Slayer seems like the only speed/thrash/metal band to survive the 80s without sounding dated

I don't understand how metal music went "Out of Wack" in the '80s. I can understand if it was dark and hard and mysterious, but who decided to put screaming and growling in it.

It's like someone said "Hey, let's make a band like Black Sabbath but fuck the shit out of it and make it so you can't understand us."

Metal music just turned to shit in the '80s.

Wow, I didn't know Ozzy posted on ILM!

Celtic Frost, eh? I'll have to listen to them right... NOW! Thanks, I forgot they existed. Celtic Frost isn't very catchy, though... and Mexican Radio def. sounds dated ;-) ... Actually, I think they sound a bit dated in general, but we'll see when I listen to it again.

How is screaming and growling not dark and hard? It is also alot of fun and that way anyone can be the vocalist. (Which made things easier for small town teenage metal bands playing shows in their friend's basement)

As for metal going downhill; I don't just blame Slayer. It was already starting to suck before Slayer got there. They just helped make it worse, that's all.

And I don't buy the anything-can-do-it argument at all. Didn't work for punk, either. Having a suck-ass band might be "fun" for the people in the band and their friends who don't mind their suckage, but what that has to do with my own listening I have no idea.

???

???

seconded - are there any thrash bands left at all, besides maybe Kreator and Exodus?

seems like the production is similar on danzig's first - really dry and kind of hollow - but it works better there.

Get one *Decibel.*

Thing is, if nobody sounds like Slayer anymore (and okay, obviously, nobody sounds *exactly* like Slayer. Nobody sounds exactly like Anthrax or Megadeth or any other old band you can name either), how does that *not* make Slayer dated (by your defintion)?

Also, I'm curious about this: How exactly are Lamb of God or Shadows Fall (or Mastodon, or the countless bands doing basically the same thing those bands do only worse), more "hardcore" than "thrash"? They sound no more like Black Flag or the Circle Jerks than Slayer or Metallica did 20 years ago. I don't get that at all.

By "anti-aesthetcicism," Siegbran, do you mean you think the bands after Slayer were less arty than the ones before? If so, I have no idea why you'd think that, either. How are Slayer-influenced bands inherently less arty (less pretentious, whatever) than, say, AC/DC-influenced or Nazareth-influenced or Sabbath-influenced or Zep-influenced or Hanoi Rocks-influenced bands? As often as not, I hear exactly the opposite. But I dunno, maybe you mean something else by that word.

Slayer had some artful lyrics:

Raining blood
From a lacerated sky
Bleeding it’s horror

And some cool groovey mid-tempo switches that make them stand out just as much as the rest of their sound really stands out from the crowd.

"Hardcore" in the sense that metal bands use it presently, not in a retro/original-meaning-of-hawdkawuh sense - I didn't & don't mean any down-the-nose-lookin' correction, was just finding the particular area of bands that you're aligning with thrash.

Mastodon is kinda in their own ballpark and it seems rather baby-with-bathwater to lump them in with Shadows Fall, but to each, etc

however, I still don't hear anybody in the field who really sounds like any of the eighties thrash metal bands, like, at all, except for the eighties thrash bands that're still working: certainly if you A-B Lamb of God & any thrash band you care to name, you'll hear more differences than similarities

speed-metal, death-metal, black metal, dark metal, mosh-metal, puke-metal, shit-metal, grindcore, etc...like I said, zillions of bands. All of whom descend from thrash in the same way that Slayer or Iron Maiden (neither of whom sound particularly like Black Sabbath) descend from heavy metal. And of course the fact that Slayer and Iron Maiden don't sound exactly like Sabbath doesn't prevent anybody from calling them "heavy metal" bands, right?

>a couple of the zillion was reduced to one<

*Decibel* isn't a band; it's a magazine containing zillions of bands, 99 percent of whom sure sound a hell of a lot more like Slayer than they sound like, say, White Lion. Which isn't to say (and I never did say) "they all sound alike." But way more of them sound like each other than sound remotely distinctive. (I *like* the magazine, by the way. And I also like a lot of the music it covers.)

That's not what I said, reworder of practically E Prime sentences.

xp

As a matter of fact, what I say above says *flat out* that I may be listening with different ears than other Slayer fans, that they may hear something I don't. I also talk about Slayer-era and post-Slayer thrash bands who I think have a *better* groove than Slayer; I'm not just saying old stuff has a better groove. And where do I say one mode of listening is superior to another? All over this thread, when people talk about how music sounds to them, I assume the "to them" part is understood. And I don't assume they are talking from a high horse. But again, I'll phrase my question differently, in what you'll maybe consider a more evenhanded way: Do listeners who believe Slayer have a great groove *not* hear a way better groove in, I dunno, AC/DC or Nazareth or '70s Aerosmith or Black Sabbath or Uriah Heep or Black Oak Arkansas? If not, can they explain why? It's not that I don't *want* to hear a great groove in Slayer; I just don't hear one, period. And, to me anyway, some types of music sound more rhythmically rigid than other music. We might not agree on what they *are*, but I doubt anyone here would say all kinds of music are equal groovwise. How is it offensive to conjecture about which musics might be more stiff? To me, death metal would be one of the stiffer musics. (So would '90s indie rock, for instance.) Why is that off-limits to talk about? To me, it seems completely germane to the discussion.

