Black Sabbath is a Joke - Comments Page 3

Al Barger has a bee in his bonnet about Black Sabbath. Specifically, they are THE ultimate Beavis and Butthead band.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Black Sabbath blows. They're a joke, a cartoon band. Specifically, they are THE ultimate Beavis and Butthead band, as you may remember. That is to say, they're a dumb band for glue sniffing teenage boys who have killed whatever brain cells they may once have had.…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

— go to most recent comments
  • 76 - Dan

    Nov 13, 2003 at 11:31 pm

    xaos tehory, did you ever consider that maybe all that drug takin' perhaps fueled his creativity. Or, more likely, was just a inevitable lifestyle choice for a rock star in creative-frenzy mode. He's probably lucky to be alive. One might even claim it was all worth it. Every dazzling star eventually becomes a red dwarf.

    Al, you so infrequently scorn a quasi-influential band with the severity you've impugned Black Sabbath. I sense you've recently got a bad dose. I never purposely listen to it anymore myself, but a few days ago, I caught most of war pigs on the way home in the car, (eclectic college radio station)and it's interesting how an old tune will give you a lift that way. Some stuff by them admittedly has not survived out of its original context.

    A band that didn't survive out of context at all, in my opinion, is the Who. I feel vindicated now for never liking them in the first place.

  • 77 - Tom Johnson

    Nov 16, 2003 at 1:24 pm

    Dan, I'd love for you to justify how the Who "didn't survive out of context." What is the context, and why don't they survive? It can't solely be because you don't like them.

    My opinion? You're wrong, way, way wrong. The Who's music remains as vital and charged as it ever was, and actually seems moreso nowadays because music today is so sterile and lifeless. The catalog from Tommy through By Numbers (and even some of the hits from their last three albums as well) is solid and timeless because it is all centered around the very things that rock would be built upon in the future. To say it "didn't survive out of context," whatever that actually means, is pretty ridiculous.

    Justify yourself. Let's hear it.

  • 78 - Al Barger

    Nov 16, 2003 at 2:46 pm

    Gotta lotta love for ya Dan, but I'm afraid that you've really stepped into the POOP bad mouthing the Who. Even mentioning their hallowed name in comparison to silly stuff like Sabbath constitutes and art crime. They were never particularly trendy or timely, and I wouldn't care if they had been. They had the SONGS.

    Crikey, Who's Next alone puts them over 99% of other bands. Hell, "Behind Blue Eyes" will best whole careers by other people- and that's not particularly even my favorite song on that one album.

    Tom, even YOU seem to be somewhat missing out here by starting with Tommy. They had an awe inspiring catalogue before we ever heard of the deaf, dumb and blind kid. "Substitute" and "I Can See for Miles" and "Magic Bus" and "My Generation" and... we could go on for a while.

    In short, the Who are only maybe half a step down from being right up there with the Beatles and Prince and Costello.

  • 79 - 23md

    Dec 17, 2003 at 6:53 pm

    Couple of quick thoughts:

    1. Al, your opinion of what constitutes music is very shallow and undeveloped. You should branch out and try to grow in your understanding of what music is. Read/Listen to some John Cage. Check out the Boredoms or even Ween. Songwriting (which seems to be what you are into) does not equal music.

    2. The whole thrust of your argument can be summed up as "They suck because I don't like them," which is fine and perfectly ok, but realize that it doesn't translate into anything universal at all and none of the arguments you made can sustain any serious scrutiny, unless you feel like you can give us all a definition of groove LOL. I have to assume like the other poster, that this is baiting, because if you actually know your stuff and have really listened to Sabbath (you use the terms), you know your arguments are unsupportable.

    3. Skynrd, as a band, can be fine to listen to, but are as derivative as they come. What ground did they really break? How can you site a garage rock noodle-fest like Freebird, which is more of a joke nowadays than a classic (is that freedom rock? turn it up!)? Also, an examination of the Lyrics of Sweet Home Alabama reveal it to be largely racist in its content.

    4. Listen to the song war pigs and note the melody, harmony, and even speed changes.

    5. Listen to the cover of the song Sabbath Bloody Sabbath by The Cranberries. Proof of a good song in my opinion is its ability to be translated into another genre and stand up.

