Dissonant black metal has become one of the most played and cherished forms of black metal. From being a form of avantgarde sound in black metal the sound of dissonant black metal has probably become as common as bands playing second wave black metal. Some arguments for adding dissonant to some of the black metal bands on MS:

- It has a distinguished sound. Its not viking black metal. Its not symphonic black metal. Its not melodic black metal. Its mostly not atmospheric black metal. Its not depressive black metal.
- It pinpoints a group and a historic period of black metal bands that in some ways are different from earlier forms of black metal.
- Some dissonant black metal are tagged "avantgarde black metal". But is dissonance avantgarde today? There is growing amount of bands that are playing dissonant black metal nowadays.

Does such a tag belong on MS? And if it does - which bands should get the tag? Discuss.

This is actually a very interesting discussion to me, as fundamentally dissonance cannot be defined using music theory outside of western 12-tone systems, however this begs the question; which genre tags can? I definitely hesitate when describing Deathspell Omega clones as "avantgarde", given how commonplace that "dissonant" style of black metal is nowadays. It certainly is a good indicator of the style a given band plays, however I'm torn as to whether this warrants a separate genre-tag.

It's very frustrating to me, as the 12-tone system which most metal bands use (excluding Blut Aus Nord's "Mort", the band Last Sacrament, and undoubtedly a handful of other obscure acts) has a very simple definition of dissonance; minor and major seconds, minor and major sevenths, and the tritone aka "imperfect consonances". Despite it being easy to describe in this system, the various traditional scale lengths in the middle-east, far-east, etc... have no technically defined way of describing dissonance (as far as I am aware of). This is fundamentally due to dissonance being described as a note unison which is displeasing to the ear, which is 100% subjective at face value.

Not sure if any of this is relevant to whether or not "dissonant" is warranted as a genre tag, but I figured I'd give the music theory side of things to the best of my abilities.

I'm not really a big fan of new genre tags unless it's an indicator of fusion. For example, "blackened death metal," "psychedelic black metal," "progressive thrash metal," etc etc. New tags for simple stylistic approaches that can cross any and all genres seems like a bit much and an approach that can easily fly off the train tracks to the point of becoming outright ridiculous. "Dissonant," "atmospheric," "technical," "brutal," things like that, these aren't actual genres, they're just approaches to composition that one can choose to take with songwriting regardless of the genre. I'd prefer to generalize and label bands either as X genre or X genre + Y genre + however many others. Otherwise you're going to create a shitfest of over-analyzing bands sounds' towards the creation of new labels, which is going to inevitably get completely crazy because, as Alex kind of said above, a lot of these labels like those I mentioned come down to subjective interpretation. There's not really any objective measurement of what is and isn't brutal, atmospheric, dissonant, technical, etc.

So yeah, color me Mr. If It Aint Broke, Don't Fix It on this topic

I will say this though, you're getting towards a good point with the matter of how much BM has evolved in sound since the second wave, and sort of raise the question of to what extent it can still be considered BM anymore. I have some friends, for example, who don't regard bands such as Oranssi Pazuzu, The Meads Of Asphodel, or Blut Aus Nord as black metal. I think that's a load of shit, personally, but I understand where such comments may come from considering how much of a divergence there is with such bands away from the OG black metal sound. After what point does experimentation in one genre really lend itself to the creation of another? That's the real question here if you ask me.

I would welcome a tag like that. Dissonant is a music speficying tag far better than existing tags on the site based on location such as bay area thrash, gothenburg metal or suomi metal. (dafuq is even suomi metal?)

Dissonant is barely avantgarde today. Avantgarde was the genre invented in late 90s to describe bands which don't belong to any other category. That's why bands like Arcturus or DsO were tagged avantgarde black back then. Then there were suddenly thousands of Arcturus' copies and thousands of DsO's copies... But those aren't different anymore. So avantgarde doesn't work. For the DsO clones I think "dissonant" is much better

People might argue that just black works and they don't like the additional tags like atmo, dissonant, whatever because it is not consolidated and blablabla... But hey, it helps describe the sound, doens't it? What if we took out all the brutal/tech tags out of the db and put all those bands on just "death metal"? Not much helpful of a description, heh? Do they all sound like Death?

