Malcolm Dome has been reporting on the Metal scene since the very start. Whilst you were still in diapers Dome was providing the inside scoop on the emerging NWOBHM scene, witnessing Iron Maiden, Tygers of Pan Tang and Angelwitch in their infancy. Scoring a place on the early Kerrang! magazine staff, he witnessed the UK debuts of the likes of Metallica and Celtic Frost. Through Thrash, Black Metal, Doom and beyond, Dome has survived in Metal journalism and become one of the leading authorities on the subject of all things Metal, working now for Total Rock Radio. The guy is a walking history lesson! In this interview he takes on a journey through the years and shows how the scene has developed through the years...
When you look at your career in Metal, can you believe the progression, the twists and turns, that the genre has made since the formative days?
It is amazing how things have changed from the 'early days'. Metal is no longer so ghetto-oriented, and is open to all sorts of influences, which makes it's definition and focus a little more diverse, and sometimes too eclectic for its own good, but nonetheless always fascinating.
What was your introduction into Metal music, and was 'Metal' even the general term in use at the time?
The first artist I heard who would fit in I suppose was Jimi Hendrix, and thence on to Black Sabbath et al. The term metal really didn't exist back then. It was 'heavy rock', which was a very portentious and almost exclusive phrase. The implication was: dare you listen to any music so termed?! The answer was 'YES!'.
(Black Sabbath)

How did you end up writing for Kerrang!, and had you written for any fanzines etc before?



My introduction to writing about rock music came in 1979 when I was fortunate enough to get some commissions from 'Record Mirror'. I was keen to break into this area of endeavour, and was lucky to hit that magazine when they were searching for someone to replace Steve Gett (remember him?) writing about rock and metal.
It was Steve who suggested I might try 'Record Mirror'. I didn't actually know him, but I had the idea for an encyclopedia of metal, and contacted both him and a certain Geoff Barton about co-writing it - very naive of me. Neither were interested, but Steve put me onto 'Record Mirror'. Incidentally that book was published in 1980. It's title? Encyclopedia Metallica - co-written with a certain Brian Harrigan. And did a rather well known band who formed in 1981 get the name from this source, I wonder?! From 'Record Mirror' I got involved with the launch of a metal monthly called 'Metal Mania'. sadly, this didn't last long, and in 1982 I thought, 'That's it. I've reached the end. Better give up writing now'. But I knew Dante Bonutto, who was running the embryonic Kerrang! at the time. he asked me to write a few reviews - and the rest sank into history.

What was the original concept behind the magazine and how confident were you that it would succeed, that there was a market for it?
I wasn't at Kerrang! when it first started. Indeed, it began life as a one-off offshoot from 'Sounds' magazine. But by the time I came onboard, the team was starting to take shape. Our philosophy was simple: we wanted to represent an exciting time in the history of rock and metal in the best possible way, to introduce people to new bands and to give the established acts the sort of coverage they'd never had before. I'd like to think we succeeded.

 Do you agree that it took a while for the magazine to accept the more extreme styles of Metal in the late 80's and that in some ways it followed the lead of magazines such as Metal Forces and later Terrorizer, in featuring extreme acts. Certainly acts like Hellhammer and Slayer were derided initially by Kerrang!, and it was only the sensationalism rather than the music which led to the introduction of the Black Metal scene into the magazine as well at a later date.
I think that's a little unfair. Kerrang! introduced UK and European fans to Metallica. We supported Mercyful Fate from the very early days. We did take a little while to warm to Celtic Frost and Slayer, but still overed them positively from a very early stage. You have to understand that kerrang! wasn't a specialist extreme magazine; we covered all aspects of the genre. But we did recognise the importance of the underground scene. And when Mega Metal Kerrang! came on the scene I believe we gave the scene far greater, and deserved, respect.

