Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

got anything to say about korn and the deftones

Korn = vomit.

Deftones are more tolerable but they get old very fast.

Korn are Terrible, I dont really like Deftones either.

Korn- First two CD's are amazing. But once Follow the Leader came out, it has just been one big downward spiral to mediocre land.

Deftones- Amazing band. Four great albums, each with a distinctive sound different from the last.

Deftones are awesome, they never get old for me. Its always refreshing after listening to Tool or Opeth, something heavy, with distorting and such to flip on Deftones, makes me feel pure..

Korns first 3 albums were great! then they turned into comercial songs and went crap.

I've only heard Korn's "Word Up" and I don't really like it

I've heard "Change" and "Around the Fur" by Deftones and I like those songs

Korn - love em

Deftones - cant stand em

They're totally different, howbout that.

Used to love Korn, kinda like childhood heroes to me. Haven't listened to em for about a year, but I'll always have a soft spot for them.

Deftones are great, one of the most underrated bands around. They are way more artistic, intelligent and creative than people give them credit for, and like Doc said, one of the few groups who are brave enough to reinvent their sound with each record.

Do not like either band.

cant say I like Korn.

Used to be a big Korn fan. I outgrew them though.

Same, they were just about my favorite Band when I was 13.

LOFL! Me too.

i still listen to KoRn's self titled CD quite a bit. other than that i listen to no korn.

deftones are one of the greatest bands alive.

I love Korn.

Not a fan of Deftones but have seen them in concert as well.

i agree with deathblow

I used to like Korn a lot, not so much anymore.

I absolutely love Deftones.

Originally posted by Deathblow
Deftones are great, one of the most underrated bands around. They are way more artistic, intelligent and creative than people give them credit for, and like Doc said, one of the few groups who are brave enough to reinvent their sound with each record.

Though I wouldn't call them underrated per se, I'd definately say that they have a distinctive sound that stays, while the rest around them changes.

I think their self-titled was the best yet, because it blended the heavier with the softer in a great way. I think that's the first "complete" Deftones album.

-AC

i agree all there albums have that different sound to them but not so different that you wouldnt know it was the deftones.....korns first few albums were great i think but there last major album was kinda a let down

Let me elaborate on my previous statement (cuz that's what I love doing).

Deftones get old quickly for several reasons. First of all, there's only so much of Chino I can stand. His voice can really wear on the nerves. Also, the albums are so lack luster. It's like you want something out of these guys but they fail to deliver in a full CD. In every album, they have a couple good songs, but the overall albums are too dissatisfying. For example, the first album had 7 Words - which rocks. The rest of the album was just annoying though. It's basically the same story for the other albums.

Mostly, their style bugs me and I wish they would put some more well instrumentated aggressive stuff out.

And as for Korn, I just hate their guts. Mostly, I can't stand the "nu metal" style that they've got. Oh, and don't even get me started on the fanbase.

Their self-titled, in my opinion, contradicts everything you just said.

-AC

AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Their self-titled, in my opinion, contradicts everything you just said.

-AC

In regards to your previous post? Hardly. It's a matter of what you listen to. I listen to metal (at least 75%) and prog (some in with that 75% but an extra 20%). What would you normally listen to? That's how I would decide that.

A metal head expects different things out of an album than someone else would. Deftones may have put out a "complete" album with their self-titled, but I found the album to be annoying and tedious. Call it as complete as you want, I found the album to be lacking a single good song.

Being the fact that it is your opinion, I'll leave that there. I expect music that doesn't annoy the shit out of me after ten minutes. You may like this same music. Not my issue.

Originally posted by RagnaViper
In regards to your previous post? Hardly. It's a matter of what you listen to. I listen to metal (at least 75%) and prog (some in with that 75% but an extra 20%). What would you normally listen to? That's how I would decide that.

Being that this topic is regarding what we hear, I can't hear it for you and make you agree with me. So that's why I said in my opinion, that it contradicts what you said. Because in my opinion, it does.

Originally posted by RagnaViper
A metal head expects different things out of an album than someone else would. Deftones may have put out a "complete" album with their self-titled, but I found the album to be annoying and tedious. Call it as complete as you want, I found the album to be lacking a single good song.

Well there you go then. I found it to be quite a solid album with many great highlights.

Originally posted by RagnaViper
Being the fact that it is your opinion, I'll leave that there. I expect music that doesn't annoy the shit out of me after ten minutes. You may like this same music. Not my issue.

