Now, Tool are sometimes, wrongly or rightly, called 'the godfathers of nu-metal' or something, and partly what I like about this song is how it feels somewhat nu-metally to me. It reminds me of Mudvayne and their bug eyes, but in the sense that Tool are like 'Shut up followers, this is how it's done PROPERLY'. Like they looked at what some people had done with their ideas and decided to show them how they're always one-step ahead of their own imitators.

I don't know tha tI agree with your assessment but regardless it seemed like a good segue to mention my thought on something.

Do you ever think that when the guitarist for Nickleback (or enter any other equally useless band-object here) is listening to the radio and hears a new Tool song come on in all of its creative masterpiece and spectacular timing and drumming and so on... and ever just realize that there's no goddamn reason for him to be making music and that he should just go back to playing covers in bars because his music is trite, contrived, horseshit? I mean... does it *ever* dawn on Tool's contemporaries how shitty their music is by comparison?

godfathers of nu-metal....

no


no

WHAT?!!? NO!

Yes, i agree. But in Aggroculture's defence, he did say that Tool "sometimes, wrongly or rightly, called". He DID NOT say "Tool are the godfathers..."

Now, back to the argument, Tool are sometimes labelled as the god-father's of nu-metal by uninformed music journalists who do the story they are told to do. It is unrealistic, however, to claim that they did not have any influence on the emergence of the crap that is nu-metal. Also, if Tool are labelled hypothetically as the god-fathers of nu-metal, it does NOT make them nu-metal. Led Zeppelin are considered one of the god-fathers of metal, but they are not metal themselves.

TOOL aren't the godfathers of anything, let alone nu metal.

Um...read my post.

Faith No More are the godfathers of "nu-metal" or at least the earlier rap-metal origins of this pathetic pseudo sub genre of music. I think alot of what got tool tied into this, were the very heavy palm-muted, oddly timed drop d guitar riffs that where all over the Aenima album. At the time of its release, 96ish, the album didn't really play a direct influence in what was becoming commercially viable. The whole last half of the nineties were a very transitional period for radio music, bridging the gap between grunge and the pop punk/screamo/hardcore thing going on now. That in between time was when nu metal reigned supreme.

Somewhere around the time of FNM's breakup was when it all began, the whole Limp Biskit/KoRn thing. These are the ones whom I'm citing when I made my original statement about FNM being the godfathers.

I do agree w/ the whole Tool having a part in the nu-metal scene somewhat, but not completely. The Toolishness (I'm copyrighting that) came along later. I think that album (aenima) was so good, that the full scope of it wasn't realised till much later. Only recently have I started to hear these bands on the radio that are so blatantly doing what the nu-metalers did to FNM w/ tool's music. The earshots, chevelles, 10years, ect. are taking the above mentioned Tool sound, and turning it into radio friendly 4 min jams. Verse Chorus Verse bullshit.

it's only fair, tool ripped their sound off from bands like king crimson and yes, so the bands who rip them off are just a derivative of a derivative of a derivative of a derivative of a derivative...

I guess my point is music keeps getting worse and less original

And Rosetta Stoned is not Nu-Metal, it's prog rock w/ the chuga chuga guitar sound that has been so overused for the past 10 yrs( hey 10 years, wonder if they got their name from...nevermind).

Never. Mention. Tool and Nu-metal. In one sentence.

Please!

There is no wrongly or rightly about that sentiment - there is only wrongly. Any source that claims otherwise either doesn't know what Nu Metal is or has never listened to Tool.

Probably not. Think about it, I'm sure most of their many fans have heard Tool, and obviously don't like them since it's pretty much impossible to genuinely like both. As Tool fans, I'm sure we're all familiar the with feeling that this music is so amazing that anyone who listens to it should obviously love it, and also the reality that so many do listen and just don't get it.

Agreed.
It's really easy for the magazines and reviewers to slot Tool into nu metal since they developed around the same time... but if you're going to say Tool in the same breath as Linkin Park and Disturbed then you should probably re-think that philosophy.

