For those who like ozzy sabbath only...i want to know why?

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

I just don't get it. I feel i should sit you down in front of some bose and a big screen, to watch radio city. Please explain what it is you are thinking?

[Billy Underdog]

Easy question. It sucks...

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

I think the early stuff is only the springboard to much greater music.

[Billy Underdog]

well, you're allowed to think so. I'm allowed not to...

[MH1986]

It's all equally great to me, so I don't get it either man.

[Josef_K]

I don't get how you can't get it... to be honest :D The ozzy era had a very different sound to it, some people liked that sound better. Also, people who listen mostly to music from the 60s and 70s will have a hard time dealing with the production technique on H&H and every album after that, there is little if any connection with the 70s Sabbath production-wise. There are people who claim that the only true Pink Floyd album was "Piper at the Gates of Dawn", there are people who say MK II Deep Purple is the only good Purple and so on. It became a very different band numerous times with the ever-changing line ups. I for example completely love the first three Rainbow albums, while I just can't stand the rest. Is it because I only like Dio and not the rest of the band? Hell no. Cozy is my favorite drummer of all, Ritchie my favorite guitarist of all, Don Airey not my favorite but great and then there's this new guy on vocals which I don't like (talking about "Down to Earth" here, I don't remember the bass player haha).

I love all Sabbath albums, but honestly I'm a bit surprised I do, because they are so very different from each other. Hell, I'd even go so far as to say that Blizzard of Ozz is much closer to Ozzy-era Sabbath than most post-ozzy Sabbath albums. I still like all Sabbath albums more than Blizzard of Ozz, but you get my point.

[Billy Underdog]

@Josef_K: You hit the nail on the head there. Thank you, now i don't have to expain it myself yet again...

[MH1986]

I don't get how you can't get it... to be honest :D The ozzy era had a very different sound to it, some people liked that sound better. Also, people who listen mostly to music from the 60s and 70s will have a hard time dealing with the production technique on H&H and every album after that, there is little if any connection with the 70s Sabbath production-wise. There are people who claim that the only true Pink Floyd album was "Piper at the Gates of Dawn", there are people who say MK II Deep Purple is the only good Purple and so on. It became a very different band numerous times with the ever-changing line ups. I for example completely love the first three Rainbow albums, while I just can't stand the rest. Is it because I only like Dio and not the rest of the band? Hell no. Cozy is my favorite drummer of all, Ritchie my favorite guitarist of all, Don Airey not my favorite but great and then there's this new guy on vocals which I don't like (talking about "Down to Earth" here, I don't remember the bass player haha).

I love all Sabbath albums, but honestly I'm a bit surprised I do, because they are so very different from each other. Hell, I'd even go so far as to say that Blizzard of Ozz is much closer to Ozzy-era Sabbath than most post-ozzy Sabbath albums. I still like all Sabbath albums more than Blizzard of Ozz, but you get my point.

Because its all well written, well performed music. It's all dark and heavy. I stand by it, if you like a song like War Pigs or Iron Man or Black Sabbath how can you not like songs like Heaven and Hell, After All, or Headless Cross? It's all the same type of music to me.

People are too hung up on labels and putting things in little preconceived boxes if you ask me.

[Billy Underdog]

if you like a song like War Pigs or Iron Man or Black Sabbath how can you not like songs like Heaven and Hell, After All, or Headless Cross? It's all the same type of music to me.

Well, it's not for me. I think War Pigs and Heaven & Hell sounds worlds apart, basically it's two different bands that just happens to have the same name. Not only because of Dio, or production, but i think the band as a whole changed.
Is it really so hard to understand that someone might feel different about music than yourself?

[Monster Boy]

Because its all well written, well performed music. It's all dark and heavy. I stand by it, if you like a song like War Pigs or Iron Man or Black Sabbath how can you not like songs like Heaven and Hell, After All, or Headless Cross? It's all the same type of music to me.

People are too hung up on labels and putting things in little preconceived boxes if you ask me.

You just labeled and put a whole slew of people in boxes there.

