Heavy-music mixing - who to listen to?

[RJ Palmer]

Hey, all. Was hoping to get a little advice from some of you guys.

I've got myself to a stage where my demo reel has impressed a local studio owner enough that he's happy for me to work out of his shop as a freelancer. This morning I went into the studio to get a tutorial on the desk, the installation, the outboard and so on, and I'm doing a voice-over type job for him in a week or two (which is a nice first session to have - not too intense, not too much stuff to set up all at the same time!)

Anyway, with the possibilty in mind that I hope to be working with local bands in this place in future, I was hoping that some of you could give me a little advice regarding the heavy stuff.

I live in a town that's full of heavy-guitar rock bands, and most of what I've engineered is more on the singer-songwriter end of things. I stopped paying really close attention to modern rock records 6 or 7 years ago and feel out of the loop on matters of mix fashion in heavy music, really from 2000 onwards.

What I'm asking, I guess, is: who should I be listening to? What bands might I expected to have a familiarity with? Who are the engineers setting these trends?

Sorry about the length of this question! My thanks to anyone who made it through it all and feels like helping me out.:)

[meLoCo_go]

What I'm asking, I guess, is: who should I be listening to? What bands might I expected to have a familiarity with? Who are the engineers setting these trends?
I see a bunch of trends in heavy sound.

There is kinda "sleek" heavy. Modern Dillinger Escape Plan, Every Time I Die etc. Steve Evetts is the one to watch on this IMHO.
Also, David Bendeth does big sounding records too.

There's also more extreme "straightforward" heavy from bands like Converge. Kurt Ballou (he plays in Converge and mixes a lot too) is one to watch here IMHO.

Those are more on alternative/punk/hardcore side, but there are a lot of guys doing metal mostly (like Sneap) but I'm not listening modern metal bands much.

And of course guys like Wallace, Costey, CLA, O'Brien are still doing great records!
Personally I like Matt Bayles sound a lot.

[Saculus]

Here is good place to lurk for Metal production which is part of Andy Sneap's Forum, and others. It also has all your equipment trends for metal production as well. http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/production-tips-449/

[Keks]

It also has all your equipment trends for metal production as well.

Oh boy.
I see a huge shitstorm in your near future.

All the best,
the keks

[Saculus]

Oh boy.
I see a huge shitstorm in your near future.

Hopefully not. Anyway there is quite a bit of crossover from the two sites. Maybe I've missed something like not reading the heading fully because of browser size. Anyhoo Andy Sneap, James Murphy, and Joey Sturgis are also worth checking out for the harder stuff.

[JNZ-AE]

For me Kris Crummet made one of the best sounding heavy records with Lower Definition (The Greatest of all Lost Arts).

His stuff with Dance Gavin Dance all sounds pretty amazing too, not as organic as they Lower Deezy stuff, but pretty tight nonetheless.

[Slipperman]

The "Sound" of the genre is at the narrowest point it has ever been in the musics 40 years history, in my estimation.

I wouldn't recommend listening to ANYTHING at this juncture.

My work included. I'm as guilty as the next guy.

Weedy's right.

I think we DESPERATELY need to TOTALLY start the fuck OVER as to how the music is recorded, presented, and ultimately... perpetuated.

Then again... if you simply DON'T GIVE A DAMN about any of this bullshit... and ya just wanna just earn some loot in yer market, you've already been directed to lemming central.

SM.

PS. I'm not claiming NOBODY is doing dramatically different work... it's more about how FEW are going there and actually getting heard.

[tothegrave]

Slippy,

This narrow-ness you're talking bout, do you mean that everyone working the genre is churning out similar sounding releases?

EDIT: didnt see your PS at the bottom. It seems once a band hits a certain level, their choices become limited to a handful of guys, who's records kill but all sound very similar from one project to another.

[Slipperman]

Slippy,

This narrow-ness you're talking bout, do you mean that everyone working the genre is churning out similar sounding releases?

Ahh fuck Dude... I dunno. Maybe I'm finally getting too old for it.

We're all recording and mixing using TINY VARIATIONS on the same tools, the same approaches... and most importantly:

The same basic CRITERIA regarding what end product should "sound like" in all the various heavy music "sub-genres".

RULES. RULES. RULES.

It's fucking INSANELY depressing and totally OUT OF STEP with the BASIC HISTORICAL PRECEDENT/PREMISE OF THE ARTISTIC UNDERTAKING.

Which is TOTAL REBELLION.

SM.

[weedywet]

to me it's more about what Mixerman says about mixing.

if I'm producing a "genre" I've never even HEARD before, and everyone in the room starts dancing around and singing and air guitaring and going crazy, then I got it right.

if none of that happens but the two band leaders sitting like dead fish in their chairs barely raise their heads enough to say "yeah man, that sounds just like _____. Cool", then in my view we all are wasting our time and money.

[Damage, Inc.]

Good point, Slip. I hate to admit this, but I have recently bought half a dozen new releases from my favorite metal bands, and I'm not terribly impressed with any of them. None of them are breaking new ground; their performances, songwriting and production seem to be mashed up versions of their older material.

I have been into metal since the '80s, and I think you're right...metal isn't supposed to be about following the leader. How 'wrong' did those early Sabbath and Zeppelin albums sound in their day? (Whether or not Zep is metal is an argument for another thread...stick with me here.) It seems that we're in the decline of the latest metal revival. The same thing happened in the '80s, when the second-rate copies of Motley Crue and Guns 'N Roses were at the top of the charts. Someone needs to come along and revive metal's spirit, rather than using plug-in presets to recreate its sound (Black Veil Brides, Attack Attack, etc.).

[iCombs]

It seems that we're in the decline of the latest metal revival.

I think 5 Finger Death Punch and Disturbed are proof positive of that.

[RJ Palmer]

Hi everyone. A big thanks for your replies. You've given me some food for thought and some stuff to listen to (really liked Me_Loco's 'sleek but heavy' description - I can think of a few bands round here that might aspire to that kind of sound in their recordings).

On the more general point, I'd much rather that every band I came into contact with had a unique vision for what they want their work to sound like, but at the same time I don't want to seem like a no-nothing to them if they reference a player/ instrument sound/album/engineer and I have no idea who they're talking about!

And even a band that do genuinely have their own thing going on, I think it's fair enough if the drummer says he wants his snare to sound more like So and So's off such and such a record. Almost all musicians learn their stuff by emulating their heroes and it's just an outgrowth of that, I guess (round here it's not likely to be a commercial decision - folks who record and make music do it for the love of it, because none of us are making any money).

Interestingly, when I was in the studio yesterday there were a lot of CDs lying around that presumably had been used as references recently, and a lot of them were somewhat older records that I am familiar with: Superunknown, Dirt, a whole bunch of nineties stuff.

[RJ Palmer]

to me it's more about what Mixerman says about mixing.

if I'm producing a "genre" I've never even HEARD before, and everyone in the room starts dancing around and singing and air guitaring and going crazy, then I got it right.

if none of that happens but the two band leaders sitting like dead fish in their chairs barely raise their heads enough to say "yeah man, that sounds just like _____. Cool", then in my view we all are wasting our time and money.

It's a fair point, but can dead fish sit in chairs?;)

[eagan]

I'm not sure this is contributing to this, but, I think it is. Ponder or disregard as you like.

If anything comes up for discussion along these lines, well, I look at it in a way pretty much like the stuff already said by Slippy, Sir Weed, DI, etc.

Sometimes (I think there was something said here in a thread very recently) somebody will make a comment like "if working in Genre X, don't you want to get somebody producing/engineering with a history of cranking out successful Genre X stuff?"... or something like that. I seem to recall some comments from Mixermensch about that kind of thing that I think hit the nail on the head, at least the way I look at things.

That is, if it's a situation of choosing somebody to work with, the point, the focus, should be, never mind what "genre" or "style" somebody's past work falls into and whether or not it's similar to what the artist at hand is.... the thing to consider is how well that prospective engineer and/or producer has done in working with a particular artist on a project and coming up with a best possible representation of THEM, doing what they do, right here, right now, in this moment.

I'm chiming in with my two cents just as a listener's point of view (which I think is really the way to approach doing any of this stuff anyway, but what do I know?).

And from that perspective, what I want to hear is stuff made by people who just know what they're doing, are good at their craft (the people on both sides of the recording gear), and really just don't give a flying fuck about "what everybody else is doing".

THAT is what's most likely to generate something I'm interested in actually hearing, personally.


JLE

[otek]

We're all recording and mixing using TINY VARIATIONS on the same tools, the same approaches... and most importantly:

The same basic CRITERIA regarding what end product should "sound like" in all the various heavy music "sub-genres".

RULES. RULES. RULES.

It's fucking INSANELY depressing and totally OUT OF STEP with the BASIC HISTORICAL PRECEDENT/PREMISE OF THE ARTISTIC UNDERTAKING.

Which is TOTAL REBELLION.


Quoted for emphasis.

Guys... I'm not dissing Andy Sneap and his work, but we are talking about a situation where famous "genre" engineers have their own online watering holes, where the wildlife comes in droves to drink freely of the techniques and methodologies used on the latest "genre" records.

Gee, can anyone say "cookie-cutter"?

On top of this, we have a bunch of artists who are cowards and would not dare to even go SLIGHTLY outside the established "genre norms".

Like Slippy says, rules. All these fucking RULES.

Does anyone have the balls anymore to be a little adventurous? Yes there are a few bands who do but they are unfortunately in the minority.


otek

[Tim Halligan]

Does anyone have the balls anymore to be a little adventurous? Yes there are a few bands who do but they are unfortunately in the minority.


I think that the bands fall into 2 camps:

1. Those who want to make money; and

2. Those who want to make music.


This is not a "metal-only" phenomenon either...sadly.


Cheers,
Tim

[weedywet]

this presumes the audience wants cookie cutter, as opposed to just not having much alternative

[John Eppstein]

IMHO ever thing since Sabbath's "Heaven And Hell" and Motorhead's "Bomber" has been downhill. Some worse than others.

Most current metal is done by guys who wouldn't recognize real HEAVY if it jumped up and bit 'em on the ass.

But what the fuck do I know?

[John Eppstein]

Hi everyone. A big thanks for your replies. You've given me some food for thought and some stuff to listen to (really liked Me_Loco's 'sleek but heavy' description - I can think of a few bands round here that might aspire to that kind of sound in their recordings).

On the more general point, I'd much rather that every band I came into contact with had a unique vision for what they want their work to sound like, but at the same time I don't want to seem like a no-nothing to them if they reference a player/ instrument sound/album/engineer and I have no idea who they're talking about!

And even a band that do genuinely have their own thing going on, I think it's fair enough if the drummer says he wants his snare to sound more like So and So's off such and such a record. Almost all musicians learn their stuff by emulating their heroes and it's just an outgrowth of that, I guess (round here it's not likely to be a commercial decision - folks who record and make music do it for the love of it, because none of us are making any money).

Interestingly, when I was in the studio yesterday there were a lot of CDs lying around that presumably had been used as references recently, and a lot of them were somewhat older records that I am familiar with: Superunknown, Dirt, a whole bunch of nineties stuff.

Buncha bullshit.

Recording great music is all about making a band sound like themselves, not a third rate copy of "So-and-so". That way lies mediocrity.

Right now what I'm doing is about as far as metal as you can get, but what I have to say applies equally to all genres - If I'm gonna suck, at least I'm gonna suck like ME!

There's nothing lamer than sucking like a copy of somebody you ain't, even if you really wish you were them.

When an artist understands this it's the beginning.

[John Eppstein]

Ahh fuck Dude... I dunno. Maybe I'm finally getting too old for it.

We're all recording and mixing using TINY VARIATIONS on the same tools, the same approaches... and most importantly:

The same basic CRITERIA regarding what end product should "sound like" in all the various heavy music "sub-genres".

RULES. RULES. RULES.

It's fucking INSANELY depressing and totally OUT OF STEP with the BASIC HISTORICAL PRECEDENT/PREMISE OF THE ARTISTIC UNDERTAKING.

Which is TOTAL REBELLION.

SM.

Fossilized bullshit. And fossilized around the wrong models to boot.

[RJ Palmer]

Quoted for emphasis.

Guys... I'm not dissing Andy Sneap and his work, but we are talking about a situation where famous "genre" engineers have their own online watering holes, where the wildlife comes in droves to drink freely of the techniques and methodologies used on the latest "genre" records.

Gee, can anyone say "cookie-cutter"?

On top of this, we have a bunch of artists who are cowards and would not dare to even go SLIGHTLY outside the established "genre norms".

Like Slippy says, rules. All these fucking RULES.

Does anyone have the balls anymore to be a little adventurous? Yes there are a few bands who do but they are unfortunately in the minority.


otek

It certainly seems true that even fifteen years ago you were likely to hear a far greater variety of engineering and mix approaches on records. In pretty much all styles and forms of music, I think.

For those of you who were working at the time, were the expectations of the artists different then? Were they more open minded about what the end result sounded like, as long as it sounded good and the label deemed it acceptable?

[John Eppstein]

There is NOTHING heavier than Ronnie Dio era Sabbath.

Nothing.

There is nothing harder than early Motorhead.

Clicky kick drums are not heavy,l and it has always confounded my why anyone would think they are.

Ditto for super high gain amps with lots of buzz and no meat.

Loud, yes.

Heavy, no.

Never been able to figure out why people don't get that.

I doesn't matter if you tune down to C# - won't make you heavier than you play and won't help if your tone has no weight.

But, like I said, what the fuck do I know?

[otek]

For those of you who were working at the time, were the expectations of the artists different then?

I think the problem is, and Slippy alluded to this, that metal is a musical form curiously beset but some strange need to categorize different stylistic varieties.

Especially since the early 90s, the genre has branched off into a bewildering and ever-expanding lattice of sub-genres, each new generation of which is more delicately set apart from the previous one.

Metal also seems a lot more prone to comparison between artists. Almost every time you see a review of a metal album, the reviewer at some point invariably talks about the album sounding "like a cross between_____ and_____, mixed with some latter-day_____".

I presume it's the same mechanism that governs how people relate to the music on a playing and listening level. This makes for a creative standoff where all deviations from the set genre norms are abluted with near ritual efficiency.


otek

[Babaluma]

i've never been really into heavy music as a genre (although i love led zep), but one band/artist/producer who is often classified as "heavy" and has been amazing me since i was a high school kid is justin k. broadrick and his "godflesh" and "jesu" projetcs. consistently great sound!

[archtop]

Maybe because it's fairly fresh in my memory, but one of the better sounding metal
mixes I've heard lately was here in the sounding forum a month or so ago.

http://thewombforums.com/showthread.php?t=15268

[AxeSlash]

Ah, this old chestnut!



Well then...IMHO (ignore at will), heavy production these days isn't as pigeon holed as you'd think.

Until you get to the flavour-of-the-month subgenres anyway, wherein I will agree that yes, there are a lot of bands that sound identical. I did FOH for three of them last night, they may as well have been the same goddamn band.

But even the like of Sneap step outside their collective boxes more these days than they used to. I can think of a few records by some of the usual big metal engineers recently that are quite honestly lacking some of their hallmark sounds. The whole thing IS moving forwards, but two things stand in it's way:

1. This pressure from various quarters for all the FOTM types to sound the same
2. The fact that most of the more interesting sounding records are buried on the smaller labels because they just don't sell as many records.



There are, however, three very identifiable mix trends in the heavy arena:

1. The over-polished not-natural sound...this is the shit you here where all the drums are triggered and snapped exactly to grid so it sounds like the damn things were programmed, the guitars are typical Dual Rectifier tuned to a drop tuning, vocals with little to no body and bass buried WAY underneath everything else. This happens a lot, and although it works for some bands (the more industrial genres spring to mind), most suffer miserably from it.
2. The way more natural, but considerably less 'heavy' sound - the likes of Opeth have proven this as a viable technique in metal.
3. Various shades of grey of compromise between the two. Unfortunately there are too few of these.



The biggest problem, however, with this whole goddamn fiasco is the inability of any two given people to agree on what 'heavy' means. One man's heavy is another man's weak, and vice-versa. Depends where you come from.

But, what has evolved from that are that there are certain mix trends that have become accepted as making the best of a difficult type of music to mix, coupled with making usually dreadful musicianship listenable.

These include:

1. High gain guitars. This is WAY understood. There's like a threshold, above which you just end up in mud. The whole point is that when the guy hits a palm muted power chord, it should go CHUNNNN, not CHZZZZ or BVVV. However, most metal guitarists are so used to playing with gain on 11 (because obviously more is better...duh...:Roll eyes:) that they just can't cut it with a sensible amount of gain.
2. Triggered/sample replaced drums. Most metal drummers, bar the ones that have been round the block enough times to really know their shit, just cannot keep a steady volume level when doing the insanely fast stuff. Thus, the only way to make that ridiculous speed double bass drumming heard without suffering from obvious spill is to trigger it.
3. Clicky drums. Misused to make #2 heard above #1, but also to give the drums some definition during the fast stuff. This has been going on for MANY MANY MANY years, it's not a new thing.
4. Vocals compressed to shit - again, to be heard over those guitars.


I'm not advocating these things as a good practice, but hopefull explaining WHY these things have come about.

And I do beg to differ on a number of the things said here, but again that's probably down to disagreement on what the word 'heavy' means.

I don't want to offend anyone or jump to conclusions, but I do wonder if it's an age thing. What the older guys grew up with defined a basis of 'heavy' for them. Younger guys grew up with an entirely different perspective on it. Thus, you tend to get older guys saying that current metal production is a complete shambles and isn't heavy, then you get the younger guys who love it.

I think I sit somewhere in the middle, I believe that the quality of the average thrash band these days is ten times better than the stuff we had in the early 80s, but at the same time it's been taken too far and has become a charicateur (sp?) of itself.

IMHO, take the best of both worlds and meld them into a thing of heavy beauty.

I had more to say but I'm running outta time. Will post more later.

[RJ Palmer]

Ah, this old chestnut!

...

I had more to say but I'm running outta time. Will post more later.

Hey AxeSlash,

Just a quick thanks for your reply. I'd kind of cottoned on to some of the general trends from what listening I have done in and around modern heavy rock records, but getting into some specifics is really helpful, so thanks for that.

Take it easy buddy. Looking forward to hearing more from you on this.

[John Eppstein]

Ah, this old chestnut!



Well then...IMHO (ignore at will), heavy production these days isn't as pigeon holed as you'd think.

Until you get to the flavour-of-the-month subgenres anyway, wherein I will agree that yes, there are a lot of bands that sound identical. I did FOH for three of them last night, they may as well have been the same goddamn band.

But even the like of Sneap step outside their collective boxes more these days than they used to. I can think of a few records by some of the usual big metal engineers recently that are quite honestly lacking some of their hallmark sounds. The whole thing IS moving forwards, but two things stand in it's way:

1. This pressure from various quarters for all the FOTM types to sound the same
2. The fact that most of the more interesting sounding records are buried on the smaller labels because they just don't sell as many records.



There are, however, three very identifiable mix trends in the heavy arena:

1. The over-polished not-natural sound...this is the shit you here where all the drums are triggered and snapped exactly to grid so it sounds like the damn things were programmed, the guitars are typical Dual Rectifier tuned to a drop tuning, vocals with little to no body and bass buried WAY underneath everything else.

A major problem IMO. You need the bass to add weight. How can it be heavy with no weight? And how can it be heavy if the vocals have no power?

This happens a lot, and although it works for some bands (the more industrial genres spring to mind), most suffer miserably from it.
2. The way more natural, but considerably less 'heavy' sound - the likes of Opeth have proven this as a viable technique in metal.
3. Various shades of grey of compromise between the two. Unfortunately there are too few of these.



The biggest problem, however, with this whole goddamn fiasco is the inability of any two given people to agree on what 'heavy' means. One man's heavy is another man's weak, and vice-versa. Depends where you come from.

But, what has evolved from that are that there are certain mix trends that have become accepted as making the best of a difficult type of music to mix, coupled with making usually dreadful musicianship listenable.

These include:

1. High gain guitars. This is WAY understood. There's like a threshold, above which you just end up in mud. The whole point is that when the guy hits a palm muted power chord, it should go CHUNNNN, not CHZZZZ or BVVV. However, most metal guitarists are so used to playing with gain on 11 (because obviously more is better...duh...:Roll eyes:) that they just can't cut it with a sensible amount of gain.
Most "metal" guitarists confuse playing fast with being heavy and compound the error with gain settings that make their guitar sound like a cross between a mosquito and a fly caught behind a window screen. They don't understand that to be HEAVY you need SLOW parts. The slow parts add weight. A lot of weight is PONDEROUS - it takes a lot of force to change direction, hence the slowness. Black Sabbath's "Iron Man" is a good example. Another thing they lose track of is that power chords on rhythm guitar impart massiveness to the sound. Hence while many of today's guitarists have a metallic quality to their sound - in the same sence that a ripped aluminum speaker cone sounds metallic - they completely miss the "heavy" part - aluminum is a LIGHT metal.

2. Triggered/sample replaced drums. Most metal drummers, bar the ones that have been round the block enough times to really know their shit, just cannot keep a steady volume level when doing the insanely fast stuff. Thus, the only way to make that ridiculous speed double bass drumming heard without suffering from obvious spill is to trigger it.
3. Clicky drums. Misused to make #2 heard above #1, but also to give the drums some definition during the fast stuff. This has been going on for MANY MANY MANY years, it's not a new thing.
I've never understood the clicky drums thing on metal recordings. Live it's understandable somewhat as a means of trying to get the drums heard over excessive back line volume when you have a less than competent sound man who is used to battling an inadequate PA, which is something that many of these bands have to deal with in their early stages. But why retain that? And why in god's name would you want to record that? Force of (bad) habit? Probably.

Clicky drums are the antithesis of heavy. Heavy drums, both kicks and toms, go FTOOM! like The Incredible Hulk stomping through the desert, they don't go <clack> like a mechanical typewriter. The sound of a typewriter isn't heavy. Typewriter keys don't have much weight behind them.

I can understand these things onstage because most bands, especially loud ones, don't have the foggiest idea of what they really sound like out front, but on record?

One thing that seems to escape a lot of metal drummers and genre-oriented engineers is that the resonance of the typical human thoracic cavity is around 80 Hz. That means that you need that frequency range to make the kick drums hit you in the chest. "<clack>" doesn't pack much punch.

Phil Taylor from Motorhead pretty much originated the double kick drum onslaught and was very effective yet his kick drums were never excessively clicky and always packed a lot of punch where it counted.

4. Vocals compressed to shit - again, to be heard over those guitars.

To with you can add "cookie monster" vocal which have become almost a parody of themselves.

I suspect that both these have become prevalent because the truth is that actual singers who have the pipes to stand up to a metal band are actually very rare and as metal degenerates more and more into something that sounds like a nest of angry wasps accompanied by a 1960s typing pool it gets harder and harder to fit actual singing into the sorry mess.

Not to mention the fact that most of these guys don't understand that power comes from dynamics. In fact this is something that's wrong with much recent metal in general. They don't understand the basic principle that if everything is loud all the time then nothing is loud and there's no weight, just too much noise.

I'm not advocating these things as a good practice, but hopefull explaining WHY these things have come about.

And I do beg to differ on a number of the things said here, but again that's probably down to disagreement on what the word 'heavy' means.

I don't want to offend anyone or jump to conclusions, but I do wonder if it's an age thing. What the older guys grew up with defined a basis of 'heavy' for them. Younger guys grew up with an entirely different perspective on it. Thus, you tend to get older guys saying that current metal production is a complete shambles and isn't heavy, then you get the younger guys who love it.

Well, yes. Older guys understand weight. We know what "Heavy" means. Young guys just call it "Heavy Metal" because to them that's what really loud music has always been called - the DON'T UNDERSTAND "HEAVY". For one thing they don't get it that in many ways Heavy metal and speed metal (and all it's offshoots and subgenres) are polar opposites. It's like the difference between a soccer ball and a medicine ball. They look kinda similar, but the medicine ball has a lot of weight to it and you can't throw or kick it very fast (and will probably hurt yourself if you try). The soccer ball will move very quickly but doesn't weigh very much. If the medicine ball hits you with much force behind it it'll knock you on your butt. The soccer ball won't.

I think I sit somewhere in the middle, I believe that the quality of the average thrash band these days is ten times better than the stuff we had in the early 80s, but at the same time it's been taken too far and has become a caricature of itself.

Self-parody, yes. Dunno if I agree about the new stuff being better. Most of what I've heard in the local metal clubs since the mid 2000s hasn't been - if anything it's become too much of the same thing - but I haven't been to any big metal shows. Of course the guys playing the big shows are today's generation anyway, they're really from the previous decade, so........ IMO it's got worse with every generation post-Metallica.

IMHO, take the best of both worlds and meld them into a thing of heavy beauty.

I'd question the application of the word "heavy" here, as I've explained. The young guys need to take a step back from business as usual and examine the concepts of what "heavy" really is. I've got a few hints for 'em:

1.) It's about power, not speed

2.) It's about tone, not gain

3.) To be HEAVY you need WEIGHT, which implies BOTTOM. A heavy structure crumbles without a solid foundation.

4.) POWER requires DYNAMICS. What hits harder, a heavyweight boxer who lands a few really hard blows or a flyweight who's all about lots of fast jabs?

Of course I'm an old guy. What do I know?

[Tim Halligan]

Of course I'm an old guy. What do I know?

One wonders...


:lol:

Cheers,
Tim

[Brendo]

The young guys need to take a step back from business as usual and examine the concepts of what "heavy" really is. I've got a few hints for 'em:

1.) It's about power, not speed

2.) It's about tone, not gain

3.) To be HEAVY you need WEIGHT, which implies BOTTOM. A heavy structure crumbles without a solid foundation.

4.) POWER requires DYNAMICS. What hits harder, a heavyweight boxer who lands a few really hard blows or a flyweight who's all about lots of fast jabs?

Of course I'm an old guy. What do I know?

Interested in your take on this song, then. We've got fast bits, slow bits, clean bits, screamy bits, sung bits... my guitar rig is from the 80s and the other guitarist is playing into a fucking fender:

lntj734_yV4

[John Eppstein]

Interested in your take on this song, then. We've got fast bits, slow bits, clean bits, screamy bits, sung bits... my guitar rig is from the 80s and the other guitarist is playing into a fucking fender:

lntj734_yV4

Interesting - I'm gonna have to listen to it again when I didn't just get back from a Batusis live gig......... Syl Sylvain, Cheetah Chrome, and Joan Jett's bassist and drummer playing in a dive bar that holds about 150 people........

[AxeSlash]

I've never understood the clicky drums thing on metal recordings. Live it's understandable somewhat as a means of trying to get the drums heard over excessive back line volume when you have a less than competent sound man who is used to battling an inadequate PA, which is something that many of these bands have to deal with in their early stages. But why retain that? And why in god's name would you want to record that? Force of (bad) habit? Probably.

Clicky drums are the antithesis of heavy. Heavy drums, both kicks and toms, go FTOOM! like The Incredible Hulk stomping through the desert, they don't go <clack> like a mechanical typewriter. The sound of a typewriter isn't heavy. Typewriter keys don't have much weight behind them.

I can understand these things onstage because most bands, especially loud ones, don't have the foggiest idea of what they really sound like out front, but on record?

One thing that seems to escape a lot of metal drummers and genre-oriented engineers is that the resonance of the typical human thoracic cavity is around 80 Hz. That means that you need that frequency range to make the kick drums hit you in the chest. "<clack>" doesn't pack much punch.

Phil Taylor from Motorhead pretty much originated the double kick drum onslaught and was very effective yet his kick drums were never excessively clicky and always packed a lot of punch where it counted.




I think you're missing something here...most 'clicky' drum sounds in metal have a LOT of bottom end in them. It's generally the low mid that's missing (and indeed, until very recently, from the rest of the mix too. I'm happy to say that midrange IS making a slow return to metal).

When you've got the likes of Pete Sandoval shifting out double kicks in excess of 240bpm (somewhat faster than the aforementioned Mr. Taylor - not to belittle his awesome work), you NEED some of that click to actually hear what's going on, otherwise it just degenerates into a mess of rumble. You need some bottom end decay on the kick to achieve the meat, but at high speed this just becomes a continuous unmusical rumble if you don't have the high mid/top end transient material to go with it. Granted, it does get overexaggerated on some records.



On the subject of vocals, I have so far neglected the word 'aggression'. Not all bands want 'heavy' as much as they want 'aggressive'. This is where the lack of body in the vocals comes in; in my experience most cookie monster/screamy type vocalists like the sandpaper effect in the high mid and top end because it sounds aggressive, and hate to hear the actual sound of the fundamental of their voice lower down in the low mid. Go figure. Anyway, this usually ends up with the guys newer to metal production agressively HPFing out the bottom and low mid (even I used to do it), leaving bugger all actual body in there. It works in a dense mix until the guitars stop, then you're fucked.

I agree that good metal vocalists (be it your power metal wailers or your death metal cookie monsters) are becoming rarer and rarer. Or maybe not, maybe it's just the raging torrent of shit vocalists that is burying the rest. Growly vocals can be done well, but there's a major problem in the way: most of the recent wave of 'gore metal' bands take the whole thing as a bit of a joke and laugh about how they intentionally don't want the lyrics to be intelligible. And unfortunately the rest of death metak is taking their lead (WHY? for fuck's sake lads...). A few years ago we had guys who were actually trying hard to make sure the vocals were intelligible; indeed a lot of the bigger death metal bands do this, but for most of the bottom feeders, they just cling on to the poor parts of early death metal bands as being 'true' to their roots (i.e. the want to imitate Chris Barnes and/or early Obituary). Which is complete bullshit when it sounds that bad.

Another personal hatred of mine is the recent 'pig squeal' vocal trend. Sounds shit. Absolutely NO power or beef in it at all. Has no place in any music ANYWHERE.

As for 'clean' vocals, I wouldn't say that it's hard to fit proper singing into a modern metal production - take Nevermore for example. Or even any one of the host of cloned swedish power metal bands. To be honest, I think the problem with the whole dynamics in vocals thing is equally prevalent in both growly vocals and singing vocals...I've had wailers in who are all over the place, and I'm currently compressing the living shit out of a growler who's just as bad. Then when you get to the good guys, I've had a growler in my own band who barely needed any compression. Same goes for a great singer - if they've got proper control over their voice, you can get away with doing very little to it.


When talking about dynamics in metal in general though, that's a different kettle of worms altogether. I think there ARE dynamics in metal, it's just a VERY different way of doing it from other types of music. With metal, the better bands almost treat tempo as a way of changing dynamic. Like, you get some fast tremelo/blastbeat section of the song, that'll then break down into a slow, chuggy, monstrous section. The idea is that you're then swapping the aggression in the first riff with the heaviness of the second. It does work. The only problem is that you get a lot of bands who want to play fast all the time, or who want to play slow all the time, or want to play midpaced...you get the idea. Those sort of guys are the ones who can only get away with writing 1/2 minute long songs before it gets incredibly boring. And then disappear off the face of the planet after their 2nd album because people realise that the 3rd one will just sound the same as the first two.


So yeah...to sum up, I metal production IS in a bit of a shit state, but not as bad as you think. I think people make a few too many sweeping generalisations about it, and I think that there ARE valid reasons for some of the mix trends we see at the moment in heavy music, but I don't agree with the dickheads who just stick to those trends regardless of whether the music needs them or not, and just churn out the same shit over and over again. THAT is a disgrace.

You don't wanna hear a metal band that's closer to the rock side of things buried underneath a typical thrash/death metal production. It just does not work. Yet people still do it. :Roll eyes:

[MKZ]

There are a few guys making different kinds of metal-ish records

Fidelman and Wallace for example. And plenty a little less known names that I don't remember. I always wonder why some metal bands don't go that route... (In terms of direction of the overall sound).



Mastodon has a huge, heavy sound without being cookie cutter.

The latest AIC record is heavy as hell at points.

System of a Down's heavier riffs have always sounded in-your-face to me.

[iCombs]

Maybe because it's fairly fresh in my memory, but one of the better sounding metal
mixes I've heard lately was here in the sounding forum a month or so ago.

http://thewombforums.com/showthread.php?t=15268

*SPITS OUT COFFEE*

Did I just get REFERENCED?

My life has changed immeasurably.

:D

[otek]

There are a few guys making different kinds of metal-ish records....

Mastodon... AIC... System of a Down

Ironically, those are some of the most mainstream and successful metal bands out there, in spite of being "different".

Even more ironically, all are being produced by guys who are known for working in many different styles of music.


otek

[MKZ]

Even more ironically, all are being produced by guys who are known for working in many different styles of music.


otek

exactly.

I think that's key.

[weedywet]

Ironically, those are some of the most mainstream and successful metal bands out there, in spite of being "different".

Even more ironically, all are being produced by guys who are known for working in many different styles of music.


otek

perhaps that's actually not irony, and actually more like cause and effect.


as i said, the true artistes, the ones who don't wanna be the "fifth best Avenged immitator", are the ones who avoid the cookie cutter.

[meLoCo_go]

as i said, the true artistes, the ones who don't wanna be the "fifth best Avenged immitator", are the ones who avoid the cookie cutter.
Not to belittle the bands named (all of which I actually LOVE) but what is exactly groundbreaking sonically in the newest AIC, Matodon and SOAD records?
They are pretty much staying true to the sound which is around from mid-'90s IMO.
It may not be cookie-cutter but it is still a cookie. Although handmade.
And I haven't heard anything that I would dare to call adventurous in a great while.
Maybe the whole rock-sound thing drained itself.

[MKZ]

Not to belittle the bands named (all of which I actually LOVE) but what is exactly groundbreaking sonically in the newest AIC, Matodon and SOAD records?



but c'mon, what is grounbreaking in all the other metal records? sonically?






Maybe the whole rock-sound thing drained itself.

But why strain yourself trying to look for something new?

Just look for something good.

[meLoCo_go]

but c'mon, what is grounbreaking in all the other metal records? sonically?
Not saying there's anything now. That's what is sad.
Ten years ago it all seemed brighter. Maybe that's what getting old is?
However, there's definitely some stuff to look into.
One thing is that in mid-'90s young band could get a contract and get top-notch production. E.g. Limp Bizkit's first album, or Deftones records, or RATM etc.

But why strain yourself trying to look for something new?

Just look for something good.
But don't you think that all the guys putting out what's called cookie-cutter here do exactly that? Do you think most bands put out something what they DON'T feel good?

[otek]

perhaps that's actually not irony, and actually more like cause and effect.

It is.

I meant ironic in the sense that the whole metal scene, like Slipperman said, is so anchored in rules and "genre" dogma.

It's always, "well, but for METAL, you have to do so-and-so".


otek

[Ein Mangfaldig Kar]

I'm going to add a couple of more videos (http://thewombforums.com/showpost.php?p=284778&postcount=1) to this thread.
I'm not that well versed in heavy, the only stuff I hear is really what I mix and or friends play (for me).
Around these parts I think there are some cool writers/bands emerging, but as you say alot of them sound alike.
they have the same sort of structure to them with the breaks downs and what not.
But still, some talent there.

I know you guys have been discussing records, but I'm wondering about the general songwriting as well has it become better, worse?

[John Eppstein]

Interested in your take on this song, then. We've got fast bits, slow bits, clean bits, screamy bits, sung bits... my guitar rig is from the 80s and the other guitarist is playing into a fucking fender:

lntj734_yV4

Good band! Not so good recording. First time I listened the other night I was thinking that maybe it was YouTube, but Kar didn't have those problems with his YT clips of live metal so.......

I don't know what method you used to record the gig but there's no bottom or low mid. I could barely hear the kick drum and bass guitar and I usually don't have that problem on this system (Not my recording system. My online computer is hooked up to a cheap-ass Sony home theater rig that isn't that great but it does have low end and I know the sound of it.)

I see the bass players fingers move but no sound accompanies them.

Also the guitars sound weak. My impression is that they probably don't sound that way live, that it's a recording problem. There's no body to the drums, either - lots of trashy cymbals and an overly loud snare but no kit tone.

The playing was tight and I liked the singer although I don't really understand the necessity of the growly bit at the end. I get that it's probably intended to build intensity but to me it just makes the vocals unintelligible. Ronnie Dio never needed to resort to that to build intensity. Or Ozzie, for that matter.

To me the growly, screamy, cookie monster thing is a gimmick that was effective for a time but too many bands latched onto it and won't let it go although it's pretty much dead and attracting flies. It seems like bands think it's de rigeur to need that if they're going to be "heavy" but it's not so - it just makes all the vocals sound the same.

[otek]

No offense, but I think it's pretty pointless to comment on the sound of what is obviously an open air video camera recording of some sort.

As for the "cookie monster" vocal, it's been around for a long time and is an accepted vocal style just like any other.

To understand where the combination of female vocals and growls comes from you need to look into particularly the European metal scene, it's not a fringe type of thing anymore but actually quite mainstream. Whether it appeals to you or not is of course purely a matter of taste.


otek

[Brendo]

Good band! Not so good recording.

I'll ignore the bits about the audio - yep, this is a Canon 500D using it's built in movie mode.

This was more in response to you saying that all heavy music is not allowed to have fast parts, nor allowed to have screaming. Our fast part has singing, our slow bit has screaming, etc...

The female vocals + male growls is an overplayed cliche - female screams mixed with that, plus I do clean male vocals as well (most often falsetto, often higher than Alex's lead vocal) is something we do quite differently than most in the scene.

As far as all the screaming sounding the same... we have female highs, female lows, male highs, male lows, combinations of the two, later versions of this song have she and i doing call and response during that section... I think we vary that up quite a bit as well. Between the two of us we've got pretty amazing scope for picking and choosing what we want to do vocally.

Oh. And for some reason, I seem to be able to sing simple melodies with my low growl as well... which always cracks us up too much to use it in a song.

[otek]

I seem to be able to sing simple melodies with my low growl as well...

Yoda?


otek

[Brendo]

Yoda?


otek

post-metal yoda. it's down an octave from where yoda sits.

[John Eppstein]

I'll ignore the bits about the audio - yep, this is a Canon 500D using it's built in movie mode.

This was more in response to you saying that all heavy music is not allowed to have fast parts, nor allowed to have screaming. Our fast part has singing, our slow bit has screaming, etc...

The female vocals + male growls is an overplayed cliche - female screams mixed with that, plus I do clean male vocals as well (most often falsetto, often higher than Alex's lead vocal) is something we do quite differently than most in the scene.

As far as all the screaming sounding the same... we have female highs, female lows, male highs, male lows, combinations of the two, later versions of this song have she and i doing call and response during that section... I think we vary that up quite a bit as well. Between the two of us we've got pretty amazing scope for picking and choosing what we want to do vocally.

Oh. And for some reason, I seem to be able to sing simple melodies with my low growl as well... which always cracks us up too much to use it in a song.

Point taken on the Canon camera. I pretty much suspected as much. I'd like to hear a more representative recording.

Understand that my earlier comments were pretty much broad generalizations about trends and therefore not necessarily really applicable to specific bands or songs.

Also what's happening around here is likely somewhat different than what's happening there. (and it's been a bit over a year since I attended any metal shows here, either, although I doubt much has changed a lot in that time.)

Back to your band - I liked what you're doing a lot more than much of the stuff I've heard recently and I'm looking forward to hearing something more representative of your actual sound, as it's difficult to tell much off a camera. The relationship between arrangement and mix is impossible to judge under these circumstances, so it's kinda difficult to say anything about how "heavy" I think it is. As if how heavy I think it is actually means anything......

BTW I never intended to say that heavy music isn't "allowed" to have fast parts - Motorhead is one of my favorite bands and they're pretty heavy. I was just pointing out the speed for the sake of speed doesn't make a band's music heavy and can actually work to the contrary.

The more you can work outside cliches and presupposed ideas the better your chance of differentiating yourself from the pack and actually making your own mark.

Oh. And for some reason, I seem to be able to sing simple melodies with my low growl as well... which always cracks us up too much to use it in a song.
I'd like to hear that......

[Slipperman]

post-metal yoda. it's down an octave from where yoda sits.

LMFBO.

I usta do the Yoda voice like a madman in sessions.

Example: "Hated you are..." Etc.

Ahh me.

SM.

[majestikc]

If you get the Yoda thing wring though you end up sounding like Grover from sesame street

[Unfcknblvbl]

Hey, all. Was hoping to get a little advice from some of you guys.

Don't paint by numbers.
Ever...




.

[RJ Palmer]

Don't paint by numbers.
Ever...


.

I'm not planning to!
To get some practical experience, I'm scheduling a couple of practice recording sessions with some guys I know locally, which I'm actually looking forward to a lot. Gives me a chance to have a crack at doing some that's way heavier and
aggressive than any music I've recorded or mixed up to now.

In the meantime, I'm listening to a few things and thinking about how I might set up the session in terms of microphones and the tracking room. All good fun.

Once again, thanks to everyone who's chipped in on this thread. I appreciate it.

[ManRoom Studio]

OP - if you have the time and the money (or can get the studio to pay for it - possible tax write-off), I would suggest attending one of Michael Wagener's production workshops, which covers both recording and mixing the style of music you're talking about. Michael is very forthcoming about the the equipment he uses and how he uses it - right down to explaining what combination of speakers and power amp tubes to create various types of distortion. Plus, you'll pick up a few tricks for recording and mixing drums so that they don't walk away from you in a metal mix. Anyway, that's the best advice I have to offer - spend a week with the guy who helped define the sound you're going for -

http://www.michaelwagener.com/html/wshops.html

http://www.michaelwagener.com/html/discography.html

The ManRoom

[iCombs]

Also in the OP vein...I blanked on a couple of the better sounding metal records I've heard in the last couple years.

Parkway Drive's new record "Deep Blue" is ASTOUNDINGLY heavy and still sounds like a real band playing real instruments. Joe Baresi really did a great job with that record...and it at least gives the impression that the band can play...which means that either he's a SUPER genius or the band could actually play and that helped out immensely.

Also, In Flames' last record "A Sense Of Purpose" sounded pretty good considering the sort of fashion in Swedish metal mixing...which is to say super plasticky and fake. Mike Clink did a pretty solid job mixing it and the clownfuckery seems to be a bit less heavy-handed than the previous few IF records.

[AxeSlash]

If we're starting to talk in terms of reference material, look back over Testament's back catalogue. There's a number of different styles of metal production going on there (although the recent stuff has Sneap firmly stamped on it's forehead...no bad thing for that band IMO, the last album sounds fucking phenomenal), from proper oldschool (but still listenable) stuff in the earlier days, through a more organic but still incredibly heavy era (Demonic album) up to the current day stuff. I have a number of their tracks sitting firmly on my reference playlist. I don't think they've had a bad sounding album since the debut.

Opeth's Blackwater Park and Dew Scented's Inwards are also stuff I reference a lot, although you do have to bear in mind the somewhat, um...'aggressive' mastering of the latter when referencing.

I also keep some weirder shit on there - there's a track from Pungent Stench's Masters Of Moral, Servants Of Sin album, which I tend to reference as a sort of "if it sounds like this, it's too clinical and not cohesive enough". Even though said album does stand up on it's own a very weird sort of way. So 'bad' reference material works too. Keep a few wildcards to hand.

But some would dispute the value of reference material (Slippy talked about this a while back) - I tend to use it as an "am I in the ballpark" sort of thing rather than actively trying to make anything sound like anything else. Kinda like, build an 'average' of a bunch of good tracks in your mind, and use that as your reference point, from which you can deviate to taste. Kinda hard to explain.

[RJ Palmer]

Opeth's Blackwater Park and Dew Scented's Inwards are also stuff I reference a lot, although you do have to bear in mind the somewhat, um...'aggressive' mastering of the latter when referencing.

I'm familiar with the Opeth record (I've got BP and Watershed). I like a lot of the songs on Blackwater Park, but felt it might also have benefitted from a more, shall we say, subtle mastering job! The acoustic parts in those songs were more adversely affected than the heavy bits admittedly.
But that's definitely a record I'd keep handy.


But some would dispute the value of reference material (Slippy talked about this a while back) - I tend to use it as an "am I in the ballpark" sort of thing rather than actively trying to make anything sound like anything else. Kinda like, build an 'average' of a bunch of good tracks in your mind, and use that as your reference point, from which you can deviate to taste. Kinda hard to explain.

Yeah, I'm with you. That's kind of my plan too. i'd like to think I'm open-minded as a musician and recordist and I hope that most of the musicians I may run into will be too.

So yeah, just really wanted to get a handle on the sorts of things clients might expect from me, but it's certainly not the plan to just imitate any one record or production style. That'd be boring (for me at least) and probably counter to the needs of the artist in the long run too.

[Flipper]

Also in the OP vein...I blanked on a couple of the better sounding metal records I've heard in the last couple years.

Parkway Drive's new record "Deep Blue" is ASTOUNDINGLY heavy and still sounds like a real band playing real instruments. Joe Baresi really did a great job with that record...vi

Agreed, however it hasn't been that well received, over here anyway..
For me the importance of this album is that it has songs, and sonic texture..
It certainly doesn't sound like the previous albums done by certain big names, which is why i think it hasn't done so well..

[Brendo]

Flipper... you ever hear the Mammal album that Mixerman did? Everyone that I know that I've spoken to about it reckons it sounds too "rock"... or too "raw"... or too "produced" (wtf? how can it be both raw, and overproduced?)...

[iCombs]

Agreed, however it hasn't been that well received, over here anyway..
For me the importance of this album is that it has songs, and sonic texture..
It certainly doesn't sound like the previous albums done by certain big names, which is why i think it hasn't done so well..

See...my introduction to them was actually through an interview with Joe Baresi...so far this is what I know of Parkway Drive.

I will say, though...speaking of bands from the land of the Wallaby...that Karnivool is one of the more amazing bands I've run across in the last few years. Had the good fortune to catch them on, well, every US tour to date (actually opened for them on their first)...and they are nothing but amazing. Killer band...Ian Kenny is an amazing singer...I literally can not say enough good things.

[Brendo]

Ian Kenny is an amazing singer...I literally can not say enough good things.

This! I take it you've got the Birds Of Tokyo albums too then?

[Flipper]

Yeah I've got Mammal.....l I like it, It's been a while since I've had a listen but from memory it didn't seem "raw" or to "rock" or anything, I just liked it..... It is a rocknroll, alternative thing anyway isn't it??

Shame they split...

Ian Kenny must be better in concert, I saw him on TV the other morning and I thought it was pretty ordinary....Mind you, at 8am I'm sure I wouldn't be killin it either..

I'm only familiar with his projects via radio..

[Brendo]

Yes, the Mammal album is very alternative rock - and I think everyone was hoping for it to sound like Karnivool or The Butterfly Effect - the Forrester sound.

But then Forrester's a bit hit or miss for me... so I dunno.

[iCombs]

This! I take it you've got the Birds Of Tokyo albums too then?

Just started in on that...Been ranting on about how "Silhouettic" has the best pre-chorus/chorus I've heard in a while. If I hear it once, I'm totally fucked for the rest of the day. Will not leave my head.

[Brendo]

Always on the same page, I'm not sure we are... Always on the same page. There goes my baby...

[iCombs]

Always on the same page, I'm not sure we are... Always on the same page. There goes my baby...

Asshole.

Now I have to go listen to it a few times to get it back outta my head while I'm mixing!

...seriously...it's like The Game.

I just lost The Game.

If you don't know what The Game is...it's very simple.

1) You are always playing The Game
2) If you think about The Game, you lose The Game.
3) All losses must be announced.

That song works on a similar concept, I believe.

[weedywet]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2uxOpailU4

[Dave Perry]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ2Cdw8THX8

[John Eppstein]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ2Cdw8THX8

WTF???

Lemme clue you in to something that's pretty basic - whiney pop pop ain't heavy.

Sorry, it's just not. It's impossible to be heavy and light and bouncy at the same time.

That's not a bad song, and it's a pretty good band but heavy?

No.

Perhaps you got the wrong thread?

[Dave Perry]

Look at Weedy's post before mine. None too heavy either.

Sorry for the (continued) OT posting. :)

[John Eppstein]

Just for a quick reminder of the meaning of "heavy":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akt3awj_Ah8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLUk0-LqKXU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiHRm2DioMA&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQ5-vPcfE-Y&feature=related

Edit: The above post was entered while I was looking up suitable Youtube examples for this one.....

[Dave Perry]

Yea, I gotta say, that Tony Iommi riff sound was most assuredly completely heavy.

Not sure why people think they need the latest Quintuple Rectumfrier with the six cascading gain stages and the modded Boss Beelzebub pedal in front of it to get a "heavy" sound when you can pick up an old Marshall and plug a good basic SS boost pedal into it and get a tone that oozes heaviosity. That is, assuming you know what to do with it and you have very tolerant neighbors. :)

And since we are playing revivalist around here I'll throw this one on (at the risk of repeating myself since I think I've done this before):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mOzRNfuH7g

As far as I know this is just a Les Paul into an MXR Distortion+ into a Marshall Plexi into a stack with Altec speakers.

[Saculus]

How about The Sword. Black Sabbath meets Kill Em All era Metallica.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI7227GHvQY

[otek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2uxOpailU4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ2Cdw8THX8

Sorry guys, nobody got it. :D


otek

[Brendo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiHRm2DioMA&feature=related

Lol, BÖC. You think this is heavy? I love them, but this song is pure cheese.

[Dave Perry]

Sorry guys, nobody got it. :D


otek

Wouldn't be the first time in my case. :)

I guess this is about heavy music, though, so we have to all be serious and grim faced about it. :)

[John Eppstein]

Lol, BÖC. You think this is heavy? I love them, but this song is pure cheese.

Godzilla's pretty heavy, although I'll grant you that my perception of it is probably a bit different from yours having actually been on that tour. You listen to those footsteps through 100,000 watts (literally) of English heavy metal PA (a Midas-Martin rig from the old TASCO company if you want to get technical) and you'll think it's heavy too!

That video was from the show they co-headlined with Sabbath at Madison Square Garden. Sabbath's concussion bombs at the start of their set knocked plaster out of the ceiling. The fire marshal had a fit! Hell of a show........

And there has always been a certain amount of cheese involved in metal. You think "Hall of the Mountain King" isn't cheesy? And Judas Priest had a pretty high cheese factor at times......

[John Eppstein]

Wouldn't be the first time in my case. :)

I guess this is about heavy music, though, so we have to all be serious and grim faced about it. :)

Unless we're BOC.......

[Brendo]

Godzilla's pretty heavy, although I'll grant you that my perception of it is probably a bit different from yours having actually been on that tour.

Not my point - you picked the wrong song... they have way heavier ones IMHO! Cities on Flame? Harvester of Eyes? Flaming Telepaths?

[John Eppstein]

ME262

[Slipperman]

First 3 BOC are great hard rock records.

They don't fit ANYWHERE in the heavy music "sub-genres" of the era.

