I can't stand Slayer

I tend to agree with the posts complaining that the OP's initial comment was a bit redundant (I hate Slayer, without expanding on why) but at least it triggered a bit of debate.
For me, Slayer are in my top three bands, Iron Maiden being another permanent in that elite, then I waver between In Flames (early stuff), Dark Tranquillity, Nile, and a few that I can't remember right now.

Listening to Slayer is like getting on a rollercoaster.  You know what you're going to get, it's the same every time and they deliver the thrills with alarming consistency.
The complaint that they are too samey is valid though seems a touch pedantic.  They were true pioneers and pretty much invented a style that is copied even to this day.  They found a formula, they figured out how to repeat it with success and by satan they stuck to it. 
The dreadful late nineties, early noughties stuff is testament to that, really, as they tried to adapt, tried to do something new and simply failed.
They're a one trick pony but, let's face it, most of us here wish we had a trick half as good as them.

Hmph alot of people are against me on this but you guys are seriously only talking about reign in blood what about something else they did? That would be like me saying that Dark Side of the Moon is good and that i like pink floyd but i hate alot of there other albums. (btw i fucking love all of floyds stuuf)

elder08 wrote: mosefus wrote: I tend to agree with the posts complaining that the OP's initial comment was a bit redundant (I hate Slayer, without expanding on why) but at least it triggered a bit of debate. For me, Slayer are in my top three bands, Iron Maiden being another permanent in that elite, then I waver between In Flames (early stuff), Dark Tranquillity, Nile, and a few that I can't remember right now. Listening to Slayer is like getting on a rollercoaster.  You know what you're going to get, it's the same every time and they deliver the thrills with alarming consistency. The complaint that they are too samey is valid though seems a touch pedantic.  They were true pioneers and pretty much invented a style that is copied even to this day.  They found a formula, they figured out how to repeat it with success and by satan they stuck to it.  The dreadful late nineties, early noughties stuff is testament to that, really, as they tried to adapt, tried to do something new and simply failed. They're a one trick pony but, let's face it, most of us here wish we had a trick half as good as them. here ya go then: 1.Lack of originality 2. Stupid hate vocals 3. horrible bass guitar and yet again vocals 4.

Let's take your points 1 at a time.
Number 1: Lack of originality
Find me a band, before Reign in Blood, that released anything that sounded like Reign in Blood.
Find me a band, before South of Heaven....well, you get the idea.
There is a huge difference between a band stagnating and retreading old ground on later material, and being unoriginal.  To conclude that Slayer were unoriginal when they first came picking and strumming out of Satan's own udders smacks of ludicrousness, as countless testimonies from adoring bands that followed and cited them as a primary influence would seem to back up.  There are few bands out there - though Venom are one before you throw that one at me - that can claim influence as highly as Slayer, particularly on the more extreme end of the metal spectrum.  And to have such influence would seem to suggest that they were doing something a little bit different than others, then others picked it up and cloned it.
Slayer unoriginal?  I think not.

2: Stupid hate vocals.
I think you are confusing the word vocals with lyrics here,  Vocals describes the style of delivery, lyrics the words themselves.
There is no question that Slayer write deliberately provocative lyrics, and would probably be overjoyed that they piss off as many people as they entertain.  Sometimes the lyrics are hackneyed and contrived, sometimes inspired.  You use the word hate as if it were a bad thing.  Given that the band named a song on their latest album Hate Worldwide, seems to me they want both their lyrics and their vocal delivery to be chock full of hate.  Whether you personally care for it is entirely up to you, but they do what they say on the tin.

3: Horrible bass guitar.
Well, I don't think I've ever heard a single note Tom has ever played, as the bass is so low in the mix so either I am deaf as a post or you possess preternatural hearing.
Either way, I cannot possibly comment.

4: Yet again vocals.
I refer you to my reply to point number 2.

To give some balance, I feel I made it clear in my original reply that I am not some blind Slayer devotee.  Yes, they are one of my favourite bands, but that doesn't make them perfect.  Even on their 'classic' albums there were misfires.  I personally don't care for Blood Red, the insufferable Judas Priest cover from South of Heaven or Hardening of the Arteries.
In fact the misfires only make the good stuff even better as it suggests that these were legitimate songs written by a real band, with ideas all their own, allowed to put out what they wanted by a record label that trusted them, sometimes naively. 
To me that is way preferable than the same same, exec sanctioned tracks found on a lot of modern metal, with albums clocking in over the one hour mark with only sufficient decent riffs to make up half that run time.

Slayer are not perfect but, could I ever attain their levels of imperfection musically, I would be more than happy.



