Smooth Jazz Version of Metal Songs

Metal is made of drop-D and double kicks.
 
lol @ sweeping off-topic generalisations.
 
Hey now, there are always outlier cases. Like the 1% of metal that isn't generic rehashed shit; same as every other genre or form of media :p
 
Hey now, there are always outlier cases. Like the 1% of metal that isn't generic rehashed shit; same as every other genre or form of media :p

i think you're confusing 99% percent of metal as being the mainstream/lame and the same, when it's actually the other way around.

popular [media] is always the smallest amount.
 
i think you're confusing 99% percent of metal as being the mainstream/lame and the same, when it's actually the other way around.

popular [media] is always the smallest amount.
Being unpopular does not preclude a band or artist from being generic or terrible. I don't believe metal is an exception.
 
that depends, i'm more happy to call 1% generic then i am 99% as - like with all of my arguments :p - i'm more likely to of heard a good 1%
 
Hey now, there are always outlier cases. Like the 1% of metal that isn't generic rehashed shit; same as every other genre or form of media :p
Point being?

No offense, but it's statements like this that make me think the person hasn't actually heard this purported 1% (or has no wish to), making their opinion kind of worthless. :p
 
Lol, I see your point. I'm just basing it on statistically-likely statistics (that sounds so spurious, oh god). There's only so far you take each genre before you're wholly in the realm of another; there's only so many ways to put together chords. I would be deeply, soul-movingly surprised if more than 1% of bands in any genre were actually pushing the boundaries of their art, and not just idly imitating superior bands/artists to make a buck, look cool, or get laid.
 
Perhaps not such a clever girl afterall.
 
I would be deeply, soul-movingly surprised if more than 1% of bands in any genre were actually pushing the boundaries of their art, and not just idly imitating superior bands/artists to make a buck, look cool, or get laid.

i don't think this is right

tread carefully; you're in the presence of me, hat man and danimal i.e. ISIS and their ilk fans. we will argue this out with you.
 
Keep in mind that I'm including shitty local bands in that figure!
 
right now the UK metal scene is striving upon these local bands! well, local depending on where you live of course... but the smaller, independent acts running splinter cell from the rest of the dull dishwater.

now listening: fall of efrafa, skinny dudes who like their black metal post-hardcore crust about the watership down books. sadly split
 
Local bands around the Gold Coast suck, all "Chugga Chugga" breakdowns and the occassional gangshout like "I LOVE MY FRIENDS!" or some stupid shit.

tread carefully; you're in the presence of me, hat man and danimal i.e. ISIS and their ilk fans. we will argue this out with you.

It's like some kind of Metallic Trio
 
I would be deeply, soul-movingly surprised if more than 1% of bands in any genre were actually pushing the boundaries of their art, and not just idly imitating superior bands/artists to make a buck, look cool, or get laid.
But see, it's those bands pushing the boundaries and evolving the genre that actually matter in the long run. If you listen to metal music 20 years ago, hell even 10 years ago, it's drastically different to what's being made today because it's been so heavily influenced by such pioneers. Ultimately, useless statistics like "99% of everything is shit" only have bearing because the average listener is only going to skim off the top of that bulk rather than actually delving into the truly relevant material. Which isn't to condemn those bands entirely, imitation isn't always a bad thing, all I'm saying is that this kind of casual dismissal of an entire genre based on it's more known/plentiful proponents is kind of silly. Anyway, that's probably not what you were going for (if anything), just that's usually the impression I get when someone pipes up with these 'statistics'.

I know this isn't really the place, but I'm gonna nerd out briefly cause I feel like it. :dork:

A great example of what I'm talking about, and one who've been posted here before, are Cynic, who are to death metal what the Pixies were to alt rock. They released a single, 35 minute LP back in 93 called Focus amid a series of horrible circumstances, including having all their gear confiscated during a tour, their rehearsal space being destroyed by a hurricane, and a series of lineup changes. The album created some ripples in the scene, but never really took off before they split in 94. They didn't reunite until 2007, doing only 15 shows in Europe, but they had such a turnout from long-time fans that it inspired them to go back to the studio and record a follow up. That album, Traced in Air, came a full 15 years after their debut, and released to huge critical acclaim. This was another short one, clocking in just under Focus' 35 minute running time, meaning that if you were to combine the albums you'd probably have the average length of a progressive metal album. :p

And yet, despite having just over an hour's worth of material (not including demos) between their 20-odd years as a band - more of which was spent apart than together - they've had a notable influence on several areas of metal, greater perhaps than several more prolific and well-known band's entire discographies. Oh, and to bring it back to the topic at hand (sort of), Cynic are often cited as being one of the first death metal bands to incorporate jazz and fusion elements into their music, leading to the more experimental and technical approach of today.

Jazz, in my metal? It's more likely than you think. :eek:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEo8IrU5MQk
 
have you heard the cynic re-traced thing? i quite liked traced in air but i don't know how bothered i am right now about reacquainting myself with them - i overspun that record

i also have no love whatsoever for their debut, despite acclaim
 
I prefer Traced in Air to Focus, but I still like it quite a bit. It's much more death metal with twinges of softer, jazzier, more progressive stuff, whereas Traced is kind of the opposite. In fact, take the growls out of Traced and you could barely call it a death metal album. :p

Haven't heard re-traced, wasn't even aware it was out yet. *tracks it down...*
 
Focus beats Traced in Air by miles. What erked me though is the vocalist, I'd rather he sing with his pure voice than through a vocoder.

And talk about going off topic...damn.
 
i don't know why people have such a problem with the vocoder - if anything, it's that, obviously accompanied by the instrumentation that make cynic who they are - that really makes the singer, as a death metal vocalist at heart, stand out. it's a radical change from what is considered a stock, boring style that really shines if you ask me.

i find focus to be their foundation footing, and traced in air to be the resolved end piece, but that's just me.
 
He isn't using a vocoder on Traced (at least not in the same way as he did on Focus), he's just electronically raising his voice by a couple of octaves to make it sound vaguely robotic. Also, he has a few parts where he uses his natural voice.

If you want to hear an album with his voice completely intact, you could check out his other band Aeon Spoke, but it's pretty timid pop/rock stuff...
 
Back
Top