 You were heavily involved with championing the exciting NWOBHM scene. Try and recall some of the excitement of that era, and explain which band encapsulated the movement best for you?
It was a time when there was genuine feeling that we in the UK had the most exciting bands in the world. These were acts who could take the energy of punk and the class of '70s metal, and take it to another level. Suddenly, there were young British metal bands who were confident, powerful and relevant. And it did change the world. The band who best summed it up have to be Iron Maiden - they represented everything that was good about the genre. But what NWOBHM did best of all was bring it back to the roots and to the people. The fans, the bands - we were as one. Such an era has never happened again.

 There were so many NWMOBHM bands that should have made it but didn't - Angelwitch, Trespass, Crucifixion, Persian Risk, Jaguar etc - was it simply due to an overload of bands, the right/wrong management and labels or, as many bands suggested, a void between the predominately London based media and the more ruralised locations of many of the bands? In what respect did Iron Maiden hold an upper hand by being based in London and therefore within easy reach of the media?
To me, the band that should have made it, yet never did, were Diamond Head. They had it all - class, style, charisma, musicality, songs. They were the 'new Led Zeppelin'. But they fell by the wayside. Why? Business reasons, more than anything else, and I believe the same could be said of so many other bands, including Angel Witch. With any genre there are a vast number of talenetd bands who fall away for a variety of reasons. The NWOBHM was no different. Did Maiden have an advantage being in London? Possibly, but they made the most of it, whereas other London-based acts didn't.


(Diamond Head)


Do you see global comparisons with today's Metal scene, with American acts treated more seriously and excitably by the UK media than home grown bands, with the US perhaps perceived as more glamorous or novel than the UK?
There's little doubt that America is perceived as more glamorous and interesting music-wise, rightly or wrongly. This dates way back, and has a lot to do with the fact that bands over here have to grow up in public and familiarity can breed something akin to contempt, whereas we only get quality American bands who are ready for major exposure. It's also true to say that the US has a hankering for quality British bands.

You were luckily based quite close to the Bandwagon (Soundhouse) venue in Kingsbury, North London. Describe some of the experiences and atmospheres of the place. Why did bands like Iron Maiden see fit to pay tribute to the venue with 'The Soundhouse Tapes'?
The Bandwagon was unique - a meeting of like minds who had never had such a haven for rock and metal before. We were enthusiasts who just revelled in the fact that we could escape to this bar, where the music combined known sounds with new young acts. The Bandwagon was run brilliantly by the ebullient Neal Kaye, a man who loved his music and had the articlate attitude to make everything work. It became the focus for up-and-coming bands like Maiden and Praying Mantis, who saw the value of playing to a place packed out with metalheads genuinely excited by new sounds. That's why Maiden paid tribute to the place - it was seminal and pivotal in the whole development of the metal scene in the late '70s/early '80s.

Was the NWOBHM as innocent as it seemed? How much of it was down to sheer musical ability winning through, or was it just as competitive as today's ultra-marketed and ultra-targeted Metal scene? When did you first become aware of the influence of powerful marketing and 'behind the scenes' dealing in the seemingly hitherto innocent world of Metal?
It's easy to believe that NWOBHM was innocent, but really was it? There was manipulation and cynicism, and ruthless business dealings. There were hidden agendas, but it was also a time when the record industry saw the potential, and had the people to make it work. Major labels understood the music and musicians a lot better than is the case today. There were fans of the music at the companies! I think I became away of the power of marketing very early on. Maiden are a prime example of how to market a band to their best advantage. By contast, Leppard suffered appallingly over here for years.


(Iron Maiden - Soundhouse Tapes)

When the Thrash Metal scene broke, with many bands providing a speedier version of their NWOBHM heroes, did you see this uptempo change as a logical progression from the NWOBHM bands, or simply a whole new movement that lived by its own rules?
I never thought Thrash was a logical progression, even though there were influences. In many ways, it took its lead as much from punk as NWOBHM. It had its own rules, attitudes and code. But it was amazingly exciting and energising. The metal scene needed a change of pace.