Edited by mosefus - 27 Apr 2010 at 7:08pm

mosefus wrote: elder08 wrote: mosefus wrote: I tend to agree with the posts complaining that the OP's initial comment was a bit redundant (I hate Slayer, without expanding on why) but at least it triggered a bit of debate. For me, Slayer are in my top three bands, Iron Maiden being another permanent in that elite, then I waver between In Flames (early stuff), Dark Tranquillity, Nile, and a few that I can't remember right now. Listening to Slayer is like getting on a rollercoaster.  You know what you're going to get, it's the same every time and they deliver the thrills with alarming consistency. The complaint that they are too samey is valid though seems a touch pedantic.  They were true pioneers and pretty much invented a style that is copied even to this day.  They found a formula, they figured out how to repeat it with success and by satan they stuck to it.  The dreadful late nineties, early noughties stuff is testament to that, really, as they tried to adapt, tried to do something new and simply failed. They're a one trick pony but, let's face it, most of us here wish we had a trick half as good as them. here ya go then: 1.Lack of originality 2. Stupid hate vocals 3. horrible bass guitar and yet again vocals 4. Let's take your points 1 at a time. Number 1: Lack of originality Find me a band, before Reign in Blood, that released anything that sounded like Reign in Blood. Find me a band, before South of Heaven....well, you get the idea. There is a huge difference between a band stagnating and retreading old ground on later material, and being unoriginal.  To conclude that Slayer were unoriginal when they first came picking and strumming out of Satan's own udders smacks of ludicrousness, as countless testimonies from adoring bands that followed and cited them as a primary influence would seem to back up.  There are few bands out there - though Venom are one before you throw that one at me - that can claim influence as highly as Slayer, particularly on the more extreme end of the metal spectrum.  And to have such influence would seem to suggest that they were doing something a little bit different than others, then others picked it up and cloned it. Slayer unoriginal?  I think not. 2: Stupid hate vocals. I think you are confusing the word vocals with lyrics here,  Vocals describes the style of delivery, lyrics the words themselves. There is no question that Slayer write deliberately provocative lyrics, and would probably be overjoyed that they piss off as many people as they entertain.  Sometimes the lyrics are hackneyed and contrived, sometimes inspired.  You use the word hate as if it were a bad thing.  Given that the band named a song on their latest album Hate Worldwide, seems to me they want both their lyrics and their vocal delivery to be chock full of hate.  Whether you personally care for it is entirely up to you, but they do what they say on the tin. 3: Horrible bass guitar. Well, I don't think I've ever heard a single note Tom has ever played, as the bass is so low in the mix so either I am deaf as a post or you possess preternatural hearing. Either way, I cannot possibly comment. 4: Yet again vocals. I refer you to my reply to point number 2. To give some balance, I feel I made it clear in my original reply that I am not some blind Slayer devotee.  Yes, they are one of my favourite bands, but that doesn't make them perfect.  Even on their 'classic' albums there were misfires.  I personally don't care for Blood Red, the insufferable Judas Priest cover from South of Heaven or Hardening of the Arteries. In fact the misfires only make the good stuff even better as it suggests that these were legitimate songs written by a real band, with ideas all their own, allowed to put out what they wanted by a record label that trusted them, sometimes naively.  To me that is way preferable than the same same, exec sanctioned tracks found on a lot of modern metal, with albums clocking in over the one hour mark with only sufficient decent riffs to make up half that run time. Slayer are not perfect but, could I ever attain their levels of imperfection musically, I would be more than happy.

you know you have a point on number 1 but 2 and 3 not so much lets analyze what you said step by step:

