Why doom is the future of metal

[Erik]

Doom metal, and especially its more extreme forms doom/death and funeral doom metal, is inherently very inaccessible and esoteric -- the extreme slowness and oppressive atmosphere is extreme in a way that makes it seem really weird to most metalheads who, ever since the advent of 80's speed and thrash metal, are used to "more extreme" meaning "faster." Doom metal has existed at least since the late seventies/early eighties and has always remained thoroughly underground. There were never really waves of doom metal popularity as there was with most any other metal subgenre.

In the beginning of death, thrash and black metal, every band had something orignal to add that made them distinctive and worthy of existence. IMMORTAL, MAYHEM, BATHORY, SAMAEL, DARKTHRONE, BURZUM -- all vastly different and fiercely original, but with the rise in popularity that followed, everyone wanted a piece of the cake: the clone bands followed and the entire "scene" turned to stagnated bullshit in a matter of years.

I'd like to argue that true doom metal is so thoroughly uncommercial and unapproachable in its very essence that it will never reach the popularity of other metal genres. Remaining underground for pretty much all of its existence has assured that mostly worthy people and worthy bands with genuine interest in the genre and in creating something original & new have entered the genre and created new bands.


Nearly every other metal genre is in severe stagnation right about now, look at:

BLACK METAL: in the "mainstream" sewage of what once was black metal, bands have either turned to norsecore or fag-goth, dressing up like clowns to sustain an "image" and forming their music after the masses, and in the "underground," bands release LIMITED TO 33 TRUE CULT tapes of some pitiful 4-track recording doing nothing but cloning greater bands from the past like Darkthrone or Burzum; copying the superficial while having no understanding of the underlying essence. How many dedicated black metal labels can you name? 50? 200? How many of them have actually released something of value, something that has furthered the genre and will be considered a classic in 10 years? Five?

DEATH METAL: we have three million gore-death bands called Fermenting Intestinal Vaginal Sewage Discharge, doing shitty impressions of what Carcass did right 15 years ago and thinking "extreme" music is about having rotten.com pictures as cover art and playing at 340 bpm with guitars tuned down to F. Bzzzt, listen to "Pleasure to Kill" and shut the fuck up, morons. See above comment about black metal labels and apply it to death metal. Still holds.

POWER METAL: Severe fucking stagnation going on here. A bunch of frilly shirted wimps and posers cloning what Helloween and Blind Guardian did 10 to 15 years ago, with no lyrical or musical depth whatsoever. I don't know so much about this seeing as I don't listen to it, but I think any fan of decent power metal will agree that worthless clone bands are utterly flooding the market by shitty labels willing to cater to 14-year olds in too big Stratovarius shirts who just can't get enough Gandalf metal to play D&D to.

THRASH METAL: "Hey, look at us, we are THE HAUNTED, HATEBREED and SHADOWS FALL, and we're the thrash metal of the future." I do believe the appropriate words are FUCK OFF. Meanwhile, in the underground, bands do nothing but clone 80's greats, because let's face it, thrash metal is basically going nowhere now. It was the needed link between heavy/speed metal and death/black metal, and if you go more melodic, you end up being the former; more extreme and you're the latter. Obviously, thrash metal doesn't really innovate any more, it's all pretty much been done. It should be noted that I don't have a problem with this, because I love 80's thrash and some of the current bands are doing such a fucking great job of reviving the spirit...


But hey, look at DOOM METAL. How many dedicated doom metal labels can you name? 5? 10? How many simple clones of true innovators such as Saint Vitus, Candlemass, My Dying Bride, diSEMBOWELMENT or Skepticism can you name..? Compare to CARCASS and DARKTHRONE clones..? Listening to the latest release by Skepticism, for example, I hear things that have NEVER been done before: true originality that does not consists of throwing techno beats on top DIMMU BORGIR and dressing up in latex, but in actually creating something totally new within the framework of a genre that has existed for 25 years or so.

So while there are obviously always the THE CHASM's, MITHRAS'es and NEGURÃ BUNGET's of the world, who genuinely try to be inventive within the frameworks of their chosen genres (and they should have all the credit in the world for it,) the signal/noise ratio for most metal genres is disgustingly high, whereas in doom metal we still have a pretty fucking clear signal. This is why people who search for true innovation and originality should look towards doom. That is all.


