In a recent review of a High on Fire show, The Obelisk said:
It was bittersweet to watch Matt Pike, Des Kensel and Jeff Matz on stage — and not just because I could barely see them for all the people standing in front of me. In a way, it was like saying goodbye. I’m still a High on Fire fan, and I even thought that some of the material from their latest album, Snakes for the Divine, which maybe I didn’t dig so much in its studio incarnation, sounded really good live, but there’s no question it’s different now. They’re a big-ass band, playing sold out shows. Hell, I saw that bus outside. It’s just not the same.
This reminded me of my review of Mastodon’s Crack the Skye:
After only a minute, I was violently allergic. That singing – ouch. I felt as if an old friend had showed up in a shiny new Hummer. Something had changed irreparably.
Why do metal fans hate it when bands become “successful”?
I have three theories. The first is that metal fans are territorial. We feel like we “own” bands. We are cool because we discover them earlier than others do. We lose that cool (and lose our cool) when others, especially if they’re the “wrong” people (hipsters, critics, outsiders to whatever circles we draw around ourselves), start liking our bands. What we like isn’t special anymore, so we’re not special anymore.
The second is that metal is classist. Musicians aren’t cool if they’re rich. (This goes back to territoriality. If musicians are rich, and we’re not rich, then they’re not “one of us”.) This is the opposite of hip-hop, which may have started with “keep it real” values, but now celebrates bling. Poor people want to be rich – and only rich people want to seem poor. Does metal, then, actually operate from a position of privilege?
The third is that bands compromise themselves (“sell out”) to become “successful” – and that metal fans hate such compromise. (Contrast with hip-hop, where “selling out” is now the goal, not the enemy.) This issue is complex. “Selling out” does not equal “becoming popular”. The two sometimes correlate, but just because a band does one doesn’t mean it’s done the other. Many bands couldn’t sell out, even if they tried. Some bands become popular without changing their sound.
. . .
Mastodon from very far away
. . .
“Selling out” is sort of a useless inquiry. Take Metallica and Mastodon, two bands that have been accused of “selling out”. Yes, Metallica stopped writing thrash and started writing radio hits. But what if Metallica wanted to do exactly that? Metallica wouldn’t be compromising themselves, and thus wouldn’t be selling out. The same goes for Mastodon. They’re not writing pop songs now. If anything, their music is more oblique and self-indulgent than ever. In fact, I’d prefer it if the band compromised itself and wrote actual riffs.
The best inquiry, as always, is “Is the music good?” (To be precise, that inquiry is really “Is the music good for me?”) If the music is good, I don’t care how the band made it. If the music is bad, I can walk away from it. And if I really support a band, I’ll support its “success”. Do I want Matt Pike and Des Kensel to go back to digging ditches? Hell no. They should be rewarded for their talents. They didn’t write ballads. They didn’t lose their riffs. They stayed true to their sound and made the right moves. They worked for their fanbase, signed to a label with huge resources, and are living the dream. Their bus should be posh.
High on Fire photo by Metal Chris
I think I agree most with your first point. There’s nothing worse than going to a show and finding it jammed with the type of people you described. People that didn’t care before the band got big and would’ve cringed had you played them a CD a year or two prior, and people who won’t care later on when they’ve moved on to whatever new thing the masses are moving into.
I don’t hear about it as much in metal, but hardcore has a million songs that express that feeling of “the scene” whether it’s rallying behind it or it’s criticism of outsiders who came and went. They wear thier territorialism on their sleeve.
Agreed. You should enjoy the spoils of your success if your success is a result of your vision, not a compromised version of it to meet someone else’s criteria. That said, how would you feel if you saw a Toyota Tundra ad with “Frost Hammer” paving (er, un-paving) the way? HoF didn’t change their song, Toyota changed their marketing to include it. The same thing is happening all over the place in indie culture right now and the same “SELL OUT!” cries ring far and wide. To me it is a chicken / egg argument. If the band’s vision congealed before anyone wanted to buy it AND is representative of their overall body of work, it is authentic and they should be able to sell it to the highest bidder without reprisal from their fan base. I think this same thing was at work with the Scion Fest to an extent. Corporate sponsor, yes, but they left the art to the artists and came to meet them, rather than the other way around. If ‘Corporate America’ is going to provide its dollars to the better artists among us (metal, indie, graphic, film, etc), we should encourage it! Hell, if Ludicra could sell a song to a blockbuster movie right now to help pay for Mr. Cobbett’s medical bills, fund future recording, pay living expenses in $an Francisco, and allow them to continue widespread touring, don’t you think they should?
