Its and age old question, ever sense Tony Iommi (Black Sabbath) detuned his guitar and began to inspire many to not only start playing but to begin their own metal bands in the garage. Still today many people who listen to heavy metal music will argue what and who is or is not metal. Personally, I feel half the battle is how heavy your music is. The other half is a coalesce of many other elements. First of all a true heavy metal band DOES NOT worry about getting drive time on the radio. True metal musicians ( and i also would hope musicians in general) are not in it for the money, Fame, ego or yes even girls ( a little hard to say that last one). They're in it for the love of the music. No amount of money should ever change their view of society or what inspired them in the first place. Metal musician's should also not be afraid to be inspired and to listen to other forms of music. Especially Jazz and Blues, both of these styles come from and are inspired by what's in your heart. Not what your fans, friends or critics want to hear. ( ask Winton Warsalus about what he thinks of music critics lol) In fact rock music is really just and off shoot of jazz and sense rock music is the foundation of metal music theres really no reason to be afraid to listen to it. A good example of a band that has kept it metal is Slayer.I was also proud of Lamb of God when their follow up to Sacrament was heavier. One example of non metalness (I guess you would call it) is Dave Mustaine. Holding a grudge for twenty plus years on the members of Metallica for kicking him out is defiantly not metal. Especially when Megadeth is considered one of the fore fathers of Trash Metal and also considered second behind Metallica. Anyway enough about Dave I don't want him to ruin my blog lol. So now that you have a sense of what I consider metal, here are some bands that might be consider metal but are not. Kiss for one, any band that paints a kat or a star on thier faces is not metal. The only member of Kiss that I would consider metal is Gene Simmons, at least he paints a demon on his face. Ac Dc is not metal for the record, they are hard rock. Bon jovi or any GLAM band should not be considered metal. Dressing up like a chick is the most non metal thing I can think of doing. (at least at the moment) Before we get to my top 15 metal bands I personally would like to say that I am truly sorry to Children of Bodom, Anthrax, Mastodon, Gojira, All that remains, and any other metal band that did not make the list. There is only 15 spots and I had to choose the ones that are my top 15 favorites. All of the above bands are very important to the modern metal scene and should not be discredited in any way. ( especially All that remains, they were number 16)
So without further a due here are my Top 15 Heavy Metal bands:
15. Hatebreed - A band thats not afraid to say FUCK YOU
14. All shall Perish - Its a shame Chris left the band, we really could of had a truly great band
13. God Forbid - Until Dallas pulled all his shit ( singing more then Byron and leaving the band) this was one of my favorite bands. I just might pick Byron Davis as my favorite metal vocalist.
12. Exodus - They seem to be the best metal band that no one has heard of. Gary holt is just a great guitarist.
11. Kill Switch Engage - Kill switch really doesn't care what anyone thinks of them, they hate Emo kids, and have stayed consistent sense 1999 when they formed. Sounds like a metal band to me.
10. Pantera - My old lead singer Tim used to say " it should be against the law to not like Pantera" and I couldn't agree more.
9. Iron maiden - A classic metal band. There lead singer flys the band around in a plane when they tour and they wrote " run to the hills"
8. Five Finger Death Punch - Their songs have a lot of meaning to them and to there fans. They write about politics, Religion, and dignity.
7. Lamb of God - When Sacrament came out this band blew up. And yet when they released their follow up Wrath it was heavier. A lot of credits go out to L.O.G for staying with the music instead of the money.
6. Black Sabbath - Easy not a true list with out the Founders
5. Between the Buried and Me - My good friend and Ex band mate James turned me on to this great band. Truely a band for musicians.
4. Slipknot - Unlike kiss they hide their identity in a very metal way. Love to say Fuck Religion and are considered( to some) the successors to Slayer.
3. Metallica - They never sold out they just were not afraid to try something new. With death magnetic released they still prove why they are such a successful metal band.
2. Slayer - A metal band that has inspired me a lot. Still going after 30 years just like metallica
you can truly tell that their in it for the music.
1. Devil Driver - Most probably would not agree with my number one selection. but there a great example of what modern Trash should sound like. They are very popular with out any drive time. and... its my list so fuck off.
There you have it my views on metal today and my top 15 metal bands.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Movies Vs. Books - The Final Showdown !?!?
