Larrok

exactly, Lux understood what I meant =D

But how can you say that a genre is, in itself, original or not? You can say it about a record, or at most about an artist... but you can't say that Metal is inherently original; that's nonsense... And if someone tells me that Thrash and Death are different, I can formally agree, in the sense that they distinguish themselves in form through different use of drums, guitars, rhythms, vocals, and even lyrics, but in substance, the approaches of many bands in either subgenre overlap because their goal often is solely to reproduce a certain type of stereotyped sound that doesn't create anything expressively original. And when I say often, I’m referring to the percentages I mentioned before.

@CarlMarx did I say you can't listen to what you want? Come on, I'm not discussing personal tastes here, read better, I went a bit further... And anyway, "bullshit talks" you keep to yourself.

What are you talking about?? I'm not talking about innovation! I'm talking about originality! It's clear that we can't expect every artist to create a new genre, but even within the same genre, it's reasonable to expect an original approach, mind you, ORIGINAL, not innovative... While in metal, most bands are not only uninnovative but not even original. I mean reworking expressive elements that have been used in the past in an original way, not COPYING in every way the stereotypes of the past.

Unforgiven, I hope you know that out of 10,000 so-called "metal" bands, there are only about 200 that have a certain originality, while the rest is nothing more than shameless and pointless copying... In short, it’s not a 50-50 ratio between bands that aim for art and expressive originality, but I would say more like 98 to 2... and I don't think the situation was any better in the beginning... there were the Black Sabbath and everyone copied Black Sabbath, then came Judas Priest and Motörhead and everyone started imitating them, then Iron Maiden, Venom, Celtic Frost (for the more extreme genres), Malmsteen (for the show-offs and power metal), and every "forefather" that achieved a certain success was followed by thousands of followers who imitated him in every way and produced photocopy albums repeating all the stylistic clichés.

I understand what you're saying, but I disagree! Metal is the perfect antithesis of what is alternative because it relentlessly aims to repeat the same stylistic elements that characterize it, primarily to attract, in most cases, its audience of sheep fixated on the distortions, the lightning-fast solos, the angry lyrics, and the heavy drums. In short, if this isn't commercialization... Of course, I'm generalizing just like you do when you speak generally about metal, but there would be, and I've said it before, commendable exceptions that deviate from this canon, but they remain exceptions.

"There are many more unknown bands than those that sell"...Look, the same can be said for every genre...there will always be more artists that nobody or very few know compared to those that many know, it's true for rock, jazz, etc...and so what? What does it mean?

Okay, one thing is to say that you don't like them (I don't really like them either), another is to say "they are a glaring example of shitty music, period." I mean, you can say that, but maybe you should argue your thesis a bit.

Anyway, this album isn't all the crap you paint it to be... it may not be exceptional (in fact, it's quite far from it), but I prefer this to the cookie-cutter Power or Death bands (not all, okay, take it easy...)... and screw the solos, the double bass pedal, and the eunuch voice or forced growling. I'm giving it a 3 because I want to protest against those who say that an album is crap just because it doesn't fit the mold of metal stereotypes. You need to listen with an open mind. That said, I repeat, this album doesn't blow me away, but I don't think it's a 1.

Listen, Supervai, I never said that metal is a shitty genre or not art... I simply limited myself to talking about sales, since I’m told it’s not a genre that sells, I only pointed out a few of the thousands of bands that are selling like crazy. That said, don’t you dare judge my musical knowledge because I assure you I know enough to express an informed opinion on the matter. I like a lot of metal and related albums (Isis, Kayo Dot, Opeth, Pelican, Cult of Luna, Mastodon among others...) but I would never dream of saying that the Metal genre itself is a niche genre, rather the exact opposite... metal has a mass popularity that hasn’t seen a decline in at least 30 years, a continuity that doesn’t exist for any other "mass" music; then of course, we have to distinguish between the "hardcore" loyal fans and the masses who temporarily get into metal... but the fact remains that the volume of sales is extremely high, and everything can be discussed except that it’s a genre for a select few. And with that, I reiterate, I am not getting into the merit of musical quality. Is that clearer?