Crossover bands can be accepted if they are predominantly rooted in metal as opposed to punk. That does not seem to be the case with Anti. Also lol @ the quality of that Youtube link.

Anti can be added because the importance in the scene... Miguel Det (vocal) was the founder of the "Horda Metalica" in 1986 the first organization/gang of metalheads in Peru, he also made the logo of Mortem if you dont know (he is a politic graphic designer now).
About Anti, they come from the ashes of the Thrash Metal band "TKCH" with John Agressor (Hadez) in guitar.. of course Anti is more a anarchy band, protestant.. but you cant deny his Metal roots.

check this better one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOZ9AECyDuY

I was just trying to add Festering Remains, brutal death from Sweden, and seen that they were blacklisted. They released their debut EP on Sevared Records back in December.

http://www.sevared.com/catalog/product_ ... s_id=10321

Is the band ok to add or has this been discussed before?

Removed from blacklist. Please re-submit.

Adding a link to studio recordings of Scolex.

http://www.reverbnation.com/scolex

Resubmitting now..

Such things don't matter if the music itself is judged unacceptable. It would help if you could provide one or more of their releases for complete streaming/download. The quality of that second link is still abysmal and we prefer not to judge bands by live material anyway. Only studio material. I don't deny metal influences from what I've heard so far, but it still sounds more like a raw hardcore/anarcho-punk band than a metal one.

Check this: http://www.myspace.com/502074020
you can hear the live tape 89 and the demo 90.

Munbdo de Mierda sounds somewhat acceptable, but the rest is straight up 80's sounding punk more than metal. I get the feeling this band overall belong more in the punkscene.

Yes of course, but they come from the Metal scene playing in the Thrash Metal concerts in the 80s. The punk scene in the beginning dont like them because they use long hair but later they accepted for his strong ideology and become part of the "Banderas Negras" a anarcho punk gang who used to literally assault the shows of punk and Metal only to spread his message (almost all of them are arrested for terrorism).

And I agree with Helvede on the music. I believe it was also me who originally rejected and blacklisted them based on those Myspace songs. Seems familiar, at least.

If you are talking of punk speak about Narcosis, Eutanasia, Guerrilla Urbana or hardcore like Ataque Frontal, Kaos General, G3.. give them a listen.
You are added Thrashcore bands like Curriculum Mortis, Desarme, Situacion Hostil.. only Anti is out, really strange.

Please.

@MetalizeR888: As I said, crossover bands can be accepted if they are predominantly rooted in metal as opposed to punk. Since those bands you mention are in the database it stands to reason they were judged and found acceptable, i.e. based in metal. The same assumption goes for any crossover/hybrid band you might find here. If you disagree with any inclusions, feel free to post here, but as a basis of approving a band, the tired "but you have those bands listed, why not this one?" argument won't fly. Please accept the staff's decision.

@KrongoggWarsong: That was already considered before the rejection. It doesn't seem to be a SP of what we would regard as "big" enough bands/musicians. I have to agree at first glance. Neither Lux Divina nor Foscor seem to be popular/well-known enough in the metal scene that a SP of any member might warrant inclusion. Fejd and Ywolf are bad examples, I don't think the former was added as a SP, but as a selected owner exception (I can't say for sure). Ywolf was added in 2003, maybe it should be deleted under our current more strict rules on exceptions. So again, sole comparison with accepted bands is a very poor argument, especially if one tries to apply it to selected exceptions.

I didn't listen to the entire thing, but what I heard was drone noise. Maybe we need to delete Hell then.

I dont want to eliminate a band from here. This is fault of the admins, not mine.

Jolly good then! Then we're all done here.

I listened to the EP and while the first half made me agree with you, TheUnhinged, noisy drone/doom... the second half was pure noise. The self-titled tape is pure noise too. Sorry.

Okay, I understand!

Soul Cycle not metal? When I submitted you once it was said to be rejected for not having physical works, then, SURPRISE, is now blacklisted for being djent. Are you kidding me? If I could, I'd have do a screen of that, but unfortunately I had to delete them.