"Well written" is certainly up for interpretation, as is "well performed". Dark and Heavy is a pretty "objective" measurement I suppose though, but just because two songs are both dark and heavy doesn't mean I have to like both of them. Apples and Oranges are both sugary fruits, I don't get how some people can like one and not the other. See?

[MH1986]

Well, it's not for me. I think War Pigs and Heaven & Hell sounds worlds apart, basically it's two different bands that just happens to have the same name. Not only because of Dio, or production, but i think the band as a whole changed.
Is it really so hard to understand that someone might feel different about music than yourself?

No it's understandable, but personally I just don't get it as I don't look at music that way. If its got distorted guitars, tight bass, slamming drums and great vocals with at least halfway decent lyrics I'm probably going to like it. Some stylistic differences keep the music interesting and only add to a more diverse listening experience.

[Billy Underdog]

No it's understandable, but personally I just don't get it as I don't look at music that way. If its got distorted guitars, tight bass, slamming drums and great vocals with at least halfway decent lyrics I'm probably going to like it. Some stylistic differences keep the music interesting and only add to a more diverse listening experience.

What your basically saying here is that you like ALL rock-music ever made. Shurly, there must be some bands you don't like...

[MH1986]

What your basically saying here is that you like ALL rock-music ever made. Shurly, there must be some bands you don't like...

There's a strong possibility that I'll like at least some aspect of most rock groups. Strong possibility I'll dislike other aspects of a group. I detest most extreme metal and whiny bands aimed at 13 y/o girls. I just find it hard to believe that someone can objectively hate Dio era sabbath and love Ozzy era sabbath in relation to the music itself with no other personal factors involved. They are similar enough that you should be able to find something you like about them. There are various degrees of liking something. Loving one and completely hating the other just seem completely at odds is all.

Maybe someone doesn't like Dio's or Geezer's lyrics, that's cool. But there are strong elements between both eras that aren't that different from one another. Not liking one of them simply out of a sense of loyalty to the other is what happens most I've found.

A more modern example is between Creed and Alter Bridge. While I don't care for Creed that much I don't hate everything about them. If I did I'd surely dislike Alter Bridge, but I rather like them. I feel Myles Kennedy brought a lot to the band, but instrumentally there really wasn't anything to really dislike about Creed in the first place. Being mainstream itself isn't necessarily a bad thing, hell, Sabbath has become very mainstream itself.

[Billy Underdog]

in relation to the music itself with no other personal factors involved.

Relation to music is itself the only personal factor needed. As for me, i can't stand Dio's singingstyle, and the music the band made went more towards "mainstream 80's metal", which i don't like so much, and further away from the 70's blues-based hard (with progressive elements) rock, which i love.
If you can't hear that there's a difference between Ozzy-sab and Dio-sab, then you'll never get how i can like one and not the other. If you DO hear that there's a difference, why is it so hard to understand that someone might like one thing, but not the other?
As Monster Boy said, apples & oranges...

I can't see why you don't like Extreme Metal, it's got, and i quote: "distorted guitars, tight bass, slamming drums and great vocals with at least halfway decent lyrics".
Don't you see how that's a stupid assumption of me to make?

[MH1986]

Its a shame I can get more enjoyment out of Sabbath than you Billy. Your missing out. I personally love the blues influence in early Sabbath, but just because the later material isn't as blues oriented doesn't mean its not good. Iommi solos to this day carry a strong blues influence. But whatever, btw I love both apples and oranges.

Thanks for the edumakation professor Billy.

---------- Post added at 12:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:57 AM ----------

Easy question. It sucks...

because of course this is pure GENIUS!

[Billy Underdog]

Thanks for the edumakation professor Billy

No problem, man. Always a pleasure to share from my eternal source of knowledge.

May i add, used to love Dio-sab too, back when i was 15-16. But musical taste can change very much in 12-13 years, atleast it has done so for me.

But i don't think it's a shame you get more enjoyment out of Sabbath than me. For all we know, my love for Sabbath can be higher than yours though i (appearantly in you eyes) have less to choose from. It's just that my strong love have purified the truth...

[Damian]

Well, it's not for me. I think War Pigs and Heaven & Hell sounds worlds apart, basically it's two different bands that just happens to have the same name.