High On Fire has done nothing wrong. They haven’t sacrificed a single ounce of their musical integrity and deserve all the success and accolades coming their way. That said, do I wish I could’ve gotten to see them when they were still playing clubs? Of course. Do I like going to see bands I once saw in clubs in bigger venues? Almost never. I like the intimacy of smaller venues. The term “sell-out” is a tricky one. If a band overtly and drastically alters their sound in order to gain mass appeal (think Candiria or Cryptopsy), then yes I do believe it is fair to say that band sold-out. Mastodon and Metallica are slightly trickier. Mastodon’s music is weirder than ever so I think its cool that they’ve become big riding a wave of a music that shouldn’t really be all that popular. Metallica needed the Black Album because AJFA maxed out their previous sound. That album was ok in my book as a way to recharge their batteries. But when Load hit, with its even more radio friendly hooks and alternative rock fashionista looks, well that certainly was a sell-out.
I ultimately want the bands I love to be successful. Lots of them have found ways to do that and still keep their integrity intact.
One aspect I could bring to your attention is that for most metal bands to eventually make it financially big, it takes a lot of records. Sometimes a few more then it would take to push their strengths in their logical aesthetic conclusion. Most metal bands either peak on their first or second record (do some research). So it’s coincidental that some listers give up on a band when it’s successful, the real reason is that they give up on it because they can see that they’re going through the motions, rehashing the same sound/writing style just so they can go on tour/make some money/flex scene muscle.
This is the biggest thing that I, as a lover of HM, don’t like. I see more harm in people talking about mediocre, spent-out variations of records that have been perfected ten/twenty years ago as if they matter, than I see in a thousand bands selling out. Selling out is easy to spot but mediocrity is insidious. The more time you spend discussing mediocrity the more you become accustomed to it. “Oh this new metal record came out, it’s neither good nor bad, if you like this sort of thing, buy it!”.
Of course there are some bands that are mostly but not completely immune of the ‘rehash’ criticism like Motorhead and AC/DC but I think that’s more a cultural anomaly pertaining to these specific bands than something new bands can orchestrate to capitalize on. High on Fire will not be excused for writing the same record over and over for long, no matter how much they sound like Motorhead+constant double bass. The addendum to common wisdom is this:
Without riffs you are nothing in metal. But even if you have riffs, they’re not enough. There needs to exist VISION.
Otherwise you’re just pushing out product for the sake of product, you know?
A lot of people who hold their scenes in priority to the vision will treat the music as something secondary altogether. Whether it will progress or not, whether its moving towards an aesthetic conclusion or whether it has reached it and should now either mutate or give up is only an excuse for them to talk about the band, talk about music, talk about how upset they are over this and that. Scene drama, scene politics, who will have sex with whom and where they wearing a vintage High on Fire shirt or a new store-brought one from last week. They are the ones that will pretend to be the most upset when a band makes a perceived bad move (like driving in in a shiny new Hummer) because that’s what they’re built to do. Talk. The few real metalheads I’ve talked to exclaim some disappointment over a band that has overspent itself and then go back to listening to emotionally and intellectually important music for them, it’s no skin off their back. Most HM bands are only good for a single record or a couple of them. Vision can be exhausted.
Selling out isn’t a big deal. Operating without vision and honesty is. Selling out usually results in loudly awful records where it’s easy for everyone to hate: hipsters and real music lovers united under the common cause of scoffing. Being visionless and rehashing usually results in mediocrity that is far more dangerous for the music listener to lap it up because it rests on a common capitalist assumption: if you like the taste of a food, you’re going to keep liking gradually diluted versions of the food because it reminds you of the original taste, right?
Wrong. Heavy Metal detests mediocrity, it puts it to the blade.
What if I were to give you the blade?
Would you…
Have the strength to wield it?
What say you to your convictions?
Are they…
A warm bed at night?
Or are they dark like shadows?
Each of us must consider why they are drawn to music such as this and plan accordingly.
I agree with your conclusions (last two paragraphs), but not really with the previous hypothesis. Or to be precise, I don’t feel that way. I don’t care if a band sells out, I don’t care if I am the only one that like a band, and I don’t care if I like the same album that everyone else. However I try to convince friends to listen to some good stuff!
I just care if the music is good (for me) or not. I don’t feel territorial at all.
Am I a strange metalhead?