Whoa, I have no high hopes for the above blob of text actually turning out readable & coherent

 

[NAD]

I agree that bands like Khanate and Sunn O))) represent the future sound of metal, but I do not think that doom is the sole future. Bands that push the boundaries of what metal embodies are the future, the extreme doom bands are part of this movement. Groups like Kayo Dot, Watchmaker, Today is the Day, and even King Crimson are part of this progressive movement, as well as Khanate, Sunn O))), et. al.

 

[Erik]

It is true, of course, that the entire future isn't doom... Some of the bands that you mention are perhaps moving towards creating entirely new metal genres, while doom is pretty much the one established genre I can think of that at large still truly innovates, with very few clone bands.

 

[spaffe]

That was a very interesting and good post and I agree with you on most points there except:

How many of them have actually released something of value, something that has furthered the genre and will be considered a classic in 10 years? Five?

Not much obviously but that's not the sole thing that makes a record worthwhile and listenable. And the fact that it wont become a classic doesn't necessarily mean that it's not good or innovate, rather it will go unnoticed due to the sheer amount of other medicore crap that's released. Which of course is equally negative.

And I you by using the term "future of metal" mean artistic integrity in a majority of the bands within the genre then perhaps yes, but then I wouldn't use the term "future of" since that implies that it will lead the community onwards and give inspiration etc, which most likely wont happen since it's so obscure etc. So the genre will stay focused and of high quality but then I would call it something along the lines of "the only genre that's truly alive" or similar.

 

[Erik]

And the fact that it wont become a classic doesn't necessarily mean that it's not good or innovate, rather it will go unnoticed due to the sheer amount of other medicore crap that's released.

I don't necessarily think that's how it works. Whenever something truly innovative and different comes along in tired genres like black or death metal, people who care about metal tend to notice. Look at all the attention The Chasm, Mithras, Velvet Cacoon, Drudkh, Negurã Bunget, Deathspell Omega, Blut Aus Nord and such have been getting lately. I do think that people will be recognizing the importance of things like "'N Crugu Bradului" and "Deathcult for Eternity: The Triumph" 10 years from now.

Also, I can take derivative stuff to some extent, there's nothing inherently wrong with playing largely the same style as another band, but when there are 200 bands all cloning "Transylvanian Hunger," you have to start asking yourself "what is the worth of this particular band? Why do they exist? Are they doing anything to further the genre, are they doing anything to make me listen to just them?"

You're probably right about "future of metal" being slightly the wrong term though. I like your suggestion.

 

[J.]

I'll keep it simple. When you guys tell me to check out a new death metal band, I usually do a little research, then dismiss it because I feel I've got enough death metal for now.

When you guys tell me to check out a new black metal band, I'm slighty more interested, because of the black metal knowledge in the forum. If it's "Pagan" or "VIking", then I do a lot more research than if it's old school raw stuff.

But if you guys mention a doom band to check, then I'm wholeheartedly interested (Mar De Grises). Why? Because, like Erik said, there is a smaller number of doom bands, and the chances of this new one being listenable for more than 2 months is a hell of a lot better than some death or black metal band.

THat being said, I always enjoy hearing about new bands.

BTW, I can't stand that sludge/fuzz crap like Khanate and Sunn 0)))

 

[Erik]

BTW, I can't stand that sludge/fuzz crap like Khanate and Sunn 0)))

Me neither so much, but you have to give them some credit for doing something new though...

 

[speed]

Well I agree with both of you, Spaffe, If i may defend Erik- which he wont like- I think the statement about nothing else being classic in 10 years was him just trying to get his point across in a very forceful and persuasive manner.

I pretty much agree with him though, most classics being created these days are in the doom/Neurosis like category. But within black metal what about Enslaved? Death Metal's got Argholesent and The Chasm. But yeah, I cant think of anymore. Especially thrash and power metal. There havent been too many new ideas, everything is professional, but there is a real lack of vision and direction. Its sort of like classical jazz in power and prog especially, the sound has been codified almost, nothing new is even allowed to happen.

 

[JayKeeley]

I agree that bands like Khanate and Sunn O))) represent the future sound of metal

Is that what he said?

but I do not think that doom is the sole future. Bands that push the boundaries of what metal embodies are the future, the extreme doom bands are part of this movement. Groups like Kayo Dot, Watchmaker, Today is the Day, and even King Crimson are part of this progressive movement, as well as Khanate, Sunn O))), et. al.