    6. Sabbath did indeed spawn a musical revolution by any objective measure, whether it is one whose substance you are able to appreciate or not.

    7. Stand classic sabbath up to the Britney Spears songs, which have rhythm and melody and groove. Are you going to tell me Britney did/is doing more for music than Sabbath under Ozzy?

    8. Sabbath with Ozzy did more than create a signiature sound which has inspired many artists and which many have tried to emulate over the years. They captured a sentiment and an emotion. They found their niche speaking to those alienating emotions we all have felt as an adolescent and even as adults some times. It is their ability to speak to that lonely place in all of us that makes them so powerful and gives them their staying power.

    9. Alice Cooper, who merely cloaks himself in the trappings of satanism/black magic for marketing (he is a member of 1st baptist church in Phoenix), pales in comparison to the real emotion Sabbath exuded.

    10. As far as the who, don't neglect the albumn Quadrophenia.

  • 80 - TDavid

    Dec 17, 2003 at 7:51 pm

    In #68 Al admitted Sabbath was OK. Maybe by comment #666, he'll be fully converted ;)

  • 81 - Al Barger

    Dec 17, 2003 at 11:49 pm

    I don't recall Alice Cooper ever specifically delving into Satanism, or really even into Black Magic. He had childhood nightmares pretty well covered though.

    Without rehashing old ground, in fairness I think you have to recognize that my complaints have been somewhat more significant than "I don't like them."

    Screw John Cage and some half-assed Ween. Ongoing exploration has me currently knee deep in Irving Berlin and Ethel Merman. Far more spiritually and intellectually rewarding than John Cage- or bloody Sabbath.

    Though this weekend has perhaps spoken against the universal verity of Berlin/Merman/Annie Oakley's classic lament "You Can't Get a Man with a Gun."

  • 82 - bleudevil

    Dec 18, 2003 at 7:00 am

    If only Jim Morrison had sat in with Sabbath for a few sessions...maybe then Al would have some true art to appreciate

  • 83 - Sergi

    Dec 25, 2003 at 12:18 pm

    Three chords, easy melody, bass and drums. This is the esence of metal and the great songs. Blac Sabbath were great songs makers. Dark songs. Songs for raining days.

  • 84 - HW Saxton Jr.

    Dec 25, 2003 at 6:55 pm

    I liked Ozzy more back when he was with Harriet.

  • 85 - Igor

    Dec 27, 2003 at 3:23 am

    Hey guy! Just respect to you for what you are doing! And for you know exactly the idea what u r talking about!

  • 86 - Levi

    Jan 10, 2004 at 3:41 am

    How dare you mock the group that created heavy metal! You glorify simple, weak bands like Lynyrd SkynTURD, Zeppelin and Bob Dylan, yet you shit on Sabbath. SkynTURD, Zeppelin and Bob Dylan are for sissies and no one in their right mind gives a shit about these dead bands. Obviously, a few of you people don't have a clue about what good music really is; or is Sabbath just too heavy for you? Stop listening to the hippie sissy shit and listen to some real Rock N Roll.

  • 87 - jadester

    Jan 10, 2004 at 6:56 am

    Having only just found this post, i would just like to ask if anyone else has heard Rhapsody.
    Sort of a mix between classical and rock, they're funny but good.

  • 88 - Karl Leman

    Mar 08, 2004 at 7:07 pm

    I notice that this comment table has gone on for a while, but I have to add a comment.

    Judging from what is written above, "Al Barger" seems to take great joy in mocking bands without any real reasons. I is a fact that Black Sabbath has played a great role in the history of rock music. Perhaps he doesn't like their music, but a good critic should be able to see them for what they are even so.

  • 89 - Eric Olsen

    Mar 08, 2004 at 7:17 pm

    Good point Karl, I agree, and I am astonished the Rock Hall hasn't seen it like that yet either.

  • 90 - Josh

    Mar 08, 2004 at 11:04 pm

    Okay, Sabbath weren't the most musically talented group in the world, but their influence in totally beyond comprehension. Sure, they were nowhere near as good as Heep, Purple or Zeppelin (their stylistic contemporaries), but they were arguably even more influential than any of those bands. Ozzy couldn't sing worth a fuck, but the man definitely paid his dues and he deserves his status. Iommi was a limited guitarist but could crank out riffs like there was no tomorrow. Butler wrote some intriguing lyrics and played some great bass, and Ward is one of rock's most overlooked drummers. If I were hard pressed to choose their best album, I would say SABOTAGE because I usually vote for the underrated instead of the overrated.