I think HoF deserve their success, I wouldn’t blame them if they continue to make albums that sound the same so they can tour/sell merch/etc. I won’t buy them, but if it’s that or going back to working construction the choice is easy and they’ve earned it. I don’t know if they can achieve a Motorhead/ACDC level of stasis and longevity but the choice and opportunity are theirs. I’m sure Pike has a vision, he’s realized it over the course of a bunch of albums. Helm you may think they’re intellectually bankrupt and you’re entitled to that opinion. maybe his vision now is that he never wants to have to go back to working a day job.
I agree with you 100% about the insidious nature of pervasive mediocrity. most music and metal especially is watered down, tasteless and without substance or backbone. isn’t that why we often search further in the extremes or margins? and why that search has begun to yield diminishing returns?
I’m territorial and petty and I happily admit it. a lot of people irritate me, people that aren’t into what I’m into and especially people who are into what I’m into. I get annoyed when things I like and think are special aren’t special anymore. that’s because there isn’t that much that’s special and what there is makes life worth living. imagine being alone on top of a mountain and watching a sunset, if there’s 30 people there in american apparel and track bikes yammering and futzing with their iphones…it makes it a lot less fucking special. I don’t feel any need to be inclusive for the sake of some abstract PC notion. Metal isn’t for everyone.
glad I got to see HoF touring smaller venues several records ago. I haven’t gotten a chance to check out the new record but it maybe where I get off their train. I hope not.
I think this post may feature the first Morrissey reference in the history of IO.
Good article, and wholeheartedly agree with your last three paragraphs.
I also think that one’s sensitivity to “selling out” may depend on your age and what “school of hard rock/metal” you come from. My two favourite bands were Rush and Queen, back when they were still putting out classic albums. They sure as hell weren’t “one of us”; the band members might as well have been extraterrestrials. Hearing both bands’ music deteriorate through the 80s was painful, but it wasn’t because they were selling out (they were already massive). It was obvious they were getting old, their tastes were diversifying, and their music, which was once so focused, became spongy and bland.
The same thing happened to Metallica, and is probably happening to Opeth. I never thought of it as selling out; it’s more the process of getting old.
Love The Smiths reference.
I like the new High On Fire. This kind of debate is exhausting and, for me, utterly meaningless. I’m too old to care. I’ve been hearing these sorts of arguments since Bob Muldowney (Kick Ass Monthly) would rant that Iron Maiden hadn’t done anything worthwhile since their debut and that Thrust and Helstar truly held the keys to metal’s future.
I like what I like and roll forward from there.
With so much revisionist history at play, the particulars of aesthetic criticism, and the fact that so much music in popular culture (yes, heavy metal is a part of pop culture, contrary to what I’ve heard many elitists spout) is simply based on fashion, on identity…what’s the point?
The gods will not be challenged and toppled, new vistas will not be explored, immortality will not be achieved. One has to let go of these desperately hard-held attachments. It’s just music. And it’s my obsession.
Metal music is insular–and people don’t like when their world is invaded. I think it’s rooted in the absorption of punk rock and it’s values–we’ve all heard it a 1000 times. However, nobody sees the fact that HOF spent years honing their craft, endless days on the road, dealing with fucked up record labels, working their asses off and basically giving up what resembles a ‘normal’ life in the process. On the flip side, metal merchandise at Hot Topic and fucking Target just bring out the ‘iwannagoonashootingspree’ mentality in me. But, time always weeds out the weak. The Platonic ideal of Metal will live on.
I think Machine Head have got to be the most obvious case of selling out. The switch to nu-metal on the third album, and then back to (roughly) their earlier sound after the whole nu-metal thing blew over is the clearest example of a band changing its sound so as to sell more records; it’s just too great a coincidence for the “what if they just wanted to play like that?” card to exculpate. I mean, they even changed the whole look of the band. I think one of them had leopard print hair for a while…
I don’t really care who likes the bands that I like. I’m actually happy if more people are getting into a band that I love as long as they’re in it for the MUSIC. Gigantic metal bands are still smaller than the big names in just about every other genre, so I don’t really get the whining.
I saw HOF at SXSW and I had mixed feelings. I was miffed seeing so many people texting during their set, and I tried to be objective about the throngs of bored girlfriends who were taking up valuable real estate at the front of the stage. On the other hand, the look on Pike’s face – he really played to the crowd – was priceless. It was a great feeling to see such a big turnout because they really deserve it, but I did have to fight that territorial feeling, of “are you really fans or are you here because it’s cool?” But I figure if I am judging someone on that premise, that most likely they are probably thinking the same way about my presence there.
