Best Hard Rock & Metal Albums - Music Diaries

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

Tha1ChiefRocka wrote:

uh, to get your diary back on track, I'm starting my metal chart, which I will be adding to over the next couple of weeks, so keep track!

Bestever Metal Albums by Tha1ChiefRocka

Also, you asked about some Avant Garde- type Metal, I think; here's something that fits that

Melana Chasmata by Triptykon

Never heard of it, thank you! Ill keep an eye on your list!

We were talking about The Beatles! How could anything go wrong!? Flogging a dead horse

_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

Part of me kept the conversation going because there's this claim that no one can really explain why the Beatles are better than Limp Bizkit (you didn't say that exactly, but just going off the same aesthetic of Scaruffi) and something tells me that even if I did instead of agreeing with any point I made, no matter the facts behind them, the retort would go back to The Beatles didn't scream hard enough or didn't bang their drums hard enough. If Dave Grohl can give homage to Ringo about his drumming as one of the best drummers in rock, I really don't see how your downplay of his playing can have any weight. It just seems that every fact I bring up gets quickly dismissed - if I were to challenge your claim in the areas you mentioned, would you attempt to re-evaluate? If you were to ask the same of me in regards to Oasis, I'd easily turn you down, so no worries. I suppose from my side it's driving me batty - it's like a shtick of who is on first or arguing over something that looks black to you but blue to me. I'm saying this in all earnestness and part of the reason I'm on these forums is I find these discussions intriguing - and even more intriguing when there's open forum and honest contemplation/discovery. I suppose I enjoy trying to understand where someone is coming from and I truly still don't either one of us has been able to come to an agreement on it (not as in we win each other over, but just understand the point of view). But hey, wars have been started over something as silly as these kinds of misunderstandings - I have some kind of faith/hope to logically overcome such things, but that's just me.

I'll stop responding if you will... Laughing

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

sethmadsen wrote:

Part of me kept the conversation going because there's this claim that no one can really explain why the Beatles are better than Limp Bizkit (you didn't say that exactly, but just going off the same aesthetic of Scaruffi) and something tells me that even if I did instead of agreeing with any point I made, no matter the facts behind them, the retort would go back to The Beatles didn't scream hard enough or didn't bang their drums hard enough. If Dave Grohl can give homage to Ringo about his drumming as one of the best drummers in rock, I really don't see how your downplay of his playing can have any weight. It just seems that every fact I bring up gets quickly dismissed - if I were to challenge your claim in the areas you mentioned, would you attempt to re-evaluate? If you were to ask the same of me in regards to Oasis, I'd easily turn you down, so no worries. I suppose from my side it's driving me batty - it's like a shtick of who is on first or arguing over something that looks black to you but blue to me. I'm saying this in all earnestness and part of the reason I'm on these forums is I find these discussions intriguing - and even more intriguing when there's open forum and honest contemplation/discovery. I suppose I enjoy trying to understand where someone is coming from and I truly still don't either one of us has been able to come to an agreement on it (not as in we win each other over, but just understand the point of view). But hey, wars have been started over something as silly as these kinds of misunderstandings - I have some kind of faith/hope to logically overcome such things, but that's just me.

I'll stop responding if you will... Laughing

Im fine with talking about it more if its going somewhere. Historically, this is often where the discussion ends (when explanation is asked for) or starts backtracking with modifications... So if you have some legit answers I'd love to hear them...

There are tons of artists/albums I rate highly that "didnt bang their drums ultra hard" or "play their guitars loud" or "scream in agony" (see my criteria re: 'not "which" emotion') ... which my selections fully back up ... obvious and demonstrable if you've listened to enough of them to know. Its about what is called for in that emotion/expression and so forth. My lists contain everything between the most subtle and nuanced and shy masterpieces to the most spectacular and outrageous and extroverted. I know you may not be directly saying these things (and were probably being tongue in cheek) but I want to curtail this if you are serious or semi serious. Over the years, such general type suppositions about the contents of my lists have been fairly common from people only familiar with a small sample size of the selections and/or that "seem to hang all their ideas about the selections on the few they are familiar with" or "on 1 or 2 they strongly disagree with".