    Oh, and I disagree with Eric's comment a while back, in which he states that Uriah Heep had only one good album. NO WAY! Hell, their first five or six albums were ALL killer. If you can, check out their first album sometime, Eric, simply titled URIAH HEEP. It totally blows away any Sabbath album.

  • 91 - Al Barger

    Mar 09, 2004 at 12:30 am

    Karl, I don't mock bands without reasons. I gave reasons, examples and counterexamples here to try to explain just WHY I was discounting Sabbath.

    Indeed, I don't think I really "mocked" them. I went well out of my way to make it a professional rather than a personal critique, and gave them a little bit of credit where I could.

    Nonetheless, I think it important to distinguish the better from the lesser, to separate the wheat from the chaff. That's the whole point of criticism. Black Sabbath are basically chaff.

  • 92 - Josh

    Mar 09, 2004 at 9:12 pm

    Sabbath were probably the biggest influence on 80's metal, which might not be a good thing...

  • 93 - Josh

    Mar 10, 2004 at 3:39 am

    Hey! Whoever disparaged Alice Cooper is full of shit! Cooper was the man! And yes, the original Alice Cooper band would've put Sabbath to shame any day of the week.

  • 94 - Josh

    Mar 10, 2004 at 6:45 pm

    By the way, TECHNICAL ECSTASY is a very underrated album.

  • 95 - TDavid

    Mar 10, 2004 at 9:22 pm

    >>Ozzy couldn't sing worth a fuck, but the man definitely paid his dues and he deserves his status.>>

    Sorry, Josh, but in Ozzy's early days he could sing. Go find yourself an old booleg live version of Sabbath's Gypsy. The dude could hit some scary notes.

    Not any more though, his voice is toast :(

    However, you can't count anybody dead in the music business though until they literally have dirt thrown over them.

  • 96 - Josh

    Mar 12, 2004 at 5:14 am

    TDavid, where could I find that version of "Gypsy"?

  • 97 - Name

    Nov 30, 2004 at 5:23 am

    Interesting comments. I fail to see how "melodic development" is the key to making good music. Heavy Metal has always been more about rhythm and of course the elusive heavyness. I guess it's a matter of personal taste. I find the "swing" or "roll" in most music to be utterly annoying personally. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is about as much of a joke as Rolling Stone Magazine. And Alice Cooper and Guns 'N Roses suck.

  • 98 - Vital

    Aug 10, 2005 at 3:21 am

    Ow please

    Black sabbath has a lot of melody in his songs. I think the guy who posted this is some kind of sick christ loving person who can't stand succes of an other person.

    Please listen to songs like Solitude and you 'll be amazed how much melody Black Sabbath has in their songs.

    thank you very much

  • 99 - You suck

    Oct 02, 2005 at 7:41 pm

    Um Al should be crusified for giving this review. Black Sabbath rules, not that i like them, but still ozzy is a legend.

  • 100 - uao

    Oct 02, 2005 at 7:50 pm

    Look at this. Al's Black Sabbath piece gets 100 replies, stretching over 2 years. Mine only got 2 replies, and one of them is spam.

    Black Sabbath were dissed throughout the 70's and 80's. I'm pleased to see them finally getting their due.

  • 101 - Michael J. West

    Dec 03, 2005 at 10:18 pm

    That is to say, they're a dumb band for glue sniffing teenage boys who have killed whatever brain cells they may once have had.

    Jeez, Al. That's what we LIKE about them.

  • 102 - James

    Jan 18, 2006 at 12:18 pm

    Try listening to Black Sabbath before slagging them off. Geezer Butler is a genious lyricist. Actually listen to them. Look at "A National Acrobat" Read the lyrics. If you think they aren't good, then you obviously have no sense of meaning. Iron Man ahs to be one of the catchiest riffs I've heard. It's their style. don't make up soemthigng great and not use it. USE IT! And don't make me laugh. Not musicians? Ok if I give you a bass, you could easily learn Bassically, Dirty Women, Fairies Wear Boots, Rat Salad? And what about Tony's solos? Could you pay them? And how about Bill's drum solo on Rat Salad? Nope. Didn't think so. Keep your opinions to yourself, nobody wants to hear you slagging off people who are more successful than you.

