I think what's happened over the years is that if you say Black Sabbath's 1970 debut LP was "the first heavy metal album," you get fewer arguments on internet forums, so people have just settled into doing that.
So... then people started getting into arguing over "what was the first heavy metal song ever released," which is a lot less contentious because there's less at stake culturally (especially between the US and the UK). Personally I'd go with "Purple Haze," but there are legitimate arguments for "In-a-Gadda-da-Vida," Blue Cheer's "Summertime Blues," and Steppenwolf's "Born to be Wild" too.
Some of those arguments don't make sense to everyone — for example, there are people who will tell you that "real" (i.e., legitimate) heavy metal guitar distortion has to be either an overdriven tube amp or an overdrive effect pedal, and such pedals didn't exist until 1972 or so — Hendrix used a Fuzz Face, which was a different type of circuit, and the others either used similar fuzz pedals or "Rat" type distortion pedals, which back then sounded closer to the opening riff from "Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones. Another example is what I call the "doom argument," whereby you can't call something "heavy metal" unless the overarching mood/atmosphere of the band, or at least the album, is doom-laden, apocalyptic, scary, quasi-Satanic, and/or evil-sounding. When that argument is accepted, the Sabs' proponents pretty much always win.
I saw a thread somewhere (not on this site) that despite their not being so doomy-gloomy, the Yardbirds would have gone down as the inventors of "heavy metal" as early as 1965 if the people producing and mixing their early records had let them record the guitars the way they (or at least Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page) wanted. But oh well, a classic case of "could'a would'a should'a," I guess! :|
Some interesting thoughts there and I've heard the same argument / proposition about The Yardbirds. I am going to put forward Truth by Jeff Beck as a great heavy rock album. We should also discuss Blue Cheer and Summertime Blues at some point. Born To Be Wild? Interesting pick.
It's an interesting point about what defines Heavy Metal, which is sort of why I thought lumping Heavy Rock and Metal together was a good option as I think that there is a lot of blurring of the lines. The Doom argument is also very relevant. Can a Metal album exist without that specific criteria? I guess we might find out here as the thread develops
Thanks for engaging with the thread. I think that it could be a good one
Interesting. I'd never heard this before and thanks for sharing Rom.
Doesn't really tick my personal boxes for Heavy Rock (but of course that's just me and other will undoubtedly disagree) but you can hear some elements that subsequent bands might have picked up and developed.
Nice track though non the less and great to hear it
... came first and is just as..., well, ... Heavy! And it's a GREAT album! 😈
Heavy was released on January 22nd of 1968.
Oooh, yes, of course it did. What a great heavy rock album that was. Two great albums in 1968 by Iron Butterfly. You've prompted me to pull Heavy out for a listen. Nice one
Vincebus Eruptum was released on January 16th of 1968 thereby beating Heavy by one week. It's also a great album! Now I'm going to have to have a battle - Heavy vs. Vincebus Eruptum - to decide which one's better! 8)
What's one week between friends? We need to talk about both albums at some point. Pulling Heavy out for a listen
Your comment about Heavy v Vincebus Erutptum means that I might need to listen to them back to back. It's a hard life!
I think what's happened over the years is that if you say Black Sabbath's 1970 debut LP was "the first heavy metal album," you get fewer arguments on internet forums, so people have just settled into doing that.
So... then people started getting into arguing over "what was the first heavy metal song ever released," which is a lot less contentious because there's less at stake culturally (especially between the US and the UK). Personally I'd go with "Purple Haze," but there are legitimate arguments for "In-a-Gadda-da-Vida," Blue Cheer's "Summertime Blues," and Steppenwolf's "Born to be Wild" too.
Some of those arguments don't make sense to everyone — for example, there are people who will tell you that "real" (i.e., legitimate) heavy metal guitar distortion has to be either an overdriven tube amp or an overdrive effect pedal, and such pedals didn't exist until 1972 or so — Hendrix used a Fuzz Face, which was a different type of circuit, and the others either used similar fuzz pedals or "Rat" type distortion pedals, which back then sounded closer to the opening riff from "Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones. Another example is what I call the "doom argument," whereby you can't call something "heavy metal" unless the overarching mood/atmosphere of the band, or at least the album, is doom-laden, apocalyptic, scary, quasi-Satanic, and/or evil-sounding. When that argument is accepted, the Sabs' proponents pretty much always win.
I saw a thread somewhere (not on this site) that despite their not being so doomy-gloomy, the Yardbirds would have gone down as the inventors of "heavy metal" as early as 1965 if the people producing and mixing their early records had let them record the guitars the way they (or at least Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page) wanted. But oh well, a classic case of "could'a would'a should'a," I guess! :|
Interesting parameters. I sorta go with the "I know it when I hear it" school and to me, the most logical starting point for HEAVY ROCK is, and quite easily I might add, Cream & Jimi Hendrix. Those two are my ground zero with The Yardbirds, Manfred Mann and as Roman pointed out heavy Garage Rock like The Monks & The Sonics & The Remains being a decent launching pad. But, yeah, it would be unseemly not to start with...
