Is that so?

And yet, Underoath, All that Remains, and other metalcore bands that no one on this site likes are listed in the archives...

Please, can we continue with the discussion of whether or not AAL is metal and stop this nonsense?

Nappy gave a valid reason, it isn't personal dislike. And it's been mentioned before that the powers that be can't fucking stand Devildriver but let them in because The Last Kind Words was indeed a metal album. Listen to yourself, you sound like you're twelve.

"You need to study better, Jimmy"

"No this class needs to be easier, dad"

Let's make something absolutely clear here: I don't have a personal dislike with Animals as Leaders. My attitude towards them is indifference, which probably applies to 95% of the bands on this website AND excluded by this website.

But they are not metal. They do have some metal riffs every once in a while, but their overall songwriting and sound are not metal. If you wish to get a more professional opinion, ask the other mods/admins, but I seriously doubt the verdict will change.

I'm done here.

Care to tell me where you're getting that coming from? I think you'll find the mods here completely despise many bands on the archives, yet those bands will never be removed. The soul reason it was deleted is because at least a couple of the mods decided it simply wasn't metal enough to be here. But whatever man, keep ranting about this conspiracy of the mods out to remove your favorite bands.

Neither do you, all you're saying is, "This band is metal and if you disagree with me than you're a close minded elitist!!!!". Using that argument makes it impossible to take you seriously.

Look it up in the "how do people feel about the Djent genre?" thread. Or actually I'll make it easier for you.



So this is a valid reason to delete a band? Really? A little more thought into this would go a long way. This is entirely pathetic.

Trashierthanthou - I don't think I can even take you serious for even thinking my statements followed in that retarded predicament. Maybe you should follow Empyreal with his initial comment.

BastardHead - Way to go, you take the cheap way out and resort to their age. How old are we, really? Again, follow Empyreal's initial comment.

False equivalence is an informal logical fallacy, therefore your claim is invalid.

It's not false equivalence though. Have you actually listened to their whole debut album multiple times? All of their songs are written in the exact same style. Look, I'll link a few for you and you can tell me which ones lack riffs to be metal or whatever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtSf3iFH ... grec_index
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rvucPus ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4A3ALOS ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z3j1sao ... re=related

And also, I am not sure how you can listen to this and come to the conclusion that it is not metal or that it has nothing to do with metal. At the very absolute least, AaL is a borderline prog metal band, at the most, it's 100% progressive metal.

And Luxul, just give up. You are making yourself look completely stupid and digging a giant hole you cannot get out of. If you want to argue that AaL is a metal band (which I think they are), I suggest you start by making more sensible posts that aren't blatant, baseless accusations.

In all my years around here, I'll never understand why people make such a big deal about their favorite band(s) not being on here. It's not like Metal Archives is the be all, end all of what is and isn't metal. The mods have every right to remove a band they don't think is metal enough to be here. It is their website and they can do whatever they want. I happen to think UFO has some pretty metal songs, and they aren't on here, but I don't go pitching a fit about it. Mostly because I don't care, and there are other websites where I can look up information on the band if I have to.

Listened to it several times, reviewed it while the band was still on the site. I'm not interested in going into detail regarding the lack of riffs though, it's a terrible, unlistenable album.

Well, you won't explain to me why Song of Solomon is a rare exception in the album that isn't metal but prog rock despite the other songs on the album sounding pretty much the same to me in my ears. I've heard it several times, and every time I thought I was listening to a metal album and I still do. I've linked many songs that sound metal to me, and if no one is going to explain to me why those songs aren't metal, then I'll keep thinking the band is metal until someone convinces me otherwise. Of course, I do like the band and that album, and I think it is fairly well written. It's hard to tell which side has more bias unfortunately.

I've been personally asked to contribute to this thread, so, here I am... after listening to a few songs that have been posted, all I can say is... I really couldn't care less. This band sounds very borderline at best. It's kind of all over the place, some occasional aesthetically "metal" moments but mostly noodling and prog wankery. "Inamorata" is probably their most metal song so far, but that's not saying that much.
Basically, I don't give two shits. If most of the moderators (that means people with a bright red name here, folks -- feel free to take any other post under advisement if you care, but note that only posts by those with bright red names have any kind of official standing) really, really think they should be restored and post several metal songs as evidence, then I'll restore them (yes, I can do that now, no need to resubmit), but for now I completely agree with Napero's decision after listening to the songs posted Dudemanguy. Most of that material is scarcely metal, if at all.

And boy this thread has some profoundly dumb posts. The latest accusation of racism by our retarded OP takes the cake, but still some more gems here:


Nevermind that I've explicitly answered this very question multiple times in the past, but, here's the most recent post on the matter. Nevermind that bringing up this tired old debate into this thread is just douchey in the first place.