 What was it like to experience a wave of US Thrash acts coming over and playing the UK - the Marquee in London was a hive of activity at the time. Did you witness the UK debuts of bands such as Slayer, Metallica, Anthrax, Sepultura etc?
I saw the UK live debuts of all those bands. Again it was an exciting time. New ground was being broken, new rules laid down. One never realised how important these acts would turn out to be, but I loved the atmosphere, the brutality and the locked in momentum and madness. It was a brave new world. And when Metallica began to show they were serious contenders, then the genre really did turn everything around. But as with NWOBHM, there were those who could never accept that their private little club was now attracting 'outsiders'.

Did you particularly favour the US or German brand of Thrash, the former perhaps more technical and influenced by UK NWOBHM acts, the latter sloppier but perhaps more aggressive? The UK never really produced Thrash on a par with either of those two nations, did it?
The UK was somewhat left behind in all of this. We had talent - Slammer, Acid Reign, Onslaught - but nothing that could compare with what was coming out of America and Europe. I liked both the US and the Germanic approaches - they were diferent, but equally as valid. The best bands from each country really were exciting and progressive, in their own ways. I feel, though, that it was with the thrash movement that the UK began to lose its grip on the global metal market - one we've yet to get back. Why? Maybe we never saw it coming, and by the time musicians reacted they'd been left behind. Also, economic and business factors played their roles.

 Do you agree that the UK was slow on the uptake for the European extreme Metal scene as a whole during the mid-90's and did this ultimately have anything to do with your decision to quit Kerrang!? Certainly whilst the Swedish melodic scene, the middle European Gothic scene, and the general European Death metal scene was producing great acts from '93-present, Kerrang! seemed to be half stuck in the past with the big hair acts, and then totally bowled over with the US grunge acts?
I originally left Kerrang! in 1987 to join Metal Hammer - along with a number of like-minded individuals. We felt that the decision to take Kerrang! weekly would dilute the quality, and Metal Hammer seemed to offer a fresh challenge. Eventually, we started RAW magazine, which I still believe had the quality to be a major success. Our mistake was in selling the title to a publishing company, EMAP- with a different agenda. At this stage, I don't think the more mainstream UK magazines were doing any sort of service for metal. You hit the nail on the head - they were stuck in a trend obsessed rut. It was left to Metal Forces and their ilk to give the scene the exposure it deserved.

(Iced Earth)

 Even now, the European and US power Metal movements seem neglected by UK media despite widespread interest in acts such as Iced Earth, Nevermore, Hammerfall, Edguy, Blind Guardian, Rhapsody etc etc. Do you as someone who works in the media feel any responsibility at all in terms of opening up opportunities for such styles of Metal to be given a chance in the UK?
Absolutely, I think there's been a 'superiority problem' with the UK media for a while, in that power metal per se is regarded as retarded and old fashioned. In actuality, it's a vibrant genre with a strong, loyal underground following over here. When I was at Metal Hammer a few years ago, I did start to introduce more coverage of this type of band, but the snobery endemic in the print media over here to this music really does an gross injustice to its quality and appeal. Maybe it's no coincidence that, since TotalRock appeared on the scene and played this sort of music on air, the popularity has risen, and the bands have begun to come over here more regularly. The media over here has the wrong attitude in this respect.


(Rhapsody)

You were known for a while as Malcolm 'Doom' Dome - how much affinity do you have with Doom Metal and can you explain why it has remained an underground, albeit fanatically cult, offshoot of Metal?
I love doom metal - always have. The 'Doom' tag was, if I recall correctly, down to Krusher and Mick Wall, but I always tried to champion those sort of bands, And still do. Doom has never emerged itself from the underground, because it has such a limited appeal, and there has never been a band (even Trouble) who've had enough commercial appeal to make things happen for the genre. Black metal, death metal et al have all had one or two bands who've taken the genre to a greater audience. Perhaps fans have a problem with its lack of speedy riffage? But doom's steadfast underground roots makes it arguably the only true sub-strata of metal. There are no compromises.