If someone asked me to put them into a category, I'd say you could get away with slotting them under progressive.

Whether they're metal and/or alternative and/or nu metal (shudder) is up to Rolling Stone and Kerrang.

I try not to place them in a genre because in all honesty, I feel that they are their own genre. NO ONE sounds like Tool. And anyone that has tried is clearly a cheap imitation.

But, if I were forced to say they were one thing or another, I'd probably side with Progressive/Psychedelic Rock.

tool was not "prog" until lateralus. lateralus was released well after "nu-metal" was in full swing. APC is considered nu-metal, and that most certainly was inspired by tool. whether you like nu-metal or not is irrelevant. Aenima is one of those albums that inspired a ton of bands to play music. By the way, since when is inspiring people a bad thing? isn't that what tool is all about anyway? and, please, don't bother with the "but fred durst is a pussy sell-out with a backwards cap because he's bald" nonsense - fred durst is the first one to list tool as a major influence. does he sound like tool? no. does he imitate tool? no. what matters is that he, along with an entire generation of moderately successful bands, was inspired to play music....by tool.

now, there's no reason to flame or call me an idiot just because you disagree with me. but, seriously, just try opening up your thinking for a second and realize that sometimes you inspire people in ways you don't see, or even way you don't like (as in the fred durst case). either way, it is a fair assessment to call tool the godfathers of nu-metal in that nu-metal is a reaction to the death of the early 90s bands. also, and here is where i expect to be called everything under the sun, 10,000 days is a nu-metal album. yeah, i said it. everyone their first time listening to it was underwhelmed (or overwhelmed for all the wrong reasons). Why? It's tool doing a tool album, and guess what - it comes off as a nu-metal album. Is it good? of course. Is it better than any other nu-metal album ever? Nah, it's not better than Mer de Noms, which is another tool album that can be categorized as nu-metal. Please, people, don't clsoe your minds and shut off your thinking just because of a certain label or persona within a community you don't like. Hell, I don't like nu-metal, and I'm glad it's dying a slow, painful death. but, you have to be realistic when judging certain things: this being one of them.


let the baseless name-calling begin...

Tool have no doubt influenced nu-metal, as have bands like NIN and RATM. That doesn't make them 'nu metal' by definition.

Best save the 'tool are nu-metal' for esoteric indie review sites, such as Pitchfork.

Not only that, but don't put Tool and APC in the same wing of music. Just because they have the same singer... that's where the similarites end. Well, other than maybe that they're both rock. That's about it.

That's like saying Faith No More is more or less the same thing as Mr. Bungle just because Mike Patton sings for both of them. They're both rock, but like APC and Tool, they're nothing alike.

Though I don't really consider Tool to be affiliated with "nu-metal" at all, this song, in particular, seems like it would be more accessible to people who listen to that stuff, depraved as they may be. I mean, the shit's fucking bouncy. This may be the first Tool song I would ever describe as "fun," in some strange sense. They may have drifted into some nu-metally territory (but the subject matter/approach saves it, imo), but I don't think they care one way or the other for nu-metal or anyone they may have influenced.

As Maynard said once [paraphrasing here], about Fred Durst: "If the school lunch lady hits on you, you're going to be grateful [wrong word], right? But you're not going to start dating the lunch-lady..."

argh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tool is not nu-metal, though it is inadvertently responsible.

Do they exist in a genre? I dont really think so, but if u had to place them in a category it would be metal or even prog rock, and not nu-metal, cos i dont hear any rapping a la fred dirst or that guy form Korn. But tool said themselves taht they don't like to be categorised, they just amke the music they feel like at the time.

I agree with this . . . Picture it this way: I've always thought that when one listens to the radio about three to seven months after a Tool album is released, one hears all kinds of instances of "artists" (ranging from newcomers trying to cash in on a niche, to has-beens trying to reinvent their images) doing their damnedest to immitate Tool's latest work. One might think that such an influence would be positive. But invariably- one after another- the products of such one-dimensional mind-farts suck sweaty, hairy man-titties; and ignorant industry-journalists dub Tool the father of this new movement in mindless, radio crap-rock.

