buggie92 (2012-07-15 17:11:48) said:
azkm (2012-07-14 07:00:37) said:I don't think it's a troll. Some people use a wider definition of heavy metal than others, that's all.
fair enough, but NIN and Nirvana have next to nothing to do with metal. NIN belongs on many 90's lists, but not a metal one. You could make an argument for Soundgarden and Alice in Chains being metal (wiki tags both of them as alt metal). The rest are all definitely metal, but undeserving of being on the list, imo. I guess it's all just OP's opinion when we get down to it though. The metal elitist in me just doesn't like it.
Metallica is the only "true metal" band on his list and their heaviest material was all released pre-90's... sure, I don't unreasonably despise their self-titled like most other folks (it has some decent songs), but it's not even close to being as metal as their first four albums, not even in the same league.
I would say NIN has more to do with Foetus and Coil than it does metal. Nirvana is punk inspired grunge.
What separates Metallica from every other band on this list is their complexity. Most of these bands play a style of rock.. which originated from the blues. Metal expands on this, straying from the 12 bar form (a bar is just a measure or phrase) and eschewing that i-iv-v formula (you know, the cheesy one where you play a chord, slide up a few frets and then up some more).
I can understand why genres get convoluted but when you really think about it, they all follow a basic order.