Written by Auntie Sahar on 06.04.2017 at 20:12

There's not really any objective measurement of what is and isn't brutal, atmospheric, dissonant, technical, etc.

So yeah, color me Mr. If It Aint Broke, Don't Fix It on this topic

By definition dissonance is a harsh, disagreeable combination of sounds, or discord. Now that's just taken from my handy Google search engine, but if we define dissonance objectively, all Black Metal, and indeed extreme metal in general, is dissonant in nature. I don't know if you can really tag different genres with what is and isn't brutal, atmospheric, dissonant, or technical in terms of genre, but you can in terms of the sounds produced.

I'm not big on black metal, in terms of knowledge of the genre, but in other, more melodic genres like power metal and sometimes progressive metal, dissonance is easily observed when the notes played in a melody do not sound harmonious/pleasing. Helloween's "Halloween" comes to mind for me.

But if we're strictly speaking of black metal, the entire genre can be seen as dissonant, and thus, placing the dissonant label in front of the genre black metal only means that their might be more dissonant than usual. I'm unsure. It seems difficult to tag the genre with a term it so clearly exemplifies already.

Written by Karlabos on 06.04.2017 at 21:15

People might argue that just black works and they don't like the additional tags like atmo, dissonant, whatever because it is not consolidated and blablablah... But hey, it helps describe the sound, doesn't it?

That's just it though. If you're gonna add a word to a bands genre/sub-genre, why not just describe them as such instead of adding a new sub-genre that's already a sub-genre of heavy metal. I don't how many more sub-sub-genres metal can have before the entire thing becomes a scholarly pursuit in itself.

The only band on earth that needs this tag is Portal But it has nothing to do with black metal.

No, because why not use avantgarde, melodic, atmospheric and existing. To me its not genre
Expermental can be good tag

Written by Auntie Sahar on 06.04.2017 at 20:12

I'm not really a big fan of new genre tags "progressive thrash metal,"

Its not new genre
Anacrusis played in 80's

Written by Karlabos on 06.04.2017 at 21:15

People might argue that just black works and they don't like the additional tags like atmo, dissonant, whatever because it is not consolidated and blablabla... But hey, it helps describe the sound, doens't it? What if we took out all the brutal/tech tags out of the db and put all those bands on just "death metal"? Not much helpful of a description, heh? Do they all sound like Death?

At what point do you really stop with the specificities of sound description though? Forgive me if I don't necessarily trust peoples' ability to control themselves with that shit. Yes, modern black metal is far removed from Mayhem, Darkthrone etc. Yes, modern death is a far cry from Death, Possessed, Morbid Angel, etc. But it still has more similarities with those genre forefathers than it does differences. That's what matters more to me, honestly. Bands like Blut Aus Nord, Deathspell Omega, TAOP, etc. did not create entirely separate genres of music with their spins on black metal (at least to me). It's way just a different way of playing within the confines of the genre, stretching those confines perhaps, but still staying within some core line of them.

I would also like to note on this issue that there are plenty of bands on site who might be just labeled as black metal even though their sound is more than that, just death metal even though their sound is more than that, and so forth and so on. I see it all the time. Getting overly concerned about correcting all these perceived errors to more accurate tags is really going to create a massive (mostly unnecessary) overload of work for our DB

Written by Winter Heathen on 07.04.2017 at 09:40

I don't how many more sub-sub-genres metal can have before the entire thing becomes a scholarly pursuit in itself.

