Jump to content

Posers, scene kids, emos, etc...


Metalhead Steve

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

ever notice that some emo bands have the most stupiest videos ever for example i saw a new found glory video once on youtube FacePalm they had rainbows clouds balloons,singer playing guitar in a monkey coustume i feel bad for shai hulud's frontman playing guitar in that band

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ever notice that some emo bands have the most stupiest videos ever for example i saw a new found glory video once on youtube FacePalm they had rainbows clouds balloons' date='singer playing guitar in a monkey coustume i feel bad for shai hulud's frontman playing guitar in that band[/quote'] I think bands like that have video's specifically made to appeal to their fan demographic, Which are young teens I gather, No different to the ridiculous antics in a Blink 182 video.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll learn to worry less about the "enemies of metal" as you get older and realize that once the popularity fades' date=' only the die hards and those who genuinely care and live and love this music will remain.[/quote'] pretenders will come and go but for many of us a life without metal is no life at all
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think bands like that have video's specifically made to appeal to their fan demographic' date=' Which are young teens I gather, No different to the ridiculous antics in a Blink 182 video.[/quote'] yeah i know i seen couple blink-183 videos too man i agree immaturity is a purest form
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheesy anything can be good or bad, depending on how you use it. There are many things I can't take seriously in metal, shitty good cop/bad cop vocal approach is probably the one most associated with metalcore, but many melodic "death" metal bands and gothic metal bands use the same or similar approach... People complain about the catchy choruses in metalcore, but it's all over many other sub-genres. BTW, "pop" isn't a genre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never did like that video from Infidel becuase he looks like he is in his mid 30's, and trying to look cool for the younger people! He comes off as very immature to me sometimes. If your into metal, punk, emo,...Thats good for you! Want a pat on the back or something? Im not going to knock any scene of any kind at all anymore. I used to when I was younger. But I realize, that all sub cultures share so many similarities that it doesnt matter. In the end, if you are worried about posers. Or anyone for that matter. You are indeed insecure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But doesn't it become irritating when people wrongly label you as "emo" or lump non-metal bands into the wrong category?
Thats a high school mentality. Everybody in high school wants to be labels you as something. Im a fully grown man. I get tons of people label me as a biker because I wear black bandanas and vests full of metal patches. I just tell them Im not riding Harley's yet but like them. Ive had people lump the music I listen to as emo. I just tell them Im not into those bands. That is all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Posers, scene kids, emos, etc...

Thats a high school mentality. Everybody in high school wants to be labels you as something. Im a fully grown man. I get tons of people label me as a biker because I wear black bandanas and vests full of metal patches. I just tell them Im not riding Harley's yet but like them. Ive had people lump the music I listen to as emo. I just tell them Im not into those bands. That is all.
People are more than welcome to call an orange a cucumber, it doesn't change the way it tastes for anyone, but it doesn't mean that they're right. So sure, calling stuff by another name doesn't really make a huge difference in the scope of things, but if I go to a restaurant and order orange chicken, I would be pretty annoyed with all of the cucumbers fucking it up. Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In much the same way that when my younger brother says "you'll like this new death metal band" and puts on some poppish metalcore garbage I become rather annoyed. Resorting to playing actual death metal to highlight the difference simply does not work. More frustrating however is that he calls all that music, and metal, crap most of the time and only pretends to like it in certain company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In much the same way that when my younger brother says "you'll like this new death metal band" and puts on some poppish metalcore garbage I become rather annoyed. Resorting to playing actual death metal to highlight the difference simply does not work. More frustrating however is that he calls all that music' date=' and metal, crap most of the time and only pretends to like it in certain company.[/quote'] He just know any better. U can't fault anyone for not understanding. If he is interested. Teach him the difference.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be a lot of adolescents on this forum. Unless you are paying monthly dues, and going through hell to earn full patched jackets. I don't see why any of u will care about what outsiders think of your music! I don't even call myself a Metalhead even though I might dress the part and collect a lot of music and shirts. I'm a human being who is an avid metal fan!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

