Hello everyone
This a very controversial question that I have conjured up in my mind whist reading some of many, many comments about songs/albums online. It is something that I personally find particularly annoying with very pedantic
Metal heads and seems to pop up across all genres of fans (
Deathcore, black
Metal, death
Metal, ambient...).
Yes, I am talking instances where people point out things like "yeah, band A sounds good, but it sounds exactly like B, therefore band A isn't that good after all/sounds boring". So what if a young and upcoming band sounds like their influential predecessor(s)? That should not take away from the quality of the music in any way. I cannot understand how someone could think one band sounds extremely awesome and euphoric, when another band sounds generic simply because the extremely awesome band came firs, even though they sound exactly alike. I think this is an unnecessary aspect to harshly point out, and just an excuse for those self-appointed music critics to
Stretch their legs with an ego boost.
Obviously a band who does something first
HAS more
Prestige to it than bands who take influence, but condemning the bands which look up to those who influence them as boring and generic is something that is illogical me.
What do you think?
I remember having fun once, it was terrible...