  • 103 - Rosetti

    Jan 19, 2006 at 3:39 pm

    that guy said it ^
    |
    |

  • 104 - martin

    Mar 29, 2006 at 10:53 pm

    black sabbath is a very good band ... listen to the songs neon knights , in for the kill and children of the grave . you guys rock .. ronnie james dio is a great guitarist and i learn most of his solos on guitar .....

  • 105 - Nick

    Nov 13, 2006 at 9:44 pm

    I see that this blog is dead in its grave but I must speak my mind...

    First off this Blog was for attention. Blogs are, for the most part written by losers

    AL, you have no clue, or you have forgotten what Sabbath was about. All 4 members of Sabbath are extremely well respected musicians with legions of people who are forever inspired. The only joke here is your blog and ALL blogs on any website

  • 106 - Joe

    Nov 30, 2006 at 8:59 pm

    Obviously this guy is not much of a musician, or much of a music fan. I suggest he focus criticism on aspects of popular art with which he has some understanding and experience.

  • 107 - Joe

    Nov 30, 2006 at 9:02 pm

    Let me re-phrase my last comment: This is not really even a matter of personal taste. If anyone holds the opinion of this blogger, they should be crucified upside down and pelted with feces.

  • 108 - Al Barger

    Nov 30, 2006 at 9:50 pm

    Howdy, Friendly Neighbor Joe. However, seems to me that you've got it about backwards here. See, I'm the one that does NOT like Black Sabbath much, whereas "crucified upside down and pelted with feces" would sound like a Black Sabbath or Marilyn Manson fan's idea of art.

    Then again, I'd about as soon be crucified and pelted with feces as listen to Black Sabbath, anyway.

  • 109 - Vern Halen

    Nov 30, 2006 at 10:42 pm

    Sabbath DOESN'T swing - AND THAT'S THE POINT. They took all the blues & gospel & funk and melody & harmony and structure out of the African & European roots of pop music and stripped it down to a slab on noise. Like the Velvet Underground before them and the Ramones after them, Sabbath were minimalists, who proved once again that you don't have to be technically GOOD to play rock and roll, or metal either.

    To steal a quote (from an author whose name I don't remember): "....as inspiring as they are uniintelligible."

  • 110 - ptown

    Dec 30, 2006 at 1:20 pm

    I was in high school when Black Sabbath's first album came out. They were considered a joke along with Grand Skunk Railroad.

  • 111 - D'oh

    Dec 30, 2006 at 1:47 pm

    Well now, for those who don't think Sabbath was good music, try duplicating Geezer's bass playing, or you might want to think of the innovations made to electric guitar playing by Iommi. This worthy lost parts of two fingers, used a prosthetic to play, made his own extra light guitar strings and was the first to tune his guitar down to C#, the bass did the same. It was this innovation , coupled with the usage of a "forbidden" Gregorian scale motif that included the "devil's note", or tritone.

    This created an entirely different soundscape for music at the time.

    From Wikipedia: "The group found its signature sound almost by accident. When the group was rehearsing in a studio which was situated opposite a cinema showing a horror movie, Osbourne recalls that Tony Iommi said to the rest of the band, "Innit weird man that people pay money to see a movie that scares the shit out of them?". The band began to purposely write dark, ominous songs in an attempt to be music's answer to horror films, and in rebellion against the prevalent happy pop music of the 1960s. In a VH1 documentary about the band, Ozzy Osbourne recalled the laughable lyrics of radio-friendly pop at the time, such as "if you ever go to San Francisco, be sure to wear a flower in your hair...," - "screw that,", they said, "let's go over there and scare everyone !!!"

    Face it folks, this was indeed the birth of "Metal", and it spoke to quite a few people at the time. Remember the time and what was going on in music then.

    Compare it to the innovation and creativity of this...