perhaps we're all just petty people who live through the manner in which we are perceived though that is a thought which had never occured to me before. It seems more likely however that after all the stereotypes we've had to cope with because of our preferred genre of music frustrations build because now on top of that we are also being lumped in with a seperate group and so suffer even more wrongful generalisations. I don't care what people say about my music generally I do however tend to correct people who use the wrong terms and that isn't limited to just music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be a lot of adolescents on this forum. Unless you are paying monthly dues' date=' and going through hell to earn full patched jackets. I don't see why any of u will care about what outsiders think of your music! I don't even call myself a Metalhead even though I might dress the part and collect a lot of music and shirts. I'm a human being who is an avid metal fan![/quote'] As I had said with my orange/cucumber comparison, it doesn't change my metal, so I don't care in that regard what people think of it. Non-metal bands being lumped in with metal doesn't change metal, but it is frustrating to try to give or receive recommendations to people for music when their definitions are skewed. And no, I'm not an adolescent, and I don't wear a patch jacket. Even if they weren't stupidly trendy right now, I still wouldn't wear one, I just don't like the look of them. I'm not sure what your reason is for putting up all of this opposition for something so simple as calling something what it is, nouns are a part of speech and exist to differentiate things for a reason. Unfortunately, we are not the Marklar, and different things have different names in our world. Bzq4YDt7V-o
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the comparison, but at what point does it become a completely different genre? Let's say you're looking for good death metal and someone recommends a death n' roll band, do you get angry and call them a poser? Rock n' roll is a form of popular music and often features verse/chorus/basic structure, add that to death metal and it's still classified as death metal. Now let's say someone recommends a melodeath/metalcore crossover band. The most common response would be "wtf is this hardcore garbage?"... wait metalcore is generally about half metal, melodeath is mostly metal... where does the disconnect happen? The numbers just don't add up to me. Second, if shitty bands get lumped in with any genre term, does that negate the whole style? I say nay and we may have uses for at least some genres and sub-genres, but I think shit gets pretty out of hand when you consider the differences are subtle at best. Most "deathcore" bands fit under the brutal/slam death tag, some under deathgrind, and some are just plain melodic death metal. A lot of "metalcore" bands are either thrash, sludge, hardcore, or just hard rock. I think the term is an umbrella that can accurately describe many things, and it definitely shouldn't be a dirty word. Finally, if you have a real passion for music, you are not a poser. Since it's impossible to judge anyone else's intentions without intimately knowing them (and even then it can be hard to read), no one should be throwing out the p-word. Same goes for the e-word (elitist).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the comparison, but at what point does it become a completely different genre? Let's say you're looking for good death metal and someone recommends a death n' roll band, do you get angry and call them a poser? Rock n' roll is a form of popular music and often features verse/chorus/basic structure, add that to death metal and it's still classified as death metal. Now let's say someone recommends a melodeath/metalcore crossover band. The most common response would be "wtf is this hardcore garbage?"... wait metalcore is generally about half metal, melodeath is mostly metal... where does the disconnect happen? The numbers just don't add up to me. Second, if shitty bands get lumped in with any genre term, does that negate the whole style? I say nay and we may have uses for at least some genres and sub-genres, but I think shit gets pretty out of hand when you consider the differences are subtle at best. Most "deathcore" bands fit under the brutal/slam death tag, some under deathgrind, and some are just plain melodic death metal. A lot of "metalcore" bands are either thrash, sludge, hardcore, or just hard rock. I think the term is an umbrella that can accurately describe many things, and it definitely shouldn't be a dirty word. Finally, if you have a real passion for music, you are not a poser. Since it's impossible to judge anyone else's intentions without intimately knowing them (and even then it can be hard to read), no one should be throwing out the p-word. Same goes for the e-word (elitist).
Nobody is calling anybody on here a poser. Listening to any kind of music doesn't make you a nice guy or a douche bag, and doesn't change who the person is, so people are out of the equation. And yes, if somebody is dedicated to the music, they are not a poser regardless of the genre, as a poser by definition would be someone who poses to like the music to conform to a certain image or fit into a certain scene. If you're just listening to metal, true or not, to look "cool" or "badass", that makes you a poser, not listening to As I Lay Dying. And yes, there is metal in metalcore, even the most banal and poppy stuff, otherwise the label would not apply. I've said before that the metal element not only takes the back seat with most of the bands I complain about, but it is also done lazily and disingenuously simply to sound as though the "tougher" and/or "cooler" label of metal can apply to them. This would then make them posers, but as you said, it is impossible to determine intent. If it was an easy line to draw then there would be no argument as to where it fell, and there would never need to be any kind of explanation or distinction between what is metal and what is a pop music, which is actually a genre BTW: Pop music (a term that originally derives from an abbreviation of "popular") is a genre of popular music which originated in its modern form in the 1950s, deriving from rock and roll.