Physical release first demo Urlo Nero - Abbi Fede

[/URL]
[/URL]

Hello, was just wondering why Psudoku was blacklisted. I understand MA's standpoint on accepting grindcore bands, but Psudoku seems metal enough to me to be included here, there may not be much death metal influence but the riffs (including the keyboard riffs) are definitely metal ones, and the drumming could be considered "metal" as well. Also, the jazz influences don't seem to be more apparent than the metal anymore than Atheist's jazz influences are.
In any case, cheers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3SWPR_gjdc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdReU5-rNtc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=506dLevESQI

Here is some proof about PS, that they are metal band.

http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Pro ... 3540342855

Sorry, but those YouTube links are worthless. We don't gauge a band's "metalness" by live performances for the simple reason that it has no reflection on the musical style of their studio recordings. A band might put on a performance that was metal as fuck, but play percussive, hardcore-drenched binary-tab metalcore in the studio. In this case, your band just happens to be rejected for being more industrial than metal.


Already been brought up before, mate.


You don't need to be posting the evidence here, since Urlo Nero isn't blacklisted. All you need to do is resubmit with the links to the images in the submission notes, which you're welcome to do so now.

Also, please try and avoid posting massive images in this thread - basic netiquette. Wrap huge images in [spoiler][/spoiler] tags, like this:

Done. By the way, if no response is posted in answer to a given inquiry, should I take that to mean that the band in question is being reviewed?

Well... yes and no. Kinda depends what the inquiry is, really. If somebody's posted some crap like "why is Tool not on this website? their album {XYZ} is progressive metle enough to warrant inqlusion on a metal website, imo...", you can damn well bet the silence isn't over contemplating a reply (unless it's debating whether or not to issue a sarcastic retort).

On the other hand, it's common that moderators miss people's posts (can you blame us?), or that yes, we are in the middle of reviewing your question.

Well, I would think and hope that Uneven Structure isn't as controversial as Tool.

Bruxers (United States) and Larvae (United States) were rejected. Here's physical proof:

Bruxers Demo (self-released)




Larvae Demo (self-released)

Atvena's Wake from Australia was probably blacklisted for not being metal, right? I found their CD (second link).

http://atvenaswake.bandcamp.com/album/hermetica

http://www.sovrecords.bigcartel.com/pro ... rmetica-cd

Okay, let me break it to you simply, then: They're not metal enough by the site's standards to qualify for inclusion here. They're more djent/prog/mathcore than they are metal, and before you begin, please spare us all the "open your minds and admit that not everything has to be Slayer to be metal" argument, because trust me, we've heard it all before...


Not sure what the reason was exactly, but I've taken them off the blacklist. That second CD is obviously metallic. You can resubmit.


Again, why are you people posting this evidence here...? Resubmit, that's why we have the submission notes. You can resubmit the band, just make sure to include the links to those images in the notes...

Also, doomedlover... could you please be sure to wrap large images in [spoiler][/spoiler] tags, how I explained here? Thanks mate, appreciated...

Apologies. Just edited my post!

Hi, dudes, I noticed something strange with Metallica and Lou Reed album:

From what I can see, the album Lulu (and the single) should be added as a new band (like this was added: http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Kis ... 3540325894) and not adding in the Metallica discography,
here is the proofs:
1.- if you notice exist an official website and a facebook page for the band "Lou Reed & Metallica":
http://www.loureedmetallica.com/
http://www.facebook.com/LouReedMetallica

2.- You can go in the Metallica official webpage and see their discography (both, albums and singles) and does not appear Lulu and the view, which I supposed are not cds released by Metallica.
http://www.metallica.com/release_list.a ... 0%26%20EPs
http://www.metallica.com/release_list.a ... m&t=Albums

3.- In their facebook in the Bio (of Lou Reed & Metallica) you can read this:
"It's definitely not a Metallica album, or a Lou Reed album," adds Hammett. "It's something else. It's a new animal, a hybrid."
http://www.facebook.com/LouReedMetallica/info

4.- The lyrics in this albums talks more of that Novel rather than Corruption, Death, Internal Struggles, Anger.