As Count_Grishnackh points out, Led Zeppelin was victimized by the same, viscious, industry cycle. I would add that Nirvana was subjected to this most unfortunate fate; in their case, spawning a generation of soulless, three-and-four chord arrangements that couldn't induce a retarded chimpanzee to masturbate and throw poo at the wall. The Beatles begat an entire mass of happy-go-lucky, smile-'til-your-face-cracks brit-pop; and later a legion of pretentiously undertalented, sitar-incorporating morons. The Dead Kenedy's were termed the precursors of a horde of snot-nosed, wannabe politicos. Rage Against the Machine ushered in an era of talkative-yet-saying-nothing raprock. Phish gave birth to a litter of mewling, jam-pop puppies . . .

Thus, it is neither surprising nor unique that Tool is targeted by the same self-effacing industry-parasites that do their best to taylor their factory-line noise to fit the last, big phenomenon to break onto the scene. What sets Tool apart from all of these artists is that they honestly, artistically, and introspectively reinvent their sound every time they release an album. Whether it is a radically different approach to rhythmic philosophy, a new emphasis in the presentation of the instrumentation, or a stereoscopic array of meaningful layering of lyrical depth; with each new album, Tool add elements to their repertoire that revolutionize the overall effect and interpretation. They are thus the victim of multiple waves of the aforementioned one-dimensional, mind-farts- and given the credit(/blame) for these inept sucker's of satan's cock- EVERY ONE OF THEM!

I'm too tired of Tool being classified as metal (let alone 'nu-metal') to give a meaningful reply. I'll just say that if people insist on pinning a genre-label to Tool, I'm happiest when its prog rock.

Howbout de-genre-ization? Pro-music-ization?

well i for one have never heard Tool referred to as the godfathers of nu-metal, or even heard anyone define Tool as nu-metal. so i think you're talking sh*t. And I think you're the first person to ever mention Tool in the same sentence as nu-metal. get F*cked

To all of you who have never heard Tool mentioned in the same sentence with Nu-Metal, I applaud your ability to tune out the industry fuck-wads who like to categorize, sub-categorize and super-categprize everything.

well thanks for the applause! god damn, shit the bed.

Tool not prog until Lateralus? WTF? APC are nu-metal? WTF?

Mike_Patton knows what he's talking about. The rest of you don't.

unfair. don't judge me.

Tool=Unique, progressive metal, that's how I have always seen them.
And in what way is Tool even comparable to Linkin Park, Korn, Limp Biskit?
You all know how pissed maynard gets when someone mentions Fred Durst :P

Did you read all the posts? A lot of them tend to agree with Mike_Patton and expound on those ideas that he submitted.

Finally...after about a year of reading through these forums, i have found that people DO NOT read all the thread, let alone the first post. A lot of people seem to just read the title of the thread and then add their abuse. I mean, there is way too many "Tool are not nu-metal. Do not say that you fucktards!" posts in this thread to disprove me. No one has said "Tool are nu-metal" except john...and even he has formed more of an argument than 90% of this thread.

Fuck, just read all the posts before saying anything.

lol, oh my word. If you agreed with Mike Patton, then my post obviously isnt aimed at you. Hells bells!!

to be fair, i didn't say tool is nu-metal. i said 10,000 days is a nu-metal album...


*dons flame-retardent body armor*

You're entitled to your opinion... just like the people that like Linkin Park...

My bad. wasnt flaming you at all. just dont agree.

Tool always is and was the only "new" new metal band

i think they are uncategorized my friend....there is no 'let's boil it down' point for Tool's music because it's always too different from everyone elses, that it needs to be given a seperate name....the assessment you give it is wrong in my opinion....

hahaha... I like that perspective!

Tool's genre is "Tool" - No one sounds like them and they don't sound like anyone else... so how could they be in any existing genre?

The genre is "Tool and Tool Wannabees"

Bands in the genre: Tool, Seether, Earshot, etc...