I feel that first of all to even have a opinion in this debate ( if thats what you would like to call it) that holds any water or weighs anything you need to be at least familiar with both party's. In this blog i will try to be as unbiased as I can. When I initially came up with the idea ( I was at work during a big rush, in case you wanted to know) other then being very excited, I started asking friends, (through face to face interaction or texting) customers, and anybody else I could in the time between work and getting home.
The overwhelming answer is movies. And on paper this would make a lot of sense. Why? well first of all movies are much much easier. Its easier, faster, and much more convenient to stay home and rent, go to a theater, ( even a popular date idea with your significant other) or you can now even rent them straight from your computer now.Metaphorically it would be the equivalent of going to Mcdonald's to get a cheeseburger rather then grilling in your back yard. So this is why I feel that, at least the majority of Americans, would choose movies. In fact i bet the average American could name more movie directors then authors. Books are much more idealogical, you actually learn things by reading them. Unless your watching a documentary your not going to learn much from.. say Transformers 2 thats going to come in handy later in life. ( I'm not at all saying thats why some one would go see a movie of the sort, and I also heard that Transformers 2 is a huge flop)
On a Psychology stand point there is a self fulling prophecy side that may go unnoticed. In other words if your cynical about a particular movie or book ( or even movies and books in general) your going to get that out of it. If your walking in the movie saying to yourself " this movie is going to suck" it really doesn't matter how good or bad the movie really is, your reaction and your memory of the movie is going to be negative. And vice versa respectively. It doesn't matter if the movie is " The Godfather" if your going to be cynical about it don't even go. You really could turn " The Godfather" into " Transformers 2". This is because if you form an opinion about something and are set on that opinion your setting your self up to fail or succeed (depending on if your being positive or negative.) You have to have an open mind about everything you try and retry. If you would like another metaphor I have a great one from a speech class I took in collage. If your nervous and think that your speech is going to fail miserably, then your going to turn the experence into that. Even if the speech goes well, your memory of the speech is that you were a nervous reck and were completely unorganized. ( Even if the speech went well and nobody could tell that you were nervous) My old Speech teacher Mrs. Thaler would video tape the speech's to have her students view them later. You could feel your cynical memory's of a speech fade away as you watched yourself do completely fine. This technique is very good for breaking nervousness and building confidence. On a side note I was telling a cousin about this, because he's about to enter the same speech class. A co worker of mine stated that doing your speech in front of a mirror would be the same. The answer is no. It would not be even close, watching your self on tape, you have a chance to develop your opinion and memory of how it went. Only to see it crushed by what really happened.
However one thing that is always interesting to me is how similar words get replaced in the memory of the speech, movie , book or story. For example maybe you might remember " Yes, I did fool you" when the actual line in the movie is " Yes, I did trick you". This is because fool and trick are interchangeable. Its something that goes unnoticed more then you realize. Yes, I know that this isn't really important to the debate. But its something that interests me and it is somewhat related to the topic.
So in conclusion, I would say that if your in a hurry and want some entertainment, a movie is definably a good choice. Just make sure its worth seeing.( stay away from Transformers 2) My personal choice would be to jump in to a good book and obtain some meaningful knowledge. Theres nothing quite like jumping into a great book next to a window on a dreary and rainy day. And its also a good way to get your mind off of an up coming event, to relief stress.
Thanks for reading
The overwhelming answer is movies. And on paper this would make a lot of sense. Why? well first of all movies are much much easier. Its easier, faster, and much more convenient to stay home and rent, go to a theater, ( even a popular date idea with your significant other) or you can now even rent them straight from your computer now.Metaphorically it would be the equivalent of going to Mcdonald's to get a cheeseburger rather then grilling in your back yard. So this is why I feel that, at least the majority of Americans, would choose movies. In fact i bet the average American could name more movie directors then authors. Books are much more idealogical, you actually learn things by reading them. Unless your watching a documentary your not going to learn much from.. say Transformers 2 thats going to come in handy later in life. ( I'm not at all saying thats why some one would go see a movie of the sort, and I also heard that Transformers 2 is a huge flop)
On a Psychology stand point there is a self fulling prophecy side that may go unnoticed. In other words if your cynical about a particular movie or book ( or even movies and books in general) your going to get that out of it. If your walking in the movie saying to yourself " this movie is going to suck" it really doesn't matter how good or bad the movie really is, your reaction and your memory of the movie is going to be negative. And vice versa respectively. It doesn't matter if the movie is " The Godfather" if your going to be cynical about it don't even go. You really could turn " The Godfather" into " Transformers 2". This is because if you form an opinion about something and are set on that opinion your setting your self up to fail or succeed (depending on if your being positive or negative.) You have to have an open mind about everything you try and retry. If you would like another metaphor I have a great one from a speech class I took in collage. If your nervous and think that your speech is going to fail miserably, then your going to turn the experence into that. Even if the speech goes well, your memory of the speech is that you were a nervous reck and were completely unorganized. ( Even if the speech went well and nobody could tell that you were nervous) My old Speech teacher Mrs. Thaler would video tape the speech's to have her students view them later. You could feel your cynical memory's of a speech fade away as you watched yourself do completely fine. This technique is very good for breaking nervousness and building confidence. On a side note I was telling a cousin about this, because he's about to enter the same speech class. A co worker of mine stated that doing your speech in front of a mirror would be the same. The answer is no. It would not be even close, watching your self on tape, you have a chance to develop your opinion and memory of how it went. Only to see it crushed by what really happened.