I mean it shoul be added in a new band something like this: http://i43.tinypic.com/312h4wl.png

Is it possible adding it (read the proofs)??

Since it was an one-off collaboration, I doubt a separate band entry is necessary or desirable. It's essentially a Metallica album even though Lou Reed wrote the material and sang. Split albums too are listed on each band's page even when there are collaborations (ie. both bands performing in the same songs that were written in collaboration).

but it is not a Metallica or Lou Reed album and it is NOT a split album (to be listed in both bands), read what Hammet says in their official facebook page (click on see more):
"It's definitely not a Metallica album, or a Lou Reed album," adds Hammett.
http://www.facebook.com/LouReedMetallica/info

Even with that, you can read the name title in official pages (Website, Facebook, Youtube and Twitter): "Lou Reed & Metallica", so they are telling something like they are a new band.
http://twitter.com/#!/loutallica
http://www.youtube.com/loureedmetallicatv

Also they have differents pages for "Metallica" and "Lou Reed & Metallica".

Can you evaluate this please ?? I have shown proofs (see above), but I doubt if Lulu should be added in the Metallica discography (since it is not a split).

http://i43.tinypic.com/312h4wl.png

If we were to add Loutallica as a new band entry, we would then have to make entries for each of the dozens of times bands like Boris, Sunn O))), and Nadja have collaborated with drone/noise artists. It would be a total mess.

No, I think the current policy for collaboration albums (making an album entry in the discography of each collaborating band that's on MA) is better than making a totally new band entry... though I personally believe that MA should have an integrated feature for these sorts of collaborations, seeing as they're relatively common (certainly more common than things like split DVD releases).

Did I say anything? Somebody's über defensive.

Do, or don't do, what you want. I don't care. My apologies for using this thread for its stated function.

Out. \m/

Sorry mate, just that I've seen this exact pattern of behaviour unfold too many times in this thread... Somebody brings up a djent/prog/mathcore band like Between the Buried and Me and it almost always winds up with said person arguing about the site's standards for what's considered metallic enough. Maybe I was being too quick on the draw (and for that I apologise), but yeah... I've seen the whole damn "mathcore IS metal you tards!"-type debate flung around here too often.

It's all right, though I'm not exactly seeing the mathcore influence in Uneven Structure's delivery; anything -core is going to refer to a basis in hardcore punk or similar genre and I don't honestly hear it in their sound. They're about as 'punk' as Meshuggah is. And while the term 'djent' is questionable as a genre descriptor because of the word's original meaning as an onomatopoeia for a riff and not a whole musical style, putting that aside for a moment, we are talking about a distinct form of Meshuggah-influenced progressive metal played by a growing generation of bands. Meshuggah's validity as a metal band is not in question and they pioneered and still play in the style, so to use 'djent' as a reason to disregard a given band as a viable metal entry is nonsensical and contradictory. Even if you take the word 'djent' completely out of the equation, there still remains a musical style here within which Meshuggah is no longer the sole resident.

Now, hold on... Does that mean that all 'djent' bands should be added or seriously debated? No. Well. Not by the encyclopaedia's standards, anyway (personally, I consider metal with heavy hardcore punk influence to still be metal, but whatever). Reason being, there really are quite a few bands cropping up in this spectrum incorporating obvious metal- and/or deathcore love, including, but not limited to, Veil of Maya, A Life Once Lost, Aristeia, Entities, etc. It does, however, mean that we should seriously consider other acts that either do not tread into that territory or do very little of it, such as Uneven Structure, Vildhjarta, Animals as Leaders, and (maybe) TesseracT. All of those have a lot more to do with groove metal than anything -core.