Yeah, the High on Fire question is interesting, because I don’t thing that they particularly moved their aesthetics, so much as the earth shifted under their feet. While I don’t think the new album is their best, I find it satisfying (though the production leaves a poor taste in my mouth), which is more than I can say about newer Mastodon.
However, it is weird watching the crowds increase at HOF shows over the last few years. From BBW to now, I have seen HOF six times. Each time, the crowd size and venue seems to swell exponentially, which feels like a close friend has suddenly become the most popular dude in the room and, thus, becomes more difficult to relate to. Ultimately, I think many of the reactions which Cosmo described are personal in nature (with a major emotional component to them). I think this is the crux of the issue and why we see so many of these reactions on the scene expressed in a deeply personal light, with aspects of betrayal.
Good points. I don’t hate it when bands become successful, I just lose interest in them. For me, part of the passion of music is finding out obscure artists and championing shit that hasn’t been championed yet. Once that’s done with, I move on. Plus, let’s be frank, most bands (not all) peak within their first three albums.
I’ve noticed the change with HOF over the years…the change from better touring vehicles, expanded merch, hipster attendees, bigger venues etc. Gotta tell ya though, all that shit is MEANINGLESS because when you see Matt or Des and they give you the same bro-hug they’ve been giving you since they hit the road over a DECADE ago…that’s what matters. Not the outside, but what’s inside. Same dudes, same goals, ripping music.
Shameless plug:
http://deathstar330.blogspot.com/2010/04/high-on-fire-interview-with-des-kensel.html
I think there can clearly be mitigating factors in all of this. I, for example, love a huge proportion of ReLoad. But it isn’t, in all honesty, as boundary pushing as the canonical earlier metallica work. Apart from Unforgiven II. Love that song.
One of the real problems with bands “selling out” is that it often comes with a dip in quality, whether perceived or real I don’t know.
I can’t see how High On Fire COULD possibly sell out. The same thing occurred when I heard a Rammstein song in a car advert… it’s very difficult to sell-out when playing overtly sexual germanic industro-metal. The fact that success has come to these two bands is simply down to the vagaries of the world we live in, not a pre-conceived plan to play to the lowest common demoninator (although both bands feature BIG riffs… perhaps that helps?)
Looking at two other bands together I think really demonstrates two different sides of the argument. I grew up as an Earth Crisis/VOD kid, and Machine Head were one of the bands that crossed me over into steeadily heavier and more technical metal. I even loved The Burning Red. But much as I have honestly enjoyed their return to “real metal”, I can’t help but feel that all the twin leads and the overly verbose (and badly delivered) lyrics are massively contrived. The fire is long gone. Contrast this with Immortal, whom I only discovered on Sons Of Northern Darkness (the “big-seller”). Now i’m a huge fan of all the varied aspects of BM, but had somehow avoided Immortal for various reasons. However on SOND I discovered them to be a cold, epic, blacker version of Hypocrisy (my personal favourite) and hence delved into their back catalogue. In essence I don’t care that they’re a big band, as I discovered them at their prime and then explored backwards, hence perhaps I feel less desperately invested and (potentially) betrayed.
Still, I like it when bands I like do well honestly. I think they should.
Hey was that Rafa from Black Cobra that commented? Missing Link Fest is gonna ROCK (and Drum Triggers suck)!!!
I think it’s a matter of perspective…people get bummed cause they saw ‘awesome band X’ way back at some tiny club, and now they’re peeking through binoculars trying to catch a glimpse at the stadium show. You yearn for the past…what is was like ‘back in day’. But, as you get older, you realize that you were just lucky to be there… Things always change. Might as well pick it up and jump on the next wave, instead of floppin’ there on the beach.
“you’re such a beautiful fish,
Floppin’ on the summer sand,
thinking ’bout the wave you missed,
when another one is close at hand”
-Stupid Girl, Neil Young
Great writeup again. The last paragraph rings particularly true;
“If the music is good, I don’t care how the band made it.”
let us define selling out. comments made encompass differing definitions: changing sound because of age, label, line ups, endorsements, bottom line. There was a discussion about relevancy here awhile ago and I think we can harken back. The repeated phrasing, “good music=good music regardless” rings true. But only to the individual. so, we are pretty much arguing, discussing, in a circle. what is relevant? raw, young talent? Experienced, technical musicianship? I get a big pink boner when i hear snakes for the divine. hof relevancy, check. for us blue collar boys who dream of greeting a raging crowd with a guitar starp around our necks, we want our musical heros to make it. And don’t you get angry when a band you love breaks up and doesnt get big. look at swedens stoner rock band Dozer. split. they made fucking great music. no dough, no show.
