The 1986 album "Kommander of Kaos" is full of metal riffs so I think acceptable, less punk more metal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j94gJH8bGRU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1f79ZHz_sU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pcSWA5RNVY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpV4ZZEXAaY

I've been told several times the same thing. One of my mates is really into Plasmatics and Wendy O. Williams as a solo artist, and has recommended me that album many times, for being "good Metal". I personally haven't heard it yet, since I want to be more familiar with Plasmatics before getting to WOW, but as far as I've been told, it's a metal album.

EDIT: Yes, I realized my post is not very helpful...

If the plasmatics album counts does "My War" by Black Flag count? Side one has Sludge metal elements and Side two is just straight up Sludge Metal. I'm probably wrong but I might as well ask.

Further response to 'Heidensang' request for addition (conversing with mod Alhadis):



Fair enough. I have a soundcloud account that I could upload the demo to and send a link to - this way, only you would have access to the songs. Do you have an e-mail address I could send the link to?



As for this, I'm not sure. I got it thrown into an order - I didn't actually ask for this CD. So, really, I never got in touch with the band directly in the first place. The CD is definitely metal, though it's also pretty awful, so I wouldn't go out of my way to order a release like this.

You can send Alhadis and/or me the link per PM.

Where did you order from and get the CD as a free bonus (if I understand this correctly)?

Yep, feel free to shoot it across PM or just drop me an e-mail, mate. gardnerjohng@gmail.com ... also listed underneath my signature, last button on the bottom-left.

Will e-mail Alhadis the link tonight.

Sadly, I don't remember exactly what order I got the bonus CD thrown in with - probably someone from Discogs, I think. Could be any European metalhead bedroom distro person, really.

Anywho, will wait to hear what Alhadis thinks of the demo - that's the final lynchpin on this request, really.

Ripper, thanks mate.

Questions about two bands by the same name from the same country.

At All Cost - Metalcore from Texas
This band was listed on MA for many years and was removed a few years ago - I believe they were added around 2004, when their only album out was "The Streets Are Alive", which is mostly full of metal riffing. The vocals are high in the mix which makes it feel more like hardcore. Their 2007 album, "Circle of Demons", is mostly on the post-hardcore side of metalcore, I believe that's what they were removed based on, as it's the most available of theirs. That first album isn't very easy to find online so I'd guess the band wasn't judged on that.
Two samples from the first album: [removed]

At All Cost - Thrashy punk/punky thrash from NYC
Although they were known as an NYHC band, this is very thrashy. Could belong here with bands like Leeway, I'm not sure.
Demo '88 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgneXjpTLaA
Demo '90 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wh0w47tZcFM

Trail of Murder (Swe), blacklisted on the submissions page.
Album released today, 26 October 2012.
http://www.amazon.de/Shades-Art-Trail-M ... 184&sr=8-1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBCsXlB96Wo

Removed from the blacklist.

Thank you! Added.

I see that the band "Schweisser" have been blacklisted. I can't see why they have been, because I have seen earlier posts showing that they were on the site (Meaning you guys at one point or another thought so too). Two of Schweisser's albums "Eisenkopf" and Willkommen im Club" are most definitely part the metal genre. I'm a newcomer to this site and I don't know if I can or not do this here, but I am able to provide mp3s or links to their music.


For example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhF6i9vpZsA (Unfortunately Youtube does not have the greatest examples for my argument, but this should do).

Also, I am able to provide pictures and scans of the CDs and prints if for some reason someone doubts their existence.

I recognize that their use of the saxophone somewhat resembles the industrial style (of using odd instruments/sounds), but that is only a backdrop on their songs, it's not at all the forefront. Wikipedia states that they are Thrash Metal, and Groove Metal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schweisser. The Schweisser Website http://www.schweisser.org/main.php describes "Eisenkopf" "Willkommen im Club" as "heavy" and "adreneline-fueled". Whether or not those are significant sources, you can decide.

Please ask me any question you wish about Schweisser, I would love to defend their metalty.... metalness..... whatever.

Nobody is doubting that, rest assured.

I'm vaguely familiar with the band. I'll take a second look at them. IIRC they became progressively less metal with each release? Not sure, but I'll check them out when I have the time, I have some albums on my hard drive.

Please don't cite Wikipedia as a reference here, though. We couldn't care less about its views on metal when it comes to judging bands for the site.