>Your argument here appears to be: "Groove? What groove?":<

That is indeed my argument. And I guess what I'm wondering, Banana, is do you *ever* think that would be a valid argument? If somebody told you that, I don't know, Matchbox 20 have the best groove of any band on the radio, would "groove? what groove?" be a valid response? If it would be, how is Slayer different? My guess is that what might make them different is that your ears hear a groove in Slayer but not one in Matchbox 20 (or Dashboard Confessional, or the Bravery, or Kenny G, well...fill in some artist you hate, okay? I'm sure some exist...) Which is to say that, it seems to me the only people being dogmatic on this thread are people who think nobody should be allowed to hear Slayer differently than they do. Well, some people do!

certainly you hear it in the riffs though! No? Do you own any Slayer, Chuck? you should really try south of heaven again some time.

I don't, however, know how to describe where one locates the groove in Slayer. The breakdowns, I guess, are where I heard it first.

xpost...do I think "oh pshaw, there's no groove at all there" is ever a valid argument? not really - nor do I think characterizing that stance as the execrable "oh everything's just OPINION, there are no judgements possible" argument is at all fair.

xp

From my *Reign in Blood* review: "..as pure a clatter as any band that's ever called itself metal has produced; unfortunately, "purity";s got nothing to do with why real people listen to music. *RIB* does swing, sort of, but unlike Aerosmith (whose Steve Tyler helped inspired Tom Araya's throaty operatics), Slayer's got too much mega-complicated chord-and-tempo-transforming distortion to be 'funky.'"

I stand happily corrected!

This seems like you're asking the album to do something it wasn't designed to do. Slayer were clearly not making the same kind of music as Aerosmith, even if you thought at the time that you could hear Tyler in Araya. So why make that comparison at all? It seems like you're setting the band up to fail. If you don't like the record, fine, but come up with a legit reason to criticize it. Saying it fails to swing as hard as Aerosmith is like pointing at a cat and scoffing, "Ha ha, you've got no gills!"

x-post with Scott, of course.

Well, it's *one* reference point. Others might include Eurodisco, Afro-Caribbean, Kraut-rock, polkas, Appalachian jigs, Steve Reich, etc. (Oddly, I've never noticed much blues or boogie in Sabbath, who sound perfectly grooving to me regardless.) But yeah, obviously, there may well be grooves I just don't feel. (And to say I don't find Slayer or, say, Pavement notably rhythmic is not to suggest I think they have no rhythm at all. All music has a rhythm. Some music just moves me -- like everybody else who listens to music, including folks who hear a great groove in Slayer -- more than other music does.)

I never said real people don't like Slayer (my 13 year old kid likes Slayer, as I said above!); I said real people don't listen to music for how "pure" it is. Though of course, I was wrong -- Many do. (Even some really smart and articulate ones, like Siegbran for instance!)

Also, Anacrusis: How come nobody ever talks about them in these parts? They were great!

Not sure I buy this line, by the way, Scott, though I'd love to hear specifics (especially if the specifics actually have to do with how the music sounds, not just what bands claim in interviews.) Thing is, as much as I like how plenty of avant-classical stuff sounds in the background (just like I like how plenty of extreme-so-called metal sounds in the background), I can't say I can actually locate the groove in much avant-classical, either. So maybe that's the problem. But again, just 'cause I can't locate the groove doesn't necessarily mean I won't like it. (Heck, I may even be be subconsciously liking it for the groove, and just not *realize* that's why I like it, who knows? In general, though, I'd guess I like it for the beauty. Most extreme metal I like seems better at melodies than rhythms, to me.)

Skyclad. And Skyclad had groove, mostly when doing the Celtic thing.

Considering the hellish realms described by metal, groove is very important. When Demonaz (??) sings, 'I am a demon / a demon with a sallow face', mate, if he's not in the groove of that sentiment, he's going to look like a bit of a faker. actually, the reason Immortal can get away with such outrageous demonic posturing is because, well, we have to laugh and say they are totally confident with their schtick, and therefore it works. This is groove. The downside of all that is that, well, they're stuck in it. For all eternity, hahaha.

