Opinions on new wave of thrash?

[exxxecutionerstefan]

Do you prefer the 80's thrash , the 90's or u like the new wave

[RexKeltoi]

80's, probably because I lived it so am probably biased have some friends still playing thrash currently that were playing it in the 80's 

[AlSymerz]

There is a new wave?

I don't wave much because I am antisocial

 

[Arioch]

A subject that interests me, thank you!

Having started listening to Metal in 1984, I quickly branched out into Thrash Metal.

I loved the first wave of albums (Slayer/Metallica/Anthrax/Megadeth/Exodus/Sodom/Kreator/Dark Angel) and when the second wave arrived (Death Angel/Vio-Lence/Testament/Defiance/Heathen/Forbidden), I went straight for it.

It was a time when these bands had everything to invent from heavy metal, punk and Motörhead.

San Francisco Thrash was the one I was most passionate about.

In the mid-90s, after the Grunge wave and the massive influx of Black bands, Thrash quickly took a back seat. Death Metal had already taken its toll, but ...

So, my favorite period will always be the 80s, but there were a lot of great records in the following decade.

In the 2000s, I listened to a few bands like Evile, but apart from Vektor, I never stuck with them for very long. At the time, most of these bands were content to pick up influences left and right, but it was rare to find anything well digested on their albums.

In the 2010s, younger bands arrived, influenced by those of 2000.

Today, we're witnessing several waves. Bands are playing Bay Area Thrash, but without reaching an ounce of their elders' genius. Others pump Exodus to the point of nausea. At the moment, it's a kind of Speed/Black that's coming to the fore.

Many of these bands are predictable. They invent absolutely nothing. After all, maybe that's just what they want. Okay, that's fine with me, but I'm not a fan at all.

I'm still waiting for a band to emerge from this teeming wave and come up with THE little original thing that will give it personality and revive this musical genre that no longer has anything original about it. But I think I'm dreaming and it's never going to happen.

It's the reason why I prefer to listen my old records.

 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

Just now, Arioch said:

A subject that interests me, thank you!

Having started listening to Metal in 1984, I quickly branched out into Thrash Metal.

I loved the first wave of albums (Slayer/Metallica/Anthrax/Megadeth/Exodus/Sodom/Kreator/Dark Angel) and when the second wave arrived (Death Angel/Vio-Lence/Testament/Defiance/Heathen/Forbidden), I went straight for it.

It was a time when these bands had everything to invent from heavy metal, punk and Motörhead.

San Francisco Thrash was the one I was most passionate about.

In the mid-90s, after the Grunge wave and the massive influx of Black bands, Thrash quickly took a back seat. Death Metal had already taken its toll, but ...

So, my favorite period will always be the 80s, but there were a lot of great records in the following decade.

In the 2000s, I listened to a few bands like Evile, but apart from Vektor, I never stuck with them for very long. At the time, most of these bands were content to pick up influences left and right, but it was rare to find anything well digested on their albums.

In the 2010s, younger bands arrived, influenced by those of 2000.

Today, we're witnessing several waves. Bands are playing Bay Area Thrash, but without reaching an ounce of their elders' genius. Others pump Exodus to the point of nausea. At the moment, it's a kind of Speed/Black that's coming to the fore.

Many of these bands are predictable. They invent absolutely nothing. After all, maybe that's just what they want. Okay, that's fine with me, but I'm not a fan at all.

I'm still waiting for a band to emerge from this teeming wave and come up with THE little original thing that will give it personality and revive this musical genre that no longer has anything original about it. But I think I'm dreaming and it's never going to happen.

It's the reason why I prefer to listen my old records.

 

Blackened speed's not thrash though Ari, it's actually good. I don't need them to invent anything new, just be good.

Of course no one's gonna come up with THE original thing that will revive the dwindling sub-genre and restore it to its former glory. Because if it was truly original, it wouldn't still be thrash then anymore, would it.

Black/thrash revived the hell out of the flailing sub-genre 20 years ago afaic, but thrash purists don't like it. They don't accept it as true thrash. Fair enough. But even as the most casual semi-disinterested thrash fan you'll ever meet, I would have no choice but to say that straight un-blackened thrash from the 00's onward is an abomination against everything we stand for and believe in and all we hold dear. 

But at the same time, when it comes to thrash metal my motto is let whatever happened in the 80's stay in the 80's.

[Arioch]

46 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Blackened speed's not thrash though Ari, it's actually good. I don't need them to invent anything new, just be good.