What was the reason for Feto In Fetus's (from Poland) blacklisting?
https://www.facebook.com/FetoInFetus

Considered non metal grindcore. But hum, I disagree with that. I'll bring it to the council.

EDIT: judged acceptable by me and Austrian beauty Azmodes. Go ahead and submit them, Oogboy

Just wondering why Bloated Pig's Demo is not on their actual discography but in the added info above? They just sent me their Complete discography, 1 Demo(as stated before) and 2 Full Lengths all in CDs.

Why are you posting this here? A report would suffice.

From what I can see it's not in the discography because the complete tracklist is not known. If you know it you can add the release and then file a report to remove the redundant information from the notes.

Cheers, was just trying to get a 2nd opinion on the matter. Thanks.

@Schweisser: Alright, I went through their discography and have to agree with Witcher's decisions to delete them. Their first album is punk rock. "Eisenkopf" and "Willkommen im Club" have some groove metal here and there, I don't deny that, but they're predominantly crossover/nu-metal/rock. There isn't a solid foundation of metal riffs, it's driven by groove-based rhythms, moshing guitars and the NDH/mallcore vocals. "Heiland" follows that trend and "Bitte warten"... well, is pretty much pop rock, H-Blockx are more metal than that. "Porocora" is some kind of weird pop punk or something.

Not acceptable by our standards, sorry.

Bands I have submitted have been rejected because they have no proof of a physical release but I've seen plenty of bands on this website with 0 releases listed under their discography. Please educate me as to why those bands are exceptions.

Sometimes, there's no info or very little info regarding the actual release. The proof in those cases lie in a review in a magazine/zine and/or advertisment.

It can be as easy as not knowing the year of release (I have a tape demo at home that I have no clue when it came out) and can't be added just because of that.

They are not. There are no exceptions to the physical release rule. As Porman said, we don't always have the luxury of complete discography entries with all the required info available, but whenever you see a barren band profile you can safely assume that proof of physical release was provided upon submission. Of course we aren't perfect, unacceptable bands can slip through sometimes and if you are aware of any you're encouraged to report them.

Hi my band Neo Star Nova-Z was rejected as it wasn't metal enough. So here's my point if you refuse after this then so be it wipe it form the record I understand.

Similar to Ayreon the music is multi-genre but there are metal elements ion every song (Dark World, black Out the Light, and Fate are shining examples they are completely metal) while almost all newer material (from album #2 and onward) are almost completely metal. There is even a death metal song there!!! http://www.soundcloud.com/brianmichaelwaymire Into the Darkness and Blackened Skies are proof.

Okay that does clear up a lot so I do appreciate your time in answering my question. I am still curious though why proof of a physical release is needed if there is proof of their music that you can listen to.

Because those are the rules. A band requires, at the very minimum, one physical, metallic release in order to qualify for acceptance on the site.

Otherwise, we'd be flooded with one bedroom MySpace band after another, none of which recorded anything more than 2-3 mp3s before giving up. We're only interested in documenting bands that've produced some permanent, lasting contribution to the world (even if it's just a small run of hand-dubbed tapes, limited to no more than 30 copies, or whatever).

Cheerz guys. Question: I wanted to add 2 bands that were featured on a compilation-CD and don't have other physical releases out (at least no releases that any info can be found about). They got rejected with the following message:
"The max number of bands on a split/compilation allowed is 6. Compilation with more than 6 bands are not acceptable. Unless the band has released something else physically that is acceptable, do not resubmit."
So my question: why is this 'not allowed' and 'not acceptable', and what has the existence of the recordings to do with the number of the parttaking bands? Is it important if the sampler features 3 or 33 bands? Don't quite understand this point to be honest (without being angry, this to be said!), a split / compilation is a physical release with real existing songs, isn't it?
Thanx in advance for replies, perhaps more than 1 opinion on that? (Cause I think some special guy here doesn't seem to like my contributions... no name of course, and he's not the one that rejected these 2 specific bands)

Hi. This post concerns the band "Those Who Lie Beneath", who have been previously blacklisted for being not metal (their first album is deathcore). However, in March they released a digital-only three-song EP called Antichrist (http://thosewholiebeneath.bandcamp.com/ ... ichrist-ep) which, in my opinion, is just plain death metal (new vocalist and all).

