Drone Metal

I have recently - and with thanks to @MaryAnneHobbs - discovered and enjoyed a style of music known as drone metal, epitomised by a group called Sunn 0))) - pronounced sun - when she played a piece of theirs on 6 music.

I suspect that this may be the first time they have been played on a national radio station, or at least one with anything like the BBC. They are, I think it is fair to say, a niche market in terms of listeners. There are others who also play drone metal like Earth, but none who take it to the purest form.

The music is defined very well by the title. There are two aspects: firstly, drone, because most of it consists of very long notes and chords played through distortion which helps to prolong the sound; secondly metal, because it is played loud. Very loud.

Having looked around the internet a little to find out about this style, there are two comments that constantly come up. People say "This isn't music" and then they say "They are not musicians", so I want to address both of these, not least because so many of the criticisms are common ones from people who don't like a particular style of music - and there are similar comments from church groups as to why certain music is "satanic" or at least not suitable for church.

I should point out that I am not arguing that drone metal is suitable for church. But this is not because it is "wrong" or "demonic", it is because there are probably only a few thousand people in the world who actually like and appreciate this style of music, and so imposing it on others would be wrong. It is an acquired taste, and not everyone wants to acquire it. If you do want to see them performing live, and get some idea of their musical style, you can watch them here.

1. This isn't music. I suppose it depends on how you define music, doesn't it? It doesn't have melody, or rhythm, which makes it harder to engage with. Having said that, it does have rhythm, just not a solid beat to it, so not a standard idea of rhythm.

But then we do listen to music with odd rhythmic structures at times - from Pink Floyd's Money to Dave Brubeck and Take Five, we accept some peculiar time signatures in our music, if the musicians can play it (these two pieces are in 7/8 and 5/4 time respectively, which are not the usual time signatures of 3/4 and 4/4). What is more, some performers like Bjork can produce pieces with the most peculiar rhythms (she seems to favour 17/8, according to wikipedia), but they are quite listenable to.

Having said that, most of the music we listen to is rhythmic, to an extent. But it doesn't need to be. Sonn 0))) produce "sonic landscapes" - which means they use their instruments to produce something different, something that invites - or insists - that you engage with it. It isn't for everyone, but if you don't like it, listen to something else.

There are also few words -where there are spoken pieces, they are part of the sonic landscape, not the song. There is a lot of focus on "words" being so important (yes, especially by church people), but in truth, that is so disparaging to the music. The words, and the singer, are not the only or most important part of songs or music. Where there are words, they are part of it, but the music is also crucial.

Music - most of it, at least, and that part that is not produced by the Cowell Money Factory - is artistry. If you don't like Jackson Pollack, that is your opinion, but you cannot say that it isn't art. Your style might be more Thomas Kinkade, which personally makes me puke, but it is art. I guess - it fails utterly to challenge me, which is what I expect art to do.

So you may not like drone metal music, but that doesn't mean you can condemn it as not being music. I don't like Hillsongs-style worship music, but I accept that it is music.

2. They are not musicians. Well watching them, it would appear that they do not need a huge amount of skill on their instruments to produce their music.

Which assumes that most of the skill in playing comes from technique on an instrument, which is doubtful. Many songs have been produced with musically very simple structures, that are not complex to master on any instrument. However to make them something else requires more than just being able to play the notes or chords - it involves being able to perform the music, to bring something of yourself into it, and to make the piece as a whole into something that is more than the sum of the parts.

I can point you to all sorts of musicians that I enjoy who are masters of their instruments, who have a technical skill level way beyond mine. But that is not why I like them - I enjoy them because I like the sounds they make. It does take a set of skills to produce sounds that I like - or sounds that are engaging.

I might try to produce and record some drone metal. This is not because I think it requires a limited musical ability, but because I believe that I have some musical talent, and I probably have the equipment to put something together. I have no idea how it will go, but it will be an interesting challenge for me!


We can be very snobby about music. For some people, it has to be of the absolute highest technical excellence possible. For others, it has to have positive words (and not engage the emotions at all). For me, music works best when it engages the emotions, irrespective of other things. But then I like Pollack and I hate Kinkade, so what do I know?