I expect the same thing, we obviously have different definitions of what is and what isn't annoying.

-AC

Originally posted by RagnaViper
Also, the albums are so lack luster.

Lack lustre? How so? Adrenaline is emotional and unpredictable right up until the very last second of the hidden track, same with Around The Fur. White Pony covered about 4 or 5 different genres on one disc, and the only part of self-titled I didn't like was the last song (sounds too much like Battle Axe and Bloody Cape and not as good as either).




Originally posted by RagnaViper
Mostly, their style bugs me and I wish they would put some more well instrumentated aggressive stuff out.

...White Pony was pretty damn well instrumentated. And according to Chino, the next album will be their most ''evil'' yet.

I like Korn, They are one of the rare bands that do it for th Music, even thought there albums are starting to become.... bad. Annnnd also concidernig that "Life Is Peachy" Was made Just too keep there fans after they started becomming popular....

Originally posted by Deathblow
...White Pony was pretty damn well instrumentated. And according to Chino, the next album will be their most ''evil'' yet.

I hope they don't change to suit the people criticising them. If they continue along the path of their self-titled, developing that sound, that'll be awesome.

I don't care, as long as whatever they do, they do it for them.

-AC

I wouldn't say anything about Deftones is lackluster or boring. I'd have to say their self-titled album is my favorite.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I hope they don't change to suit the people criticising them. If they continue along the path of their self-titled, developing that sound, that'll be awesome.

I don't care, as long as whatever they do, they do it for them.

-AC

Yeah that's what I've been thinking. If anything, it's the less agressive aspects of their sound that I prefer.

But saying that, if they could do something along the lines of the spooky, unpredictable vibe of Adrenaline set against the massive soundscape they created on self-titled, a more agressive style would definitely work; When Girls Telephone Boys is my favorite track on s/t.

Originally posted by Deathblow
Lack lustre? How so? Adrenaline is emotional and unpredictable right up until the very last second of the hidden track, same with Around The Fur. White Pony covered about 4 or 5 different genres on one disc, and the only part of self-titled I didn't like was the last song (sounds too much like Battle Axe and Bloody Cape and not as good as either).

Adrenaline? That's the first one with 7 Words on it correct? No problems with that album except they really needed to bring up the production quality. Around the Fur was emotional, sure, but nothing noteworthy. White Pony can cover as many genres as it wants. I still can't stand the album for more than ten minutes. Same goes for self titled. In fact, it's just how the Deftones are. Can't stand em for longer than ten minutes.




That I'll give you. At least for a numetal album. Overall though, I've been rather unimpressed with their discography.

Originally posted by RagnaViper
In fact, it's just how the Deftones are. Can't stand em for longer than ten minutes.

No, it's not ''how they are'', it's how you perceive them. And you're loss, I guess.





Originally posted by RagnaViper
That I'll give you. At least for a numetal album. Overall though, I've been rather unimpressed with their discography.

First off, ''at least for'' nothing. It was well instrumentated and that's that. Also, nu metal album? Deftones have made, oh, I'd say maybe one nu metal song in their entire history. Which is ''Back To School'', if you wanna get specific.

Originally posted by Deathblow
No, it's not ''how they are'', it's how you perceive them. And you're loss, I guess.







First off, ''at least for'' nothing. It was well instrumentated and that's that. Also, nu metal album? Deftones have made, oh, I'd say maybe one nu metal song in their entire history. Which is ''Back To School'', if you wanna get specific.

Yeah, it is how I perceive them. And I would hardly consider it a loss. There's far better stuff out there.

And trust me. They're nu metal. That's the closest genre to them.

Wikipedia link

They're mentioned as two genres. Rock and nu metal, and since rock is so broad, we'll stick with the nu metal. Seriously. They've used rap, spoken, and sung lyrics. They use a DJ. They have no solos. NU METAL.

True, I'd consider them Nu Metal to.

Originally posted by Dr. Strangelove
Korn- First two CD's are amazing. But once Follow the Leader came out, it has just been one big downward spiral to mediocre land.

Deftones- Amazing band. Four great albums, each with a distinctive sound different from the last.

Isn't having a different sound on each album what you are saying is wrong with Korn?

I don't understand why people think Korn started to suck. Their music is banging and original. I can't wait until the next album comes out. Take a Look in the Mirror was the best they've had in a while.