    You may or may not enjoy the genre these boys created, but they are to Metal what Chuck Berry was to Rock & Roll.

    deal with it

  • 112 - Al Barger

    Dec 30, 2006 at 3:42 pm

    D'oh- Certainly Black Sabbath has been very influential in the creation of some strains of "heavy metal." But the bands that they've inspired have mostly all been just awful.

    Hey, Madonna has been even MORE influential than Black Sabbath. She gave us Britney Spears, after all.

  • 113 - D'oh

    Dec 30, 2006 at 3:51 pm

    No, Al...Disney gave up Britney. but don't let silly shit like facts get in the way of your rants.

    There are many other types of music besides 4/4 with a backbeat, 120 beats per minute, major scales or pentatonic...you know, "pop" music.

    To each their own, but for any serious student/admirer of Music who approaches the topic honestly and with an open mind...you have to give Sabbath their due, as well as their rightful place in the Hall of Fame.

  • 114 - duane

    Dec 30, 2006 at 4:02 pm

    Good. The Black Sabbath debate has reopened.

    I don't know how to embed links, but I would recommend looking up their performance of War Pigs live in Paris (1970) on youtube if you want to see a rock drumming tour de force by Mr. Ward, along with Ozzy singing pretty much on key and with power (with different lyrics). And listen to Geezer, too. He's all over it.

  • 115 - D'oh

    Dec 30, 2006 at 4:06 pm

    Ah, duane, ask and ye shall receive.

  • 116 - Al Barger

    Dec 30, 2006 at 4:13 pm

    Oh D'oh, there's PLENTY of blame to spread around for Britney Spears. Certainly Disney might be blamed in a general corporate way - but Madonna is clearly the artistic role model of adult Britney.

    But of course, the argument I'm making there is that simply being influential isn't necessarily a positive achievement. It only counts to the good if you're a GOOD influence.

    [SARCASM ALERT]
    But of course, you're right on target with the explanation about the only good music being "4/4 with a backbeat, 120 beats per minute, major scales or pentatonic." That's certainly the only things that ever cross MY speakers.

    That's why I won't listen to Black Sabbath. They're such GENIUSES that I can't get my little cracker mind around such brilliant and unprecedented creativity. I'm just not smart enough to get Black Sabbath, like you and Beavis and Butthead do.

  • 117 - D'oh

    Dec 30, 2006 at 4:21 pm

    Al, different stroke for each, is my motto.

    You have every right not to like something, however, you lose any credibility for objective insight or reasoning when you dismiss something merely because you don't like it, rather than from understanding it and making your point that way.

    Take Britney for example. Just hearing that heavily processed make believe voice in the formulated pablum it resides in like a roach in plain yogurt, makes my very DNA curdle.

    Yet, I give credit where it's due, little pop songs can make a lot of money from the bubblegum crowd.

    Yet, even you must admit that from a standpoint of sheer musicality, her entire collection pales in comparison to a single note of Robert Johnson's guitar, much less the creative innovations and musical stylings of the original Sabbath line up.

    So,m where you may not like them, and it's your absolute right not to, by trying to deny that they have earned their place in the Hall of
    Fame is an absurdity of objective analysis.

    Q.E.D.

  • 118 - Mike

    Mar 30, 2007 at 4:25 pm

    Al, you are entitled to your opinion, granted. Other than that, you are kind of an asshole, downing a very popular band that has been around for a long time.

    But, I guess not everybody likes the same thing, your bit. What do you listen to Al? Let us pick apart the things you like and shit on them.

  • 119 - Al Barger

    Sep 23, 2007 at 10:42 pm

    Haden - I live in Laurel, Indiana. Let me know when you're coming to visit, and I'll bake you a cake.

  • 120 - Tired

    Jan 06, 2008 at 3:16 am

    Man, you must be some sort of moron. I'm not convinced you've listened to any Sabbath other than the songs played on the radio. Each were among the best at their inatruments, Geezer Butler was an amazing bassist, Bill Ward was an amazing drummer, and Tony Iommi was an amazing guitarist, who had to relearn after having the tips of his fingers cut off. They had a broad spectrum of music, some simple, some intricate. Cimplicity doesn't mean it sucks, hell, Smoke on the Water is a classic and most often the first song guitar players learn. As far as swing goes, there are few songs they've made without a groove, tell me you can't move to Fairies Wear Boots and I'll call you a liar. You can just listen to the music and get a feel for what the theme is, not so with the modern crap we must endure. Sex and evil sells, they've made millions off of it and have inspired major bands like Slayer to do the same. It's 3 am, I don't remember what else I read, but thought I'd say something, I like to point out idiots.

