Rolling Metal Thread 2012

I mean, it's a good album, and I would definitely include it in my, say, top hundred of the year, but top 10 seems rather shortsighted.

if you're doing the official list for a major publication, there are other factors that need to be considered – consensus amongst the other writers that cover that genre for the publication, a view of the potential legacy of the album, whether or not it's the "best" of the year or just your favorite.

I don't want you to think of me as yelling. I want you to think of me as disagreeing in a calm and reasonable tone. (You fucking idiot.)

- What constitutes "a major publication" in 2012? There are no publications that could truly be considered "major" anymore, in my opinion. If you mean "a publication read by lots of other critics ready to snipe and throw darts" (which is really what "major" means in this context), then say that, even if it makes the world of music criticism look exactly as petty and dominated-by-dickbags as it is.

- If you're seeking consensus, don't ask one person to compile the list. Do it with ballots and a group of voters numbering in, at minimum, the double digits. Otherwise you're pretending to objectivity. A one-person list has no obligation to anyone but the list-maker.

- Albums made with some sort of "legacy" in mind are frequently awful. Timid, overthought, and dull as fuck. That's what we have indie for; there's no need to let thoughts of "legacy" and the like pollute metal, which should always remain (or at least have the potential to be) the soundtrack to a 14-year-old boy thumping his scrawny chest in his bedroom.

Maybe he should have said longevity rather than legacy.

re 'years past matter':

i still like the krallice a lot and have played it dozens of times, but i can't say i understand it much when it's not playing - hard to even remember, compared to the previous one. i wonder if that might not have an effect on its list placeability.

Longevity is a ridiculous concept w/r/t music too. How many times do you have to listen to an album all the way through before you think you've gotten your money's worth (assuming you paid for it)? If you pay $15, do you think the album "owes" you 15 plays? Or a given time-span of enjoyableness? Does it have to be good now, and still good five years from now? Have you ever put a record back thinking, "Sure, I might like this today, but what am I gonna think about it when I'm 40?"

which should always remain (or at least have the potential to be) the soundtrack to a 14-year-old boy thumping his scrawny chest in his bedroom.

this is kind of depressing!

Longevity is a ridiculous concept w/r/t music too.
By longevity I mean some essential quality that compels repeated listens. Seems pretty non-controversial that this would be a desirable value.

Albums made with some sort of "legacy" in mind are frequently awful.
Seemed like Jeff was talking about a list-maker estimating (post-hoc) an album's potential legacy going forward, which is a different thing entirely from the artist's intent, so no conflict there.

Yeah, legacy probably wasn't the right word. Longevity isn't quite it, either. I guess I mean its place in the larger picture. If it's an album by an established act, does it significantly up their game, take them in an interesting new direction, set a new benchmark for their corner of the world, serve as the most fully realized example of their vision yet, or is it just plain awesome? If it's a newer act, do they bring something new to the table, provide an exceptional example of the genre they're working in, surprise you, etc. For example, let's look at the Devin Townsend record I put pretty high up on my list. He's been around for a while, put out a million releases, and yet Epicloud serves as a consolidation of all the styles and interests he's worked with over the past two decades, and he executes the results amazingly well. Meshuggah are the long reigning progenitors of "djent," and while they've had missteps in the past (I'm not a big fan of most of their post-millennial work), their latest album cements that they are still the best while bringing in a new, welcome organic production. Pallbearer, who are obviously divisive, certainly work within traditional doom, but with great songwriting and a hopeful undertone that seems fresh. On the other hand, you have Lamb of God, who have basically been on a creative plateau for the good part of a decade (even if their latest is there most polished version of that stagnation), Dethklok, who put out a totally solid, totally derivative death metal album, and Morbid Angel, who did try something new but failed horribly. You have to weigh those against everything else that came out this year and go, well, was said totally solid death metal album REALLY better than all the other death metal albums that came out this year?

As for major publications – I would consider a publication with the Voice's long and storied history, with its wide circulation and prominent website and end of your critic poll and ownership of several other publications with large circulation in major cities to be a major publication, yes. Do I think they should've assigned that list to one writer? No, I don't.

xxp Also, why wouldn't an album "that is fun right now" be one you'd be more likely to return to 5 or 20 years down the line than a less fun one you just think is, ho hum, "important" or whatever? And how, exactly, would you determine which album is "best" (as opposed to your "favorite" -- never understood the difference myself, since neither is objective) other than by how much you actually like the thing? In what way is something you don't like "better" than something you do? Why would you base your list on what other people like? Isn't that kind of chickenshit? Why don't you trust your own tastes? (Don't mean to direct any of these at you personally, Jeff, and I'm not yelling at you either. But I don't think what you're suggesting makes much sense. It also makes for really boring lists. Which there are too many of already.)