[1] The terms popular music and pop music are often used interchangeably, even though the former is a description of music which is popular (and can include any style).[1] As a genre, pop music is very eclectic, often borrowing elements from other styles including urban, dance, rock, Latin and country;[1] nonetheless, there are core elements which define pop. Such include generally short-to-medium length songs, written in a basic format (often the verse-chorus structure), as well as the common employment of repeated choruses, melodic tunes, and catchy hooks.[1] So-called "pure pop" music, such as power pop, features all these elements, using electric guitars, drums and bass for instrumentation;[1] in the case of such music, the main goal is usually that of being pleasurable to listen to, rather than having much artistic depth.[1] Pop music is generally thought of as a genre which is commercially recorded and desires to have a mass audience appeal.[1] Conforming to genre lines is not something I really give a shit about, but they do exist for a reason. The principle of genres expanding to encompass new elements and having genres formed within it or by influence taken from it is fine, but the distinction should be made. You're right, we don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater and write genres off completely, but when certain hallmarks of the genre grate on my ears in most cases, it makes it difficult to wade through the proverbial shit to find the few golden nuggets. And sure, it's definitely a fair argument that some things get over-genretized, but it doesn't have to be a bad thing. I like to look at it as a testament to how diverse music is, as opposed to something that should be barring in terms of creativity in order to conform to guidelines of said genre.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody is calling anybody on here a poser. Listening to any kind of music doesn't make you a nice guy or a douche bag, and doesn't change who the person is, so people are out of the equation. And yes, if somebody is dedicated to the music, they are not a poser regardless of the genre, as a poser by definition would be someone who poses to like the music to conform to a certain image or fit into a certain scene. If you're just listening to metal, true or not, to look "cool" or "badass", that makes you a poser, not listening to As I Lay Dying. And yes, there is metal in metalcore, even the most banal and poppy stuff, otherwise the label would not apply. I've said before that the metal element not only takes the back seat with most of the bands I complain about, but it is also done lazily and disingenuously simply to sound as though the "tougher" and/or "cooler" label of metal can apply to them. This would then make them posers, but as you said, it is impossible to determine intent. If it was an easy line to draw then there would be no argument as to where it fell, and there would never need to be any kind of explanation or distinction between what is metal and what is a pop music, which is actually a genre BTW: Pop music (a term that originally derives from an abbreviation of "popular") is a genre of popular music which originated in its modern form in the 1950s, deriving from rock and roll.[1] The terms popular music and pop music are often used interchangeably, even though the former is a description of music which is popular (and can include any style).[1] As a genre, pop music is very eclectic, often borrowing elements from other styles including urban, dance, rock, Latin and country;[1] nonetheless, there are core elements which define pop. Such include generally short-to-medium length songs, written in a basic format (often the verse-chorus structure), as well as the common employment of repeated choruses, melodic tunes, and catchy hooks.[1] So-called "pure pop" music, such as power pop, features all these elements, using electric guitars, drums and bass for instrumentation;[1] in the case of such music, the main goal is usually that of being pleasurable to listen to, rather than having much artistic depth.[1] Pop music is generally thought of as a genre which is commercially recorded and desires to have a mass audience appeal.[1] Conforming to genre lines is not something I really give a shit about, but they do exist for a reason. The principle of genres expanding to encompass new elements and having genres formed within it or by influence taken from it is fine, but the distinction should be made. You're right, we don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater and write genres off completely, but when certain hallmarks of the genre grate on my ears in most cases, it makes it difficult to wade through the proverbial shit to find the few golden nuggets. And sure, it's definitely a fair argument that some things get over-genretized, but it doesn't have to be a bad thing. I like to look at it as a testament to how diverse music is, as opposed to something that should be barring in terms of creativity in order to conform to guidelines of said genre.