If this band were to be deemed metal enough, would their "metal" release need to be physically released in order to qualify for addition to the site? Their first album is definitely available on CD, but it's not metal.

Thanks.

We have chosen that seemingly arbitrary limit to purposely draw a clear line between splits and various artists compilations for the site. V/A comps are often just label samplers containing only one song by the band and not really anything that could be counted as part of their discography. It's not that hard -relatively speaking- to record one song and then have it featured on a sampler. This way, this particular rule also goes together with the physical release rule when it comes to weeding out extremely short-lived projects.

For your information, until recently the limit for splits was 5, and I think longer ago it was only 4 bands. Of course it's not always a clear-cut issue, there are obvious splits with more than 6 bands on them out there, I guess, just as there are some label compilations with fewer than 6. Then there's the definition of what's a split and what's a sampler. Grey areas, as always. However, we can't review every single such release and decide whether to accept it as a legitimate part of the band's discography or not. That would be a moderation nightmare, especially for bands already in the database. The amount of useless V/A compilations is staggering, I'm sure. The current limit of 6 bands appears to cover things quite nicely and is an elegant way of measuring acceptable releases while at the same time not being too far removed from reality and common sense.

Besides, compilation appearances are not completely barred from the Archives, they can be added to the additional info on band pages.

So yeah, those are the rules. It's similar to the reason the physical release rule is in place. We can't just throw these out of the window and wing it to our heart's content.

I'm afraid so, yes. As it is, it seems to be unacceptable, metal enough or not.

Long-time lurker here. I use m-a all the time. Even got the Android app--thanks!

England's Admiral Sir Cloudesley Shovell is blacklisted. Are they not metal enough? The Shovell is similar to the stoner metal band, Axxicorn, and they're listed. I can see the argument for and against The Shovell, but I think they make a good enough case to be included in the metal-archives.


http://youtu.be/B0tKsIhMpFs --a bit of a long intro, which picks up at 2:15

http://axxicorn.bandcamp.com/album/war-of-the-giants

If not, I get it.

So that's clear now. I can imagine this is a hard case, and I think at least one of those 2 bands didn't record more than those 2 songs (even if just these 2 songs were perhaps actually their only demorecordings - which is yet to be discovered) - this split / sampler seems to be a very "regional" one, perhaps to give some local bands a platform. I'll try to find out more.
Thanx for the detailed answer, nevertheless!

Hi, I was wondering about the band Æþelruna(formerly Adalruna).
I trid to submit & it was renected, I believe this was because it was believe to be more dark ambient than metal, but I've looked at the new releases & they seem to be quite metal.
Anyway here are some samples for clarification.

http://soundcloud.com/tracks/search?q=%C3%86%C3%BEelruna

Thanks

Have got a band ready for submission, only not sure how to get a picture and logo of band do you need to contact said band to have permission to use logo.

No you do not. If you cant find the picture/logo, then don't add one,

Thank you!

You're welcome.

Wrong on both accounts. It's Rage Against The Machine.

Edit: funnily enough, these two are fairly far down the list... Slipknot is in the 200's range, and Limp Bizkit is almost 2400... Guess they were rarely submitted early on, possibly because the rules list them as examples of what's unacceptable.... haha, right, as if people who'd submit them were smart enough to read the rules, silly me.

Wow, I figured with the term "Fred Durst" being utilized, Limp Bizkit would have been number one. Or Korn.

First of all, don't use the "A is here, so B must be as well" argument, that won't get you anywhere in most cases. Bands are judged individually and for us to follow these comparisons is a subtle, gradual path to feeling obligated to approve rhythm 'n' blues for the sake of consistency. Obvious hyperbole, but I hope you get my meaning.

Now, the band with the annoying name... Like many of those retro bands they reside at a "proto-metallic" crossroads where distinguishing heavy rock and metal can be difficult. When they were first submitted I judged them to be more psychedelic/heavy/hard rock than metal, i.e. slightly but noticeably on the "wrong" side of the bushy fence. They are certainly not stoner metal. "Stoner" seems to be misapplied to any kind of psyched heavy vintage stuff nowadays. Anyway, the band might be metal enough, what I'm hearing now on Youtube is enough for me to say that another review certainly couldn't hurt. I don't have the inclination right now to dissect them, though. More later.