Wrote that before your last post, obviously. But I'm still not buying it. "Fun right now" is really underrated by critics; always has been.

heavy metal could get hit by a bus crossing the street at any moment

Honestly have never been a huge fan of year-end lists in general that are supposed to be a consensus of some publication's "brand" or whatever. They pretend the outlet has a voice that speaks for all its contributors or editors, but that's pretty much always a lie in my experience. Individual lists make sense; actual polls can make sense. (And the Voice has Pazz & Jop for that.) Beyond that, it's mainly marketing.

man i could stand to listen to a totally solid death metal from this year

Yeah, certainly fair. And having different voices (no pun intended) out there is certainly a valuable thing. I think maybe my problem with this particular article is that it feels like a marketing-mandated listicle rather than an actual critical evaluation of the best metal albums of the year, but that is, as you pointed out, an entirely subjective thing on my part. If she was the official metal envoy for voice media, like Brandon over at pitchfork, that would maybe be a different story, but as is it feels like they were just like "hey, you write for us and like metal, can you knock one of these things out for us by tomorrow?"

"Fun right now" is certainly a valid criteria, no denying that (and it's something I try to acknowledge in my own writing), but the inclusion of Dethklok just feels kind of lazy. Even though, again, I do really like that record!

I realize we have this sort of "end of year poll LOL" debate every year, but I don't know, sometimes it's valuable to be critical of criticism.

If it's an album by an established act, does it significantly up their game, take them in an interesting new direction, set a new benchmark for their corner of the world, serve as the most fully realized example of their vision yet, or is it just plain awesome? If it's a newer act, do they bring something new to the table, provide an exceptional example of the genre they're working in, surprise you, etc

By the way, I'm not denying that all of these factors might obviously figure into how much you like something -- might make it more compelling, more worth returning to, more fun; might give it more potential for future usefulness. But the trick of criticism (list-making and otherwise) is to figure out how much you like or dislike something, and then figure out why, not the other way around, by marking off variables on a checklist or whatever. There are plenty of great albums that do nothing new at all, always have been. And new directions aren't necessarily good directions.

I don't like the Dethklok album at all, by the way. But I also don't distrust the guy on facebook who tried explaining why he thinks it's one of the year's best metal albums. He's a pretty good critic, and he hears tons of metal. In his world, maybe it is one of the best.

I agree, Chuck. And I feel like, when writing a review of an album, that's the approach to take. But when you're compiling an end of year list, something which by its very nature requires more rumination on why you like something and why that thing is more worthy of promotion at the end of the year (and end of year lists are supposed to take into account how well an album has aged in the intervening time after it's had a lot of time to sit with you), it's pretty valuable to look at those different factors.

end of year lists are supposed to take into account how well an album has aged in the intervening time after it's had a lot of time to sit with you

Obviously agree with this. But otherwise, I'm more likely to (mostly sub-consciously) ask myself questions like: (1) How often do I play this?; (2) How often do I expect to play it in the future?; (3) How much do I get out of it when I do play it? (which might eliminate stuff that seems more lightweight, but then again might not); (4) How much of it do I care about?; (5) How much do I want to hear it right now? All of which add up to: Of these two (or 200) albums, which one do I like more? "Importance" (however you define it) is a minor issue.

Since I don't get paid by whoever is buying ad space in the magazine, I try to be 100% honest about what albums I like the most, in the order that I liked them.

Unfortunately, I am often most excited about artists who are my booking clients (go figure that I book some of my favorite bands). So it's a drag that due to "conflict of interest" I'm annually barred from putting bands like YOB on my year-end list.

Actually, (aside from my own album which I am very proud of), I have decided to throw in the towel and include the Agalloch e.p. on my lists since it's just a great record.

I'm not advocating dishonesty. I just think there are certain criteria that need to be weighed when putting together an end of year list, especially if it's supposed to be representing the publication and not just your personal favorites – and there is a difference, Chuck. For example, Die Hard is probably my favorite movie, but I'm not going to claim that it's the best movie ever made.

I definitely see a different between the "objective" best and my "personal" favorite. Big time.

I'd say that Master of Puppets is the best Metallica album, but Ride the Lightning is still my favorite. I get that.

I don't get that (especially that specific an example!) at all. If Master Of Puppets is "better," why wouldn't you like it more? That makes no sense to me.

Die Hard is probably my favorite movie, but I'm not going to claim that it's the best movie ever made.

Just the best one you've ever seen?

I mean, I believe people who say Charlie Parker is a great artist, even though I don't get him (in fact, I've called him "probably the greatest artist whose music I don't get"), and I could say the same about certain movies I've never made it through. (I probably wouldn't say anything was the best movie ever; I haven't seen enough movies. Could maybe say the same about metal albums, except that I subtitled a book The 500 Best Heavy Metal Albums In The Universe once.) But the smaller the pie gets from "in all of human history," the sillier the distinction seems to me. Nothing from 2012 has been canonized; I'll be damned if I'm going to contribute to the canonization of albums I don't actually love, just because somebody else with more boring taste than me (okay, with different taste than me) does.

