Right, but they were local at that point...Eazy E brought them to the forfront and their first national album was what you hear today, er, post 1993.
Point is they didn't sound that way when they first came out.
Thats not a fair comparison. Metallica is known worldwide by hundreds of millions of people...Khayree, well, isnt. The better comparison would be, who sounds like 2Pac, Biggie, Wu-Tang, Nas, etc. About as many as metal bands that take after Metallica.
It's a fair comparison you just aren't looking at it from the right lens. The lens you should be looking at it from is the lens that they influenced bands and bands pay homage to them. So biggie, pac, nas, etc isn't relevant to what I'm talking about as I specifically said bay rap. Would any music fan say new Bay Area music is influenced by older Bay Area music and that their music reflects it? No. They'll say it sounds like everything else that is out there.
I do agree that it seems rap artists tend to stray towards "whats cool"...that is obvious. However, metal has done the same thing...sorta. There are about 20-30 different sub-genres of metal, a vast majority of them created within the last decade. Metal has been around since the late 60's. New bands will come out and have a similar sounds to a new genre becuase its fresh and it sells...and then they either disappear or mature to a more traditional sound over time.
There are more sub genres than that. Many of them go back 10-20 years and yes it has been around for decades. However, a lot of bands keep their sound and have no need to go with a "traditional" sound. Shit, AIC doesn't have Layne Staley and the bassist died a few years ago yet they still have the AIC sound. Again, with bands you can hear the roots because bands have a reason to listen and study older music. 1. Because they want to learn how to play. 2. Because they want to cover. So how many bay artists are studying older bay music and implimenting what worked or what they find unique, in their product?
Its an interesting topic because i really do feel hip-hop is such a unique case, mostly because its the "newest" genre of music. Therefore, its still finding its groove, so to speak. It also springs, for the most part, from a very specific demographic: inner city, monitory youth. I dont know of any major genre of music that is so specific to one demographic...and its usually represented in the music. Most other genres talk of love, heartbreak, angst, politics, etc. Hip-hop tells a 1st person story, mostly, of someone trying to get up and get out a better life.
It's not the newest genre of music and it's been around since the late 70's. Probably before that if you consider Last Poets or Blow Fly to be rap. So no, it's not still finding its groove when it's been 40 years, has made people rich and is one of the most widely used, if not the most widely used, form of music when it comes to marketing and advertising goods.
Yes it springs from a specific demographic but that was in the past. Now you have lesbian rappers talking about murder, Japanese rappers talking about whatever it is they are talking about, Korean rappers, British rappers, etc. Not that it's anything wrong with that but rap just isn't getting up and getting a better life. Ice T spoke everything you just mentioned on his first album. Short rapped about the shit, ATL did, the list goes on and on. What people don't want to talk about, and I'm just going to lay it out there now, is the fascination people have with those who are struggling and the need some people have to live vicariously through other people but without the bullshit that comes with it.
That's a MAJOR problem in rap and it's one that hits Bay Area hardest real hard. It's all good, all fine and dandy and this guy or that guy is keeping it real, yet when shit hits the fan and people get bodied, it's "but it's only entertainment." No it's not, for some people this shit is LIFE and it's a means to put food on the table but "fans" don't see that shit.