Written by Iwan Ruby on 31.07.2021 at 22:28

Symphonic Power Metal, the reason is simple i grew up listening to this genre a lot and i also play in a band with that genre too..

Huh....

You do realize 'despise' is more like "hate", "dislike", right?

For me it's Hair Metal, followed by Power Metal. These do nothing for me other than making me roll my eyes.

Nu Metal to some extent. I can tolerate it if it's mixed with extreme metal and there are no Rap elements present (because Rap is my number 1 most hated music genre).

I used to hate -core and -grind subgenres (and I still hate 95% of these bands), but then my wife dragged me to a Deathcore show with five bands (four -core bands and Rivers of Nihil) and I have to admit that I somewhat enjoyed Carnifex and Thy Art is Murder (but mostly the former). IMO these bands have the potential and the talent to evolve into Blackened Death and Tech Death bands respectively if only they got rid of those constant breakdowns and lazy, lame chugging interludes. There were some decent riffs here and there; it just seems like such a waste of talent.

I guess not every band can be Cattle Decapitation. They started as a -core band, but eventually turned into one hell of an enjoyable Death Metal band. *looks it up* Oh wait, they're listed as Deathgrind? Well, nevermind then.

Written by Brutal Water on 01.08.2021 at 02:11

For me it's Hair Metal, followed by Power Metal. These do nothing for me other than making me roll my eyes.

Nu Metal to some extent. I can tolerate it if it's mixed with extreme metal and there are no Rap elements present (because Rap is my number 1 most hated music genre).

For years I used to hate Power Metal, I found it way too cheesy and stupid, but I am starting to get into it it now, mostly German Power Metal bands like Helloween and Blind Guardian, bands I never used to like, until recently.

As for Nu metal I have never really taken a liking to bands of this genre, and I completely agree with you on mixing rap with Metal, rap has never been my thing at all, so mixing it with Metal is a no go area for me.

Written by Guest on 10.11.2016 at 06:10

Written by Ganondox on 10.11.2016 at 05:45


Many of the most notable blackened death metal were black metal bands which incorporated more elements of death metal over time, so there is big problems with your claim that " blackened death metal band will always be a death metal band that has some black metal characteristics regardless of the source", and beyond there is no guarantee it's meaning will stay the same, just as the meaning of melodic death metal has expanded over time.

How is there an issue with my claim? Those bands would have been described as black metal originally and then went on to alter their base sound with death metal whilst retaining the more superficial black metal sounds. They became primarily death metal whilst remaining culturally related to black metal. Simple to understand (if you put the time into it). Of course there's no guarantee it will stay the same, but at this point the term and use is very clear. And when I said "source" I meant source of information, not source of the music, i.e. the band's early albums, just in case that's from where your confusion arises.

Quote:
Deathened black metal is primarily used to mock the attitude you are expressing here, google makes that very clear.

Good quote from the final link I posted down there:

Quote:
"Deathened" black metal exists, but it's usually labeled as black/death metal or merely black metal. The reason such a descriptor doesn't exist (even with a less ridiculous name) is due to the fact that most bands of such a style were black metal bands that developed from a death metal sound. Blackened death metal, on the other hand, is death metal that has adopted a smattering of black metal.

There's even a mention of that odd term on a wiki forum during the presumed infancy of the genre's "blackened" discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ABlackened_death_metal:

Quote:
If a band plays more than one genre, it is usually reffered to as Black/Death Metal or Thrash/Death Metal or whatever (just to indicate that both genres are applicable) but not as Blackened Death Metal or Trashed Death Metal or whatever. And how do you call a band that plays mainly Black Metal with Death Metal influences instead of vice versa? a Deathened Black Metal band maybe? Come on, only when notable magz and books consitently start using the term "Blackened Death Metal", can this term be used as a Wiki-page. If a band wishes to discribe itself as Progressive Epic Thrash/Death Metal or whatever, cheers to that, but don't make it a seperate Wiki entry. Page should just be deleted...81.88.110.49 (talk) 10:55, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

It's easy to mock because it sounds so absurd but it's as I said a half-jokingly used distinction that doesn't arise very often because of black metal's vague structural qualities. To use the term one would have to be aware of that distinction. That page shows the earlier birth of the discussion of the genre, showing its relative infancy but even now "blackened death metal" still doesn't have its own page in wikipedia, indicating it's still primarily used in discourse of the off-the-cuff enthusiast, rather than having entered the mainstream vernacular (like metalcore). Even RYM don't feature blackened death metal and they have profiles on every conceivable genre and subgenre under the sun. There are certain profiles than summarise it as simply a vague combination of black and death but when discussion arises it tends to do down the route as what I am describing, for example the MA discussion linked below, especially when it comes to usefully employing the term.

The wiki page does however conclude / finish with:

Quote:
well essentially this genre is death metal which employs some black metal playing styles, attitude, appearance, lyrical content etc.

So, yeah. Even back then there appeared to be a distinction made.

Quote:
There isn't a specific blackened death metal sound, but there is general consensus in the music community that the refers to any fusion of black and death metal, and the genre has historical roots. Metal Archives may be an exception, but they've always been very idiosyncratic with their definitions. Maybe your way of thinking is a consensus in the death metal circlejerks, but definitely not in the musicologist community as a whole.

Metal Archives, for all their poor qualities (such as ostracising certain genres, which really doesn't relate to this topic here), tend to be quite correct when it comes to classifying metal bands on their profiles so no idea why you think they are idiosyncratic in that regard. Pertaining to black and death metal perhaps you would like to elaborate on why they are "an exception" and "idiosyncratic" seeing as they're probably the first place the vast majority of metallers turn to for a variety of information. Also cite examples where they are wrong. I've no idea what "musicologist community" means; sounds like imaginary nonsense to me with no supportive evidence given but your "general consensus" doesn't seem to exist as far as I can see it, nor here or metal archives; two pretty good sources, along with that less great but still useful wiki discussion page, i.e people that are actually concerned and in discussion of the meanings of the terms, as opposed to some lazily extrapolated and theoretical "musicologist community."