  • 121 - Andrew

    Mar 27, 2008 at 3:54 am

    This blog is dead, however I could not help replying.

    Al, what you are saying is blasphemy. If you say Black Sabbath can't play their music, you're very wrong. Just like everyone says, try playing bass like Geezer Butler...you'd struggle big time. Also, Tony Iommi lost two fingers and managed to play some of the best riffs ever written.

    And just because a band sometimes is simple, that DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE BAD. Look at The Beatles..their music is very simple yet it sounds brilliant.

    it's obvious you're some idiot critic who judges a band by their songs on the radio.

  • 122 - Keith

    May 03, 2008 at 5:43 pm

    "Lumbering sludge describes their ideas of rhythm."

    Yep... I believe such "sludge" is a quality of metal music... Something that Black Sabbath perfected.

  • 123 - jim

    Jul 28, 2008 at 10:36 pm

    Al Barger:

    You claim that it "is an outrage against any proper ideas of theology and geometry" that Black Sabbath was nominated several times for the Hall. What exactly does Black Sabbath or the Hall of Fame have to do with "proper ideas of theology and geometry"? Care to qualify that? If not, then stop throwing around words you don't know how to use.

    You want MELODY or RHYTHM? "War pigs" basically sums it up. So does "Heaven and Hell". And as Keith said (comment #122), "lumbering sludge" is an important aspect of metal. "Sweet Leaf," anyone? Of course, if you don't like the way they sound, then so be it. But to deny that they are a classic band is just unintelligent. They pioneered heavy metal. Without Black Sabbath, metal would not be the same. End of story.

    You also said they lack harmony. With one guitarist and one bass guitarist ... there just isn't much room for harmony. But listen to some of Iommi's dual guitar solos, like on "Children of the Grave" or "War Pigs."

    And yes, it is acceptavble to criticize Black Sabbath. I think ozzy has a somewhat thin and annoying voice. I think the bridge part of "Electric Funeral" totally kills the apocalyptic atmosphere of the song. But these are just opinions. It is a fact that Black Sabbath is an important band.

    If you don't like Black Sabbath, fine. It doesn't really matter to me. Just don't pretend you actually know anything about music and "theology and geometry" -- whatever that was supposed to mean anyways.

  • 124 - james

    Jan 06, 2009 at 1:56 am

    [personal attack deleted] hahaha two pages of you bitching about black sabbath. Dude they are a classic band, and to deny that is just completely stupid. Study what bands are actually famous and sound good, then come back and people wont take you as a fucking joke. [personal attack deleted]

  • 125 - livershot

    Aug 25, 2009 at 8:28 pm

    I'm a little late to this party but Al is totally wrong, in my opinion. He's judging Sabbath based on their most popular songs, "Iron Man" and "Paranoid", which arent even close to being the best ones they did. Try "Supernaut" or "Into the Void" or "After Forever", or etc. The part of this article that really bugs me is the attack on Sabbath's rhythmic abilities. No groove? Bullshit. Ok, maybe they didn't do much that is conventionally danceable, but that doesn't mean they didn't swing in their own way. Most of their grooves are too slow or fast to really dance to, but still make you feel like dancing, and all that trapped energy goes to your head and spine, rather than the feet. Finally, Bill Ward's drum breaks on "Behind the Wall of Sleep" were funky enough for Too $hort to sample as the beat for "Paystyle", so don't tell me HE doesn't know how to lay down a funky groove.

    Anyways, most of your critique goes like this: "They were heavy, loud, dumb, slow, they don't have pretty melodies, they're tones are ugly, they sing about ugly things etc." You're just bashing them for not meeting a boring standard of whats "real music". You just don't get it. Sabbath werent so much about pure aesthetic appreciation (although they DID have some very nice melodies at times), but about pure VISCERAL RAW POWER. You might as well put the Stooges or Ramones up next, and say they suck cuz they didn't write like Bach.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Feb 14, 2012

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for January

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs