Does anyone else not consider them metal?
I get a more hard rock vibe from them.
share[deleted]
MovieChat Forums > Iron Maiden Discussion > Does anyone else not consider them metal...
Wouldn't know what to call them. They started out as a hard rock act, evolved into metal, and now they're more of a Trans-Siberian Orchestra experience.
shareTell me you've never seen Iron Maiden live without saying you've never seen Iron Maiden live...
shareI haven't heard much of their new stuff.
shareThey aren't "modern," non-melodic throat garbling fake metal, if that's what you're comparing them to.
shareThis is what I'd say is metal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saBvKn3lJEU
That's a little closer to Sabbath. One obvious difference in styles between that kind of metal and Maiden is Maiden doesn't work so heavily in the blues. It's closer to classical music in that way. The link you provided, today, I would call Doom Metal or Sludge.
sharethat "fake metal" you're referring to has been around since the 1980's. Death Metal and Black Metal are the two largest subgenres of metal by band volume and influence across metal.
shareWasn't impressive back then. Ain't impressive now. Just angry incels vomiting into a microphone (and are we going to pretend the patron saint of Black Metal ISN'T Yoko Ono?...).
shareWhy do vocal coaches disagree with you?
https://youtu.be/DrDM6V08wcE?t=380
No matter what you think of this - not many people can do this.
Do they? I couldn't tell because it just sounded like they were burping out a particularly gaseous taco.
shareYes they do.
You replied within 2 seconds. I added a link.
Here's another: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl5T-glTdXw
And this IS melodic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DjmQXtZUx4
I'm sure there's some way to explain this music as sounding like something more than an evacuation of bile, just like people extract profound philosophical insights from Marvel movies. It doesn't change my personal perception of it.
shareHow you think it sounds is irrelevant. It is an acquired taste, and not everyone can acquire it - but it does take talent.
shareIron Maiden is best described as Metal. Just Metal without qualifiers. They aren't thrash, nor Heavy, death or grind. Just Metal.
Judas Priest, same thing.
[deleted]
I generally find NWOBHM pretty tame by metal standards. I listen to Diamond Head and Witchfinder General, but I don't gravitate to them if I want a kick in my metal.
shareTheir guitar tone is pretty thin for a metal band. Some of their songs are hard rock, "From Here to Eternity" and "The Angel and the Gambler" come to mind. I always figured that was because they're N.W.O.B.H.M. and came out before thrash. The imagery is definitely very metal.
shareThey're very riff driven. Their solos are nothing special.
shareThey mostly use Stratocaster's which have a different tone to the usual humbucker equipped guitars that most metal and rock bands use. Even a Strat with a humbucker won't sound that full and heavy.
shareTheir first two albums mostly remind me of punk. After that they do get more heavy but there is always a prog rock theme going on in the background and sometimes foreground of a lot of their stuff. They were metal at the time. Even Black Sabbath sounds pretty light compared to modern metal though.
shareI agree with Sabbath. They are hard rock to me, but I'd say they were heavier than Iron Maiden and Judas Priest.
shareSabbath started off as jazz players in a band called "Earth". Their drummer was into swing music, you can really hear the jazz influences and swing drum beats even when they became Sabbath. Priest stated getting heavier in the 90's but yes before then they were more a hard rock sound.
shareAnd Tony Iommi was in a psychedelic band called Velvett Fogg but left before recording their first album. It's some weird stuff so I don't blame him for leaving.
shareTheir first two albums mostly remind me of punk.
There's some punk influence, for sure, but they were way too adept at their instruments with complicated riffing to be punk, e.g. "Genghis Khan." share
The original singer's voice is more basic as well and the production of the first two albums is also fairly basic. But you can hear that the band are influenced by more than just a basic metal sound even at that point.
shareIron Maiden was textbook definition of Heavy Metal in the 80s, they could even be considered New Wave of British Heavy Metal.
Heavier bands, like Metallica and MegaDeath, were considered Thrash Metal.
I understand we’re you’re coming from though, listening to Iron Maiden now the music doesn’t seem that “heavy”, regardless, for their time they were Heavy Metal.
This actually could raise the question: is it possible that the definition of a specific genre can change over time? Was hard rock metal? Was metal hard rock?
shareI know you didn't ask me but yes it can change and diversify. Iron Maiden at the time were a heavy band. It's also more than just distorted guitars. It's the scales that get used, the lyrical themes, the drum patterns. Iron Maiden and Motorhead for example are two different bands and although Motorhead self identify as being "Rock n Roll" they are from a strictly noise perspective heavier than Iron Maiden. But Iron Maiden still have that heavy metal sound overall.
By the time Metallica came along with "Kill 'em All" in 1983 they made every heavy band before them sound like the blues.
There are so many categories of heavy metal now that I don't think you could list them and say that list would be complete. I think most people have given up and just call it "Metal" or "Heavy music".
The thing about metal is that there's a fine line between that and hard rock. There were definite punk influences in early Motorhead, but they're not hard rock to me, they're just metal and definitely heavy.
shareI consider them to be heavy as well but it's not how they see themselves which is another issue again. Some bands come up with their own descriptions of their sound as well and then you listen to them and shrug and say "Well that's just ordinary *insert genre*".