Too much brain. Too much tongue in cheek. Too much dark/inside joke humor.

Too much absolutely fearless incorporation of ANYTHING they wanted to put in their music.

The BIG PICTURE of what a bunch of fucked-up WEIRDOS they were, is what made them HEAVY.

Not the sounds or riffing.

Those had more to do with the Doors, T. Rex, and even Chuck Berry(ME262) to end up doing ANYTHING but flying RIGHT THE FUCK over the heads of yer average Sabbath fan of the day.

The cartoon period started on Agents of Fortune.

So did the popularity.

What a surprise.

Beginning of the end for the most part.

Still had their moments now and again in later years and albums... But if you listen to the band live in 1975(especially the brothers), and then move to 1980, they are a SHADOW of their former selves in almost every conceivable regard(Not Buck, he didn't drop off as a player till much later).

Case in point. Al's drumming on linked video cleanly shows he is NO LONGER PRACTICING the instrument, only playing shows, and he's having too much backstage fun.

MASSIVE EARLY BOC fan here, in case nobody's noticed. Especially the Bouchards and Sandy Pearlman. After they did the first tour with Mahavishnu, and Albert got a load of Cobham every night for while... he was ON FIRE for several years/records.

Later(live) it was strobes and fog, lasers, drop triplet ghayity, soggy timekeeping and fill execution... and just too much general partying before shows.

There was a short window where they, along with THE BAND "Alice Cooper" were the coolest American HR band(s) going. Basically 1972 - 1975.

And if somebody mentions KISS here, there's gonna be a death.

Those greedy morons single-handedly shamed and discredited the genre and generally fucked EVERYTHING up with their DREADFUL songwriting, inane lyric, marketing exploits, and "music as the visual equivalent of a choreographed 100 yd. dash" bullshit.

Killed.

If I could get back there and kill them(KISS) in 1973 and make it back to the current time unscathed, I guarantee the world would be a remarkably better place and I would have done something truly significant for mankind.

It is with great sadness and regret that I face every day realizing this is probably not going to happen.

If anyone on this board has a time machine and an assault rifle they can loan me for 15 minutes I would be eternally grateful.

I'll go into the future(after I kill KISS), get the winning lottery numbers and give them to you.

Grain of salt, but not really.

SM.

PS. I am not threatening to kill KISS now mind you. It's 37 years too late and the damage is already done.

PPS. Just think. A world without Poison and Motley Crue!!!

[chrisj]

Not my point - you picked the wrong song... they have way heavier ones IMHO! Cities on Flame? Harvester of Eyes? Flaming Telepaths?

Holy shit yeah, Cities On Flame With Rock And Roll. One of the heaviest riffs ever. Good way to be kicked in the nuts by sound and like it :)

Here's my suggestion- tried to find the tighter album version and failed, this is from some weird video mashup. Skip ahead to about 1:00 and it's the chorus I'm thinking of most of all-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmbWStiyat0

This is another one I like from the album I _wanted_ to find that first track from-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbTYvDSB25s

Not sure if that one's too fast to be heavy, but I think it's the only heavy song that can possibly have the lyric 'dance the can-can with my feet in the air'. Also these guys are a good example of the Slipperman principle of you have to execute very cleanly to be heavy, get a load of the middle section where it's mostly drums with bass and guitar accents...

[chrisj]

Some older school heavy, but not as far back as Sabbath- I'm kinda like 'Sabbath? really? you're gonna go THAT far back?'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRhZ5UX0-us

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yROLRovCkso

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzA_YZMP8xM

And out of left field and not normally considered 'heavy' or at least not ever considered metal- but remember how this one's been covered...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kQKOthaApM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKueHdKJ0jg

And right back to the dawn of time ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0KrgU-idQg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9XKVTNs1g4

That's probably where Fletcher got the idea that you could be heavy with a guitar, no fuzz box, and a Twin or other totally nonheavy amp :) the trouble is, the drums, bass and songwriting are doing most of the 'heavy' lifting there...

Seems like it's partly about instrument voicing, a LOT about attitude and songwriting, and guitar tone very quickly became an indispensable part of heavy after a certain point which Sabbath probably initiated...

Here, my notion of the insemination of heavy. Conception of the guitar tone, conception of how to write a heavy riff, conception of lyrical attitude- it's all there and totally, completely unformed and ungrown into anything yet :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8T8eNhKSik

[MKZ]

in this video there's a fundamental part of what I think of as heavy (don't mean it's right or wrong)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ms9wL7ksjiU






scooped guitar has never really made any sense to me, unless you need a vocalist that needs a lot of space especially for his/her 70/80s style revers or whatnot




and holy shit... that jam at the end of Heaven And Hell that was posted.... put a smile on me face.

[otek]

Too much absolutely fearless incorporation of ANYTHING they wanted to put in their music.

I wish more current bands would take note of this.


otek

[John Eppstein]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzA_YZMP8xM
This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated due to multiple third-party notifications of copyright infringement. .

[John Eppstein]

Some older school heavy, but not as far back as Sabbath- I'm kinda like 'Sabbath? really? you're gonna go THAT far back?'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRhZ5UX0-us

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yROLRovCkso

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzA_YZMP8xM

And out of left field and not normally considered 'heavy' or at least not ever considered metal- but remember how this one's been covered...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kQKOthaApM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKueHdKJ0jg

And right back to the dawn of time ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0KrgU-idQg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9XKVTNs1g4

That's probably where Fletcher got the idea that you could be heavy with a guitar, no fuzz box, and a Twin or other totally nonheavy amp :) the trouble is, the drums, bass and songwriting are doing most of the 'heavy' lifting there...

Seems like it's partly about instrument voicing, a LOT about attitude and songwriting, and guitar tone very quickly became an indispensable part of heavy after a certain point which Sabbath probably initiated...

Here, my notion of the insemination of heavy. Conception of the guitar tone, conception of how to write a heavy riff, conception of lyrical attitude- it's all there and totally, completely unformed and ungrown into anything yet :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8T8eNhKSik

Taking those in succession:

Judas Priest - definitely METAL, but they've never impressed me as being HEAVY. Perhaps not as lightweight as Def Leppard, but not heavy. Everything they do seems to be a caricature of what they're trying to, but unlike a band like BOC any humor is entirely unintentional. (And anything that might actually BE an attempt at humor isn't particularly funny.....)

ZZ Top - love 'em and they definitely have an element of heaviness to them, but they also definitely NOT metal. I'm going to go out on a bit of a limb here and start that IMO one of the defining characteristics of metal is that metal doesn't swing. In fact it might be argued that the genesis of metal was when white boys who don't swing started trying to play blues riffs really loud with a lot of bottom. (And maybe threw in some pretentious pseudo-classical ambitions. See the clips at the end of this post.) That's a gross oversimplification of course, but it bears some thinking about.

ZZ Top, like Canned Heat, is essentially a loud boogie blues band (especially on their older stuff), tracing their roots directly back to the likes of John Lee Hooker and other Texas and Louisiana boogie artists, and they swing like crazy.

The Stones - perhaps my all time favorite rock and roll band, but not heavy and not metal and why would they want to be?

Jumpin' Jack Flash? Really? That's an ACOUSTIC GUITAR riff! And heavy music does not have sitars!

Now if you want to go back to the very beginning of heavy metal there's this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGmkM4v9AaY&p=98D01C3AA57B2ED7&playnext=1&index=7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiQJmNkoCNM&p=98D01C3AA57B2ED7&playnext=1&index=6

One of the hallmarks of much (although not all) classic heavy metal IMO is the quasi-operatic vocal.

[otek]

Judas Priest - definitely METAL, but they've never impressed me as being HEAVY.

Not sure how you define "heavy" exactly - if you are talking about tempo and groove, then your observation kind of makes sense, as Judas Priest always tended to favor mid-to-up tempos and a somewhat sprightly feel. Still, take a listen to "Take On The World", "Victim of Changes", "The Rage", or "Beyond The Realms of Death".

On the other hand, as groovy as their drummers were (Simon Phillips, Dave Holland), the guitars were frequently playing slightly ahead of the beat, particularly on the earlier records - perhaps this may account for your lacking sense of "heavy".


otek

[Dave Perry]

Maybe he just means they sounded pop to him.

[Slipperman]

This over at GS a few minutes ago.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5948620-post1.html

So I click the link and listen to the whole fucking thing.

Then I post:

Wow. What a shitload of burning plastic EVERYWHERE in that mix. If somebody did that to my vocal track... I'd slice his fucking nuts off and feed them to my snake.

Guy sounds like 3 identical operatic androids having rough sex in in a Plexiglas telephone booth.

Just a thought.


Then.

I thought better of it and took my post down.