No, no, no, and NO. Remember when I warned you for mini-modding? This is why. Stop posting inaccurate shit as if you had any authority on the matter, you are going to mislead the noobs and you are perpetuating this idiotic "50%" myth (I still don't know where the fuck that came from, probably out of some other mini-mod's ass years ago?).

Enough with the "50% metal" or "51% metal" canard already. It has never, EVER been official site policy for a single moment, and I'm sorely tempted to ban the next idiot who so much as repeats it. Not that you can measure that kind of thing with a percentage anyway. If I have an hypothetical Judas Priest album with 10 songs that include 2 ballads and 1 acoustic intro, that would "only" be "70% metal", so we can see why it's utterly meaningless.


I sure can; it wasn't deleted because of a personal dislike, period. You just made that shit up. Hell, the Napero post you quoted doesn't even support your own claim.

For the last time*, no band has ever been rejected or deleted because of "personal dislike". Considering how many terrible bands are listed, the very idea is simply too ludicrous to even take seriously. If anyone ever makes the suggestion, expect scorn and ridicule, at best.



....


*

^What he said.
But I understand being annoyed about this. The response to why Steel Panther's not on here was because some random metalheads didn't find their riffs to be metal. A band that is essentially 80's heavy metal worship but with a fresh ambition is NOT going to take metal in a different direction and will NOT kill the genre as worries of the admin on the first page of this topic expressed. If anything its keeping traditional metal, well, traditional.

I'm not a huge fan of that band but I'm just using it for the sake of argument. Not all bands need to have riffs like Immolation to be metal.

I hate this argument so much. Stop bringing up Deep Purple. It says in the fucking rules that they are not a metal band by their own definitions, and were arbitrarily added by the mods for influence because the owners of the site damn well wanted to. For this reason DP are not a band which should be compared to for acceptable metalness levels.

As for AAL I actually thought that song was pretty cool, didn't have any metal riffs though, just a few chugs. Haven't heard anything else they've done though.

I never looked up if SP was allowed on here or not, but I am so glad to hear that they are not. Pure 80s glam rock that is barely even worth a chuckle. It's might be a good parody, but they are parodying shit, so their end product isn't far off the mark, if you follow me. Also you do realize that there is an entire global heavy metal revival scene going on right now (dubbed NWOTHM by some), right? pfft!

Geeze. That's all I have to say about the discussion on Animals As Leaders.

Sorry to beat a 'dead horse', but I just have to respond to this bit about Soulfly, since it's the first time I am actually seeing Morrigan's reason for not allowing them on the Metal-Archives:


In that URL you state that you would allow Soulfly in when they release something "completely unambiguously heavy fucking metal". You even said you'd settle for "The Jester Race". I think they did that twice! Conquer in 2008 and Omen in 2010. Especially Omen, since that's the album I have listened to the most trying to find exactly where this "altcore garbage" occurs. I've failed to hear a single shred of alternative, and there is definitely no -core influence. (I'm not saying either of them sound like The Jester Race, but in terms of how metal they are to my ears and in my opinion, they exceed The Jester Race)

So... If there is indeed any "alt-core garbage" could you kindly link to which song on Omen has such "alt-core garbage" and at what time in that song does it occur?


----

The question of Soulfly I just asked does relate to the Animals As Leaders discussion going on here, because it was brought up that AAL doesn't have that many metal riffs. Excluding leads, the rhythmic riffage does seem to be just chugging in odd time signatures. But with Soulfly, as a comparison, in their earlier albums they didn't have very many leads - the band was very rhythmic oriented (and that's not just because of their old nu-metal sound, but because they incorporate 'world music' rhythms in their stuff). Starting with Dark Ages and going as far back as Prophecy, they started to move toward a groove/thrash sound and ditch the nu-metal. The most recent album that had any sort of leanings to their old sound (at least to my ears and in my humble opinion) is Dark Ages. Conquer contains a significant Bolt Thrower influence overlaid upon a base of groovy thrash metal. Omen seems to continue that development with a considerable broader array of death metal influences. In fact, it is my opinion that Omen is metal riffs from start to finish, excluding the very last track which is more of a melodic outro with a guitar solo. Max uses death growls and there are absolutely no "whiny vocals". The riffage itself is groovy death/thrash, and I don't see too much difference between Omen and the latest Sepultura album Kairos. In comparison with another band related to Sepultura and Soulfly, Cavalera Conspiracy, I'd say the recent Soulfly output is even more metal than that, and CC is on the archives.