You've highlighted one of my dilemmas when I started this thread. Hendrix immediately came to my mind but I don't really considered him Heavy Rock otherwise I might have gone with Are You Experienced as the start of it all. Jimi is an interesting one as I've always though of him as being Psychedelic Blues but it's still a totally valid pick.
Cream? Love 'em. I'd go with the heavy blues (where's the line between blues and rock though?) label for them but others will say, that's a great shout.
maybe it did all start in 1966 with Fresh Cream. Another album I'm going to be pulling out over the next few days.
I can see this thread dictating my listening for a few days to come. Love It and all of the varied and interesting engagement. Exactly what i had hoped for when I set it up
You've highlighted one of my dilemmas when I started this thread. Hendrix immediately came to my mind but I don't really considered him Heavy Rock otherwise I might have gone with Are You Experienced as the start of it all. Jimi is an interesting one as I've always though of him as being Psychedelic Blues but it's still a totally valid pick.
Cream? Love 'em. I'd go with the Heavy Blues (where's the line between blues and rock though?) label for them but others will say, that's a great shout.
maybe it did all start in 1966 with Fresh Cream. Another album I'm going to be pulling out over the next few days.
I can see this thread dictating my listening for a few days to come. Love It and all of the varied and interesting engagement. Exactly what i had hoped for when I set it up
Keep it coming
I think the pivotal transition can be heard by comparing & contrasting ...
So THIS - Blues Breakers vs. Fresh Cream - will be my first battle. I'll listen to both over the next day or so and try come up with 3 elements that I feel marked the creation of a new sound/genre.
I would distinguish between two types of the post-psychedelic blues-rock sound of "heavy rock", the proto-hard rock kind (Amboy Dukes, Steppenwolf, Gun, Good Ratts, Heavy Balloon, Blues Creation, Groundhogs, Third Power, and Frijid Pink - I know some of these are after Zep) and the proto-metal kind (Vanilla Fudge, Iron Butterfly, Bitter Creek, Blue Cheer, Les Goths, Captain Foam, Morgen, 31 Flavors, Majic Shipp, Mint Tattoo, Wicked Lady, and Randy Holden), in accordance with the idea that hard rock means Zep and metal means Sabbath. Of course these are overlapping categories, so it's a matter of which way each artist seems to lean. I would pay special attention to (Blue Cheer member) Randy Holden's Population II (so intense!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEE_ncKoCzo). You could even put Cream's October 1967 Detroit show in one of these categories, a more aggressive and less experimental version of what they were doing beforehand, recorded at the Grande Ballroom amidst local riots, so pretty much the same milieu that the MC5 were based on (but a whole year before "Kick Out The Jams") and contemporary with Blue Cheer's "Vincebus Eruptum": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vr_Hb8uI4Mo.
is often credited with being the first heavy rock album. It’s certainly a booming blues album. Heavy Metal? Maybe! I always want to think that the self-titled Black Sabbath album takes that honour, but this is certainly HEAVY!
Having said that, this album is quite different to
Blue Cheer were very heavy blues-rock turned up to 11 whilst Black Sabbath produced something darker and heavier and importantly for me slower, with down tempo guitars. Both great albums but I still prefer the Sabb.
Anyway, VE edges towards and is almost metal but not quite for me. It’s primitive and furious and a great visceral listen. It really doesn’t sound like it’s nearly 60 years old.
I would distinguish between two types of the post-psychedelic blues-rock sound of "heavy rock", the proto-hard rock kind (Amboy Dukes, Steppenwolf, Gun, Good Ratts, Heavy Balloon, Blues Creation, Groundhogs, Third Power, and Frijid Pink - I know some of these are after Zep) and the proto-metal kind (Vanilla Fudge, Iron Butterfly, Bitter Creek, Blue Cheer, Les Goths, Captain Foam, Morgen, 31 Flavors, Majic Shipp, Mint Tattoo, Wicked Lady, and Randy Holden), in accordance with the idea that hard rock means Zep and metal means Sabbath. Of course these are overlapping categories, so it's a matter of which way each artist seems to lean. I would pay special attention to (Blue Cheer member) Randy Holden's Population II (so intense!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEE_ncKoCzo). You could even put Cream's October 1967 Detroit show in one of these categories, a more aggressive and less experimental version of what they were doing beforehand, recorded at the Grande Ballroom amidst local riots, so pretty much the same milieu that the MC5 were based on (but a whole year before "Kick Out The Jams") and contemporary with Blue Cheer's "Vincebus Eruptum": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vr_Hb8uI4Mo.
Great take on the subject DBV and you've listed some great examples there. I have the Groundhogs down as a band that we need to discuss. I adore the band and was luck enough to see them play a couple of times. You've also mentioned a few bands that i have no idea about so going to investigate these more.
I'm revisiting Fresh Cream and MC5 are definitely in the frame as one of tje great, early heavy rock bands.
Led Zep and The Sabb are pretty much shortcuts to describe a certain sound but you're right, there is so much more out there to discuss
um. we got a live update, folks. I just realized how influential Cream were on the the MC5!!! There's no question after listening to Free Cream over the last week that CREAM was the genesis of perhaps all things H-E-A-V-Y!!!!
SABBATH-ZEPPELIN-THE MC5
EDIT: I f anyone would like to refute this axiom, I have examples & samples. 😈
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Repo