Originally posted by RagnaViper
Yeah, it is how I perceive them. And I would hardly consider it a loss. There's far better stuff out there.

And trust me. They're nu metal. That's the closest genre to them.

Wikipedia link

They're mentioned as two genres. Rock and nu metal, and since rock is so broad, we'll stick with the nu metal. Seriously. They've used rap, spoken, and sung lyrics. They use a DJ. They have no solos. NU METAL.

None of those things prove anything, apart from the fact that they share a few elements with nu metal bands. Incubus, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Faith No More to name just a few, have used most or all of the above, and as for the solos thing, tons of bands who aren't metal don't have solos.

Instead of looking at the technicalites (which people seem so keen to do all the time), look at the execution and artistic direction the band take, it's massively different from nu metal. The only reason Deftones do, and always will be, pegged as a nu metal band is because they used to tour with Korn and Limp Bizkit, and are attributed along with the former to launching the whole nu metal thing. There's also the small matter that they don't actually sound like any other nu metal band, and seeing as it's possibly the most derivative genre in history, that's a dead giveaway.

Basically, they are connected, but not the same.

Originally posted by Deathblow
None of those things prove anything, apart from the fact that they share a few elements with nu metal bands. Incubus, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Faith No More to name just a few, have used most or all of the above, and as for the solos thing, tons of bands who aren't metal don't have solos.

Instead of looking at the technicalites (which people seem so keen to do all the time), look at the execution and artistic direction the band take, it's massively different from nu metal. The only reason Deftones do, and always will be, pegged as a nu metal band is because they used to tour with Korn and Limp Bizkit, and are attributed along with the former to launching the whole nu metal thing. There's also the small matter that they don't actually sound like any other nu metal band, and seeing as it's possibly the most derivative genre in history, that's a dead giveaway.

Basically, they are connected, but not the same.

Alright, I'll level with you for a second. What genre would you consider them to be?

I don't. Along with Tool, Opeth, Porcupine Tree and Dredg, Deftones are one of the bands I'm happy not to categorise. Why do I need to place any of these bands into anorexic little spaces of vague definition when they clearly transcend them?

Originally posted by Deathblow
I don't. Along with Tool, Opeth, Porcupine Tree and Dredg, Deftones are one of the bands I'm happy not to categorise. Why do I need to place any of these bands into anorexic little spaces of vague definition when they clearly transcend them?

That's what I assumed. Genres are in no way "anorexic little spaces of vague definition". They're broad forms of categorization. Nothing more. It's not an insult or a cage, it's just a tab to be noted under. It's not confining at all.

Tool is progressive rock with metal influences. Opeth is death/prog metal. Porcupine Tree is a prog band. Dredg is a prog band. Sure, they all have their own unique characteristics but they also posess several specific qualities that are shared by other artists. Same goes for Deftones. They carry several characteristics that associate them heavily as nu metal, and it's the closest genre to them.

Yeah, genres are, but what you just named are sub-genres, or sub-sub genres. That's anorexic. Just calling PT prog is incorrect, they have elements of psychadelic, metal and indie rock (for want of a better word), Dredg aren't prog at all IMO, more experimental/art rock, which isn't even a genre, Opeth lyrically do not fit in to death metal at all, and they obviously are just as much acoustic rock as they are metal or prog. Tool are far too removed from both prog and most metal to be called either on their own. Deftones have elements of nu metal, and from album to album have shown elements of hardcore, emo, shoegaze, prog and even trip-hop. It just gets smaller.

Putting them in with the genre they are ''closest to'' is grossly unfair.

Originally posted by RagnaViper
That's what I assumed. Genres are in no way "anorexic little spaces of vague definition". They're broad forms of categorization. Nothing more. It's not an insult or a cage, it's just a tab to be noted under. It's not confining at all.

Well it is. Unless it's a very specific and wide genre such as "Rock". It gets into labelling. People who label are generally people who feel it makes them more knowledgeable. As ElectricBoogaloo pointed out when someone labelled The Mars Volta as Prog/Salsa/Metal/Rock.

Originally posted by RagnaViper
Tool is progressive rock with metal influences. Opeth is death/prog metal. Porcupine Tree is a prog band. Dredg is a prog band. Sure, they all have their own unique characteristics but they also posess several specific qualities that are shared by other artists. Same goes for Deftones. They carry several characteristics that associate them heavily as nu metal, and it's the closest genre to them.