Yeah I wasn't really saying anyone here was calling anyone a poser, just kind of responding to the thread as a whole. I also agree with a lot of what you're saying. However, just because it has a supposed definition doesn't mean it's a genre. I disagree with using "pop" as a genre term as much as I disagree with the terms "classical" or "melodic death metal"... I still use these terms in such discussions because they will most likely get the point across to most readers/listeners. My dissatisfaction with such labels actually comes from a desire to be more specific with musical classification. Let's use "melodic death metal" as an example again: the "melodic" prefix tells me nothing about what to expect. Most people use the word "melodic" merely to mean they use natural minor/major progressions instead of the chromatic progressions which were typical of the formative death metal records. My problem with that is that you can make a melody from any scale (it doesn't have to sound "pretty" to be a melody), and technically metal riffs are usually little melodies. Furthermore, "melodic death metal" seems to describe either power metal with harsh vocals, or death metal with clean vocals... and I don't think either embellishment to its parent genre really merits a whole new term. Do you see what I'm getting at? I just have a hard time seeing the line. When does a collection of sounds become a whole new genre or sub-genre, and how diverse can that style become before a new classification is really necessary? Even with all this diversity of sound, how much different can one sub-genre of metal be from another? I just don't think the gaps are really as wide as we make them out to be. I think these terms need to go away, or perhaps be reexamined and/or redefined: melodic, progressive, post-, power, groove, djent, bestial, brutal, technical... the list goes on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another issue I have is when you say something contains "pop" elements, and apparently pop is an amalgamation of other genres... then what does that mean? You typically are speaking of catchy choruses and structure, but those are just songwriting elements which are also typical of many other genres. Even the "verse/chorus" structure could just be a shortened version of the movements in symphonies. What makes it all that different? Instrumentation? Is it the complexity of the melodies? I'm a little off topic at this point, but these are just some things I think about when we talk about genres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I wasn't really saying anyone here was calling anyone a poser, just kind of responding to the thread as a whole. I also agree with a lot of what you're saying. However, just because it has a supposed definition doesn't mean it's a genre. I disagree with using "pop" as a genre term as much as I disagree with the terms "classical" or "melodic death metal"... I still use these terms in such discussions because they will most likely get the point across to most readers/listeners. My dissatisfaction with such labels actually comes from a desire to be more specific with musical classification. Let's use "melodic death metal" as an example again: the "melodic" prefix tells me nothing about what to expect. Most people use the word "melodic" merely to mean they use natural minor/major progressions instead of the chromatic progressions which were typical of the formative death metal records. My problem with that is that you can make a melody from any scale (it doesn't have to sound "pretty" to be a melody), and technically metal riffs are usually little melodies. Furthermore, "melodic death metal" seems to describe either power metal with harsh vocals, or death metal with clean vocals... and I don't think either embellishment to its parent genre really merits a whole new term. Do you see what I'm getting at? I just have a hard time seeing the line. When does a collection of sounds become a whole new genre or sub-genre, and how diverse can that style become before a new classification is really necessary? Even with all this diversity of sound, how much different can one sub-genre of metal be from another? I just don't think the gaps are really as wide as we make them out to be. I think these terms need to go away, or perhaps be reexamined and/or redefined: melodic, progressive, post-, power, groove, djent, bestial, brutal, technical... the list goes on.
I get what you're saying, and while some of those terms may be a bit misleading, I don't see why they would be bad. Sometimes the differences are subtle, but you can't tell me that In Flames and Devourment sound anything alike, despite both technically being death metal bands. More than separate genres, these terms tend to be used more as showing the emphasis of the band as opposed to something different. Progressive death metal and brutal death metal are still death metal, but emphasize different traits that may or may not have already been present in the parent genre. Also, in addition to having different facets of the sound emphasized, these do tend to accompany a very different feel and atmosphere not just from each other, but also from standard death metal, or whatever the case may be. I'll give you that djent is pretty fucking meaningless though, an onomatopoeia for the sound of downtuned groove metal/metalcore definitely does not merit its own genre, as it pretty well already exists.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are sub-genres which could be removed entirely as their practitioners can easily be redefined within the context of other sub-genres. Djent being one, battle metal another. The genre distinction is somewhat necessary in some respects to avoid confusion given the sheer volume of metal bands in existance and the variety of sounds between them. As for the term "melodic death metal" it is a descriptive term not a stand alone genre. "Melodic Death Metal" refers to a death metal band which concentrates on crafting a particularly melodious sound in much the same way that "technical death metal" expounds highly technique based musicianship. This only causes problems for me when more then one descriptive title can apply to the one band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Join Metal Forum