Yes, it's true. It's not Thrash, although it's not far off. On the other hand, I need to hear something new, something fresh. I hate listening to something new and thinking I've heard this riff 50,000 times before.

 

46 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

But at the same time, when it comes to thrash metal my motto is let whatever happened in the 80's stay in the 80's.

I'm going to come to terms with the fact that, for me, Thrash died in the 90s.

[FatherAlabaster]

I don't listen to a ton of thrash, but when I do, nine times out of ten it's something from the 80s or early 90s.

1 hour ago, Arioch said:

On the other hand, I need to hear something new, something fresh. I hate listening to something new and thinking I've heard this riff 50,000 times before.

100% agree.

[Nasty_Cabbage]

The eighties and early nineties are of course my favorites, but I also have some of the newer bands that I like. I find it's best not to get too caught up in the whole new vs. old thrash sort of mindset even when a newer band invites the comparisons. I'm often not free of that pitfall myself. Beyond just very broad genre categories, sometimes getting caught up in that mentality is setting myself up for disappointment. Even though they're a far cry from thrash, I remember reading an interview with Chris Black (drummer for Pharaoh) about his own his own heavy metal band (Dawnbringer) where he said that being original is the last thing on his mind when he's writing songs. Easy enough to understand; a person likes the music they like and will very naturally imitate whatever his favorites are within that genre.

I also don't really think of the eighties and early nineties being all that separate from one another. If I had to pick a semi-arbitrary point where the original thrash ended and we entered the modern phase of tagging odd genre combinations on anything that showed a concerted effort to change into something a little more palatable to the younger audience it would probably be the exact day that Coroner released Grin. Again though, it's kind of arbitrary and not worth fighting over.

[AlSymerz]

There is a new band breaking soon that sounds promising, they're called Slayer, people should get on board early with them and they might play more gigs.

 

[agamerwholovesmetal]

For me nothing is going to top the albums that came out during thrashes initial popularity (1983-1992). Some bands within the last decade or two like power trip and municipal waste have come close though.

[GoatmasterGeneral]

Just now, Nasty_Cabbage said:

The eighties and early nineties are of course my favorites, but I also have some of the newer bands that I like. I find it's best not to get too caught up in the whole new vs. old thrash sort of mindset even when a newer band invites the comparisons. I'm often not free of that pitfall myself. Beyond just very broad genre categories, sometimes getting caught up in that mentality is setting myself up for disappointment. Even though they're a far cry from thrash, I remember reading an interview with Chris Black (drummer for Pharaoh) about his own his own heavy metal band (Dawnbringer) where he said that being original is the last thing on his mind when he's writing songs. Easy enough to understand; a person likes the music they like and will very naturally imitate whatever his favorites are within that genre.

I also don't really think of the eighties and early nineties being all that separate from one another. If I had to pick a semi-arbitrary point where the original thrash ended and we entered the modern phase of tagging odd genre combinations on anything that showed a concerted effort to change into something a little more palatable to the younger audience it would probably be the exact day that Coroner released Grin. Again though, it's kind of arbitrary and not worth fighting over.

That's because being born in '86 you didn't become musically aware and get into metal until probably '97 or '98 or so give or take. (close?) So to you everything that came before that would've all been just older stuff. 80's, 90's what's the diff? And then everything since then would be the "newer" stuff.

In retrospect the thrash scene had a pretty short heyday. The first thrash albums hit the shelves in '83/'84 at the tail end of the NWOBHM heyday. Then by '85 more thrash albums dropped, suburban metalhead kids discovered moshing and thrash quickly became hot shit. But it was short lived, because the sub-genre had peaked by '86/'87.

By the early/mid 90's around the time when Grin came out a lot of "thrash maniacs" had lost interest and moved on to other sub-genres, as had a lot of the OG thrash bands. There are so many 80's thrash bands where you can draw a line somewhere in the vicinity of '90/'91/'92 and say they were good - up until that point. Coroner, Metallica, Slayer, Sepultura, Testament, Exodus, Anthrax, Megadeth...I could go on and on.

I was there in the 80's living through it as an adult. I was all in for thrash and I was buying each hot new thrash release as they came out. Yet there were heaps of 90's albums (thrash as well as the more extreme sub-genres) that I missed in real time and only found out about years later. Perfect example, I was a huge Coroner fan in the 80's but to this day I still don't think I've ever heard Grin. What did Testament do after The Ritual in '92? I have no fucking idea. I was a hardcore thrash maniac living in NY but somehow I never heard Demolition Hammer for another decade after those albums came out in '90 & '92.