However one thing that is always interesting to me is how similar words get replaced in the memory of the speech, movie , book or story. For example maybe you might remember " Yes, I did fool you" when the actual line in the movie is " Yes, I did trick you". This is because fool and trick are interchangeable. Its something that goes unnoticed more then you realize. Yes, I know that this isn't really important to the debate. But its something that interests me and it is somewhat related to the topic.
So in conclusion, I would say that if your in a hurry and want some entertainment, a movie is definably a good choice. Just make sure its worth seeing.( stay away from Transformers 2) My personal choice would be to jump in to a good book and obtain some meaningful knowledge. Theres nothing quite like jumping into a great book next to a window on a dreary and rainy day. And its also a good way to get your mind off of an up coming event, to relief stress.
Thanks for reading
Saturday, June 27, 2009
A place for Jazz in modern music
During my first quarter of collage, I had to give an informative speech for well. . . Speech class. Many topic idea's came and went, until finally the idea of Jazz came to mind. Many people, especially my age(19), are very misinformed about jazz. They view it as outdated and old. I scene it on all of their faces when I first started my speech. By the end many ( I can not speak for all of them) were very entertained and interested. Many who do consider jazz outdated are just ignorant to the music style. But if you don't try something how do you know you will not like it? My point precisely.
So how is jazz still relevant to the modern music scene? I feel that this question is best answered by looking at its history. Jazz is responsible for many of the elements that are still found in modern music. Some of these elements include introducing vocals, basic song structure, and the pentatonic scale. Vocals was a huge edition to music, especially pop music. For without vocals what we now know as modern pop music would likely not exist. I know many people who cannot listen to music that does not contain vocals. I think that this is because vocals give you something to catch on to. Its what you hum at work when you are bored. Something else that jazz added to modern music in general was, song structure. Sure jazz musicians improvised around "head" arrangements. But this eventually turned into A-B-A-B-C-B-B structure. ( if your not a musician the A's are verses the B's are the chorus and C is the bridge) Lastly theres the pentatonic scale. which was created by taking the major scale and omitting the second and the sixth notes. So for example an A major scale becomes an a pentatonic by playing A,C,D,E and G instead of A,B,C,D,E,F and G. When I asked my high school music teacher Mr. Murphy (for an interview I used in the speech I mentioned earlier) about jazz he immediately quoted Ken Burns jazz documentary. ( worth checking out by the way) Ken Burns states that he believes that America's three greatest accomplishments are the Constitution, Baseball, and Jazz. I couldn't agree more. ( except I would change the baseball part to football ) Mr. Murphy also made the point that jazz is more then just music, it represents the history of many cultures. Such as call and response from its African and Southern roots. Jazz musicians play off of one another though improvisation. Which is the best part of jazz to me. ( and I think Wynton Marsalis would agree) this keeps the music new and spontaneous.
One last thing I have to mention is guitar solo's. They may have been the "In" thing during the 80's hair metal period. But a true guitar solo has so much more substance then just flash. A real guitar solo adds something to the song that nothing else can add. It makes the song worth listening to. The guitar solo is a result of a jazz guitarist named Charlie Christian. He was the first to start doing guitar solo' s and viewing the guitar as a soloing instrument. So as a guitarist myself i have to forever to pay respect to everything that Charlie gave to music and guitar.
So to conclude, jazz is a music style that has added so much to modern music. It should never be considered outdated or meaningless. Listening to jazz with open ears is like eating lays potato chips you can't eat just one! Jazz continues to influence many modern musicians to this day including myself.