I think the misconception of yours (and perhaps some others not familiar with me) is that I am biased or have not already evaluated the Beatles -- thoroughly. It is likely I have spent more time of invested listening with them than a majority of hardcore Beatles fans. I have listened to their albums hundreds of times and they were my favorite Pop/Rock band "EVAR" for a couple years back around 2000-2001 or so. I am more than happy to suddenly find their albums to be masterpieces on the order of Mozart or something, so go right ahead and show me. I literally have Alanis fucking Morrisette Shocked

and Prince and Original Sin ranked very highly on my lists just in case you are mistaken that I am averse to great pop and the like ... *cough* In the Aeroplane Over the Sea 9/10 *cough*... I have bands blatantly influenced by The Beatles (but superior musicians and/or composers) such as Green and XTC ranked among my greatest of all time... You should get more familiar with all the incredible music on my list -- to the degree that you might not be already -- and you might just find my position quite a bit more justified than you think.

I dont know why you would get hung up on or choose Limp Bizkit in retort as they are very far from a substantial artist in my mind, and Im sure Scaruffi's ... they rate lower than The Beatles. Theyre nowhere to be found on any of my lists and hardly register on his. If you want to know why he gives one of their albums a 7, ask him or read his review -- its not one I agree with (yet??? who knows...) so it beats the hell out of me. I think Significant Other sucks. I couldnt even finish it the last time I attempted, but am always open to changing my mind.

I dont care about notes like "Ringo influenced Dave Grohl to play drums". I am interested in the content, the expression, the depth of expression, the elements inherent to this: creativity, emotional expression, conceptual expression... We are talking about music. So if you can answer those questions with regards to their musical expression(s), by all means...
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

Last edited by AfterHours on 11/18/2018 02:12; edited 6 times in total

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

If you think I am downplaying Ringo's drumming then go ahead and explain why he is a significant drummer. What does his drumming express aside from mainly just "slightly idiosynchratic way of keeping the beat because that is the structure of the song"? Does he add any additional conveyance to their work or just do a competent job of holding the song together? What does he do expressively that stands out in an era where the likes of the following existed: Bonham, Keith Moon, or (for more laid back or cheerful approaches), Max Roach (of, say, Brilliant Corners) or (a little later) Mick Fleetwood (for instance, Rumours) ... or (for supreme examples of filling in a song and complementing the rhythm section but expressively) Charlie Watts or Roach again (Freedom Now Suite) ... or Elvin Jones (such as A Love Supreme) etc?
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

A few new thoughts:

I just realized I've never heard a Type O Negative album, although I was certainly familiar with them shortly after I first started getting into heavy music ('98-99). I've downloaded the one on your list for immediate listening (I'm currently not staying where there's wifi but I am using a hotspot for Spotify), and am also curious about the two that are listed ahead of it on BEA in both ranking and rating. This is their first album though, a lot of bands earliest work is best but less loved for some reason.

Speaking of which, the three Sepultura albums prior to Roots are also grade A. Definitely a top 5 metal band for me.

*Megadeth... Rust in Peace rocks though, and according to friends "Holy Wars" is one of my top 3 best-performed karaoke songs. The other two, you ask? "I Want You, I Need You, I Love You" by Elvis and "Love of My Life" by Queen.... And I'm kind of embarrassed for putting that part of my personal life out there.

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

badseed wrote:

A few new thoughts:

I just realized I've never heard a Type O Negative album, although I was certainly familiar with them shortly after I first started getting into heavy music ('98-99). I've downloaded the one on your list for immediate listening (I'm currently not staying where there's wifi but I am using a hotspot for Spotify), and am also curious about the two that are listed ahead of it on BEA in both ranking and rating. This is their first album though, a lot of bands earliest work is best but less loved for some reason.

Speaking of which, the three Sepultura albums prior to Roots are also grade A. Definitely a top 5 metal band for me.

*Megadeth... Rust in Peace rocks though, and according to friends "Holy Wars" is one of my top 3 best-performed karaoke songs. The other two, you ask? "I Want You, I Need You, I Love You" by Elvis and "Love of My Life" by Queen.... And I'm kind of embarrassed for putting that part of my personal life out there.

