Posers, scene kids, emos, etc...

[RelentlessOblivion]

because if we were to eliminate all the genre distinctions it would be very confusing for metalheads trying to find new bands. Just think if you couldn't stand harsh vocals and you had to wade through bands which sounded like Bathory, Nile, Skepticism, Anathema, Celtic Frost, Morbid Angel etc to find a few bands which sounded like say Queensryche and Fates Warning. With the genre distinctions it is simple for a fan of clean vocalled bands to find something they will like and the same goes for fans of harsher vocals.

[BlutAusNerd]

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

Too many sub labels. How about just call it metal?

I'm fine with that, as long as all of the bands contained therein are at least mostly metal. I typically don't use genres when describing the sounds of bands to others anyway, it is more descriptive (to me anyway) to compare them to other bands with regard to technique, atmosphere, and other attributes. The only place where this is not the case is in my recommendations threads, as they were each set up within different genre sections here on this site, but they are also easier for users to find new bands that they're looking for this way. In the end it really doesn't matter, but it can be helpful if used correctly. Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

[KSMASH]

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' date=' 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.[/quote'] I'm fine with wanting to distinguish between different sounds and trying to lump them together for the purposes of categorization, I just take issue with many of the lines that are drawn and the actual terms used. My main issue with "melodic" being a prefix for sub-genres is that (as I said before) most -if not all- guitar riffs are melodies. A melody is the combination of pitch and rhythm, or basically any little tune (think of it as any collection of notes that you can hum). Unless you're playing absolutely atonal ambient noise, you're most likely playing something melodic. So I just think we need a new term there. Or let's say "mathcore" is stupid because all music is relative to mathematics. I don't want to completely throw away genres or even sub-genres. I just think there needs to be a restructuring of sorts. There's a few "metalcore" and "deathcore" bands that are basically death metal, but they get the "core" suffix because of a few breakdowns or screamed vocals. I think stuff like that needs to at least be reevaluated.

[RelentlessOblivion]

On that subject I have nothing to say, all metalcore and deathcore sounds the same to me.

[KSMASH]

On that subject I have nothing to say' date=' all metalcore and deathcore sounds the same to me.[/quote'] If you don't spend a lot of time listening to either sub-genre, then of course you will probably think it "all sounds the same".

[KSMASH]

The Red Chord is way different from Through the Eyes of the Dead, Despised Icon doesn't sound like Ion Dissonance, Burnt by the Sun doesn't sound like the End, Biohazard is different from Ringworm...

[RelentlessOblivion]

I recognise it is an unfair generalisation to make given I haven't heard every metalcore or deathcore band in existance but I find no difference in those I have heard. I suppose though that given my distaste for these genres. This dislike stems from an observation that many elements of metalcore and deathcore are simply watered down versions of what I am already familiar with. Coupled with the stupid choruses there is nothing for me to enjoy at least generally speaking. I don't dispute there are metalcore or deathcore bands that are actually good I just haven't heard them and am not interested enough to actively pursue them.

[forge]

Deathcore just sounds tacky and badly produced to me. Of course I haven't heard every band either, but they used to play a lot of it on Liquid Metal on satellite radio, and it always disappointed me. Out and out death metal sounds a bit better to me. I think deathcore came about as a thing for people who weren't quite ready for death metal!

[Metalhead Steve]

The only thing I hate is when a deathcore band is 50%+ breakdowns. Deathcore that gets your adrenaline going (Whitechapel, Winds of Plague) and deathcore that is "true" deathcore, as I call it (Heaven Shall Burn), is fine. I just don't like blends of Post-Hardcore (emocore) in metal, with the exception of one or two bands. Blends of real Hardcore and real metal is perfect. The way I am... If I see someone wearing an Asking Alexandria shirt, I don't care. I think it's cool they listen to heavier music. But, AA is post-hardcore, so whenever it's grouped with my music, I get uneasy.

[KSMASH]

The only thing I hate is when a deathcore band is 50%+ breakdowns. Deathcore that gets your adrenaline going (Whitechapel, Winds of Plague) and deathcore that is "true" deathcore, as I call it (Heaven Shall Burn), is fine. I just don't like blends of Post-Hardcore (emocore) in metal, with the exception of one or two bands. Blends of real Hardcore and real metal is perfect. The way I am... If I see someone wearing an Asking Alexandria shirt, I don't care. I think it's cool they listen to heavier music. But, AA is post-hardcore, so whenever it's grouped with my music, I get uneasy.

Yeah, but if metal and hardcore keep evolving, then what is "real" metal or hardcore? If you want to be really specific with genre lines (which is apparently the general consensus of how genres should work) then all of the bands you listed have very little "true" hardcore influence at all. It's relatively easy to see the jump from 80s hardcore to 90s metalcore (Black Flag + Black Sabbath = Biohazard... easy enough), but I have a hard time hearing any "real" hardcore influence in the bands listed above (as well as many other supposed "deathcore" bands). If you want to get way technical with it, what most people currently consider hardcore is pretty much metalcore (which is where a lot of the breakdowns come from) and if deathcore bands are taking influence from a sub-genre which is already part metal... why even add the "core" tag? All Shall Perish, Heaven Shall Burn, Through the Eyes of the Dead... most of their "core" influence comes from metalcore, and arguably from the more metal aspects of the sub-genre. Let's just put it all under a microscope!!!

[Metalhead Steve]

I'm terrible with genres so this isn't a good discussion for me to have. I just don't like overused breakdowns and whiny vocals. I should mention that the best blend of hardcore and metal that I've found is Cult of Luna, though.

[KSMASH]

I'm terrible with genres so this isn't a good discussion for me to have. I just don't like overused breakdowns and whiny vocals. I should mention that the best blend of hardcore and metal that I've found is Cult of Luna, though.

I think everyone's horrible with genres haha. Sometimes they're effective, other times it's just a way for people to dissociate themselves from supposed "bastardized" versions of their favorite music. The lines are simultaneously too specific and not nearly specific enough.