I try to be relatively nice over there... It's a long and boring story that dates back to Dec. 2002 when I joined.

Ahh me.

Here. I just get to hate my life out loud.

SM.

[Slipperman]

On the JP tip.

I think "Sin after Sin" is one of the HEAVIEST records ever recorded.

INSANELY HEAVY.

Fuck the "sounds".

SOUNDS? SOUNDS?

Sounds don't MEAN SHIT.

Dust. Nada.

If yer listening to "sounds" yer totally fucked and have missed the entire point.

Simon Phillips @ 19 years old had already forgotten more about PROPELLING MUSIC IN A COMPELLING FASHION than the VAST MAJORITY of metal drummers will EVER know as they are lowered into the dirt. John Eppstein had some post above about "not swinging" in metal and whatnot. I call bullshit. Phillips laid those type of fucking theories lower than copper ore on that record. Forever.

They NEVER got back there. EVER.

Closest they ever came is "The Sentinel" off DOTF.

For entirely different reasons.

Make no mistake, I love some other Priest material and I think they are a QUINTESSENTIAL HM band... but THAT album fucking SLAYS me.

Every single minute of it.

ONLY JP record I can say that about.

Even the "throwaway" tracks groove like a motherfucker(Kneel for the Priest).

SM.

PS. Admitted bias. I spent my ENTIRE Heavy music drumming career trying to attain and perpetuate the approach that SP pulled out of his ass in the 20 or so days he rehearsed and recorded with the band. Kinda sad when I think about it. HOHOHO. I once met him when he was on a TAMA tour in the mid 80's... Tortured him for over an hour AFTER the showcase, making him show me stuff like the opening fill from "Dissonant Aggressor". He was graciously BAFFLED ANYBODY gave a shit or had paid one iota of attention to his work with the band. I would play him my hamhanded version of what I "thought" he was playing and he would laugh and go... "Oh... it's probably the Cobham thing from such and such" and hammer my ass with it like falling off a log. Kinda got me thinking I might do better on the OTHER side of the glass. Ahh me. De Troof hertz.

[John Eppstein]

This over at GS a few minutes ago.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5948620-post1.html

So I click the link and listen to the whole fucking thing.

Then I post:

Wow. What a shitload of burning plastic EVERYWHERE in that mix. If somebody did that to my vocal track... I'd slice his fucking nuts off and feed them to my snake.

Guy sounds like 3 identical operatic androids having rough sex in in a Plexiglas telephone booth.

Just a thought.


Then.

I thought better of it and took my post down.

I try to be relatively nice over there... It's a long and boring story that dates back to Dec. 2002 when I joined.

Ahh me.

Here. I just get to hate my life out loud.

SM.

What was that track, The Compendium of Hackneyed Heavy Metal Cliche's? Regardless of whether they fit together or not? What's with this compulsion to insert growling into utterly incongruous places where it doesn't fit or make sense?

[Dave Perry]

I'm still not clear on what isn't heavy about JP, but, I don't know, I think Halford had a generally heavy sounding voice, even in later Priest stuff. He's still known as the "Metal God" even after having to overcome the stigma of being gay.

He's a much heavier vocalist than a number of the 80's metal guys, or, say, Steven Tyler. Does Vince Neil have a "heavy" voice? How about Klaus Meine? Bruce Dickenson?

[eagan]

Wait.. Simon Phillips played with Judas Priest??

Well, fuck me running... I had no idea. Shows how much attention I've paid to those guys (like.. zilch).

But aside from that, to der Schlippermensch... to be fair here, I think that in trying to look at this from a drummer's point of view; spending some time with a kit and Simon Phillips and coming away with the conclusion that you're not as good as Simon Phillips definitely still leaves a pretty wide margin to go through before you get to "SUCK".

You could be far from being as good as him and I might still think you're a pretty fucking good drummer.



JLE

[johndou]

Fast vs slow, clicky kick versus no clicky kik etc. Natural vs processed. Pig squealing vs cookie monster vs operatic. Gain vs tone. Can I throw in another category? bands with a solid rhythm section vs bands with a double kik wanker and some poor sod of a bassist who is in any case never heard.

The only bands that sound heavy to me have a fucking HUGE (and interesting) rhythm section. In most cases, the band is also not a showcase for two dueling guitarists. A big rhythm section transforms a band from cartoony bullshit to something with weight. And, the moment a band is a showcase for any one member, they lose me. Meshuggah has a phenomenal drummer, but the band never feels like a showcase for his skills. Tool is never about danny carrey alone. Early mudvayne revolved around a fantastic drum/bass combo.

Also, bands with a sense of space. Referring to slipperman's thread on HM mix topologies, with every instrument trying to be at the front.

[John Eppstein]

Fast vs slow, clicky kick versus no clicky kik etc. Natural vs processed. Pig squealing vs cookie monster vs operatic. Gain vs tone. Can I throw in another category? bands with a solid rhythm section vs bands with a double kik wanker and some poor sod of a bassist who is in any case never heard.

The only bands that sound heavy to me have a fucking HUGE (and interesting) rhythm section. In most cases, the band is also not a showcase for two dueling guitarists. A big rhythm section transforms a band from cartoony bullshit to something with weight. And, the moment a band is a showcase for any one member, they lose me. Meshuggah has a phenomenal drummer, but the band never feels like a showcase for his skills. Tool is never about danny carrey alone. Early mudvayne revolved around a fantastic drum/bass combo.

Also, bands with a sense of space. Referring to slipperman's thread on HM mix topologies, with every instrument trying to be at the front.

Well said.

[MKZ]

There was a short window where they, along with THE BAND "Alice Cooper" were the coolest American HR band(s) going. Basically 1972 - 1975.


I'm sort of a "fan" of the Alice Cooper Band

Love it to Death
Muscle of Love
Killer
Billion Dollar Babies
School's Out

Welcome To My Nightmare was cool as well. I think it was the first "solo" Alice record (?)


I think I gotta check out the first 3 BÖC records....

[Slipperman]

I'm sort of a "fan" of the Alice Cooper Band

Love it to Death
Muscle of Love
Killer
Billion Dollar Babies
School's Out

Welcome To My Nightmare was cool as well. I think it was the first "solo" Alice record (?)


I think I gotta check out the first 3 BÖC records....

Those are the 5 best records, although the first 2 have some fairly insane material on them as well.

Funny about the first 3 BOC.

Went back and listened to them for the first time in probably 30 years last night.

Almost EVERYTHING was different than I remembered.

Bugged me the fuck out actually.

SM.

[otek]

Funny about the first 3 BOC.

Went back and listened to them for the first time in probably 30 years last night.

Almost EVERYTHING was different than I remembered.

Bugged me the fuck out actually.


I had the same epiphany over some of the Judas Priest records I had to break out again the other night, in order to deliver at least a marginally semi-coherent response to an earlier post in this very thread.

I was astonished by how the guitar parts on the earlier records were often rushing the beat. Probably get a lot more obvious when you have a drummer that grooves like Phillips.

On that note, Holland was no slouch either, though his parts are generally much more basic.


otek

[MKZ]

Alice cooper and blue öyster cult were before my time*, but I can't remember that happening to me...**

I tried to think of some examples... I re-bought Iron Maiden's first album a couple of years ago and I liked it even more than I did as a kid when I had it on cassette.

I'm listening to Secret Treaties. (album) Gonna listen to "My Stars" and "Luney Tune" next.

EDIT: *but so was iron maiden's first 4 albums
** now that I think about it, I guess Ride The Lightning and Countdown To Extinction sounded a lot less "heavy" than what I remembered them sounding in the early 90s when I was listening to them

[MKZ]

One of the heaviest albums I know is Once Upon The Cross by Deicide. I fuckin love that album.

I heard the drummer complained that they played the songs slower than they were supposed to... I guess that's the magik I hear in that album.

[John Eppstein]

One thing I've noticed over the years - and not just in heavy music - is that frequently studio recordings are a bit slower than live performance.

[Dave Perry]

On that note, Holland was no slouch either, though his parts are generally much more basic.

Speaking of basic, I actually think Alex Van Halen is quite a good rock drummer, though I've had other drummers poo poo that analysis.

[iCombs]

One thing I've noticed over the years - and not just in heavy music - is that frequently studio recordings are a bit slower than live performance.

I think it's probably more the case that the live performance is faster.

With the notable exception of a band like Pantera...who when they did a half-time groove would often SLOW DOWN A FUCKLOAD...I'm thinking like the live ending to "This Love." Not only is it half time, but they musta dropped 10 or 15 bpm on it as well.

Really, I think that though I'm generally NOT a fan of the way Pantera records sound, those motherfuckers understood a thing or two about groove and tempo.