The buzz around thrash was just gone by then, in large part because the originators had all started sucking. And maybe more importantly, the majority of the hot new young metal bands spawned in the early/mid 90's which had themselves been heavily influenced by thrash metal, were mostly opting to play in other newer more extreme sub-genres. That's what really killed thrash, the better young metal musicians who had cut their chops on 80's thrash metal albums were coming of age in the 90's and forming death metal bands not thrash bands. Just like the young metalheads around my age who grew up on Sabbath, 70's dinosaur rock and the NWOBHM came of age in the early 80's and mostly chose to form thrash metal bands.

Before I go though, I'll have to agree with your drummer friend Chris Black. When vetting an album and deciding if the collection of songs makes the grade or not, originality is about the last thing on my mind. I'm fine with originality when it occasionally happens, (as long as I like the music obviously) but it's definitely not a requirement. I really don't like weird little quirky surprises in my music. Don't reinvent the wheel dudes. Just write riffs that make me bang my head please.

[AlSymerz]

40 years thrash had been a thing. It's really a credit to the genre for being so strong and lasting through the mess that every other genres left behind

[agamerwholovesmetal]

17 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

There are so many 80's thrash bands where you can draw a line somewhere in the vicinity of '90/'91/'92 and say they were good - up until that point. Coroner, Metallica, Slayer, Sepultura, Testament, Exodus, Anthrax, Megadeth...I could go on and on.

Most of those bands never really recovered from the 90s either. Sepultura haven't had a well liked album since max and igor left, Metallica has been repeating the same mistakes since death magnetic like poor production and songs that go on for way to long, megadeth albums have been hit or miss since 2004 and coroner haven't released an album since the 90s

[GoatmasterGeneral]

Wildly unpopular opinion I'm sure, but metal bands aren't supposed to be lifetime institutions. There will always be exceptions of course, but creatively speaking most bands don't have any more than maybe a good solid decade in them if they're lucky, and I'm fine with that. Give me your 3 or 4 or 5 best albums you have in you, and then fuck off already. Don't worry, I'll find plenty of new bands. To me these legacy bands from the 80's and 90's are like a football team winning the championship, and then keeping that same championship roster together for the next 30 - 40 years. Why would anyone care about listening to new stuff from, or especially seeing a band play live with mostly the same old geezers from 1985? I can't fathom it.

I can certainly understand the nostalgia blast one can get from the occasional spin of an old favorite record from decades past. Or even young people discovering these old classic records for the first time. I'm not saying burn all the old records, but let these old geezer bands break up and retire already. Slayer had the right idea. I have their first 4 albums and I'll still spin them once in a blue moon, I don't need any more Slayer than that. Everything they've released since 1988 has sucked for me anyway. They're all 60 now, worth tens of millions, why keep going? Megadeth's last good album was 1992. Sepultura's and Coroner's were both 1991. I just have no interest in hearing any new albums from 99% of bands who've been together over 25 or 30 years. I've never been able to understand why so many fans just can't seem to let go of their favorite bands. 

The Metallica I knew were diagnosed as terminal in 1988 and then officially flatlined for me in 1991. They served their purpose for a few years, can't deny I enjoyed their records quite a bit back in the 80's. But I've since moved on. Couldn't possibly care any less what they've been up to over the last 30 years because they're in a different head space now. They're just not the same band from Ride the Lightning anymore, we've got irreconcilable differences now. I divorced them, told them to lose my number. I dug their first 3 records in the 80's, but they're another generation's band now, I don't even know who they are anymore. And it's not just them, I feel this exact same way about any 30+ year old band you could name. Bands that in some case meant the world to me at some point years ago, but it was a fleeting moment in time. Fans shouldn't expect that to last forever.

The one and only possible exception to this legacy ban for me is Overkill. I did go and see them play live 3 years years ago, and I absolutely enjoyed the show. But I hadn't seen them live for close to 20 years before that, and these dudes are my age, so I did have to temper my expectations first before going in. Love Blitz, but even he would tell you he ain't the same Blitz from 1987, or even from 2003. But even with the 'Kill I'd be totally fine if they announced their retirement from music tomorrow. I reckon I had already gotten more than my money's worth out of them 20 years ago already now. And their retirement from touring and making records wouldn't mean I couldn't still spin Horrorscope or Taking Over or Killbox or even Wings of War when the mood strikes. 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

14 minutes ago, AlSymerz said:

40 years thrash had been a thing. It's really a credit to the genre for being so strong and lasting through the mess that every other genres left behind.