Tool aren't prog rock with "metal" influences. There's arguably more metal in their music than there is prog influences so if anything, they're hard rock. Just hard rock, which is how they classify themselves if they choose to. Opeth class themselves as death metal but I personally think they are way more than that and there's not a genre I'd use to put them in, because there isn't ONE that adheres to what they play. So sticking them in the closest genre to them, as you did with Deftones, is quite ignorant. Because they're not "death metal".

Dredg are most certainly not prog over all. Porcupine Tree have alot of prog influences and make alot of music I guess you could consider prog rock, but they too have influences and sounds all over the place. Especially considering they have so many albums and dip into techno, hard rock, metal, prog and such over all of them.

Sticking bands into the closest genre to them just because they don't have one of their own is ignorant. It's people like you who complain no music is breaking boundaries, why? Because you're too quick to lump bands doing ANYTHING new in with anything that exists now.

-AC

Originally posted by Deathblow
Yeah, genres are, but what you just named are sub-genres, or sub-sub genres. That's anorexic. Just calling PT prog is incorrect, they have elements of psychadelic, metal and indie rock (for want of a better word), Dredg aren't prog at all IMO, more experimental/art rock, which isn't even a genre, Opeth lyrically do not fit in to death metal at all, and they obviously are just as much acoustic rock as they are metal or prog. Tool are far too removed from both prog and most metal to be called either on their own. Deftones have elements of nu metal, and from album to album have shown elements of hardcore, emo, shoegaze, prog and even trip-hop. It just gets smaller.

Putting them in with the genre they are ''closest to'' is grossly unfair.

Sub genres are just closer and more specific shared characteristics. There's still nothing anorexic about it. Sure, the artists you mentioned have several of those elements, but they can still be placed into a genre. Any band can be placed into a genre if they have enough shared characteristics.

Elements are just toppings. Toppings don't change the fact that the cake is chocolate or strawberry though.

When I'm angry I tend to be not that nice to people, it's one of my characteristics.

Does that mean I'm able to be put into the catagory of someone who has anger management problems because we share the characteristic of short fuses?

-AC

Why does everything have to be labelled as being part of a genre?

Can't you just accept that many bands (including Tool, Porcupine Tree, Opeth, Dredg, and Deftones, all of which are favorites of mine), have music that is so different or so varied that it can NOT be placed in one single genre?

Quite frankly each of those bands listed I think make up their OWN genre, as they are ones you won't find any other bands that really sound like them.

Originally posted by Lana
Opeth, Dredg, and Deftones, all of which are favorites of mine), have music that is so different or so varied that it can NOT be placed in one single genre?

Opeth to me just seems like Straight up Death metal.

Originally posted by SlipknoT
Opeth to me just seems like Straight up Death metal.

How much of their music have you listened to? Because they also have some really mellow melodic songs, which are absolutely beautiful.

Yeah, and I don't hear Cannibal Corpse making 20 minute long epics.

Originally posted by Lana
How much of their music have you listened to? Because they also have some really mellow melodic songs, which are absolutely beautiful.

You tell him.

On the genre thing, I think I can see the point being made, which is that almost all bands share broad characteristics with at least some other group of bands.

I can see the other side as well though, IE to be in a genre, you have to be generic.

Personally I don't bother with genres, I just listen to what comes out of the speaker.

Having said that, genres do serve some function in terms of a kind of pre-judgment which can save time. Not gonna go into detail on that because just realised how far off topic it'll go- but yeah, if I know something is Garage, I know it's unlikely I'll like it. That's not the same as definitively pre-deciding that I won't though.

Of course, when you get to the point of calling something post-post-nu-NWOBHM emocore, there's no point in doing it anymore.

Originally posted by Lana
Why does everything have to be labelled as being part of a genre?

So that when you go to a store and say "I want something that sounds similar to (X)" then the person can actually help you. So that when you go to a movie you know what type you are going to see instead of being just suprised. Don't you think you would be pissed if you hated horror movies and walked into one thinking it was a funny one? Just deal with the fact that genres exist. If they didn't, what would you describe your musics as? "Uh, I like it cuz it goes duh-duh-duh reall heavy and then teh drums are all like: clash boom boom clash. It's radical!"

Read Victor's post, he gets it spot-on.

And actually, I can't say I've ever gone into a store saying that I want something that sounds similar to ______, usually I go in with what I want to get already in mind, or just wander around and listen to samples and buy something that sounds good.

I like both bands quite a bit.