When applied to rhythm, as it usually is, a rhythm suitable to the hellish realms has to convey a hell being in his or her element: alert, sharp, confident, strong, and sort of blurry and untouchable (ie, not of this world, not too human).

I don't think Slayer really descend to the hell realms as a dreamworld or nightmare. their hell realm is the human one, eg of recent actual history. If they channel archetypes, it's not the primary intent. They are realists (hence their occasional nod to Satanism is sometimes dismissed as token, not an authentic belief), and their material is not particularly numinous, spiritual or dreamlike.

I.e., the death metal (nihilist) approach to evil as opposed to the black metal (romanticist) approach. Note that this was not yet the case on their first two albums.

Indeed, the only way for a metal band to convincingly pull off the evil angle is to back it up with impressive music. That's why a band like Cradle of Filth are universally rediculed and Immortal are much respected even when they're pretty much equally goofy lyrically/imagewise.

(Abbath is the singer, btw.)

A joke, right? I'll use the line in a record review: "Grave exhibit a child-like mastery over sexual pleasure..."

the reason Immortal can get away with such outrageous demonic posturing is because, well, we have to laugh and say they are totally confident with their schtick, and therefore it works. This is groove

Only when preaching to the converted.

When applied to rhythm...a rhythm suitable to the hellish realms has to convey a hell being in his or her element: alert, sharp, confident, strong, and sort of blurry and untouchable

Ha-ha. Tilt!

and their material is not particularly numinous,

I dunno. This thread has Slayer fans with it, empirically demonstrating and remonstrating the opposite.

http://www.backstreet-merch.com/stores/slayer/official_slayer_jumper_christmas-holidays-jumper_slay246.html

This product is currently unavailable

Fuck.

There's no real dedicated Slayer thread, is there? Anyway, thanks to unperson's amplification on social media, I finally read this interview with Kerry King, who remains true to his ethos while simultaneously disabusing me of any lingering suspicions he's anything but one of the good ones.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/kerry-king-slayer-idle-hands-from-hell-i-rise-1234951010

What inspired that lyric (to "Toxic")?

I wrote that right around the time that Roe vs. Wade went down. The biggest point I’d like to make in this interview is that every Supreme Court justice that got hired under Trump lied to get their job. A fucking judge lied to get his lifetime job. How fucked up is that? They overturned Roe vs. Wade because that’s why they were put there. It took me a long time to get over the fact that our Supreme Court justices lied. It shows up in numerous songs. It’s in “Toxic” and “Residue.”

“Rage” seems political, too. Mark sings, “Alternative facts for an alternative God.”

Remember when Trump left the White House to take a picture with a Bible in front of a church? “Rage” has a lyric about getting a baton to the face because Trump, this person that’s not as smart as the rest of us, has to go out and take a picture in front of a fucking church with a Bible. A lot of “Rage” is about that because the police in the streets looked like a Gestapo. I remember one where they pushed this 80-year-old man. He fell back and cracked his head.

I’m like, “How can you do that and sleep at night?” It’s like, “I’m Kerry King. I write the most fucked up words you’ll ever fucking hear from anybody, but I still feel for humanity.” I was so sad that day. I’m like, “How can you be a part of this and say it’s OK and tell the policeman that’s OK?” George Floyd, how can you tell me that’s OK? It’s not fucking OK. That’s our society.

Are you ready for November?

I’m ready to leave.

Do you worry about alienating fans of yours who like Trump by talking about this?

I think fans enjoy the music. I don’t think fans are that influenced by what I think politically, and they have their opinion, and I don’t try to talk them out of it. I state facts. If you like to believe it, good for you. If you don’t, stay in your hut.

man i should really check out these Slayer guys some day

Wait, what?

https://static.tixr.com/static/images/external/img/fa2eb2d2-47a9-4e7e-a5f7-f10238506d7c.jpg

yep. they've reunited for this and Louder Than Life. I would be amazed if they did a full-on gigantic tour based on what Araya has said in past but.....i wouldn't mind seeing the boys again (16 times wasn't enough)

"zillion other dime a dozen thrash bands out there these days"
???

"seconded - are there any thrash bands left at all, besides maybe Kreator and Exodus?"

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Sunday, May 29, 2005

haha! just wait a few years old people from the past! it turns out there will be 4 million nu-thrash bands and every thrash band that made as much as a demo in the 80s will reunite and go on tour again. the 21st century will hence be named "The Age of Thrash Again Only More and Sneakers will be Very Important and also what Patches You Have". i know. how could you know. but it happened like 5 minutes after this 2005 post.

Even back then you had loads of retro thrash/black thrash bands - Desaster, Gehennah, Aura Noir, Desekrator, Destroyer 666, Sabbat, The Crown, Ritual Carnage, Abigail, Impiety, Nifelheim, etc.