No it's not! It's a testament to how most people have really shitty taste in music. Anyone with any experience listening to music should know that almost all of the most popular music will always be the worst most inane shit imaginable. The more popular it is, the worse it sounds. Because if it was really any good, it wouldn't be so popular. 

Thrash has held its popularity reasonably well in the wake of literally hundreds upon hundreds of derivative worthless modern garbage bands, mostly because the more extreme genres of metal are literally too extreme for most people. Thrash is about as extreme as a lot of people are equipped to deal with. Which I suppose is fine for the normies and casuals, but imo that's no excuse for genuine metalheads.

Also, when you say thrash has been a thing for 40 years, all sub-genres of music from back in the day 30, 40, 50, 60 years ago are still things. Sub-genres don't ever really die, there's always some small group of dedicated fans out there keeping the flame alive.

And also, could you please explain to me how every other genre has left behind a mess? What does that even mean, Orca? Post 1995 thrash is about the biggest mess I can think of within the metal world. There will always be some handful of exceptions, (can't really think of any off the top of my head though) but the overwhelming majority of that re-thrash shit is worthless and irredeemable. Totally fine if you're into it, knock yourself out as they say. But let's be honest with each other here for a minute. Because pretty much everyone you talk to over 35 or 40 who has any interest at all in thrash metal will all tell you the same thing: that for the most part these modern young bands' takes on traditional thrash is pretty much worthless garbage.

[AlSymerz]

40 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

And also, could you please explain to me how every other genre has left behind a mess?

One day you'll stop taking the shit I say so literal.

 

[Nasty_Cabbage]

Quote

There is a new band breaking soon that sounds promising, they're called Slayer, people should get on board early with them and they might play more gigs.

Hey now! You're supposed to gatekeep that information otherwise it's like insider trading. Any young new band needs approval by the relevant council of elders and a full earmarked assayer of the federal metal reserve prior to dissemination. You know the rules.

Quote

That's because being born in '86 you didn't become musically aware and get into metal until probably '97 or '98 or so give or take. (close?) So to you everything that came before that would've all been just older stuff. 80's, 90's what's the diff? And then everything since then would be the "newer" stuff.

In retrospect the thrash scene had a pretty short heyday. The first thrash albums hit the shelves in '83/'84 at the tail end of the NWOBHM heyday. Then by '85 more thrash albums dropped, suburban metalhead kids discovered moshing and thrash quickly became hot shit. But it was short lived, because the sub-genre had peaked by '86/'87.

Close... sort of. Looking back we moved so frequently, and local reputation was so pivotal to my father maintaining his service and employment in whatever area of the country we were sent to/wanted to go, that there was a ton of back and forth as far as what I had access to musically. We could land in a spot for a year where pretty much nobody was going to bug you about what you listened to on your own time, to a place where even admitting to enjoying something outside the parameters of church music could spur a witch hunt by the rest of the community who safeguarded their desire not to expose their children to pervasive modern influences in the media at all costs. I was still, with a few notable exceptions pretty much always into the heavier side of radio-rock throughout everything, and the rest of it was just about access and the slow erosion of barriers via increasingly convenient technology.

I just realized I probably sound like a whiny underdeveloped infant who hasn't gotten over certain aspects of the environments he grew up in. I can't emphasize enough that this isn't my intent. Truthfully I don't have the energy or time to carry around overripe anger with me anymore. It was just the reality of the situation for me at the time, for better or worse.

Whatever the case, you were pretty close with your time-frame estimation. I'd really only add the qualifier to that frame that my early love affair with metal older than myself was not without circumstantial interruption. So there's going to be blind spots and holes here and there.

As far as the subject at hand goes though, I do think that the heyday of thrash can be pretty firmly marked in the late eighties, with fewer and fewer really authentic thrash bands still firing the occasional head-shot into the early nineties. I just don't really see the point in kicking up dust over whether the Municipal Wastes of today can be completely qualified or disqualified from living up to the imminent legacy their thrash forbearers established. That's really all I meant.

Quote

Wildly unpopular opinion I'm sure, but metal bands aren't supposed to be lifetime institutions. There will always be exceptions of course, but creatively speaking most bands don't have any more than maybe a good solid decade in them if they're lucky, and I'm fine with that.

