Fathers of Heavy Metal

by lhversaw Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:12 pm

Ok so we all know that there is some controversy over WHO was the first Heavy Metal band. Half would say Zeppelin and half would say Sabbath. BUT I would tend to say that we need to take a look at some music history to get there so here we go.

Led Zeppelin - while they formed in 1968 the first album came out in 1969. While they came out of the ashes of the New Yardbirds, which was a reforming of the Yardbirds in some respects Zeppelin was the form of the band that has some Metal sounds to them. Mainly Hard Rock/Blues while steeped still in Psychedelia it is hard to deny that the genre Metal could have been fathered by Zeppelin.

Black Sabbath - Also formed in 1968 but not releasing until 1970 a hard driving Bluesy version Of METAL and today is always called Metal but back in the day this was still called Hard Rock. While they are THE FATHERS OF DOOM METAL they didn't beat Zeppelin to the "METAL" sound that became a genre.

While it seems clear cut with this little study don't be so sure...............

Blue Cheer - Forming in 1967 this band was very much a Psychedelic Heavy band that if you listen to their debut album there is no doubt they are just as much what we call "Metal" as is sabbath and zeppelin. Vincebus Eruptum was released on January 16, 1968 beating Zeppellin but a little over a year. While Sabbath and Zeppelin may seem to also have MORE music don't be so sure. Sabbath DOES have that on Zeppelin and Blue Cheer but Blue Cheer has 10 albums between 1968 and 2007. To give you a taste of what I call the FIRST HEAVY METAL BAND refer to the videos below.

Now I suppose another candidate could be Iron Butterfly with their album Heavy the band formed in 1966 but didn't release until January 22 1968, which is again after Blue Cheer, but still worth consideration.

So tell me what are your thoughts. This may be my OWN OPINION but it is also stated in fact with formations as well as first release. I believe one can't say they were the first at something without a release. You may form in 1952 but if you don't release until 2015 you can't state that you were first at anything. So what are your thoughts on this? Am I way off base? Is there a band that pre dates Blue Cheer that is any HEAVIER in a METAL sound?

by Guest Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:48 pm

It is not my intention to argue, but in my honest opinion, Black Sabbath was the ONLY first Heavy Metal band!

Sure Blue Cheer and Iron Butterfly and Led Zeppelin had Metal 'sounding' stuff. But they were all just Hard Rock.

Black Sabbath was THE first band to release an actual album of pure and true Heavy Metal.

They are and will always be the TRUE fathers of Heavy Metal.

Disagree with me if you like ... but I will NEVER change my mind regarding this. Also, according to RYM, one of the largest music database websites in the world ... Black Sabbath was THE first to release anything truly Heavy Metal in 1970! So Heavy Metal was born in 1970! Great year because of this incredible birthing!

by lhversaw Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:12 pm

I will respectfully disagree as Sabbath didn't release until 2 years after Blue Cheer and they were not any heavier than Blue Cheer until later in their Career. https://www.quora.com/Who-was-the-first-heavy-metal-band

This guy would also tend to agree with me. However you are, as are all, entitled to your opinion. For sure Sabbath is the father of Doom Metal in all forms hands down. But I tend to think that you have to base it on who had the first release. Also even Cream had 2 songs that could be considered metal back in 1967 but they are not considered metal as it was only 2 songs where as Blue Cheer is indeed a full album of it. Smile

love your take on it.

by metaldude Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:51 pm

I understand that there were bands before Sabbath but, speaking only for myself, when I listen to them, they sound old. That doomy element that Sabbath brought might just be what changed rock into metal. Songs like Black Sabbath, Electric Funeral, or Into the Void still sound heavy, even today. When I listen to this, I have to remind myself it's 45 years old. Bands are still imitating this sound today.

I respect everyone else's opinion, but for me, Black Sabbath are genre inventors and all-time heavyweight champs.

by d@v!d Thu Nov 05, 2015 7:32 pm

lhversaw wrote:Ok so we all know that there is some controversy over WHO was the first Heavy Metal band. Half would say Zeppelin and half would say Sabbath. BUT I would tend to say that we need to take a look at some music history to get there so here we go.