Right on! Its an extremely offensive, disturbing and relentlessly ambiguous album (between jet black comedy and shockingly offensive, violent hyperrealism with little warning or cues). There are also a lot of layers to it, replete with offensive and outrageous parallels throughout between the protagonist's vindiction/revenge and Nazism, torturous death camps/the Holocaust, the lead singer literally becoming a crazed "Hitleresque" figure hurling his violent angry diatribes at the abused, including absurd sloganeering and "call and response" with his "crowds" (definitely not for the PC crowd whatsoever -- or anyone that would have difficulty or take offense in separating its Art/fiction from reality). It is among the last albums I recommend to anyone, but as angry, expressionist, horrific, gothic, industrial, terrifying Metal, it's a masterpiece.

Whether one likes him or his writing style or not, Scaruffi's review (for pointing out the essential emotional, conceptual and creative elements) is very useful to get a really good grasp on it.
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

Last edited by AfterHours on 11/18/2018 03:05; edited 2 times in total

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

badseed wrote:

Speaking of which, the three Sepultura albums prior to Roots are also grade A. Definitely a top 5 metal band for me.

*Megadeth... Rust in Peace rocks though, and according to friends "Holy Wars" is one of my top 3 best-performed karaoke songs. The other two, you ask? "I Want You, I Need You, I Love You" by Elvis and "Love of My Life" by Queen.... And I'm kind of embarrassed for putting that part of my personal life out there.

Re: Sepultura ... Between you and Facetious, I gotta check their others out.

Re: Megadeth/karaoke ... recording coming soon, all on the same EP/album? Very Happy

_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

AfterHours wrote:

If you think I am downplaying Ringo's drumming then go ahead and explain why he is a significant drummer. What does his drumming express aside from mainly just "slightly idiosynchratic way of keeping the beat because that is the structure of the song"? Does he add any additional conveyance to their work or just do a competent job of holding the song together? What does he do expressively that stands out in an era where the likes of the following existed: Bonham, Keith Moon, or (for more laid back or cheerful approaches), Max Roach (of, say, Brilliant Corners) or (a little later) Mick Fleetwood (for instance, Rumours) ... or (for supreme examples of filling in a song and complementing the rhythm section but expressively) Charlie Watts or Roach again (Freedom Now Suite) ... or Elvin Jones (such as A Love Supreme) etc?

I'll just let this "tribute" speak for itself. If you think this means nothing, then, please continue dismissing any and every evidence I give of anything special about them... if you can objectively look at this and give any real feedback, then I'd be happy to address your criteria you gave earlier in comparison to VU, another group I think is at times on par with The Beatles, and (also maybe we change this to a PM or something?)

Now, yes there is that John Lennon joke that Ringo isn't even the best drummer in the band, but if you know anything about them, this is exactly the kind of humor in the band and is a nod to Paul being quite the multi-instrumentalist (also doing drums for The Beatles). Is he the most technical drummer ever, no. Does he have a feel and "playing to the song" - writing melodies with the drums, that some of the best drummers envy, absolutely. To me technical drummers are a dime a dozen - playing with feeling as Ringo did (dismiss all you want, there's only these drummers who disagree, and countless more):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJTjjAXDZSY

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

sethmadsen wrote:

I'll just let this "tribute" speak for itself. If you think this means nothing, then, please continue dismissing any and every evidence I give of anything special about them... if you can objectively look at this and give any real feedback, then I'd be happy to address your criteria you gave earlier in comparison to VU, another group I think is at times on par with The Beatles, and (also maybe we change this to a PM or something?)

Now, yes there is that John Lennon joke that Ringo isn't even the best drummer in the band, but if you know anything about them, this is exactly the kind of humor in the band and is a nod to Paul being quite the multi-instrumentalist (also doing drums for The Beatles). Is he the most technical drummer ever, no. Does he have a feel and "playing to the song" - writing melodies with the drums, that some of the best drummers envy, absolutely. To me technical drummers are a dime a dozen - playing with feeling as Ringo did (dismiss all you want, there's only these drummers who disagree, and countless more):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJTjjAXDZSY

Sorry you take offense to this. But I'm not going to pretend like he is remarkable.