(Trouble)

Again Doom Metal was favoured briefly by media such as Kerrang!, touting such acts as Candlemass, Cathedral, St. Vitus etc, but association didn't last long. Do you feel that in some ways the media is caught between two stools - on the one hand it genuinely wants to support existing bands but on the other it must always been seen to be unearthing new styles to maintain its relevance and 'keep ahead' of the trends?
I think you have a point. There has to be a balance. It's neither fair nor desirable to cast aside the past every so often, but the future of rock and metal (as with antyhing) rests with young blood. Rather like a good football team, the trick is to blend and mix successfully. All too often the media in the UK have overbalanced towards the new, hence the reason a magazine like Classic Rock can do so well...and deservedly so. Right now, I feel that Metal Hammer has got it about right. too many others chase trends in a very misguided and haphazard fashion. Rock magazines that are chameleon by their very nature do not foster loyalty - and loyalty should be crucial for the brand. That sounded far too much like 'marketing department speak'. Oh no!

 How frustrating was it for you personally to have to constantly keep finding new acts to feature in favour of older ones, or did you in fact see that as your job description in a sense?
It was never frustrating - rather it was exciting, a challenge. But I always believed one had to respect what the older bands had achieved. Rock and metal always stood apart because of a healthy relationship with the past. Once that started to be eroded, then it lost focus. Fortunately, that's returning.

When did you become interested in the Black Metal scene and how did you set your own personal background against the more extreme views of the acts coming from Norway in particular? Did you feel any sense of deja-vu musically having witnessed Venom and Bathory create the genre in the early 80's anyway?
I loved black metal going back to the days of Venom et al. There was something 'attractive' about the way the best bands here used 'horror imagery'. But what was tongue-in-cheek back in the '80s took a decidedly nasty twist with bands like Burzum and Mayhem. Personally, I found their fascist, anti-social stance rather worrying. People like the late Euronymous liberally bathed in the worst possible philosophies. All very disconcerting.

(Euronymous)

Given that bands like Darkthrone and Burzum were prone to the odd misguided outburst concerning race and politics, do you believe it is possible to seperate the sentiment from the music itself and do you have any sympathy with those who claim Metal can be a band influence on impressionable young minds?
The politics of bands like Burzum was unacceptable and ran counter to the far more liberal aproaches of the majority in this genre. And I have to admit to being very concerned about the way that people can be misled by lyrics and image. Bands must take responsibility for the consquences of their actions. They cannot hide behind the facade of 'art shouldn't be censored'.



(Venom)		 This brings us to the issue of censorship in music - its no so long ago that groups like Judas Priest, Iron Maiden and Venom were targeted as potentially bad influences on youth. Now we have Marylin Manson and Cradle of Filth tarnished with the same brush.
Are there any boundaries in music and how much presonsibility should the musician take for his words and projected image?
As I said, musicians do have responsibilities. I do not condone censorship by outside bodies, but that doesn't mean bands can wash their hands of what happens when people are influenced by what they hear. All too often in recent times, bands are so intent on avoiding the financial implications of law suits taken out against them that they forget about the wider community and how to deal with it.
So many bands try to shock and forget that maybe their shock tactics have no artistic merit. Some of the law suits, for instance the one brought against Judas Priest, are ridiculous, but then it's up to to the artist to show these up. But not all are born out of a pathetic attempt to shift the burden of guilt onto outside influences. Some do have genuine cause for grievance.

 Relating to Earache and the extreme scene in general, what is it about this brand of Metal that attracts such loyal, fanatcal fans? Even when the media coverage swings away from Death Metal for example, the fans still turn out to buy the records and attend the gigs.......
That's exactly why the fans love it. Because it bucks the trend. It's 'our music', it 'belongs to us'. Fans find a community and family spirit, because there are no media intrusions. The fact that the world at large cannot understand makes it more appealing. The nature of death metal means that its very extremity acts almost as a rite of passage.