And just to put it out there, even though you and everyone else already knows, having slight influence from punk or metalcore or whatever does not automatically disqualify a band from an entry here, since there is an obvious chunk of metal bands here with the label. Hell, you even have Killswitch Engage on here.

Just sayin'.

The mods have said several times that Meshuggah aren't necessarily considered metal aside from their debut album and the material leading up to it:
viewtopic.php?p=1584449#p1584449
viewtopic.php?p=862429#p862429
viewtopic.php?p=1524526#p1524526
viewtopic.php?p=1552771#p1552771

Witcher is gone, but his opinion is not uncredible, I do think later Meshuggah is metal even if the bands influenced by them are not!

To a degree, I certainly can see where Witcher's sentiment came out of, and to deny that his thoughts still matter would be incorrect. But that is besides the point; we might argue influences until we're blue in the face, but that is not how we judge other bands on an individual level. With that said, however, Gatherum, the fundamental difference between your conception of metal and the conception used here is that what you consider "metal with -core influences" this site considers "-core with metal influences." When a project is fundamentally driven by a style of music then, when it comes to judging bands that "hybridize", we tend to go with what is the driving force. You do see otherwise, but the basis - the unit of analysis - that we use is ultimately the metal riff. And, when it comes to those styles that adopt a musical outlook that is more -core than metal, they tend to rely less on metal riffs than on the musical characteristics of those other styles. As far as the djent style (and don't give me the BS about naming conventions - that grows beyond bands' wants and desires), that's in and of itself is a similar conundrum, again, due to a lack of substantial metal riffs.

What's not metal about the riffs of any of the bands discussed?

since the Soulfly issue is out of the way i guess we can now move on to to discussing that other groove metal band; Ektomorf

so i'm gonna give this another try

seems like in the past any questions about this band have always been answered with 'I refer you to the correct thread' or 'must be a heavy metal band', (well groove metal is subgenre of heavy metal apparently), and yes i checked also with the search option... so to me it's not clear if anyone even checked out their music online, to see if they match MA's criteria... since these kind of questions were always answered, with something like ' You're in the wrong thread idiot/troll, now buzz-off' or something like that...

the band sounds exactly like Roots-era Sepultura and Burn My Eyes-era Machine Head, although they have quite the tribal-ish sound, there's a Balkan-kind of ethnic influence in their sound (unlike Sepultura's South American influences)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wS_1EhA ... ure=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAMXodcypAM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agEUv0na ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMCpfEH ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY8yRjsz ... ure=fvwrel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6_O4gkI ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNEx8oNk ... ure=relmfu (demo from 1996)
...

also, they have numerous physical releases according to http://www.ektomorf.com/releases.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ektomorf

and for some metallic characteristics; no clean vocal singing, no rapping, constant use of harsh vocals, thick bass-y distorted guitar tones (like with Machine Head, Soulfly, Sepultura), breakdowns (bd's can be metal aswell yes), on last.fm they are tagged as groove metal,... I don't really know what else to say actually, to prove they are not indie rock/ hardcore punk/alternative rock/nu metal/... ? do i have to say they don't sing about breaking up with girlfriends ?


groove metal = metal

There are People that call Nu-Metal: Metal (it's in the name isn't it, they say) but that also doesn't qualify as being Metal.
You might have valid points here but the problem with such sub-genres is that they differ from band to band so the Mods look at each band individually.
I sometimes think they might be a little less strict but then again: if they weren't there would be loads of material on the EM site that has nothing to do with Metal, side-projects aside.

I hope for you that the mods may deem Ektomorf Metal enough for inclusion but I think that most points about bands like Ektomorf have already been made in the Past so if there is no new material to prove that point it might be hard to get permission to submit them or get them removed from the blacklist.

Thank god I am not a mod on this site. I would probably let enough borderline bands in which are now blacklisted.