Helm, you gotta get your own blog or something. Love everything you write about. though i wonder with your dour view on nearly everything contemporary I wonder what you do enjoy.
“Poor people want to be rich – and only rich people want to seem poor. Does metal, then, actually operate from a position of privilege?”
To an extent I think metal does operate from a position of privilege, since it’s an overwhelmingly white genre. In America at least most white people aren’t yet properly terrified of poverty. (The current recession may be changing that, though.) They tend to think of being poor as something they can do for a while, after college or between jobs, and then simply decide to quit doing later. Black people, thanks to our country’s shameful history, have an acute and painful appreciation of poverty as something that can last generations if not centuries.
This difference in my view is why you don’t see a lot of hip-hop fans gnashing their teeth about artists “selling out” by making big money. The hustle to escape poverty is a huge part of hip-hop’s culture, and in that context it’d make little sense to criticize somebody for succeeding. Only somebody relatively privileged is likely to view financial success as a corrupting influence rather than a prize or even a lifeline.
I realize I’m generalizing horribly here about almost every point I’m making, so at best my statements will be generally true. Also, I am white, in case that conditions how you read me.
“The hustle to escape poverty is a huge part of hip-hop’s culture, and in that context it’d make little sense to criticize somebody for succeeding.” Good point here but why is it that almost all hip-hop classics were done BEFORE the artists made it big? It’s the hunger, passion and NEED that drives musicians to make their best efforts. Take a look of Twisted Sister. Their first three albums were full of anti-authoritarian remarks and “we against them” spirit but when they became big (MTV played a big role here playing their videos from Stay Hungry constantly) they resorted to toothless hard rocking fun music.
I generalized a little bit more I wanted though. I’m not saying that a band who’s signed on a big label and has already tasted some success (both artistic and financial) couldn’t pull off anything relevant. Sure success can tame artists but in the end it depends on the artists as human beings. How they cope with all of the fuzz and is there anything meaningful they can still project forward. It just happens that sometimes they don’t even have any riffs left at this point.
“Helm, you gotta get your own blog or something. Love everything you write about. though i wonder with your dour view on nearly everything contemporary I wonder what you do enjoy.”
Thanks. My problem is not with contemporary music. I like a lot of it. Negura Bunget – OM, Confessor – Unravelled, Spiral Architect – A Skeptic’s Universe, Orphaned Land – Mabool are a few relatively recent records that I consider essential. My problem is with rehash and mediocrity, same back in the 80’s same now.
If a band becomes successful without changing their sound to become successful, I’m all for it. If you write an album with the intent of doing nothing more than selling more units and brush aside integrity, that’s selling out to me.
Just to echo what other people are saying…popularity is not bad at all if the music still crushes. That rarely happens. I’d rather enjoy a band’s music live with a bunch of other people instead of standing there alone.
Keep in mind that “selling out” in metal is sort of a loaded term. Just because HOF are touring in a nice bus, packing halls and selling more records doesn’t mean much when they get off the road. Matt Pike will still need to bartend when he isn’t touring and the band members might not have good health insurance. The guys from The Black Dahlia Murder get the cover of Revolver and also tour in a decent bus but if you get past the botched toenail surgery on their DVD you’ll see that most of the guys are living in very modest homes in the Detroit area.
When it comes to “selling out” in extreme metal I think what most people mean is “making a living.” If you’ve sold out you can just play and not work in the Costco butcher shop. None of these bands are staying in five-star hotels and bedding starlets like Paul Stanley or collecting expensive artwork like Lars.
While I’ll agree that High On Fire’s latest was a boderline flatline, I don’t get the fuss over their venue filling ability. They are playing in San Diego tomorrow at The Casbah, pretty much the same venue they’ve been playing down here from their beginning…it’s not like they’re playing a basketball arena or even 1500 person rooms. I’ve said before and I’ll say it again…some folks really need a hobby if ANY of this is distressing to them!
Also, I don’t recall anyone wetting themselves over HOF playing Sounds Of The Underground, in sports arenas, when Blessed Black Wings came out!
Great article Cosmo, really enjoyed reading it.
I used to be all about the Scene Not Herd mentality. Now I don’t care. If I like the music, I support the band, public opinion be damned.