Led Zeppelin - while they formed in 1968 the first album came out in 1969. While they came out of the ashes of the New Yardbirds, which was a reforming of the Yardbirds in some respects Zeppelin was the form of the band that has some Metal sounds to them. Mainly Hard Rock/Blues while steeped still in Psychedelia it is hard to deny that the genre Metal could have been fathered by Zeppelin.

Black Sabbath - Also formed in 1968 but not releasing until 1970 a hard driving Bluesy version Of METAL and today is always called Metal but back in the day this was still called Hard Rock. While they are THE FATHERS OF DOOM METAL they didn't beat Zeppelin to the "METAL" sound that became a genre.

While it seems clear cut with this little study don't be so sure...............

Blue Cheer - Forming in 1967 this band was very much a Psychedelic Heavy band that if you listen to their debut album there is no doubt they are just as much what we call "Metal" as is sabbath and zeppelin. Vincebus Eruptum was released on January 16, 1968 beating Zeppellin but a little over a year. While Sabbath and Zeppelin may seem to also have MORE music don't be so sure. Sabbath DOES have that on Zeppelin and Blue Cheer but Blue Cheer has 10 albums between 1968 and 2007. To give you a taste of what I call the FIRST HEAVY METAL BAND refer to the videos below.

So tell me what are your thoughts. This may be my OWN OPINION but it is also stated in fact with formations as well as first release. I believe one can't say they were the first at something without a release. You may form in 1952 but if you don't release until 2015 you can't state that you were first at anything. So what are your thoughts on this? Am I way off base? Is there a band that pre dates Blue Cheer that is any HEAVIER in a METAL sound?

I think you have some valid points. I disagree somewhat on your point about release times. If a band writes and plays material but doesn't get it released for years after, I would still be more apt to credit them for originality than another band that wrote later but released sooner.

by deathisgain Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:37 pm

I would either go with Gustav Holst (listen to the 4:24 mark, that is METAL, and it inspired Black Sabbath's "Black Sabbath"

Or Richard Wagner

by Guest Thu Nov 05, 2015 11:46 pm

metaldude wrote:

I respect everyone else's opinion, but for me, Black Sabbath are genre inventors and all-time heavyweight champs.

You got that right bro!!! There is none other!!! Rockin Loud

by Friday13th Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:05 am

Black Sabbath is the first, even if its not like they invented any one part. They just put it all together correctly.

In my mind there are more pre-conditions to being heavy metal than just being heavy or having a tri-tone riff or distorted guitar tone. Sabbath had the atmosphere, the lyrics drenched in darkness (sorry but as great as Blue Cheer and Zeppelin are, those guys were still singing about women and drugs same as every other late 60s rock band), the riffs, the solos, the anguished singing. If you have to draw the line somewhere, it can't just be based on one or two things. Guitar tone isn't everything. On the flip side, we can't just claim all heavy sounding classical music as metal. How about Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D minor? It's just as heavy and dissonant as Holst and Wagner just on the organ.

I think the most metal track before "Black Sabbath" was "21st Century Schizoid Man" by King Crimson, which has all the heavy metal elements in addition to jazz and more technical prog playing than anyone else. I don't know if ya'll have heard "Caledonia" by Cromagnon, that is another heavy metal shocker from '69. As for full albums, I don't think there was a consistently metal album before Paranoid.

by Guest Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:39 am

Friday13th wrote:Black Sabbath is the first, even if its not like they invented any one part. They just put it all together correctly.

by Temple of Blood Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:52 pm

Heavy metal has to be dark, not only "heavy".

by Guest Fri Nov 06, 2015 4:15 pm

Temple of Blood wrote:Heavy metal has to be dark, not only "heavy".

Precisely!