I know for sure that System of a Down has been denied as a "metal" band, but I'd like to make the case that they ARE metal, as an appeal -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olILVp-J7Y8

I believe metal to basically be the focus on aggression in music. Melodically this means usage of dissonance, chromatic scales, Harmonic Minor/Natural Minor scales, Phrygian Mode, and Diminished scales. Rhythmically this means accented heavily, with loud, distorted guitars, aggressive vocal usage (which usually means screams or just very strongly emphasized clean vocals, as is the case with Iron Maiden or King Diamond), and aggressive drumming such as fast beats or strong hitting beats. Doom Metal is an example of aggressive music that isn't necessarily fast, but still aggressive because the drummers hit harder, and the guitars are tuned lower to give a more impacting tone.

All of those things considered, I don't see how System of a Down doesn't count. They pretty much include all of those criteria. Most songs of theirs have heavy, distorted guitars, tuned as low as Drop C, which is not standard for a "rock" band, usage of heavy drumming including blast beats (examples being "Bounce", "Attack", "Dreaming", and "Cigaro".)

I do see the reasons why they might be rejected, but here's my points for why they still should count -

1.They might not be considered metal because they contain elements from non-metal genres. They heavily borrow from punk, ethnic music, opera, experimental, etc. In response to this, I'd like to point out that their BIGGEST influence musically has always been Metal, at least as far as Toxicity, Mezmerize, and Hypnotize.

2.They might not be considered metal because of their timing. In 1985, System of a Down would have been considered metal. However, since they came out around the same time as other "Nu Metal" bands, they have been unfairly lumped in. System of a Down isn't Nu Metal for the simple reason of sharing basically no similarities. Their most similar artist, in my eyes, would be Devin Townsend, who is also a combo of a bunch of genres, but is still metal enough to be accepted on this website.

Really, it's not like I'm trying to be defiant or anything, I just think SOAD deserves to be named as a metal band. If they weren't a 90's band, they would easily be considered metal. Black Sabbath was considered metal despite having very heavy rock influence, simply because they were the first metal band. Now, metal takes on a new scope, where by today's standards, if a band were to release an album like "Black Sabbath", it'd be considered Rock. SOAD is not considered Metal by most people's standards mainly because they have a lot of soft moments between the heavy moments, and their vocal style is very unusual for a metal band. They happened to release music at a time where metal was dominated by the heaviest of the heavy, but just because the band has more dynamics and more influences than strict metal doesn't mean they aren't metal. To me, they are "Experimental Metal", and the reason why is because their riffing, drumming, and singing sync up most with metal, but the minor elements sync up with other genres. The riffs are largely low tuned, heavily distorted, tremolo picking/palm muted and often Phyrgian Mode. The drumming has plenty of double bass, blast beats, and Thrash Metal beats.

But hey, if you guys don't think it's Metal, then I'll still consider them Metal. And if Rush can be considered metal, I don't see why System of a Down can't.

Their sound has far more influences than metal, aggression isn't exclusive of metal (crust punk for example)
if they could pull out a "Soulfly" I'm sure they will get added in here, but they haven't, so you better wait 'till they do.

As far as I know Rush is considered Metal because of the Roll the Bones era, which qualifies as Metal enough for inclusion.
I think it depends on the fact if SOAD has made one album that is considered Metal enough by the site's standards.

Orthrelm is metal evolved to a microscopic level of precision. Did you blacklist them out of jealousy?

Pathetic.

Jealousy of what...?

People, stop discussing SOAD, Ektomorf and whateverthehell else you've mentioned here. If Soulfly gets approved because they finally make an unambiguously metal album, it does not follow that bands with characteristics or sound similar to Soulfly's earlier output will make it here. SOAD will not get here on my watch, Ektomorf has been debated several times in the past and thus I can avoid listening to it, and so forth. If it sounds like Soulfly's latest, sure, bring it up. Otherwise, keep it to yourself.

Thank you for your collective understanding.

Just curious, why was Tombs blacklisted? Path of Totality seems completely metal.

Use the search function - the mods have discussed that album several times.