I said I dont see how it's significant in an era when... etc. I did not say his work "means nothing". His style was interesting, slightly idiosynchratic and aligned well to the Beatles work. But similar expressive tendencies had already been culminated by albums such as Brilliant Corners (and other, particularly 50s, Jazz) in much more creative, charismaric, vibrant, "melodic" turns by Roach (also his work with Rollins and his own albums). And there have been countless more creative and interesting drummers in melodic Rock or Pop ever since Ringo's time. Seriously, Max Roach brought this sort of thing to a whole new and remarkably communicative level. I am not saying Starr is a useless or pointless drummer -- he is competent and aligns well to their songs. I am saying he pales in comparison to giants of the art. I am quite sure if he had more range and less technical limitation he may have influenced them to push their rhythms and structures further. Any other conclusion is quite a stretch (imo) and clearly -- primarily -- a justification for the band he was in. I would assert (as much as it might irk you) that 99% of the reason Ringo is mentioned among the greats from time to time is because he was in the Beatles, not because his skills, technique, or other factors, were extraordinary.

Note: If you want to hear an astonishing example of culminating this sort of expression in the extended suites of Progressive Metal, I would recommend becoming familiar with Dream Theater's Images and Words (if not already).
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

AfterHours wrote:

sethmadsen wrote:

I'll just let this "tribute" speak for itself. If you think this means nothing, then, please continue dismissing any and every evidence I give of anything special about them... if you can objectively look at this and give any real feedback, then I'd be happy to address your criteria you gave earlier in comparison to VU, another group I think is at times on par with The Beatles, and (also maybe we change this to a PM or something?)

Now, yes there is that John Lennon joke that Ringo isn't even the best drummer in the band, but if you know anything about them, this is exactly the kind of humor in the band and is a nod to Paul being quite the multi-instrumentalist (also doing drums for The Beatles). Is he the most technical drummer ever, no. Does he have a feel and "playing to the song" - writing melodies with the drums, that some of the best drummers envy, absolutely. To me technical drummers are a dime a dozen - playing with feeling as Ringo did (dismiss all you want, there's only these drummers who disagree, and countless more):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJTjjAXDZSY

Sorry you take offense to this. But I'm not going to pretend like he is remarkable.

I said I dont see how it's significant in an era when... etc. I did not say his work "means nothing". His style was interesting, slightly idiosynchratic and aligned well to the Beatles work. But similar expressive tendencies had already been culminated by albums such as Brilliant Corners (and other, particularly 50s, Jazz) in much more creative, charismaric, vibrant, "melodic" turns by Roach (also his work with Rollins and his own albums). And there have been countless more creative and interesting drummers in melodic Rock or Pop ever since Ringo's time. Seriously, Max Roach brought this sort of thing to a whole new and remarkably communicative level. I am not saying Starr is a useless or pointless drummer -- he is competent and aligns well to their songs. I am saying he pales in comparison to giants of the art. I am quite sure if he had more range and less technical limitation he may have influenced them to push their rhythms and structures further. Any other conclusion is quite a stretch (imo) and clearly -- primarily -- a justification for the band he was in. I would assert (as much as it might irk you) that 99% of the reason Ringo is mentioned among the greats from time to time is because he was in the Beatles, not because his skills, technique, or other factors, were extraordinary.

Note: If you want to hear an astonishing example of culminating this sort of expression in the extended suites of Progressive Metal, I would recommend becoming familiar with Dream Theater's Images and Words (if not already).

I'm not offended by what you are saying. I am wondering if you even watched the youtube video and wondering what you thought of Dave Grohl's comment that he was the king of feel. Or any of the comments that were made. Or did you completely dismiss them as knowing nothing about drumming or music? It feels like you completely dismissed it and carried on about nothing mentioned in the youtube video. How can I provide any evidence if it isn't even evaluated?

And yes, we probably wouldn't know Ringo if he weren't in the Beatles, that's ok. We wouldn't have heard of Max Roach without his affiliations either (filling in for Ellington's drummer).

Now I love Max Roach's drumming and probably 90% of the suggestions you make. I suppose the one thing that's different is others are putting Ringo on the same page as other greats and you are denying it... do you have any real evidence supporting why all these claims are false from countless professional musicians, music critics, and music historians? It seems pretty clear that they disagree with you about his emotive, innovative (beyond the quirk that he played right handed kit, left handed), and melodic playing.