OK, but at some point you have to be very clear in the distinction between which music is truly pushing the boundary, and which music is simply making ridiculous noise for the sake of being different or 'radical'.

A lot of people confuse noise and chaos with being "progressive" and it's simply not true. People are easily duped I guess, but somewhere a band is making noise and a fan base exists to interpret said noise into something more than what it truly is: useless noise.

And very simply, doom is primal. It is what started metal, and it'll probably end it. Fact: it is impossible to like metal but simultaneously dislike doom. It is inherently impossible. Granted, there are different flavors of doom, but we all instinctually react to doom riffs and song structures because it is the DNA of metal.

 

[spaffe]

I don't necessarily think that's how it works. Whenever something truly innovative and different comes along in tired genres like black or death metal, people who care about metal tend to notice. Look at all the attention The Chasm, Mithras, Velvet Cacoon, Drudkh, Negurã Bunget, Deathspell Omega, Blut Aus Nord and such have been getting lately. I do think that people will be recognizing the importance of things like "'N Crugu Bradului" and "Deathcult for Eternity: The Triumph" 10 years from now.

Yes, true to some extent. But it's not a good argument to mention bands already getting recognition as an example that talent leads automatically to recognition, since none can possibly know how many talented bands that are still unoticed as of now.

Also, I can take derivative stuff to some extent, there's nothing inherently wrong with playing largely the same style as another band, but when there are 200 bands all cloning "Transylvanian Hunger," you have to start asking yourself "what is the worth of this particular band? Why do they exist? Are they doing anything to further the genre, are they doing anything to make me listen to just them?"

You're probably right about "future of metal" being slightly the wrong term though. I like your suggestion.

Yes of course, the underground scene of black metal is utterly pathetic most of the time, 90% of all bands could probably be put down and the genre would not loose anything.

I sometimes find it strange that the kids (yes I'm twenty but I still use the term ) don't realize that they've just vapid copy-cats, but I find it stranger still that there are so many labels signing ANYTHING vaguely similar to agressive music. Perhaps that's the greatest difference of nowadays as opposed to some years ago; the bands have not increased that much but the underground lebels have.

 

[NAD]

JayKeeley, you aren't thinking outside the box, mate. Your preconceived notions of what doom should be is not allowing you to realize that groups like Khanate and Sunn O))) are very doomy. I would consider Sunn O))) the next step after bands like Candlemass, and then Khanate an even further step away from Sunn O))). Actually, truth be told, I think the very fact that Khanate exists is proof that the doom of all living things is approaching.

OK, but at some point you have to be very clear in the distinction between which music is truly pushing the boundary, and which music is simply making ridiculous noise for the sake of being different or 'radical'.

True, but who makes the distinction? You think Goatsblood is noise, I don't. I think Rwake is noise, Nate and Doomcifer don't. Whether or not a band is truly innovative or just ridiculous isn't objective, I don't see how it can be. I think it is much easier to determine who is pushing boundaries as opposed to who is good at it or not, because creating something that hasn’t been created before is pushing a boundary regardless of whether the listener enjoys it or not.

Fact: it is impossible to like metal but simultaneously dislike doom. It is inherently impossible. Granted, there are different flavors of doom, but we all instinctually react to doom riffs and song structures because it is the DNA of metal.

I disagree, and I think this is what isn't allowing you to hear Khanate as doom. I'll bet there are a ton of speed metal freaks that wouldn't listen to Sabbath if you put a gun to their head, besides the fact that I think blues is more integral to metal as we know it than traditional doom is, and there are tons of metal fans that wouldn’t give blues a second thought. Or how many black metal fans love punk rock?

As usual, this is all subjective.

 

[IOfTheStorm]

I dont agree that one genre is the future of metal. The style that represents the "future of metal" is probably what Nevermore or Biomechanical play: technical power/thrash metal with large influences from traditional heavy metal, building a bridge between the past and the future. There is no specific "future of metal" all genres will co-exist there will be musical monuments in every single one of them, as well as crappy releases. Thats what history of metal wrote so far.

 

[NAD]

Haha, you just described Gruntsplatter. Seriously, it's pretty much 45 minutes of white noise. I really enjoy it.

