Metal and punk share a lot of DNA for sure. Heavy Rock/Hard Rock/Classic Rock would all be twigs on the same branch of the music family tree as well.
 
Mind you, to appreciate the difference, it's worth listening to the Sex Pistols' Anarchy In The UK and then comparing it to Megadeth's cover version of the same song. Megadeth's version is reasonably faithful to the original, but on a simple A-B of the two versions, the Pistols' version is undoubtedly a punk song, and Megadeth is most certainly a metal song (see below).
 
With punk and metal, it's the distorted guitars that provides the closest link I guess. Add in some good old fashioned in-your-face aggression and you're halfway there. It's certainly not always the case I will concede, but the biggest differences between the two would probably be the subject matter of the songs, and the technical expertise of the musicians.
 
Motörhead arguably invented thrash, although to me, they had more of the punk 'ethic' than Maiden ever did. I think the punk thing with Maiden might have had more to do with Di'Anno's spiky hair than the music they played. As I mentioned before, having seen them before they released Iron Maiden, I can testify that there was nothing 'punk' about their songs or performance, even at that early stage in their career.
 

 

 
Although this could be the bestest version ever....
 

Beepster

Rain
I do find that there's a punk edge to those first albums w/ DiAnno - an element of aggression, a few songs w/ faster tempo, not to mention the topics of the songs. Far from the history lessons of Alexander the Great or the adaptation of classic English poetry such as Rime of the Ancient Mariner...
 
The level of sophistication is closer to street smarts than literature clubs. 
 
Obviously, Dickinson HATES punk, so what HE associates with it is bound to be detestable to him. Punk saved rock and roll, forcing it to get its head out of its pretentious butt w/ all the long-winded jams and solos, and to become abrasive and relevant again. It was about to become old people music.

Indeed. DiAnno definitely had the street hood vibe. Dickinson the pseudo intellectual vibe.
 
I can appreciate and relate to both.
 
I don't think Maiden could have scrounged their way up from street level without DiAnno and I don't think they could have refined themselves enough to acheive stadium level without the "Dick".
 
Kind of like what would Metallica have been without Mustaine? What would they have been if they kept him? My answer would be... not anywhere near what they DID become.
 
As far as punk... anyone who denies the punk movement had a direct influence on the creation of metal was either born too late or still hold the old street beefs to the point of zealotry.
 
I was born too late so never saw the progression. I know better now.

erm, metal was around at the same time or before punk mate. the high energy and short song format of punk was not dissimilar to metal, but in metal the riff/technical aspect was a lot more important. there was no political message in metal.

SteveStrummerUK
 
Metal and punk share a lot of DNA for sure. Heavy Rock/Hard Rock/Classic Rock would all be twigs on the same branch of the music family tree as well.
 
Mind you, to appreciate the difference, it's worth listening to the Sex Pistols' Anarchy In The UK and then comparing it to Megadeth's cover version of the same song. Megadeth's version is reasonably faithful to the original, but on a simple A-B of the two versions, the Pistols' version is undoubtedly a punk song, and Megadeth is most certainly a metal song (see below).
 
With punk and metal, it's the distorted guitars that provides the closest link I guess. Add in some good old fashioned in-your-face aggression and you're halfway there. It's certainly not always the case I will concede, but the biggest differences between the two would probably be the subject matter of the songs, and the technical expertise of the musicians.
 
Motörhead arguably invented thrash, although to me, they had more of the punk 'ethic' than Maiden ever did. I think the punk thing with Maiden might have had more to do with Di'Anno's spiky hair than the music they played. As I mentioned before, having seen them before they released Iron Maiden, I can testify that there was nothing 'punk' about their songs or performance, even at that early stage in their career.
 

 

 
Although this could be the bestest version ever....
 

bastard ;-)

 

mgh

bastard ;-)

Now in easy to access video format for your pleasure
 

mgh

Beepster

Rain
I do find that there's a punk edge to those first albums w/ DiAnno - an element of aggression, a few songs w/ faster tempo, not to mention the topics of the songs. Far from the history lessons of Alexander the Great or the adaptation of classic English poetry such as Rime of the Ancient Mariner...
 
The level of sophistication is closer to street smarts than literature clubs. 
 
Obviously, Dickinson HATES punk, so what HE associates with it is bound to be detestable to him. Punk saved rock and roll, forcing it to get its head out of its pretentious butt w/ all the long-winded jams and solos, and to become abrasive and relevant again. It was about to become old people music.

Indeed. DiAnno definitely had the street hood vibe. Dickinson the pseudo intellectual vibe.
 
I can appreciate and relate to both.
 
I don't think Maiden could have scrounged their way up from street level without DiAnno and I don't think they could have refined themselves enough to acheive stadium level without the "Dick".
 
Kind of like what would Metallica have been without Mustaine? What would they have been if they kept him? My answer would be... not anywhere near what they DID become.
 
As far as punk... anyone who denies the punk movement had a direct influence on the creation of metal was either born too late or still hold the old street beefs to the point of zealotry.
 
I was born too late so never saw the progression. I know better now.

erm, metal was around at the same time or before punk mate. the high energy and short song format of punk was not dissimilar to metal, but in metal the riff/technical aspect was a lot more important. there was no political message in metal.