They just happen to have something else in common also, namely the same writer and signature sounds from guitarist Tony Iommi. Lineup preferences aside, I can't find myself actually hating anything he has played on guitar, which keeps me from hating or only liking only one particular incarnation of Black Sabbath.

[Billy Underdog]

I can't find myself actually hating anything he has played on guitar, which keeps me from hating or only liking only one particular incarnation of Black Sabbath.

Which is great for you, never said you should'nt, but i must be allowed not to, if that's what my taste tells me so.
I can't say i hate Iommi's (or Geezer or Bill's) playing, but i find it got more boring. Vinnie's even more so.

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

Im Laughing all the way. Please. Once you experience the Sound that Iommi and Geezer have perfected, you will only appreciate that no other than Black Sabbath could it be. Ian Gillan's Disturbing the Priest, or Bobby Rodinelli on Cross Purposes only compliment what Black Sabbath is. Truely it is the sound, the riffs, the structure.

[Monster Boy]

Im Laughing all the way. Please. Once you experience the Sound that Iommi and Geezer have perfected, you will only appreciate that no other than Black Sabbath could it be. Ian Gillan's Disturbing the Priest, or Bobby Rodinelli on Cross Purposes only compliment what Black Sabbath is. Truely it is the sound, the riffs, the structure.

Great, let's all laugh at each other's taste in music shall we? Please? Good times. Once you step inside of my incredible brain you will know THE TRUTH about Black Sabbath, to the sound of trumpets. Butt trumpets I think.

[Billy Underdog]

Im Laughing all the way.

I'm laughing at the fact that you seem to think your musical taste is superior to mine.

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

Uhm, the song Heaven and Hell started as an Osbourne-era song. I think.

[Billy Underdog]

Uhm, the song Heaven and Hell started as an Osbourne-era song. I think.

Nope, it was Children Of The Sea. And Ozzy probably didn't do anything with it, as that was the reason he got fired...

[Josef_K]

Seems like I missed out on a fierce discussion concerning the Ozzy-era vs everything else... I wonder if there will ever be another one again some day on these forums?

Again I don't think this is strange at all, I mean, MH1986, do you like ALL eras of Deep Purple? If you do, do you like ALL eras of Rainbow? Do you know anyone who doesn't? It's the same there, imo the band Rainbow might have changed more drastically than Sabbath ever did, but the difference is not too big. In many ways Ozzy and Dio/Martin are the opposite, with Ozzy's almost whiny, very down to earth vocals and Dio/Martins soaring, dramatic vocals. The vocals have a large influence on the sound, by far the largest compared to other instruments according to many. So the fact that the guitarist is the same doesn't make it "more or less the same" imo. It's different, VERY different. The drastic change in lyric themes also caused the overall atmosphere to change, as well as the already mentioned step into the 80s/90s with different production values as well as a different mainstream interest that everyone had to adapt to to a certain degree, no matter how awesome your riffs are. Sorry if I've been repeating my earlier post a bit here, but I still just find it very easy to believe that someone loves the Ozzy era and completely hates the rest or at least dislikes them. Now, if someone said they loved the Dio-era but hated the Martin-era, that would be weird. The only valid argument there would be if the person thinks that "Martin is just an inferior Dio-clone" which is rubbish to my ears but I can see where they are coming from.

[nunoni]

I actually do get it. The original Sabbath (not the line-up, but the first years), just as many other seminal bands of the time, were making a new path, creating new genders. There was nothing for them to follow, no genre where they could establish themselves here or there, not even something they could build on. They were creating it as they went along.

This makes for music that is exceptionally innovative, and different from everything else before or after.

It ran its course, by the mid 70s they had nothing left to give in these terms, no new paths. That was the end of that "original" Black Sabbath, leading inevitably to exhaustion, and to trying to find "new things to do" but without the creativity and freshness required to do those things. So albums like NSD are the least "original" of all Black Sabbath albums.