Last night at my band meeting we were discussing sampling the metal factory down the street and using it for a new song. We were half joking at first, but then the gears started turning and we'll probably do it.

The extreme example is here, and I can't determine where the line between art and noise resides, because I don't think there is an objective line. Like the old addage concerning pornography: "I'll know it when I see it."

Lest any of us forget that many people consider something as tame as a Guns N' Roses electric guitar solo as noise, I know you've all heard that from elders or other idiots. :Spin:

 

[NAD]

You might have a groupie that doesn't think so. Send it to mousewings, see what she calls it.

 

[JayKeeley]

But the Guns n Roses example of being noise to some people doesn't truly equate because it contains melody. Old people calling GnR noise is just a figure of speech. There are bands out there actually making 'music' with zero melody or conventional song structure, which therefore, mathematically even, equals NOISE. Cosmic resonance, if you will.

Yeah, I know it's all subjective, but most music is temporary, with that I am sure we all agree. Khanate, as an example, may be *a* next evolutionary step, but it does not spell the end of musical evolution, it's just another milestone and a miniscule one at that which, in truth, makes it a FAD. Don't take that as a negative, take it in the sense that ANY music that has a temporary appeal is more than likely a fad. Khanate's appeal to most will be through 'shock value', not conventional musical structure. And after a while, people stop being so shocked and move on. That's human nature.

In 30 years from now, people will not be listening to Khanate in the same way that they're listening to Black Sabbath, although they may both be doom bands. In fact, all things come full circle which probably means that eventually when we're all OLD and on our deathbeds, it is very likely that we'll be listening to Black Sabbath. There is music that attaches itself to your very being (say, Mozart, Sabbath, childhood nursery rhymes, your mother's lullabyes when you were an infant, etc.) and then there is stuff that comes and goes.

In any case, who am I to say which music 'attaches' itself to different people? I'm just being devils advocate in that even I recognize that there is music that I love today, but probably know that I will not be listening to it in 20 years time. Is everyone that honest with themselves? Either way, doom is in my DNA and therefore will live forever in the temple of doom in the arms of Kali Ma and her Pankot Palace.

 

[JayKeeley]

Not at all, I didn't grow up with Sabbath. Their first album came out the year I was born, but shit, I was listening to Ozzy and Maiden etc well before Sabbath. I was probably listening to other metal for 2-3 years before going "full circle".

The point is this, Sabbath is metal in it's PUREST FORM. That is why everyone into metal appreciates it. I don't think I have ever met anyone who is truly into metal that didn't like Sabbath.

Come back in 16 years and then we'll talk.

 

[NAD]

In 20 years I'll probably still listen to Alice in Chains, but I doubt I'll be listening to Morbid Angel, even though I grew up with both. I don't really know though, I still listen to both now some 10+ years after discovering them, but only AiC is it a regularly a daily occurence.

 

[NAD]

I like my sentence structure on that last post.

I don't think I have ever met anyone who is truly into metal that didn't like Sabbath.

I know several people that don't like Sabbath, and they are certainly metal.

 

[JayKeeley]

I doubt very much that I will be listening to Metallica in 20 years time. They were my very soul and being back in 1986 and I couldn't ever imagine living life without their musical involvement, and today I'm lucky if I even give them the time of day. Time has told us all that they were indeed a fad, and a MASSIVE one at that, and their disingenious existence made it all the more resentful. Their music is not timeless, but the blueprint is. And that blueprint existed way before they did.

Oh and Sabbath is just an example. Again, I refer to any music in its purest form, including Johan Sebastian Bach, Tony Iommi, Robert Johnson, etc.

 

[JayKeeley]

Purest form, possibly, (primeval form, I'll grant you that... Deströyer 666 is METAL\m/\m/\m/ in its purest form ) but anyway, I'm still not buying the deathbed business. Why would I suddenly start listening to something more than I have before only because it is the purest form of metal? You're assuming that the "purest form of metal" is what I subjectively like.

I don't know really. I'm just being honest in that 'variations' of a pure artform normally don't last as long (within yourself) as the pure or primeval form equivalent. Maybe it's just a fact of life. It starts to delve into how the human mind percieves music - why is some music happy? why is some music sad? why do all humans react the same way? This can be proven when you play different music forms to an infant, and see how they react. They have had no music training, but there is an instinctual response according to the music they hear.