 Were you instantly attracted to Death Metal early on or did it take one particular release to turn you on to this harsh brand of Metal. What bands first ignited your interest in Death Metal and what did you feel the sound and passion of the early bands did for the Metal scene at the time. If I remember correctly the media was still acting like Faster Pussycat was cutting edge...........
I loved Faster Pussycat and Death, Motley Crue and Celtic Frost. My taste has always been very wide. from glam to slam, as it were. The more extreme the better, really.

Where do you see the extreme scene moving now? The influence of Slipknot seems to have opened the ears of younger kids to extreme music in general, and Cradle of Filth's major label move may open the door wider still?
To me Slipknot and Cradle represent the commercial end of the spectrum. They are far from extreme. But there are so many bands experimenting with pure noise and energy. And there's also been a shift towards a return to traditional death/thrash values. The underground has never been more diverse or challenging. If Cradle and Slipknot achieve anything, then let's hope they encourage younger fans to explore the real depths of extreme metal.

 So the future of extreme Metal according to Malcolm Dome is who/what?
I wish I knew. I believe it will remain diverse. There will be pure noise cults, plus bands who use orchestration and choral parts to complement their fury and ire. Watch out for Finland's Moonsorrow among many. And if there's any justice Stoke's own Charger will make major inroads.

 Journalism is such a cut-throat part of the music business - how have you manged to stick around so long and what advice would you give to any prospective young wannabe journos out there?
You know, this is something I've talked about with Jerry Ewing (Classic Rock/Metal Hammer) on more than one occasion. Where are the new generation of writers? It is worrying. I have no clue what the secret of longevity might be, but anyone who wants to make it as a writer has to have the talent, the discipline and stickablity to put up with setbacks.

Obviously you are heavily involved in radio work these days. Why do you see this as more exciting/enterprising than print media? And how do you see the potential for internet radio to develop in an age of broadband internet connections and greater online access?
I believe That TotalRock Radio could be the most significant media development for rock music in this country. Why? Because we don't offer opinions, we play the music and let the people who matter - the fans - make up their own minds.
Our success might encourage others to try their hand, but this is the most exciting team of people gathered together under one media umbrella since the golden age of Kerrang! in the mid-'80s. You cannot buy this expertise and enthusiasm. It's priceless.

Do you miss some of the naivety of the early days of Metal's development? There's a certain lack, these days, of the humour that existed (intentional or otherwise) in those early bands look, sound and demeanour that you don't see too much of now. Maybe we are losing the fun aspect of the music in a bid to be taken 'seriously' or in a bid to gain instant credibility and recognition these days? I bet Korn wouldn't know a Bad News moment if it came up and screamed 'futurisitc Heavy Metal' at them?
I believe slowly people are beginning to realise how much the '80s were, and once they get a grip on this, then who knows. Perhaps one day Korn might laugh at themselves. If Spinal Tap were reinvented as a nu metal band, could Slipknot, Deftones et al laugh at such a parody? I doubt it, but without humour rock music has no soul.

 Metal fashion has come a long way from back patches and denim through to spiky hair and wallet chains. For you, if you had to pick one look that defined Metal music for you, what would it be. Please say that of Derek Smalls in Spinal Tap :-)
That of Derek Smalls in Spinal Tap - there I said it! I've never been fashion conscious, but somehow you know a metalhead immediately. There is no one look, just an atitude that comes through.

A lot of people seem to necessarily view today's music as worse than in the oft-quoted 'good old days' - How important do you think a sense of history is in Metal or do you think the freshest scenes spring from a disregard for the older conventions?
A sense of history is crucial. Without it, you are looking at trends and pop music. Rock and metal is - and should be - more than this.