Thanks for reading
So how is jazz still relevant to the modern music scene? I feel that this question is best answered by looking at its history. Jazz is responsible for many of the elements that are still found in modern music. Some of these elements include introducing vocals, basic song structure, and the pentatonic scale. Vocals was a huge edition to music, especially pop music. For without vocals what we now know as modern pop music would likely not exist. I know many people who cannot listen to music that does not contain vocals. I think that this is because vocals give you something to catch on to. Its what you hum at work when you are bored. Something else that jazz added to modern music in general was, song structure. Sure jazz musicians improvised around "head" arrangements. But this eventually turned into A-B-A-B-C-B-B structure. ( if your not a musician the A's are verses the B's are the chorus and C is the bridge) Lastly theres the pentatonic scale. which was created by taking the major scale and omitting the second and the sixth notes. So for example an A major scale becomes an a pentatonic by playing A,C,D,E and G instead of A,B,C,D,E,F and G. When I asked my high school music teacher Mr. Murphy (for an interview I used in the speech I mentioned earlier) about jazz he immediately quoted Ken Burns jazz documentary. ( worth checking out by the way) Ken Burns states that he believes that America's three greatest accomplishments are the Constitution, Baseball, and Jazz. I couldn't agree more. ( except I would change the baseball part to football ) Mr. Murphy also made the point that jazz is more then just music, it represents the history of many cultures. Such as call and response from its African and Southern roots. Jazz musicians play off of one another though improvisation. Which is the best part of jazz to me. ( and I think Wynton Marsalis would agree) this keeps the music new and spontaneous.
One last thing I have to mention is guitar solo's. They may have been the "In" thing during the 80's hair metal period. But a true guitar solo has so much more substance then just flash. A real guitar solo adds something to the song that nothing else can add. It makes the song worth listening to. The guitar solo is a result of a jazz guitarist named Charlie Christian. He was the first to start doing guitar solo' s and viewing the guitar as a soloing instrument. So as a guitarist myself i have to forever to pay respect to everything that Charlie gave to music and guitar.
So to conclude, jazz is a music style that has added so much to modern music. It should never be considered outdated or meaningless. Listening to jazz with open ears is like eating lays potato chips you can't eat just one! Jazz continues to influence many modern musicians to this day including myself.
Thanks for reading
Friday, June 26, 2009
Some Thoughts on the New England Patriots 2009 Off Season
NFL teams are and will forever be changing. It is the name of the game in order to be successful in the National Football League. The key is to find the players that best fit in to your coach's or team's "System", not the players that are considered the best by the public media. The New England Patriots are no different. This off season has been very eventful and is still ongoing. It is one of the best off seasons I've seen in my eleven years as a patriots fan. It all started with disappointment and being mocked by the other thirty one NFL teams. (yes even the Detroit Lions had something to say) When the Patriots did not make the playoffs after an eleven and five record. This was the first time since 2002 that the pats missed the playoffs! when Quarter back Matt Cassel was given the franchise tag. Everyone had their own opinion as to how the Patriots should go about the situation. Some thought that it would be wise to keep Cassel as a back up and others (including myself) thought it would be an even better idea to trade while his value was high. Kevin O'Connell would serve as a nice back up for Brady, since the plan is that he is going to take his place when Tom decides to retire. Besides if Matt Cassel does well for another franchise, it would be cool to know that he got his start in New England. Eventually the Kansas City Chiefs traded the thirty fourth overall pick in the 2009 draft for Matt Cassel and Outside Linebacker Mike Vrabel. How ever you viewed the situation the dust has settled and it is what it is. With that said however, I felt that trading Vrabel and Cassel for one second round pick was a bit of a bad trade. I thought that Mike Vrabel had more trade value then he was given. In the end it did turn out to be alright deal, the Patriots selected Free Safety Patrick Chung from the University of Oregon. I have not seen a lot of Patrick's playing but he does sound promising. (to me at least) Wide Receiver Jabar Gaffney was released and then signed by the Denver Bronco's. Losing Jabar really does hurt. I still remember the great catch in the corner of the endzone against the Baltimore Ravens (2007 season). A touchdown that kept the Pats perfect. Then again there was the drop in the game against the Indianapolis Colts (2008 season) . The catch would have won the game and maybe propelled the Patriots into the post season. Oh well, what ever Jabar Gaffeny's legacy is as a Patriot, I will still enjoy watching him play. acquiring wide receiver's Joey Galloway(Tampa Bay Buccaneers) and Greg Lewis (Philadelphia eagles) more then makes up for his loss.