Thumbs up

by Guest Fri Nov 06, 2015 4:56 pm

It has been argued (not by me) that the first true Heavy Metal record was In Rock by Deep Purple. I can see their point as Black Sabbath ST was not quite there, Paranoid definitely, and In Rock was released in between.

I have both Blue Cheer Vincebus Eruptum and Iron Butterfly In-Gadda-Da-Vida and whilst both loud for the time Blue Cheer are more heavy blues rock and Iron Butterfly Acid Rock.

Yes Heavy Metal has both those elements but also something else.

by Guest Fri Nov 06, 2015 6:20 pm

I think Heavy Metal was all 'there' on Black Sabbath's debut album!

I know there is some Hard Rock in it too, but still. It's a Heavy Metal album! The firstborn among many brethren! Twisted Evil

by lhversaw Fri Nov 06, 2015 6:33 pm

Great points all of you. I guess it is a matter of what you use as your guide for metal. Some of you use "it has to be dark" Some of you use "It has to be a whole album" While those are great points There is no doubt that this topic will be debated FOREVER. I don't doubt that Sabbath is the father of Doom for sure and that they were very much metal, however according to them they were just hard rock. One brought up Blue Cheer as being very Blues oriented. You are right they are but then again so was sabbath as was Deep Purple and zeppelin etc. So with that in mind one could almost argue that Jimmi Hendrix may have been the first metal artist.

I will still always recognize Blue Cheer as the first for me as they were formed first and released first and early on compared with all other candidates they were just as heavy and one could argue dark as well. I have seen some really cool info and ideas shared here and I love this topic. Metal 1

It boils down to your point of view I have heard that Venom was the first and well that was a decade later. I guess it depends on what you consider metal.

by Guest Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:25 pm

With Black Sabbath's self titled I do not see that as any different overall in style than Blue Cheer's first album, so if you count that as heavy metal then Blue Cheer beats them and yes subsequent to that Jimi Hendrix.

Tony Iommi himself though has stated that he created a different sort of music.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/videos/black-sabbaths-tony-iommi-explains-metals-birth-in-animated-interview-20150219

by Guest Sat Nov 07, 2015 4:33 pm

lhversaw wrote:
It boils down to your point of view I have heard that Venom was the first and well that was a decade later. I guess it depends on what you consider metal.

I like that idea. Let's draw a line in the sand with Venom and stop the debating. Very Happy

by lhversaw Sat Nov 07, 2015 6:00 pm

Headshrinker wrote:
lhversaw wrote:
It boils down to your point of view I have heard that Venom was the first and well that was a decade later. I guess it depends on what you consider metal.

I like that idea. Let's draw a line in the sand with Venom and stop the debating.

Actually I thought this topic was a very good kind considerate topic and there is no real right answer so I don't really think we are debating. At least I didn't think so. Very Happy

by ThomasEversole Sat Nov 07, 2015 7:49 pm

lhversaw wrote:
Headshrinker wrote:
lhversaw wrote:
It boils down to your point of view I have heard that Venom was the first and well that was a decade later. I guess it depends on what you consider metal.

I like that idea. Let's draw a line in the sand with Venom and stop the debating.
Actually I thought this topic was a very good kind considerate topic and there is no real right answer so I don't really think we are debating. At least I didn't think so.

That was my two cents for this topic on the other forum. Smile

The point I made was that the founders of heavy metal and the first heavy metal band are two completely different things. Founders, the bands Larry mentioned. The first metal band, Venom.

I agree with headshrinker, that's a clear line in the sand.

...I know Venom were seen more as extreme metal pioneers, but since everything has gotten HEAVIER in the last 40 years - they're heavy metal today. Blue Cheer doesn't resemble today's metal much.

by Guest Sat Nov 07, 2015 9:33 pm

I definitely was not using the word debating in any negative sense. I think this thread has maybe changed my mind about this topic.

by lhversaw Sat Nov 07, 2015 9:36 pm

ThomasEversole wrote:
lhversaw wrote:
Headshrinker wrote:
lhversaw wrote:
It boils down to your point of view I have heard that Venom was the first and well that was a decade later. I guess it depends on what you consider metal.