Incidentally comments like "death metal circlejerks" is dismissive and somewhat insulting of groups of people that are interested in the distinction of sounds when it comes to classifying and recommending bands to people with greater accuracy. Just because you don't understand said distinctions doesn't mean they don't exist or are worthy of your mocking attitude. Rather it's groups like that you should be looking toward to enhance your understanding of the subject at hand instead of disregarding them because they don't fit your current argument. At least they actually exist and can be a source of information, unlike your supposed group of mysterious elder musicologist experts which I'm fairly sure don't exist outside of your head.

Here we go, you can carry on the discussion with Metal Archives, who seem to largely have come to the same conclusion as I have from what I can see: http://www.metal-archives.com/board/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=99131

Maybe they'll be more receptive to your specious reasoning.

Sorry, not buying it, these are just people's opinions that don't reflect wider consensus. In particular Wikipedia talk pages are not held to the same standards as the main page. Anyway, a lot of Metal Archives idiosyncrasies relate to their exclusion of genres, which sometimes leads to misclassification. One I recall is them misclassifying In Flames as "melodic groove metal", which to be fair is the least ridiculous thing they classified newer In Flames as, but it's still blatantly wrong as they aren't anywhere close to groove metal. An actual fusion of groove metal and melodeath would be Devildriver. I guess the real reason for their misclassification is the refusal to admit that alternative metal is a real metal subgenre, as it's from alternative metal than In Flames gets all of their groove elements. Finally, the issue with "death metal circlejerks" is they aren't interested in classifying with greater accuracy, they are only interested in classifications within their particular scope, which comes at the expense of how things are classified in a wider context. If you get away from Metal Archives and go to someplace like Rate Your Music where there are people with much more informed opinions you'll see they come to very different conclusions. That's someplace outside of my head where the musicologist community exists. Speak for yourself when it comes to being dismissive and insulting. I'm so glad you're gone, it's only because you deleted your account that I'm seeing this nonsense now. Bit of a shame though as you seemed fairly intelligent at first, only to show off more of your ignorance as you went along and become ruder.

Back on topic, I've since come to the conclusion that slam death metal specifically is the worst metal subgenre. There is other brutal death metal I enjoy, but I've haven't found any slam I actually like, best I've come to is tolerating Vulvodynia.

Written by Ganondox on 06.08.2021 at 08:55

Written by Ganondox on 10.11.2016 at 05:45

... there is big problems with your claim that...

How is there an issue with my claim?

Huh.... Are you arguing with yourself? =/

Written by Karlabos on 31.07.2021 at 23:00

Written by Iwan Ruby on 31.07.2021 at 22:28

Symphonic Power Metal, the reason is simple i grew up listening to this genre a lot and i also play in a band with that genre too..

Huh....

You do realize 'despise' is more like "hate", "dislike", right?

i often think, why can't i get away from that genre!
the more i resist it, the more i seem to get entangled in it..

Written by Ganondox on 06.08.2021 at 09:23

Back on topic, I've since come to the conclusion that slam death metal specifically is the worst metal subgenre. There is other brutal death metal I enjoy, but I've haven't found any slam I actually like, best I've come to is tolerating Vulvodynia.

I simultaneously appreciate our differing opinion while calling into question how you can tolerate one of the most generic slam bands in the scene...

Written by Troy Killjoy on 15.08.2021 at 03:19

Written by Ganondox on 06.08.2021 at 09:23

Back on topic, I've since come to the conclusion that slam death metal specifically is the worst metal subgenre. There is other brutal death metal I enjoy, but I've haven't found any slam I actually like, best I've come to is tolerating Vulvodynia.

I simultaneously appreciate our differing opinion while calling into question how you can tolerate one of the most generic slam bands in the scene...

I dunno, I don't listen to enough slam to even know what generic slam sounds like as most of what I've heard is so bad I just turn away from it. Vulvodynia sounds a bit more trad-death though, their tone usually isn't irritating like I've heard from many slam bands, and they've got enough tech elements to be a bit interesting. It's not something I'd go out of the way to listen to, but not something I'd turn off either. The only reason I listened to them in the first place though was because my father interviewed them and then mentioned it to me, and I recognized the name.

Written by Shmelevod on 14.09.2021 at 14:13

The genre I hate the most is this beer-tavern-humppa-troll metal (Finntroll, Korpiklaani, and alike). It was big in Russia at some point in time and it really pissed me off. It's like what the fuck are you so happy about?! I mean, take a look out of the window, it's all grey-colored and depressive over there! Why wouldn't you start playing DSBM instead?

Maybe they do it to keep themselves happy?

Written by M C Vice on 15.09.2021 at 10:24

Written by Shmelevod on 14.09.2021 at 14:13

The genre I hate the most is this beer-tavern-humppa-troll metal (Finntroll, Korpiklaani, and alike). It was big in Russia at some point in time and it really pissed me off. It's like what the fuck are you so happy about?! I mean, take a look out of the window, it's all grey-colored and depressive over there! Why wouldn't you start playing DSBM instead?

Maybe they do it to keep themselves happy?

Maybe they are just temporarily lying to themselves? =/

Any genres of music that aren't my cup of tea I just don't bother listening to, so it's not worth hating unless someone forces it into my ears.

DSBM is underhated, incredibly boring stuff. When one of your most well known bands is only well known for made up stories, I think there's something wrong in the very fundation of the genre.