elder08 wrote: mosefus wrote: elder08 wrote: mosefus wrote: I tend to agree with the posts complaining that the OP's initial comment was a bit redundant (I hate Slayer, without expanding on why) but at least it triggered a bit of debate. For me, Slayer are in my top three bands, Iron Maiden being another permanent in that elite, then I waver between In Flames (early stuff), Dark Tranquillity, Nile, and a few that I can't remember right now. Listening to Slayer is like getting on a rollercoaster.  You know what you're going to get, it's the same every time and they deliver the thrills with alarming consistency. The complaint that they are too samey is valid though seems a touch pedantic.  They were true pioneers and pretty much invented a style that is copied even to this day.  They found a formula, they figured out how to repeat it with success and by satan they stuck to it.  The dreadful late nineties, early noughties stuff is testament to that, really, as they tried to adapt, tried to do something new and simply failed. They're a one trick pony but, let's face it, most of us here wish we had a trick half as good as them. here ya go then: 1.Lack of originality 2. Stupid hate vocals 3. horrible bass guitar and yet again vocals 4. Let's take your points 1 at a time. Number 1: Lack of originality Find me a band, before Reign in Blood, that released anything that sounded like Reign in Blood. Find me a band, before South of Heaven....well, you get the idea. There is a huge difference between a band stagnating and retreading old ground on later material, and being unoriginal.  To conclude that Slayer were unoriginal when they first came picking and strumming out of Satan's own udders smacks of ludicrousness, as countless testimonies from adoring bands that followed and cited them as a primary influence would seem to back up.  There are few bands out there - though Venom are one before you throw that one at me - that can claim influence as highly as Slayer, particularly on the more extreme end of the metal spectrum.  And to have such influence would seem to suggest that they were doing something a little bit different than others, then others picked it up and cloned it. Slayer unoriginal?  I think not. 2: Stupid hate vocals. I think you are confusing the word vocals with lyrics here,  Vocals describes the style of delivery, lyrics the words themselves. There is no question that Slayer write deliberately provocative lyrics, and would probably be overjoyed that they piss off as many people as they entertain.  Sometimes the lyrics are hackneyed and contrived, sometimes inspired.  You use the word hate as if it were a bad thing.  Given that the band named a song on their latest album Hate Worldwide, seems to me they want both their lyrics and their vocal delivery to be chock full of hate.  Whether you personally care for it is entirely up to you, but they do what they say on the tin. 3: Horrible bass guitar. Well, I don't think I've ever heard a single note Tom has ever played, as the bass is so low in the mix so either I am deaf as a post or you possess preternatural hearing. Either way, I cannot possibly comment. 4: Yet again vocals. I refer you to my reply to point number 2. To give some balance, I feel I made it clear in my original reply that I am not some blind Slayer devotee.  Yes, they are one of my favourite bands, but that doesn't make them perfect.  Even on their 'classic' albums there were misfires.  I personally don't care for Blood Red, the insufferable Judas Priest cover from South of Heaven or Hardening of the Arteries. In fact the misfires only make the good stuff even better as it suggests that these were legitimate songs written by a real band, with ideas all their own, allowed to put out what they wanted by a record label that trusted them, sometimes naively.  To me that is way preferable than the same same, exec sanctioned tracks found on a lot of modern metal, with albums clocking in over the one hour mark with only sufficient decent riffs to make up half that run time. Slayer are not perfect but, could I ever attain their levels of imperfection musically, I would be more than happy. you know you have a point on number 1 but 2 and 3 not so much lets analyze what you said step by step:   2: Seems to me that you might be a fanboy when it comes to slayer know what im saying as true but instead try to insult me by correcting my mistakes on saying vocals instead of lyrics (You obviously werent confused otherwise you wouldnt have corrected me) I wasn't trying to insult you at all, I was trying to educate you so you don't repeat the mistake in future.  I'm a teacher.  It's an instinct.  It's pretty important when communicating that you use the right words, else the meaning of what you say may be lost and you may come over as foolish.  If you choose to be offended, that's fine, but no insult was intended. As for being a fanboy, I fully admit to being a huge fan, as I stated quite clearly, but the fact that I also concede to faults would suggest that your argument is pretty weak.  I think the definition of fanboy is someone who claims every note of every track is flawless, and refuses to acknowledge any areas of imperfection.  I certainly have never done that. And you are right, I wasn't confused, but others may be, say, people who speak English as a 2nd language (the vast majority of the globe).   3:You agree deep down inside yet you decide to insult me yet again with the fact that i can hear a bass. (your fucking deaf then) honestly if you try to listen for bass you can hear it you know what its probably all that horrible shit slayer wrote that youve been listening to I absolutely do not agree deep down as I am fully able to understand and express my own thoughts, but thanks for the insight.  And again, I wasn't insulting you.  In fact, the opposite is true as I was suggesting that your ability to hear is superior to my own. Seriously, I can't hear the bass.  Apologies for that. Here's a thought: You kicked off this debate, which I applaud you for, yet are railing against someone trying to make reasoned arguments.  It is possible to disagree with someone without finding them stupid or idiotic, labels which I would not even consider applying to yourself.  Also note that at no point have I resorted to name calling or mocking insinuations as you did in your last post by suggesting that I was fucking deaf.  I'm not fucking deaf, but I am a touch long sighted. Anyway, I'm just enjoying the discourse.  Cheers.

Hey, elder08, even if you are the one and only 'Slayer Hater' in the village (by the way, I was not at all offended by the old post name, I found it quite amusing and pretty epic actually) then, you might as well be proud of being a little different. I hate most modern metal and have been slammed for it a few times but I like the fact that I'm a wee bit unusual. I'm a Slayer fan by the way.

                                                                          
-Forbidden/"Kannaworms"
Well, happy days are here again, mis-understandings, fights, beer strewn across the stage and hits
your favorite singer in the face . . .
All the stupidity and aggression one comes to expect in . . . HEAVY METAL

I'm in total agreement with Fusion King, I too have many Bands I could care less about that others deem
the centers of the universe.  But hey, as you see in many of the threads, you keep seeing "the same
people " ,dont worry, more will show up, either to agree or be the typical rude and "my way or
the highway" attitudes that get me angry about "our own kind" (dont mis-understand, I believe in
"opinions" but why not be constructive and get into specifics) .

Yes, as TS asked, What are these "Modern Metal Bands" that dont measure up? Enquiring minds want
to FRY you imeanwant to know .
Let the dis-agreements begin! WooHoo!!!


Edited by MAVIIIVAM - 11 May 2010 at 10:41am

Thanks for that. Be sure to keep us updated.

GET BACK UNDER YOUR BRIDGE AND KEEP YOUR GODDAMN OPINIONS TO YOURSELF.

Oh yeah and did I forget to mention...

Slayer can't stand you either.

Hey guys, cool down already! I understand that it is very annoying (and that's an understatement) to see one of your favourite bands bashed - this is why I think negative threads are not such a good idea. However, let's not start calling each other names - that's not a good idea either.