 
^^This^^
 
Tony Iommi invented heavy metal, just up the road from here.
 
And Judas Priest made it even better, just up the road from that.
 

mgh
erm, metal was around at the same time or before punk mate. the high energy and short song format of punk was not dissimilar to metal, but in metal the riff/technical aspect was a lot more important. there was no political message in metal.

Disagree. There was certainly "proto-punk" and "proto-metal" kicking around and bubbling under the surface around the same time but the punk stuff solidified and hit the musical psyche before metal did. Sabbath was its own thing and of course highly influential with the use of the "Devil's Fifth" but were really more of a jazz/rock fusion that took a wrong/twisted turn THEN became metal afterward. Seriously I listen to those early albums and there is absolutely no real connection to metal aside from a couple riffs that got yanked into the metal repertoire. Real metal didn't kick off until the first wave of punk had all but died off and got forced back underground. That original wave of punk is what influenced what really became metal in the clubs of England.
 
Even Zeppelin, who get called metal were a distorted up blues band. Alice Cooper was just a shock rock spazz hanging out with Zappa (all very blues/rock/jazz oriented stuff in the early days... undefined).
 
In a lot of ways I think Maiden and Preist were the first REAL metal bands playing REAL metal music. Everything before that was proto metal. Even Sabbath followed that lead even though they were the ones who opened the door up to the diminished 5th riffs (and Zeppelin the "chug" riff).
 
Punk got a an official name in 1975 and mass recognition but really bands like the Kinks were doing that well beforehand and other more "recognized" pre-punk bands like Television and Death preceded that (and almost preceded Sabbath).
 
So it comes down to labels really and when the "style/fashion/movements" came about. Metalheads didn't really come about until after the mohawks.
 
The musical styles of both... well they had been in the primordial ooze for a while but the punk sound was probably more evolved well before Iommi had the ghostly image appear at the foot of his bed shocking him into writing the riff to "Black Sabbath" (the big... nasty... devil's fifth we now so casually chug around).
 
Pistols style riffs had been around forever before Malcolm concocted his nefarious scheme to sell more S&M gear.
 
It should be noted I am one of those who make a serious distinction between "metal" and "hard rock".
 
Zeppelin and AC/DC, in that mindset, are NOT metal. They are hard, blues based, rock.
 
Sabbath were distorted, dark, drugged out jazz rock that led to the metal movement which didn't kick of properly until almost a decade later. Essentially proto metal who became what they created.
 
Now if we want to talk Steppenwolf... well... that's a pretty damned proto-metal band and I'm honestly not quite sure where to slide those buggers in. Again very blues/rock oriented but they had the chugs, growls, power and all that.
 
It's kind of like punk and metal were ALWAYS there. Mod stuff evolved into punk. Biker/hippie stuff into metal. Both feeding off of/influencing each as their fans rejected each other.
 
If we bring it down to leather, head banging and shredding vs. mohawks, safety pins inserted through extremeties and pogoing... punk came first.
 
/not a historian
//loves both

And all that is COMPLETELY ignoring the Who's "My Generation" which really was the first punk song. They only got sucked into the "Mod" thing because that's the only crowd that would have them... and mods pretty much begat punk anyway.
 

For Steve... 

I'll ignore PIL's version since it's still Johnny Rotten, but here are a few other covers.
 

 

 
And, finally, the best version EVER!!!
 

 
 
 

well I agree to some degree Beep but also disagree a bit....Sabbath were definitely metal from the 2nd album on, there's deffo a lot of heavy blues on the 1st album but also you cannot ignore the title track (and you don't). Priest were also active in this time.
However, metal and punk both grew out of heavy rock, both had clear demographics and images, but musically they were different and certainly ideologically.
The first metal 'movement' was post punk (NWOBHM) and from then on metal had waves of sub-genres (speed.thrash, death,black then glam, prog, heavy, funk etc)
it doesn't really matter I suppose...except metal won!;-)

mgh
 
erm, metal was around at the same time or before punk mate. the high energy and short song format of punk was not dissimilar to metal, but in metal the riff/technical aspect was a lot more important. there was no political message in metal.

Granted metal was there before - but by the late 70's, rock music was in sort of the weird place. All those classic bands were regarded as dinosaurs. For exemple, I am a die hard Black Sabbath fan, but in the second half of the 70s, albums like Technical Ecstasy and Never Say Die weren't exactly genre defining. Their music certainly doesn't sound as inspired as on the first 4 or 5 albums.
 
Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, KISS and those big rock bands weren't exactly in their prime and most of them were seeking themselves and experimenting or trying to build a reputation as serious musicians - which is usually the sign of decline...
 
They'd lost "the eye of the tiger" to use a bad analogy. They were well-established, rich, drugged out and lacking focus.
 
Incidentally, maybe it's just me but I certainly hear a social/political message in songs like War Pigs.
 
Likewise, I can't hear a song like Breaking the Law and not think of the whole punk scene.
 
It seems to me that bands that became relevant in the late 70s reacted to the whole punk movement - they brought back energy, the anger and that edge. Music for social misfits.