In about a week (give or take a few days), I will be posting the first part of my annual "top metal albums of the year" list. I spend the entire year keeping up with all the new metal releases each week, and listening to as many of them as I can. As such, I feel my lists are fairly thorough and they cover all subgenres and all levels of popularity--from mainstream all the way down to unsigned bar bands.
However, before I publish this year's list, I wanted to lay out the criteria by which I judge the albums I hear. My lists tend to be radically different from all other lists out there, and I'm hoping that by writing out these criteria, not only will my readers better understand from where I am coming, but I can also better evaluate the albums for my list.
As such, there are four main criteria by which I judge an album: 1) technical ability, 2) innovation, 3)consistency and cohesion of songs across the album, and 4) the ability for the music to please my ear. These criteria are each given mostly equal weight, with the exception of the fourth one. I will lay each of them out in more detail.
1. Technical ability
This is, in many ways, the easiest to asses. Insane guitar and keyboard shredding, vocals with massive power or range, complex and/or creative drum and bass arrangements, nontraditional song structures, etc. are all things I look for that indicate a band possesses exceptional technical skill. Though technical talent is mostly meaningless on its own (see: Dragonforce), when combined with the other elements listed below, it can mean the difference between a good album and a transcendently great one.
2. Innovation
I think this is where I differ from many other music critics out there. Let me first say that I love innovation--without it the genre would grow stale and die off. One of the bands that will be on my list is called Kvelertak. They're from Norway and their self-titled debut is probably the most innovative and creative piece of metal I've ever had the pleasure of hearing. It breaks so many conventions and rules of the genre and yet...I can't help but love it. But, like technical skill, innovation means very little by itself. You won't find Mastodon or Anthrax on my list because their new albums are simply not any good. It's that simple. And on the flip side of that, a band that shamelessly copies the styles of bands that came before them will not be penalized by me as long as they create good music in the process. Innovation is important, but it is not the be-all-end-all of the metal scene.
3. Consistency and cohesion of songs across the album
Despite the long title for this criteria, it's actually very simple: If an album contains no weak songs, that is good. If the songs work together to create an atmosphere that stretches across the whole album and enhances the listening experience, that is even better. Doom bands really excel in the cohesion and atmosphere criteria, and to a lesser extent so do prog bands and any sort of well-executed concept album.
4. The ability to please my ear
This is the most subjective, hardest to define, and also most important criteria for me. The clearest way I can define this criteria is to say that if any part of an album makes me tap my foot, bang my head, throw the horns, or smile uncontrollably, it counts for a lot. And if a band can make me laugh out loud in joy, that's automatically a contender for album of the year. And I don't mean a happy, cheerful joy, but rather an amazed joy, where the sheer brilliance of a composition causes such a rush of emotional power that it needs to be released by either laughter or tears (or both). I find a handful of albums like this every year, and it is the biggest reason why I love metal music. The ability that metal artists have to blow your mind with the power of what they have created is unparallelled in the world of music, and is a joy that all metalheads are able to share.
No comments:
Post a Comment