Another event that transpired was the trading of Corner Back Ellis Hobbs III. Personally I was disappointed in this trade. Hobbs was one of my favorite defensive players this past year. All tough he was criticized for letting Plex catch the game winning touch down in Super Bowl 42. He was the glue that (somewhat) held an injury prone secondary together this passed season. He played injured during many of the games and the Eagles made a hell of a deal to get him. The Retirement of Rodney Harrison is hard on, not only Patriots fans, but football fans in general. Like him or not Rodney added excitement and a charisma that will be forever missed. I look forward to seeing him on NBC's pregame. lol. Brandon Meriweather should do an alright job playing his postion. He lead the secondary in INTS, many of which lead to win critical games. Signing Corner back's Shawn Springs and Leigh Bodden is a breath of fresh air and allows me to sleep peacefully at night. With out these two our secondary would be in nothing but trouble. Springs is a proven shut down corner. Which is just what the Pats are going to need now that they have to play T.O and Lee Evans twice next year. Terrence Wheatley had an impressive rookie season last year and will further add some depth at corner. I am really excited to watch him play.(one can only hope) Jonathan Wilhite is many people's favorite to be the next big Patriot corner. Something like say, Ty Law? I don't know about being the next Ty law, but having a big impact on New England's secondary is a great possibility. New England has one of the most promising running attacks in the NFL . Who who argue when your Half backs are Fred Taylor, Laurence Maroney, Kevin Faulk, Sammy Morris and the rookie sensation Ben Jarvus Green- Ellis. A solid running attack is just what the Pats need with Tomcat(Brady) coming off a M.C.L and A.C.L tear. And lets not even get started about the brady issue or the "Tom Brady rule". In my opinion Brady was never a Micheal Vick type player and there's no reason to start now. He should return to about 95% of what he was before the injury. Brady can leave the running up to Taylor and Maroney.
So in conclusion the New England Patriots have a promising 2009 season. The only thing that concerns me is the Line backing Core. Many of the Line Backers were either traded or released. But i am sure the Bill Belichick has a plan. . . he always does.
Can wait for September to roll around
Thanks for reading
Another event that transpired was the trading of Corner Back Ellis Hobbs III. Personally I was disappointed in this trade. Hobbs was one of my favorite defensive players this past year. All tough he was criticized for letting Plex catch the game winning touch down in Super Bowl 42. He was the glue that (somewhat) held an injury prone secondary together this passed season. He played injured during many of the games and the Eagles made a hell of a deal to get him. The Retirement of Rodney Harrison is hard on, not only Patriots fans, but football fans in general. Like him or not Rodney added excitement and a charisma that will be forever missed. I look forward to seeing him on NBC's pregame. lol. Brandon Meriweather should do an alright job playing his postion. He lead the secondary in INTS, many of which lead to win critical games. Signing Corner back's Shawn Springs and Leigh Bodden is a breath of fresh air and allows me to sleep peacefully at night. With out these two our secondary would be in nothing but trouble. Springs is a proven shut down corner. Which is just what the Pats are going to need now that they have to play T.O and Lee Evans twice next year. Terrence Wheatley had an impressive rookie season last year and will further add some depth at corner. I am really excited to watch him play.(one can only hope) Jonathan Wilhite is many people's favorite to be the next big Patriot corner. Something like say, Ty Law? I don't know about being the next Ty law, but having a big impact on New England's secondary is a great possibility. New England has one of the most promising running attacks in the NFL . Who who argue when your Half backs are Fred Taylor, Laurence Maroney, Kevin Faulk, Sammy Morris and the rookie sensation Ben Jarvus Green- Ellis. A solid running attack is just what the Pats need with Tomcat(Brady) coming off a M.C.L and A.C.L tear. And lets not even get started about the brady issue or the "Tom Brady rule". In my opinion Brady was never a Micheal Vick type player and there's no reason to start now. He should return to about 95% of what he was before the injury. Brady can leave the running up to Taylor and Maroney.
So in conclusion the New England Patriots have a promising 2009 season. The only thing that concerns me is the Line backing Core. Many of the Line Backers were either traded or released. But i am sure the Bill Belichick has a plan. . . he always does.
Can wait for September to roll around
Thanks for reading
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