----

Deep Purple is on here because they are an important band to metal. I'll be honest, I've always seen them as a metal band. Just not the type of metal that will start moshpits and shit. There are other projects that are here for arbitrary reasons, mainly playing neo-folk and such, but they are still a "part of" the metal scene. Is Animals As Leaders a part of the metal scene? That's an interesting question, because some might say yes, some might say no. If I were a promoter putting together a show with Animals As Leaders, what kind of local bands would I put in as openers? If you think of it that way, it is really difficult to truly say if AAL is a part of the metal scene or not. I can see how they'll appeal to metal fans that like progressive elements, jazz-fusion and even this so called "Djent" style. But I get that Tobin's background as a guitarist for a metalcore band, later playing live for Born of Osiris and such, would also draw in modern metalcore fans. Is this an argument for re-including AAL? No. But I think this raises a key point - they are well known, and more prone to public scrutiny. They are known to bring in metalcore fans to their shows. Being well known, and being popular with a decidedly non-metal crowd, brought in scrutiny from Napero who decided that they ought to be nuked. If they weren't so well known, they might not have been nuked, at least until someone posts a complaint or fills out a report.

----

Sorry for the long-winded post! lol

Yeah, right, like I'm going to waste my time enduring a re-listening of that garbage all the way through a second time just so I can satisfy your curiosity by pinpointing exact moments that I consider objectionable? Nice try.

Or, again, see here. Or just search my posts with the appropriate keywords. If you guys really want to see what I've said in the past and don't remember, it's really not that hard instead of bringing back the same old shit over and over again in every thread about objectionable bands.


Good for you. I certainly don't think so or else they'd be here by now.

Let. It. Go.

Oh, I'm not asking for every single moment you consider 'objectionable', just one song, that contains this 'alt-core garbage' you speak of and preferably the exact time segment that the 'alt-core' occurs. That way I can hear what exactly you are hearing as 'alt-core garbage' and try and understand your point of view. If it's so full of the alt-core, shouldn't be too hard, right? Because otherwise to be frank I think you are entirely wrong about Omen having 'alt-core garbage', and entirely wrong about the album being not metal enough for the Metal Archives.

But I don't spend every waking day obsessing about it. Sure I disagree with Soulfly's absence from the Metal Archives. I disagree with the deletion of Between the Buried and Me, though I haven't posted about them in years and don't intend to. I disagree with the deletion of AAL but I at the very LEAST see where Napero's viewpoint is coming from. In fact, I agree with some of the points he has made and I'm not really interested in typing up long winded posts about AAL. But with your viewpoint, you mention this 'alt-core' that doesn't seem to exist in recent Soulfly albums (because I'm not hearing any*), and you also mention that they won't be added unless they release an album of 1980s thrash. It doesn't make sense to me, and I'm just asking for the example to try and make sense of your point of view. Though I'm likely going to call it out as bullshit*, and it likely won't serve any purpose in swaying your decision. But it might answer more than just my question, and allow others to see your point of view. Or they might just cry bullshit.

* Everyone's ears hear things differently. I might hear death metal in Omen, others might hear just thrash metal, others might hear melodic screamo and realize they accidentally downloaded Attack Attack. I'm being as careful as I can in dissecting opinions on what is and is not metal because it is IMPOSSIBLE to completely objectively decide what band is and is not metal. I'll even go as far as saying that it is not a fact that Motorhead is metal. It's an opinion. Lemmy himself doesn't consider Motorhead a heavy metal band, instead prefers the label "rock and roll" (iirc). There was a time when the term "heavy metal" didn't exist, this was only retroactively applied to some old Black Sabbath albums after it was noticed that they inspired a new form of rock music. Though it is a well developed opinion with a long history, heavy metal itself is still an opinion and everyone will have a slightly varying definition of such.

With that in mind, and this is advice I present to all of you that don't agree with the deletion of AAL or rejection of Soulfly or whatnot: The Metal-Archives isn't a worse place because AAL was deleted. It's still the best resource on the internet (imho) for heavy metal, and not just the meticulous cataloging of even the least-known bands but also a repository of reviews of some of these lesser-known bands. Though the standards for admittance is strict, I think that ultimately is what makes this site so great. Soulfly being rejected from Metal-Archives won't ruin that for me. It's really just an after thought, and I only brought it up in this thread because someone else already did.

Though the subject will undoubtedly be brought up again in early 2012 when they release their eighth studio album. Will that be Soulfly's "The Last Kind Words" (in reference to the album that got Devildriver admitted to this site)?

You're a whiny little child screaming on the internet (actual age does not matter; I am talking about mental age), huffing and puffing because a website took off a band due to a difference in opinion in what is 'metal.' That's factually retarded, and the fact that you're taking this so personally and getting so outraged over it leads me to believe you have nothing else to do with your time but sit here and bitch. Also there's no personal dislike involved in the band's deletion - if you think that, you're an idiot in addition to being immature. Stunning resume you're building for yourself here.

PS Soulfly is crap, and even if they did play metal it wouldn't be worth talking about enough to get on here anyway.

I really couldn't care less what you think. The album was chock full of those moments (as was Kittie's), I remember this much. I don't remember the "exact time segment" and I certainly am not going to waste my time finding out. Why should I? It's your problem, not mine.

The rest of your post is tl;dr, not remotely interested. Apparently you also can't figure out what "Let. It. Go." means, so consider yourself officially warned, because I'm frankly sick of you.

Thread over.