On the topic of Ektomorf...

One pattern I've noticed on blacklisted bands is that they are later accepted either because an early release is deemed metal, or the most recent release is deemed metal. Perhaps an argument can be made in the former for Ektomorf based on their 1996 demo Hangorf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BciCWBxtIHY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNEx8oNkJhQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bg6GsL27Fk0

It's groove-laden and somewhat thrashy, somewhat crossover, and being from 1996 it borrows extensively from Sepultura - mainly the albums Roots and Chaos AD. But that's not to say the moderators heard this demo and made a decision on it some time ago. If that's not the case perhaps that can change? I was able to find a download link for the demo and could put it up on Mediafire and PM the link to the moderators. I'm willing to bet the three songs I posted are indicative of the rest of the demo though.

Drop the issue of Ektomorf. It is very rare that a band is removed from the blacklist due to a reevaluation of an earlier release... Ektomorf would not qualify. Enough mods have heard its releases over time to gauge their sound. Ektomorf is not one of those examples of an obscure band wherein earlier releases are difficult to find, and therefore difficult to judge. Ektomorf is a popular enough band that we have been able to ascertain the sound from its releases.

Personally, I'm getting a bit tired of the discussion surrounding Ektomorf and SOAD the moment Soulfly has been accepted. As Napero said, we didn't accept Soulfly because of anything BUT its latest release, and we didn't do it cursorily (as certain submitters definitely know). The projects that have been on the blacklist on non-metal grounds for a very long time are there for a reason, and that suggests that as of the time that they were put on the blacklist that there hasn't been a metal release available. Neither Ektomorf or SOAD have produced anything recently that would qualify as predominantly metal. I wouldn't consider The Acoustic to be predominantly metal, and SOAD's last album of any significance was released in 2005 and is most certainly not metal.

If you knew the answer to my question, Dillon, you could have easily answered it. Probably would have taken you about ten seconds more than telling me to use the search.

As it would've taken you about ten seconds more to search it than make a post, Alex.

Obviously you're right, but it's the principle that counts.

I knew the mallcore wankers would start pushing for their shitty pet mallcore band as soon as Soulfly would be accepted, but I'm still really fucking annoyed. System of a Down? Hahaha yeah right. Go fuck yourselves. Seriously.

Sorry for bringing up Ektomorf, just wasn't sure if the earliest material was considered metal enough. Never heard of the band before.

Now, I wasn't even going to reply to Derigin's post, but I have another band to bring up... one that's been brought up many times just this year alone. This is a band I've enjoyed for quite a while now and I am glad I discovered them, and I feel their historical importance is unquestionable even if they've historically been on the melodic side of the spectrum. The band I'm talking about is Praying Mantis!

I do remember bringing them up before when Sanctuary was released. Some parts of that album are quite metal but lets not dwell on that release. I don't know if they have another album coming up (I hope they do, more Mantis is always welcome!) but they recently released an EP of old songs that are rerecorded. None of the recent discussions brought up this EP, and before 2012 they've only been mentioned (at least on this specific board) in 2010 (before the Metalmorphosis EP).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuakDgWjVGo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-8t3n4_Nwc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9cmPVBSF2A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3paOxStoppQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3g_nSZQ3Wo

Out of those five songs one is a ballad, though it picks up towards the end.

Also:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONuzEqvV9mw vs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOzGfcm4Apk

Though Time Tells No Lies was considered already, I take it.

Don't think this will really go anywhere but hey it was worth a shot! That's what this thread is for, aye? Besides, whether or not Praying Mantis is ever included into the archives will have no impact on how awesome their music actually is.

Don't you have something better to do? I don't know, do the dishes of walk your dog named Max Cavalera...

Praying Mantis, even though they're in the NWOBHM spectrum, is and hard rock band, the 2011 ep songs are new versions, albeit more metallic ones, of old songs, I don't know if that really counts, someone else could tell you.