I like that idea. Let's draw a line in the sand with Venom and stop the debating.
Actually I thought this topic was a very good kind considerate topic and there is no real right answer so I don't really think we are debating. At least I didn't think so.

That was my two cents for this topic on the other forum.

The point I made was that the founders of heavy metal and the first heavy metal band are two completely different things. Founders, the bands Larry mentioned. The first metal band, Venom.

I agree with headshrinker, that's a clear line in the sand.

...I know Venom were seen more as extreme metal pioneers, but since everything has gotten HEAVIER in the last 40 years - they're heavy metal today. Blue Cheer doesn't resemble today's metal much.

This is VERY TRUE. But I was kinda of taking into consideration that what was metal when it started barely resembles Hard Rock NOW. Another example of that is Def Leppard, Motley Crue, Cinderella and pretty much every what we call now "HAIR METAL" which really now a days is considered Hard Rock. So under those conditions I would agree with you. However taking into consideration for that period in time and what Metal started out as I would say as for "METAL" Venom was about a decade late to the Party. Now if we break it up further then I would look at it like this:

Father of Metal - Blue Cheer followed a year later by Sabbath and Zeppelin.
Father of Doom - Sabbath hands down
Father of Extreme Metal/Thrash/Black Metal etc - Venom.

I think one ALWAYS Has to look at the time period when looking back to determine where and when something as a whole started.

by lhversaw Sat Nov 07, 2015 9:37 pm

Headshrinker wrote:I definitely was not using the word debating in any negative sense. I think this thread has maybe changed my mind about this topic.

Cool I was hoping to keep this a positive thread Very Happy

by ThomasEversole Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:12 pm

lhversaw wrote:
Father of Metal - Blue Cheer followed a year later by Sabbath and Zeppelin.
Father of Doom - Sabbath hands down
Father of Extreme Metal/Thrash/Black Metal etc - Venom.

I would agree with that list completely.
...but in terms of the FIRST metal group, based on metal being what it is today, irregardless of who fathered whom, I still view Venom as the first metal band. ;P

by Guest Sun Nov 08, 2015 3:55 pm

I agree Venom was the first extreme Metal band! Really their early stuff is considered Speed Metal nowadays. But Speed Metal really did open the door for the extremities in Metal - Thrash, Black, Death, etc.

For me, Black Sabbath will always be the first Metal band. But I totally respect the views of others with different opinions than mine.

by alldatndensum Mon Nov 09, 2015 6:49 am

I don't think we should grade the metal of yesteryear by what the definition seems to be today. Today's metal is mostly sub genres of what pure metal was. That's absurd. To define any movement, you start with the fathers.

I won't get caught up in the who was first debate. I just know that the scene was built and driven by the works of Sabbath, Deep Purple, Led Zepplin, and many others. The early magazine chronicling the scene even pulled in bands like Aerosmith. So, people can CALL those bands "hard rock" now, but historically they would be wrong. The scene called it metal back then, and that is what it was. Everything since has been a derivative work based on those pioneers and is truly a sub genre. To downgrade those bands now is nothing more than revisionist history. Period.

by ThomasEversole Tue Nov 10, 2015 8:38 am

alldatndensum wrote:I don't think we should grade the metal of yesteryear by what the definition seems to be today. Today's metal is mostly sub genres of what pure metal was. That's absurd. To define any movement, you start with the fathers.

Lets say that someone got their drivers license back in 1950 and for whatever reason, they're being tested/graded again on how they drive.

Do you give them the driving test that was available in 1950?
...or do you grade them on the rules of the road today?
___________________

Its absurd to grade yesteryear's metal on a 40 year curve, because we all live in the present. Its absurd to pretend 40 years of metal didn't happen because other bands happened first.

by Sponsored content

Fathers of Heavy Metal

Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal

Re: Fathers of Heavy Metal