Wow, I have a busy as hell day at work with no time for ilx and you guys go crazy with the good discussion.

But you can all breathe easier, my Krallice CD finally showed up in today's mail, only four months after placing the order.

Expect your cross-town mail order in 2014.

Lol.

People who make year-end lists should obviously have perfect knowledge of the breadth of human history and culture, past, present, and future, is all I'm trying to say.

I think there is too much water being held on a EOY record list. Maybe a bit more thought can be into a eoy list from a publication, as it should rep what THAT particular publication is about, but a personal list is up for whatever floats your boat. Thats why its a personal list.. Global impact of a record is NEVER a consideration

The specific list under discussion wasn't (framed as) a personal list, though, but rather as representing the publication.

For what it's worth, I am still scared to look at that list. Really want to stay oblivious to whatever is going on at that publication. (I sort of have a history there, see.)

Well, the piece was written in editorial plural voice, contrary to the premise undergirding this whole tangent.

There is a circle of Hell reserved for people who use the "editorial we." And at the Voice, of all places -- Okay, I'm definitely leaning toward boycotting Pazz & Jop. No good can come of this.

I don't really agree with anything j3ff is saying here (sorry!) but that vv article is pretty irritating to me. starting things off by praising an album for how 'not metal' it is just isn't what I'm looking for in a '10 best metal records of 2012' article, weirdly enough. just not my bag.

otoh, grim kim's list seems really cool and makes me want to check out a bunch of albums even though all I listen to nowadays are albums that YMO members play on or produced. knelt rote! their first two ruled! didn't realize a new one dropped, man I gotta listen to that.

Knelt Rote is badass live. I've never tried listening to their recordings.

those are also pretty badass

Shameless plug...I wrote a thing on Barge to Hell, which was last week and loads of fun:

http://social.entertainment.msn.com/music/blogs/headbang-blogpost.aspx?post=b12cd001-00fa-4cbf-82cf-5bd960a5b2b4

Not as into this Corsair record as some of the other people on here. It's decent, but I don't know, I feel like Gypsyhawk do the Thin Lizzy thing with more verve and better songs.

In the meantime – Hells Headbangers 7" roundup on the Deciblog! http://www.decibelmagazine.com/featured/7-inches-of-hell/

Adrien, your write-up on Barge to Hell was a fantastic read, seems like such fun! It's still hilarious to see all those death metal dudes cavorting in the sunshine like that, the picture of Attilla invisible oranging the sun is all time.

I've started trying to organize my year-end lists, and wow was there a lot of good metal this year. It's looking like I'm going to mix the less abrasive metal into my "regular" lists this year, and have a separate list for, more or less, metal with noisy vocals. The short list for this, at the moment: Agalloch, Ahnengrab, Anamnesi, Ankhagram, Arbor, Arstidir Lifsins, Azoic, Blut Aus Nord, Cradle of Filth, De Magia Veterum, Deathspell Omega, Desiderii Marginis, Dodecahedron, Dynfari, Ea, Evoken, Eis, Frozen Ocean, Heimdalls Wacht, Krake, Liam, Oak Pantheon, Raventale, ScerrA, Seirom, Solbrud, Stagnant Waters, Svartidaudi, Tempestuous Fall, Thisquietarmy, Thormesis, Timor et Tremor, Ubi Sunt, Wild Hunt.

I won't reveal which metal albums are destined for my main list, but they're ones I've mentioned here one or twice or several times.

Yeah, I really need to start cranking on my lists, but I keep hearing good new stuff!!

the thing is that metal is the genre where one isn't as assailed by the "but if it's fun right now, that's valid!" mindset - metal, from the early eighties forward, is pretentious and ambitious and these are both good qualities in the right time and place. Metal should be monumental. There is plenty of "it's great for this summer" music on the pop charts, give me my Quixotes in metal please.

man i could stand to listen to a totally solid death metal from this year

Spawn of Possession dude

That record fucking rules.

So is the EOY metal poll happening, and if so, when?

not soon, i hope

Agree with Jon there's no need for a poll. It's not metal.
Just everyone list top 20's here and those inclined can check the albums out. Never saw the need for big fancy email polls other than the big ILM one run by johnny fever.

well i'm still in favor of the poll, because this is one of the most interesting polls on ilm in general, i'm just not prepared to participate just yet. i'd like a few more weeks.

Yeah, the metal poll is fun.

Spawn of Possession dude

holy shit

Best discovery for me from the year-end metal lists so far? Satan's Wrath, Galloping Blasphemy. Placed pretty high on Decibel's list and, after hearing it, I can't believe we didn't walk about it itt (unless my Ctrl-F is betraying me. It's super fun Greek blackened thrash with a decidly old school feel. Also this:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HWCuuJfW8PU/UGtl5vIT6NI/AAAAAAAAMps/WVi0Q5Hqi-I/s640/satans+wrath+01.jpg