 Do you subscribe to the view that the UK media doesn't do enough for UK bands - those we do build up we tend to do so in order to knock them down at the earliest opportunity. Is it a simple case of overseas acts seeming more glamorous or fresh? Or should UK ats work more at a professional approach that seems to come naturally to our American ounterparts?
There are two views. One is that the UK media should support the homegrown scene, the other is that they should cover good bands, irrespective of their nationality. Personally, I feel both are valid. Cast your net far and wide, but never forget to look on your own doorstep.

I'd like your personal views on your first first reactions upon discovering the following bands, and then their subsequent developments and careers; talking about how and why bands make it, can you try and pick out why these bands achieved the success they did in each case?
1. Iron Maiden
2. Slayer
3. Metallica
4. Emperor
5. Morbid Angel
MAIDEN- from the first time I saw them, I knew they would make an impact. Why? There was an energy, a focus and a force that put them apart from the norm. Their first two albums, 'Iron Maiden' and 'KIllers' caught the zeitgeist. I understand why they had to replace Paul Dianno with Bruce Dickinson, but they somehow became a different animal, more successful, perhaps more adventurous, but they lost that indefinable zest. However, the Maiden of the mid-to-late '80s were still magnificent, on a plane all their own. But they did lose their way a little in the latter days with Bruce, and then completely lost the plot when they brought in Blaze. However, Bruce's return has inspired a resurgenceof interest, activity and respect for them. Today, Maiden are possible the most loved of all the British metal bands.

SLAYER - When I first heard Slayer, I wondered what on earth was going on. But seeing them live put it all into perspective. What a ferocious beast. They really defined speed metal, and 'Regin In Blood' is an essential album for anyone into extreme metal. I believe they lost their way when drummer Dave Lombardo left. However, these days their strength is a continuity that refuses to allow them to progress - as with AC/DC.

METALLICA - It might seem obvious now, but Metalica always stood apart from the thrash scene that gew up around then. Even back in the 'Kill 'Em All' days, they were more than 'just another metal band'. They had pwoer, panache, a sense of melody and real drive and ambition. It was their focus and single-minded attitude which took them as far as they've gone. They might have been prepared to compromise, but in doing so never really sold out. They were determined to take their style and sound to as many people as possible. Diehards might claim the band that made those first three albums bear no resemblance to the current incarnation, but look at it this way: they were responsible for those early albums - nobody else. One of the cornerstones of metal for more than two decades.

EMPEROR - Arguably the greatest black metal band of them all, Emperor started out with the handicap of being connected to the church burnings etc. in the early '90s, and also being ridiculed for their corpse paint image. But once people began t see the big picture their talent couldn't be denied. A phenomenal musicianship and intricate ingenuity put them head and shoulders above all of their rivals. Such a shame they chose to break up at the height of their powers - or is it?!

MORBID ANGEL - The most commercially successful of all death metal bands, Morbid Angel gained immediate attention 15 years ago because they could combine sheer brutality with articulate musicianship. Despite various personnel shifts, nothing has altered in this respect. Perhaps they have been slightly bogged down in recent years, but they remain one of the principles of the genre, and a band who've never been afraid to risk the ire and confusion of fans and critics.

How have you managed to keep your enthusiam for this music over the years?
I just love the music. Why? It's an emotional thing. I also think it helps to mentally stay a 12-year-old!

 Of all the events and changes within Metal you have been witness too what have been the most memorable and why?
There have been so many, but I still feel one has tyo go back to the birth of Iron Maiden. Everything else we know today flowed from there...

 Finally - do you think that Metal's future is assured no matter what trends come and go? It seems like this much misunderstood musical form just won't die despite the critical rejection it has received virtually since its inception.
Metal will never die. It might 'develop' or 'transform', but it is as strong today as ever.

Check out Malcolm Dome on Total Rock at www.totalrock.com
Interview by Dan Tobin
click the logo to return to
the Wicked World site