end up voting for Berlusca? Or even vote for Forza Nuova?.... rhetorical question....) If you're interested in endless political discussions, dear Ossian, I invite you to read some posts in the review of Master of Puppets by Joe Strummer... there's a nice discussion about the major systems of the world between me and that despicable, deceitful fascist Mauro.... you’ll definitely have fun, go on, go!!! There hasn’t been a single time he’s managed to counter my arguments...

Well, as a metalhead, I simply mean someone who predominantly and enjoyably listens to METAL music, of whatever genre it may be (well, maybe not just any...), goes to concerts of this kind... etc. It's not a swear word!!!
Anyway, I listened to the album again... one of the seven wonders. It would be among the four or five that I would take to a desert island...

Alright, so I guess they’re not thrash, are you happy? But in my opinion, they’re not really death either... they’re an extremely important transitional band, as I’ve said... sometimes they’re more thrash, sometimes they’re more death. Is that good? Anyway, I’ve never considered the vocals to be a crucial factor... you missed the final part of my last post. I meant exactly the opposite. When I said Thrash with death vocals, I (vaguely) meant "reign..." with the singer from Napalm Death. Well, it’s well-known that us metalheads always end up squabbling over pointless disputes, like the genre of a certain album... it’s obvious that genres are defined to give an idea of the type of music. They’re not really important. If someone asked you, not knowing them, what kind of music Slayer plays, you’d say death metal without batting an eye while I’d say it’s very tight thrash with death moments... but we’re still talking about the same band.

The two disks are different, there's no denying that, but you can't make your argument that only looks at the origins, neglecting the long evolution of genres! Otherwise, then Venom are no longer an N.W.O.B.H.M. band with satanic iconography and lyrics, but truly a Black Metal band (and what about all those who came after? what were they playing?)...
For the second question: Thrash with death vocals.
Oh, I almost forgot the riffs... so what? The entirety of Black Metal is based on unmuted riffs, they're always used, in all the songs and in all varieties, but it doesn't seem to me that you've ever defined Slayer as a Black group, right? Just because you put a black vocal on Raining Blood doesn't turn it into a Black piece... it's still THRASH. I hope I've answered your endless questions...

So... are we still on about the voice thing? It doesn’t have anything to do with it. Every singer in every genre manages it their own way depending on the expressiveness they want to give their music. But does Chuck Billy from Testament (whom you yourself have referred to as pillars of THRASH) have a vocal style similar to Hetfield's? No, not at all; in fact, it’s pretty clear that he has a singing style more like Araya's. The same goes for the solos. It depends on who’s playing them... it might be true that Hanneman/King never matched Hammet as guitarists, they play very fast, sure, but that’s because all their music is faster compared to that of the 'Tallica. As for studs, I could tell you that while Slayer, big fans of Judas Priest, tended to resemble their idols, Metallica chose a more ripped punk style... but that doesn’t seem enough to judge their musical differences...

Really strange the voivod...it's true, and also original. I think Strapping Young Lad are pretty cool too... about the chaos I joined...this site is full of assholes who don't understand the subject matter at all, even less than me who hasn't been listening to metal for that long...so I introduced myself a bit brusquely and uncompromisingly to see who I had in front of me...that's all. Anyway, I don't think that the music of Master and that of Raining... are opposite, aside from the speed they seem similar to me, both thrash I mean... what genre do you think Kreator plays for example?

If I am part of the company... I felt I was being less unreasonable than others. Anyway, it’s silly to continue categorizing groups into genres, whether by looking only at origins, as you do ossian, saying, for example, that Venom invented black metal, so anyone who doesn't sound like them can't be considered black... or the same thing with Slayer and death. Nor by looking only at the contemporary characteristics of death and black and thus considering these groups outside of these genres. The reality, in my opinion, is that groups like these represented a PASSAGE, a connection, so they can be regarded in one way or another depending on one's personal sensitivity... If we all had to think in the first way, then genres would have to be further divided into subgenres, and then again and again and again as long as musical evolution continues, until getting tangled up in these categorizations and losing sight of the purely musical discussion...

And it’s not said that all the bands considered part of a genre have to sound the same... it’s not that if Metallica invented thrash, anyone who doesn’t sound the same isn’t thrash, right…?!
It would be like saying that since "Nemesis Divina" by Satyricon doesn’t sound like "Battles in the North" by Immortal, one of the two isn’t black metal...
Anyway, I’m going to listen to "Master..." and "Reign..." and we’ll catch up, okay…!
Metal up your ass!!!!

Anyway, I didn’t say that death is characterized only by growls, and that if there's no growl it magically turns into thrash...even from a score perspective, the two genres are different. Plus, that there is death and death, I've already stated myself. The European one is different from the American one.
I believe Slayer initiated two distinct musical movements: the "Bay Area" thrash (which is different from that of Metallica, who I consider an exceptional one-off in the thrash realm) and death in general, significantly influencing Scandinavian black metal, but I don’t consider them “the first death band.”
Anyway, I still view Slayer as a thrash band in retrospect, very extreme but still thrash... I told you, it might just be a matter of personal sensitivity...