As if we're not already in the process of turning it into one with discussions like this over additional genre descriptors and if/when they're merited? I dunno, call me Mr. Simple, but I just don't lose too much sleep over these kinds of debates. The (non)presence of a certain genre label on X site isn't going to stop me from enjoying a band or thinking of their sound along my own personal lines of interpretation. So why should I really care all that much? It isn't going to for anyone else either, but some people just seem to get so bent out of shape and worked up if a tag is missing, if the improper tag is there, etc.

As I said in the SB before this was turned into a full thread: I have a strong feeling most if not all other circles of black metal aren't raising this as an issue. This seems to be yet another one of those overly fussy topics for discussion that seems to have the strange habit of taking place only on MS

Written by Auntie Sahar on 07.04.2017 at 15:28

Written by Winter Heathen on 07.04.2017 at 09:40

I don't how many more sub-sub-genres metal can have before the entire thing becomes a scholarly pursuit in itself.

As if we're not already in the process of turning it into one with discussions like this over additional genre descriptors and if/when they're merited? I dunno, call me Mr. Simple, but I just don't lose too much sleep over these kinds of debates. The (non)presence of a certain genre label on X site isn't going to stop me from enjoying a band or thinking of their sound along my own personal lines of interpretation. So why should I really care all that much? It isn't going to for anyone else either, but some people just seem to get so bent out of shape and worked up if a tag is missing, if the improper tag is there, etc.

As I said in the SB before this was turned into a full thread: I have a strong feeling most if not all other circles of black metal aren't raising this as an issue. This seems to be yet another one of those overly fussy topics for discussion that seems to have the strange habit of taking place only on MS

I have to clarify some things you probably has misinterpreted - 1 this is just a normal discussion, noone is losing sleep over this so dont worry. 2 We are all enjoying music as much as usual. Calm before the storm. 3 MS has a forum, its normal to use it, nothing fussy here.

Written by Guest on 07.04.2017 at 16:50

I have to clarify some things you probably has misinterpreted - 1 this is just a normal discussion, noone is losing sleep over this so dont worry. 2 We are all enjoying music as much as usual. Calm before the storm. 3 MS has a forum, its normal to use it, nothing fussy here.

Excuse me if I was exaggerating, it was just my way of saying that I don't personally feel this is that important a thing to worry about, in the grand scheme of things at least.

On this site I think if you want to really dissect and have deep discussion of stylistic variation and evolution within genres, our list feature is a much better tool than simple tags. A list on "dissonant black metal" that can provide context with descriptions and point people to specific albums (not just bands with large discogs to sort through) is more useful for understanding something like this and what it says about the genre's evolution. Tags don't really do much other than say "yeah it's there and we acknowledge it's there"

Written by Auntie Sahar on 07.04.2017 at 14:50

overload of work for our DB

Oh, no. The staff just needs to make the tag addeable. Of course, after that let the users do the work. The ones who can add genres, that is.

Quote:

The (non)presence of a certain genre label on X site isn't going to stop me from enjoying a band or thinking of their sound along my own personal lines of interpretation. So why should I really care all that much? It isn't going to for anyone else either, but some people just seem to get so bent out of shape and worked up if a tag is missing, if the improper tag is there, etc.

The same argument applies both ways. if you care so little about the presence or not of the tag why not juts add it just for the sake of those who would find it useful? =p

I also believe debating over whether a tag is correct or not just like happens often on that gernre styles thread is a bit dumb... especially when someone ends up mentioning Opeth is dark rock
But having the tag just for specifying the genre doesn't hurt. for instance there may be a lot of good black bands which i didn't have the courage to even check because they're labeled "just" black metal, but if there were more descriptors maybe I would be aware of them

Written by Karlabos on 07.04.2017 at 17:30

The same argument applies both ways. if you care so little about the presence or not of the tag why not juts add it just for the sake of those who would find it useful? Having the tag just for specifying the genre doesn't hurt. for instance there may be a lot of good black bands which i didn't have the courage to even check because they're labeled "just" black metal, but if there were more descriptors maybe I would be aware of them