I don't know that that's all that hot of a take. I do agree with you in general, but I also think it's necessary to acknowledge that a big part of that line of reasoning is not wanting to be a part of your own personal Spinal Tap effect. It does seem to generally hold true, but I would personally hate for that idea to prevent me from listening to something even if it pales in comparison. Then again, I often give legacy bands far too much leeway. It seems fairly instinctive to understand that the primal or animal nature of thrash in particular can be intrinsically tied to youth, and it does sometimes get a sad sigh from me to see things like Slash getting molested live on stage by Fergie (Fergy? Furgie? Fuck I don't know) on the superbowl half-time show. Sometimes you just gotta eat a shit sandwich and hope what comes next is better, I guess.

[AlSymerz]

Just now, Nasty_Cabbage said:

Hey now! You're supposed to gatekeep that information otherwise it's like insider trading. Any young new band needs approval by the relevant council of elders and a full earmarked assayer of the federal metal reserve prior to dissemination. You know the rules.

 

Yeah, but when I'm unsupervised I'm a rule breaker!!

 

[Arioch]

I have read all your messages and would like to thank you for this lively discussion. Everyone's views are interesting.

The most important thing is to listen to what you like. It's that simple.

🤘

[GoatmasterGeneral]

Just now, Arioch said:

I have read all your messages and would like to thank you for this lively discussion. Everyone's views are interesting.

The most important thing is to listen to what you like. It's that simple.

And here I was staying up super late just to see what our thrash maven Ari had to say about all this thrash nonsense. Finally he gets here and reads all the posts he missed while he was sleeping, and these are your invaluable pearls of wisdom? "Listen to what you like?" Comme c'est simple. 

[Arioch]

I, too, was an adult when Thrash was born, and I rushed out to buy as many albums as I could from the 80s. I didn't have enough money to discover everything, so I spent months listening to the same records. I caught up a little later.

So, I'm well aware of the beginnings of this kind of Metal, and I'm simply incapable of being in the head of a fan who got into Metal 10 years ago and discovered Thrash.

Just as I can't get inside the head of an early Black Sabbath or Deep Purple fan. What he feels, I feel differently.

As I said here a while ago, my favorite band doesn't play metal. They're a progressive rock band born in 1969 and still around today. I only started listening to their music 6 years ago. It's impossible for me to feel the same pleasure listening to their first records as someone who discovered them in 1969.

Oh, and one more thing I can add. When I see how, these days, a band like Testament "seals the deal" by offering absolutely nothing new, apart from new titles, I agree that once the magic albums are behind them, it's better to hang up than to go on for the sake of going on. Speaking of Slayer, I think they should have stopped right after Christ Illusion. The last two were already too much. But my favorite band, no way! 😅 Firstly, because in a career spanning 55 years, the line-up has changed considerably, but also because new musicians always join in and participate in the musical creations, which breathes new life into the band every time.

But all this is to say, in the end, that it's not always easy to be understood by someone who doesn't have the same background in Metal, but that's not the point. Life's too short to bother listening to things you don't like.

33 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

And here I was staying up super late

Time for bed, my friend 😊

Edit : I'm not sure "seals the deal" will be understood. In France, it's an expression for something you do to please others and make money, without being creative about it.

[GoatmasterGeneral]

Just now, Arioch said:

I, too, was an adult when thrash was born

You must have been very mature for a 14 year old.

 

Just now, Arioch said:

my favorite band doesn't play metal. They're a progressive rock band born in 1969 and still around today.

You just like them because you were born in 1969 and are still around today.

 

Just now, Arioch said:

I'm not sure "seals the deal" will be understood. In France, it's an expression for something you do to please others and make money, without being creative about it.

We use the phrase a bit more literally.

 

Just now, Arioch said:

Time for bed, my friend 😊

Nah, it's only 4:50, not even light out yet. Soon. One more album or two. Probably not thrash.

[Arioch]

3 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

You must have been very mature for a 14 year old.

Indeed... Maybe I got a bit carried away when I said I was an adult at the time. I was a teenager, sorry for the confusion.

6 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

You just like them because you were born in 1969 and are still around today.

Absolutely not. Their music is simply magical. I don't care what year the band was born.

7 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Nah, it's only 4:50, not even light out yet. Soon. One more album or two. Probably not thrash.

😆

[AlSymerz]

It's funny how these sorts of threads always come to the same conclusion. Thrash is the best.

 

[Arioch]

40 minutes ago, AlSymerz said:

Thrash is the best.

Yes, but it all depends on the period.