Anyway, some people are attracted to this trail blazing surge of creativity, and don't want to accept that what came later is worthy of this. That's ok. I suspect the same people, if they were given Dio Black Sabbath albums, but with a different band name on it, might find it in themselves that they actually love that music. But, simply stated, it is not the same uniquely creative band.

[Monster Boy]

Anyway, some people are attracted to this trail blazing surge of creativity, and don't want to accept that what came later is worthy of this. That's ok. I suspect the same people, if they were given Dio Black Sabbath albums, but with a different band name on it, might find it in themselves that they actually love that music. But, simply stated, it is not the same uniquely creative band.

I understand your line of reasoning, and the creativity of the original line-up certainly does play a role for me in any case, but you've made up some imaginary people here. And I mean the people who "don't want to accept that what came later is worthy of this". What you wrote implies there is no question about whether the later music is as good: one either accepts it or closes their eyes to the truth. I know that, for me at least (as far as I can know the reasons for my preferences), what I like has nothing to do with what I want to accept. What some people truly seem to not be able to accept is that others can have completely valid reasons (ones based on "the music itself") for liking different music.

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

Who is it that I'm listening to between Osbournes limited vocals? I.e. The thrill of it All. Same tone and jazz/blues heaviness as what is found between Dio's

[Billy Underdog]

Who is it that I'm listening to between Osbournes limited vocals? I.e. The thrill of it All. Same tone and jazz/blues heaviness as what is found between Dio's

What are you talking about?

[KazolOrajia]

Partly because the other eras were so different. People don't like change, especially when they've become used to something and fallen in love with it.

Another reason would that they don't consider it to truly be Black Sabbath. In their mind, the original line-up is the only true one.

And, of course, maybe they just don't like it. I love all Sabbath, but other people don't. It deeply saddens me, and I'm frightened of these albums being completely forgotten, but I can't tell people what to like.

[Monster Boy]

Partly because the other eras were so different. People don't like change, especially when they've become used to something and fallen in love with it.

Another reason would that they don't consider it to truly be Black Sabbath. In their mind, the original line-up is the only true one.

And, of course, maybe they just don't like it. I love all Sabbath, but other people don't. It deeply saddens me, and I'm frightened of these albums being completely forgotten, but I can't tell people what to like.

I know there is no bad intention in your post, but this is yet another instance of somebody who loves all eras guessing why other people don't. It would be much better if people would speak for themselves here, rather than dish out biased opinions on how they think other people are biased. I guess I'm on a bit of a campaign here, sorry to keep tooting the same horn. The last thing I'll mention on the subject is that if I turned this on its head you might get offended. For instance:

People who like all the eras of Black Sabbath generally do not hold creativity in high regard. People don't like changes (time changes, mood changes) in their music, especially when they've become used to and fallen in love with the same doomy riffs over and over.

Another reason would be that they like anything with the label Black Sabbath. In their mind, all it takes is the name for them to like it.

*the above beliefs are not mine. I repeat, not my beliefs, just an example of how speaking for others can be sort of rude*

[Billy Underdog]

I know there is no bad intention in your post, but this is yet another instance of somebody who loves all eras guessing why other people don't. It would be much better if people would speak for themselves here, rather than dish out biased opinions on how they think other people are biased. I guess I'm on a bit of a campaign here, sorry to keep tooting the same horn.

It seems like he have'nt read anything of the thread, but just jumped right down to reply...

[Josef_K]

What are you talking about?

Tony Iommi. He (IommiGeezWallofSound) suggests that Tony didn't change when the band did (I guess), which is just madness imo :D "Same tone and jazz/blues heaviness as what is found between Dio's (... vocals))". Really? You think there is as much jazz/blues influences in 80s/90s Sabbath as in 70s Sabbath? I can't say anything else than... I disagree... deeply. Sure there are some old influences that appear here and there but it's an OBVIOUS decrease in such influences from H&H and onward imo.

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

Please. Iommi's approach and has changed a lot- have you read his book? The change from Vol.4 to Never Say Die is just as big of a leap. I would consider Iommi without Geezer to be a watered-down version of Sabbath, but it is those two that make the Sabbath sound what it is. Imo

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

It's all equally great to me, so I don't get it either man.