I guess that's an OK point then, especially the last thing you said. I too generally ignore BM, death, etc. bands on here if they're just labeled as such and nothing more. Sometimes I take a shot and explore anyway, and the sounds of those bands do end up having more to them than just those labels, but... it'd be nicer to have an easier way to tell that right off the bat, sure

As I've said, I think thematic content and lyricism is a big factor in the creation of new genres, and I'm still not too keen on the creation of new tags purely on the basis of sound differences. But I will agree with one thing, it's definitely smarter and makes more sense than tags on the basis of location. "Cascadian black metal," "Finnish death metal," etc. are all pretty dumb if you ask me. Hell, it's a commonly used term but I don't really even like "New Wave Of British Heavy Metal" either

As usual Karlabos makes the most sense. It wouldn't hurt and it is certainly more useful in determining a band's sound than some other tags that are being used by the site.

Written by Auntie Sahar on 07.04.2017 at 17:43

Written by Karlabos on 07.04.2017 at 17:30

The same argument applies both ways. if you care so little about the presence or not of the tag why not juts add it just for the sake of those who would find it useful? Having the tag just for specifying the genre doesn't hurt. for instance there may be a lot of good black bands which i didn't have the courage to even check because they're labeled "just" black metal, but if there were more descriptors maybe I would be aware of them

I guess that's an OK point then, especially the last thing you said. I too generally ignore BM, death, etc. bands on here if they're just labeled as such and nothing more. Sometimes I take a shot and explore anyway, and the sounds of those bands do end up having more to them than just those labels, but... it'd be nicer to have an easier way to tell that right off the bat, sure

As I've said, I think thematic content and lyricism is a big factor in the creation of new genres, and I'm still not too keen on the creation of new tags purely on the basis of sound differences. But I will agree with one thing, it's definitely smarter and makes more sense than tags on the basis of location. "Cascadian black metal," "Finnish death metal," etc. are all pretty dumb if you ask me. Hell, it's a commonly used term but I don't really even like "New Wave Of British Heavy Metal" either

To something you said before this- I don't think this is a debate, so much as a discussion on tagging metal genres with different descriptive words to separate bands within the same genre into other, more concise categories. I like discussions like these!

And back to point- Atmosphere, thematic content, and lyricism is a big factor when it comes to creating new genres. As far as sound differences go (and I think I was slightly off in my point yesterday), I think adding descriptors can be a really good indicator to the type of sound the band displays, IE Viking Black Metal would sound different than Dissonant Black Metal. For the most part, not every band in any one genre will sound the same. Adding some type of description can help make these differences clear, and shows the diversity within the genre as well.

If there is a melodic tag, it makes sense to have a dissonant tag as well I think. However, there is no ending in this discussion. There are so many sub-genres in metal, it's becoming a bit ridiculous. At the end of the day, if someone likes a particular style of a certain outfit, they can go to the band's profile and check out the "similar bands". Or they can just search a bit in the forum and maybe start a new thread asking "can you suggest bands similar to Lurker Of Chalice?". There are plenty of people here who will respond to such a question, aren't there?

Written by Auntie Sahar on 07.04.2017 at 17:43

As I've said, I think thematic content and lyricism is a big factor in the creation of new genres, and I'm still not too keen on the creation of new tags purely on the basis of sound differences.

With ideology comes sound. I am quite sure that black metal still would sound like second wave if there hadnt been a change in ideology(s).

Written by Guest on 10.04.2017 at 17:55

Written by Auntie Sahar on 07.04.2017 at 17:43

As I've said, I think thematic content and lyricism is a big factor in the creation of new genres, and I'm still not too keen on the creation of new tags purely on the basis of sound differences.

With ideology comes sound. I am quite sure that black metal still would sound like second wave if there hadnt been a change in ideology(s).

There might be a change in ideology of the second wave of Black Metal, but it still takes similar elements from the first wave. It instead develops different sounds from those elements.