That's a very broad generalization and pretty ridiculous. So every 80's band that qualifies as hair metal only cares about drugs and girls and being famous? Yeah, right. You can hate the music and their looks, but your statement is just flat out wrong. Glam metal is a subgenre of heavy metal, but still metal. As i said many times, the term 'Hair Metal' only came about as a derogatory term so people could put down a band, a sound, or a look they didn't like or understand. In the "definitive metal family tree" of his documentary Metal: A Headbanger's Journey, anthropologist Sam Dunn differentiates pop metal, which includes bands like Def Leppard, Europe, and Whitesnake, from glam metal bands that include Mötley Crüe, Twisted Sister and Poison.
Hair metal is another of those stupid terms that was applied to the genre YEARS after the fact, most likely by hipster journalists. In the 80s/ early 90s it was METAL. All hair metal is heavy metal.
Judas Priest was really the first band to define heavy metal, in both music and image. Rob Halford basically invented the image of what people would equate with heavy metal, and musically, Priest was the first to pretty much disregard blues influences for the most part, which separates them from Sabbath, Zeppelin etc. And nobody could credibly say that Judas Priest is not a real Heavy Metal band. In the '70s there was no distinction made between heavy metal and hard rock and any band that featured any aggressive guitar riffs could get hit with the tag. Bands like Heart and Queen were getting called metal, which is kinda ridiculous in retrospect.
That said, it is unfair to say that the difference is that Hair Metal is about image and Heavy Metal is not. Just different images.
I was in high school 1990-94, and we called it Metal. It was always good to have a few trash metal albums around for when boys would come around. But if they weren't around it was Poison, Winger, Guns n Roses, Cinderella, Warrant, Slaughter, Def Leppard, etc. Hair metal was popular as soon as Metal Health and, to a slightly lesser extent, Pyromania were released - that was early 1983. Hair metal reigned for a decade or more.
No, I didn't say that ALL that glam or hair metal was EVER about was drugs and girls and being famous, but in terms of LYRICAL content? Yeah, a large majority of their LYRICAL CONTENT revolves around that.
And I STRONGLY disagree with you that all of the bands you are mentioning qualify as metal, and so does Encycloepedia Metallum, the Metal Archives.
It doesn't matter to me that you are 4 years older than me, I honestly believe I know a whole lot more about the history of metal music than you, and I generally disagree with a number of statements you are making.
I'll agree that "hair metal" as a term came later, and we can agree on that, and yes, the stuff you like was called GLAM ROCK and GLAM METAL during the 80s.
And while I'll agree that glam metal is a subgenre of metal, I think that in order for those bands to count as metal they need to be heavy enough and have their roots tied firmly enough to the metal lifestyle, and the bands you list like Winger, Cinderella, Warrant, Slaughter, Poison.....NONE of them are considered to be metal music by Encycloepdia Metallum: The Metal Archives and their panel of around 100 experts and thousands of critics because those bands are simply not very heavy.
Mostly they are just rock music.
Encyclopedia Metallum DOES however consider Def Leppard as Heavy Metal, and rightfully so cause they were part of the New Wave of British Heavy Metal.
Trivia question (AND DON'T GOOGLE IT!) Do you know what the NWOBHM is? Cause if not, that will cast some doubt for me on your knowledge of metal history.
Encyclopedia Metallum also DOES consider Motley Crue metal, as well Twisted Sister, Skid Row, Quiet Riot, Dokken, Stryper, Scorpions, and a number of others, and I agree on all of those as they have a heaviness that a lot of the bands you mentioned don't have.
As far as this statement that you made:
" In the '70s there was no distinction made between heavy metal and hard rock and any band that featured any aggressive guitar riffs could get hit with the tag. Bands like Heart and Queen were getting called metal, which is kinda ridiculous in retrospect"...
You are CORRECT that "
In the '70s" people thought that way about metal, and maybe your friends in the 90s called Winger and Ratt metal, but RIGHT NOW AT THIS CURRENT POINT a lot of those early bands you listed are no longer considered metal and the majority of bands you list as glam rock you like are NOT considered to be metal by the foremost authority on the web, and standards of what a style consists of DO change over time.
Now I don't ALWAYS agree with Encyclopedia Metallum, but I do here.
As far as your statement that you think Judas Priest was the first metal band, I am going to disagree and think Sabbath was the first WELL KNOWN metal band, although yes, you are correct that Priest was the first to take away the blues element and add the twin guitar attack, but IMO Sabbath were a MUCH HEAVIER, DARKER AND BETTER BAND!!
Not to mention that there WERE other metal bands as early as Sabbath and even before them, but you probably haven't researched that as heavily as I have.
At the same time and before Black Sabbath all these bands existed that could rightfully be considered metal, but they were mostly kind of obscure and not well known: The Flower Travelin' Band from Japan, The Flying Hat Band (had Glen Tipton from Judas Priest), Bloodrock, Warpig, Deep Purple of course, a band called THE ORIGINAL Iron Maiden (not the one everyone else knows about) who formed in 66' and broke up in 70' and were AMAZING, Writing on the Wall, Iron Claw, Clear Blue Sky, Necromandus, Zior, Monument, and quite a few others.
I am also not sure why you bring up Judas Priest at all and say "no one could say they aren't a metal band" because yes, they are an important early metal band, but so what?
What annoys me most about your posts is that you are acting like your opinions are FACTS that cannot be disputed.
What also annoyed me is that you said something like "the early 80s were the last great age of metal" because the glam bands you like had top hits on the radio, and 1) I don't think that something being popular on the radio or MTV is ANY proof it is actually GOOD music, just that people like it and I think most people have shit taste
2) There is TONS of INCREDIBLE metal that has continued to come out after the 80s, in the 90s, 2000s and 2010s, and I don't agree that the time period you are talking about was the last great age of metal simply cause those bands had radio hits.
3)....And this is the REALLY weird thing: So....basically, you kind of made this thread to attack the "popular music media" of the 90s, generally MTV and the radio, for popularizing grunge music that you hate, in favor of the glam rock that you like...RIGHT??
BUT...then you say that the fact that the glam rock you like had top hits on the radio in the 80s is proof that "the early 80s was the last great age of metal."
So,
on the one hand you are saying you hate the music media that made grunge popular, but also that you support the opinions of that same music media which awarded the bands you like top hits on the radio in the early 80s.
Don't you see the dichotomy there?
THAT IS THE SAME MUSIC MEDIA!
You can't BOTH love it and hate it.
Me personally, I am of the opinion that USUALLY the music that is really popular is complete SHIT, and that most things that are popular are shit because most people have shitty taste, and that if you want to find REALLY good music you usually have to look to the underground, and I personally feel that metal music in general is mostly meant to be an underground movement and a style that is NOT supposed to be palpable to your average listener.
BUT...I do think that SOMETIMES the radio and music media get it right. I DID and DO like grunge music, especially soundgarden, and they were popular, and Sabbath was recognized in their day, and there was some good popular 60s rock, so I won't say that what is popular is ALWAYS bad in my opinion.....
But I think that about 75% of the time the music that makes hits on the radio and television is some of the worst music out there.
So...I just found that statement that since the music you like had hits on the charts in the 80s was proof that that was the last great age for metal and that it was all downhill from there as far as metal is concerned is anything but true.
I get it, you have strong opinions about the music you like and don't like, and so do, but at least I don't try to say the music I like is necessarily better than what others like and that everyone's opinion is subjective.
What I WILL say is that I think certain styles are not CURRENTLY considered metal, based on the foremost metal web authority The Metal Archives.....and while I don't think they get it right 100% of the time, I think they have a pretty good grasp on the current state of metal music.