Selling out, to me, is when a band sense that it in the cusp of achieving mainstream acceptance and popularity, and then go out of their way, i.e. change their sound, their art, etc., to really break through. High on Fire haven’t done that, but they’ve signed with a major label that may or may not have the power to cajole them into doing so in the future.
So no, they haven’t sold out. But depending on their contract, they may have plenty of time to do so in the future. Time will tell.
Uhh…also, E1 (formerly Koch) isn’t a major label.
I wrote a review of High On Fire’s 4/7 show in Cambridge, MA just three days before the one JJ at The Obelisk saw and this is my thoughts on what JJ had said:
“In JJ’s review, of this same tour‘s stop in New York City (just two days later), over at The Obelisk, he commented on how if definitely seems as the band has taken that step to the next level, losing so of the intimacy it used to have. I did not get that sense at all. Granted the Middle East Downstairs is a much smaller and more intimate venue than the Gramercy in NYC (I think this is an important point, not to be overlooked), but they looked and sounded as though they were right at home. Nothing to lead you to believe the setting was anything other than perfect for them. I think what may be happening is that, as the band has become seasoned road warriors of the highest caliber, they are more able to play to the size of the venue. Be it an arena opening for Megadeth, Metallica or Mastodon to owning the small stages in dingy clubs. I think this will always be a blue-collar band. All three guys still milled around in and outside of the club prior to their set. They were approachable. Matz practically stood next to me for Black Cobra’s set and I was able to meet and shake hands with Pike. As I said before, If Snakes for the Divine is the album that puts High On Fire in metal’s upper echelon they well deserve it.”
http://sludgeswamp.blogspot.com/2010/04/my-high-on-fire-review-better-late-than.html
Considering that only fools would consider a career in music these days I’m not getting too upset anymore if I discover that one of my favorite bands are doing an attempt to broaden their sound to get some more fans.
Fact it that downloads has killed music. Of course this can be argued to death (but it’s free exposure, I bought the albums afterwards blah, blah) but people forget that sales from a record also has impact on where a band is able to play gigs and sell their merch.
I’m not sure if it would be possible for a new metal band to come along now and become millionares and retire on some HM approved island in the pacific.
If I loved playing music and wanted to continue doing it would be pretty easy to start looking at who was selling out gigs and getting paid good money. Having integrity, artistic vision and grass root fans are great but it only works if you got a job on the side.
Your credibilty ends the moment you sell your first record. No exceptions.
Since 9 out of 10 metal fans are in their own crappy bands that go nowhere isn’t it possible they are just jealous, or maybe it’s strategic. Maybe they are attacking the bands playing bigger venues so that more people will go to smaller venues to see their band or their friend’s band.
On the other hand some bands become obsessed with fame and money and start sucking. Sometimes it’s the pursuit that causes it. Sometimes it’s their inflated ego once they get recognition. This is different than “selling out” strictly speaking since the band may never have taken a stance in the first place that they later break.
There does appear to be a period of euphoric awesomeness right before a band explodes. Their underground fan base converges on their shows and for that moment everyone is caught up in the zeitgeist. That time period can’t last forever and maybe some fans miss that feeling and have no other way to express their frustration than complaining about the band in question.
I like this article and it raises some good points. But it reminds me of people who give child-rearing advice that don’t have kids of their own. Most of the people who criticize and shun bands who have broken big are folks who a)
In the case of Mastodon, I always get pissed off when people give them shit for changing their sound. They never watered their sound down, they just tried something different. Sure, Remission is by far their best album. But who wants to hear the same album over and over again? Too many bands do that shit. It’s nice to never know what you’re going to expect from a band, I miss that. I like the changes that Mastodon make because none of them are permanent. Their next album could be straight up death metal, none of us have any clue. That’s what makes a band exciting.
Mastodon have hit the mainstream now, touring this summer with Alice in Chains and the Deftones. They’re not making a death metal album.
Once you get past your teenage years it becomes obvious that it no longer matters if you like the band everyone else does or if you,re the only fan of a really obscure underground act. Good old principle of good and bad music applies. If it’s good then why can’t it be good for others? At least the bands finally see some monetary compensation for all those years of hard work.
All 3 theories mentioned in the post applies because metalheads are outcast to begin with. They identify with their bands more than any other genre fans. When changes occurs, they react (usually badly).
I do feel the opposite when too many crusty, pot-smoking, beer-belly, mosaic-of-patches metalheads identify with the music I like.