    joinus-home.jpg

  • Our picks

    • Whichever tier of thrash metal you consigned Sacred Reich back in the 80's/90's they still had their moments.  "Ignorance" & "Surf Nicaragura" did a great job of establishing the band, whereas "The American Way" just got a little to comfortable and accessible (the title track grates nowadays) for my ears.  A couple more records better left forgotten about and then nothing for twenty three years.  2019 alone has now seen three releases from Phil Rind and co.  A live EP, a split EP with Iron Reagan and now a full length.

      Notable addition to the ranks for the current throng of releases is former Machine Head sticksman, Dave McClean.  Love or hate Machine Head, McClean is a more than capable drummer and his presence here is felt from the off with the opening and title track kicking things off with some real gusto.  'Divide & Conquer' and 'Salvation' muddle along nicely, never quite reaching any quality that would make my balls tingle but comfortable enough.  The looming build to 'Manifest Reality' delivers a real punch when the song starts proper.  Frenzied riffs and drums with shots of lead work to hold the interest.


      There's a problem already though (I know, I am such a fucking mood hoover).  I don't like Phil's vocals.  I never had if I am being honest.  The aggression to them seems a little forced even when they are at their best on tracks like 'Manifest Reality'.  When he tries to sing it just feels weak though ('Salvation') and tracks lose real punch.  Give him a riffy number such as 'Killing Machine' and he is fine with the Reich engine (probably a poor choice of phrase) up in sixth gear.  For every thrashy riff there's a fair share of rock edged, local bar act rhythm aplenty too.

      Let's not poo-poo proceedings though, because overall I actually enjoy "Awakening".  It is stacked full of catchy riffs that are sticky on the old ears.  Whilst not as raw as perhaps the - brilliant - artwork suggests with its black and white, tattoo flash sheet style design it is enjoyable enough.  Yes, 'Death Valley' & 'Something to Believe' have no place here, saved only by Arnett and Radziwill's lead work but 'Revolution' is a fucking 80's thrash heyday throwback to the extent that if you turn the TV on during it you might catch a new episode of Cheers!

      3/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 10 replies
    • I
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/52-vltimas-something-wicked-marches-in/
      • Reputation Points

      • 3 replies

    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/48-candlemass-the-door-to-doom/
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • Full length number 19 from overkill certainly makes a splash in the energy stakes, I mean there's some modern thrash bands that are a good two decades younger than Overkill who can only hope to achieve the levels of spunk that New Jersey's finest produce here.  That in itself is an achievement, for a band of Overkill's stature and reputation to be able to still sound relevant four decades into their career is no mean feat.  Even in the albums weaker moments it never gets redundant and the energy levels remain high.  There's a real sense of a band in a state of some renewed vigour, helped in no small part by the addition of Jason Bittner on drums.  The former Flotsam & Jetsam skinsman is nothing short of superb throughout "The Wings of War" and seems to have squeezed a little extra out of the rest of his peers.

      The album kicks of with a great build to opening track "Last Man Standing" and for the first 4 tracks of the album the Overkill crew stomp, bash and groove their way to a solid level of consistency.  The lead work is of particular note and Blitz sounds as sneery and scathing as ever.  The album is well produced and mixed too with all parts of the thrash machine audible as the five piece hammer away at your skull with the usual blend of chugging riffs and infectious anthems.  


      There are weak moments as mentioned but they are more a victim of how good the strong tracks are.  In it's own right "Distortion" is a solid enough - if not slightly varied a journey from the last offering - but it just doesn't stand up well against a "Bat Shit Crazy" or a "Head of a Pin".  As the album draws to a close you get the increasing impression that the last few tracks are rescued really by some great solos and stomping skin work which is a shame because trimming of a couple of tracks may have made this less obvious. 

      4/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...