Way better imo

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

They just happen to have something else in common also, namely the same writer and signature sounds from guitarist Tony Iommi. Lineup preferences aside, I can't find myself actually hating anything he has played on guitar, which keeps me from hating or only liking only one particular incarnation of Black Sabbath.

Yes indeed. Iommi is one creative dude. His signiture sound is unlike anyones. He seems to play in the same way but riddles upon infinite riddles. He is a true master of his craft. Absolutely a genius and a dedicated musician. It's all in his approach to the notes. Watch him closely, with his virbrato and you'll see why Geezer and Dio have said it doesn't get any better.[COLOR="silver"]

[Damian]

All good, but as Billy noted, personal taste can vary widely and for some, either Tony himself of the balance of different musicians around him from different era's can greatly impact your listening pleasure both positively and negatively. For me, his sound is very distinct and appreciated, and will always be synonymous with all eras of Sabbath. Your mileage may vary.

[Formerly Riffs]

I just don't get it. I feel i should sit you down in front of some bose and a big screen, to watch radio city. Please explain what it is you are thinking?

Hey, I really like the Radio City show (although I prefer the Wacken performance) but it's a different band. Some people will like it, some won't. It's not that hard to understand.

Bands change over time, for a variety of reasons. I don't feel I need to love everything Ritchie Blackmore ever came up with just because I like some of it. Same with Iommi, Ozzy, Dio, David Gilmour, James Hetfield and so on.

Also, I think people often make too much of a fuss about band lineups and forget that OTHER things change too. Individuals change and times change too. For instance, I know that a crapload of people who say "I love Ozzy-era Sabbath" really mean "I love the first three albums and a few songs off Vol 4, Sabbath Bloody Sabbath and Sabotage".

To use another example, I find that Heaven and Hell and Mob Rules have a truckload in common despite having a different drummer, while Mob Rules and The Devil You Know are vastly different in tone, energy, structure, feel and approach even though they share the exact same lineup.

That's why I'm always a little amused when people expect greatness from an original lineup reunion. Like it was 1972 all over again. It's not. Some folks assume the next record is gonna be made up of Iron Mans, War Pigs, Black Sabbaths and NIBs when really, most of the original era classics were created within three years of the band's existence. It's more likely that you're gonna hear something craptacular like Psycho Man than a classic track like Into the Void.

A band's lineup is a critical factor in the music but there's more to it than just that.

[Sabhuman1978]

Ozzy Sabbath? Dio Sabbath? Me like both!

[IommiGeezWallofSound]

Hey, I really like the Radio City show (although I prefer the Wacken performance) but it's a different band. Some people will like it, some won't. It's not that hard to understand.

Bands change over time, for a variety of reasons. I don't feel I need to love everything Ritchie Blackmore ever came up with just because I like some of it. Same with Iommi, Ozzy, Dio, David Gilmour, James Hetfield and so on.

Also, I think people often make too much of a fuss about band lineups and forget that OTHER things change too. Individuals change and times change too. For instance, I know that a crapload of people who say "I love Ozzy-era Sabbath" really mean "I love the first three albums and a few songs off Vol 4, Sabbath Bloody Sabbath and Sabotage".
To use another example, I find that Heaven and Hell and Mob Rules have a truckload in common despite having a different drummer, while Mob Rules and The Devil You Know are vastly different in tone, energy, structure, feel and approach even though they share the exact same lineup.

That's why I'm always a little amused when people expect greatness from an original lineup reunion. Like it was 1972 all over again. It's not. Some folks assume the next record is gonna be made up of Iron Mans, War Pigs, Black Sabbaths and NIBs when really, most of the original era classics were created within three years of the band's existence. It's more likely that you're gonna hear something craptacular like Psycho Man than a classic track like Into the Void.

A band's lineup is a critical factor in the music but there's more to it than just that.

I do hope and pray that the next album is as good as Heaven and Hell or Cross Purposes musically I think it will. Iommi has a lot to express considering all factors.

[Billy Underdog]

I do hope and pray that the next album is as good as Heaven and Hell or Cross Purposes

I really hope and pray the new album won't suck THAT much...