Aramazd was once accepted here, then deleted for not having physical releases; now is blacklisted.

And I also noticed that bands like Skyharbor and Amaranthe are blacklisted when they are still present here in the archives: why?

Sometimes mods reject if there isn't any proof of a valid release included, before listening to the music. A rejection for release issues doesn't always imply that the music is considered okay, and vice versa. Mods don't always have the same MO when it comes to the band queue. It shouldn't be a problem if one would include all the necessary proof upon submission.

Also, you don't have to include huge screenshots (well, huge for my display at least ) in your post. Just link to the pages. We can check the blacklist ourselves.

I don't know Aramazd, but it seems they were deleted by Witcher in 2010 for the reason you gave. Can you provide proof for a valid release?

Skyharbor and Amaranthe are indeed in the database and still on the blacklist (I have now removed them from the latter for the time being). This can happen sometimes, older blacklist entries with slightly different data can be forgotten and linger. I see the user who submitted Skyharbor used another spelling to go around the blacklist (which is strictly forbidden, btw) and Alhadis approved the band. Amaranth was probably submitted with another country given, so again the blacklist didn't affect it. It was added before v2 went online, so some earlier parts of the modification history are hidden and I can't tell what exactly went on. I haven't listened to either band, but will look into it (especially Skyharbor, which seeing that it was blacklisted as "djent" and now is accepted as "progressive metal" looks dubious).

EDIT: About Amaranthe... it's possible that the band was blacklisted years ago because people kept submitting it while there was no valid release. Then in 2011 they released their full-length, it was submitted as "international" instead of Indian and was approved, no one ever noticing the old blacklist entry.

EDIT #2: Skyharbor nuked and blacklisted again.

i guess this got overlooked.
can i resubmit freigeist diktat, both or none of them?

Right, that slipped my mind. You can resubmit Freigeist Diktat.

I laughed hard at Opferbereitschaft's side, not sure if I'd call this black metal. Sounds more like an electric guitar playing a few chords to death and meandering along to a guy plagued by a particularly hellish form of constipation.

With the new This Is Hell 7" release coming out, can they get accepted as a crossover/thrash group? I know they've been blacklisted because the started out as a straight hardcore punk group, but they've clearly have evolved into a metal band with their last and next release.

http://youtu.be/7M6UAwbcy9c

I tried to submit the Denver based progressive melodic death metal band Moth and they are blacklisted, presumably because their album is not yet out.

It is released as of Saturday.

Though it is available in a digital form, it's also a physical release:

Physical proof: https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos- ... 2568_n.jpg
https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/endle ... d586467032

I'm going by facebook posts made about the album's release: https://www.facebook.com/MusicMoth

Completely unofficial here, because I am NOT a site moderator, but they're still strongly hardcore. I'm familiar with their entire discography, and while the newer stuff is thrashy, a lot of it is a bunch of metal riffing put into hardcore songs. When the vocals take the lead, the guitar riffing is generally a hardcore punk style - the style of hardcore bands with leftover Slayer riffs (a description coined by Converge) tends to still be predominantly hardcore. There's quite a few NYHC bands who had a lot of thrashy stuff while still having a significant portion of their music being primarily punk. I know This Is Hell quite well, but generally the crossover/hardcore hybrid that they play isn't accepted on MA unless it's almost entirely thrash. For reference: Leeway is on MA because they're predominantly thrash metal, Agnostic Front's "Cause for Alarm" and Madball's early stuff are thrashy but not predominantly metal. One recent example of a band that didn't have a hardcore history and played a similar style was At All Cost from NYC, I inquired about them but they were on the non-metal side of the line for MA.

I forgot to add this link here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 0Nm2swggp4

Moth is safely within the metal spectrum.

The band The Devil And The Desert Wanderer was rejected for being not metal enough ("it isn't even close to metal"). I completely understand that "metalness" can be debatable; I was just wondering under which genre should they qualify then? (I thought they sound like a mixture of Pelican (without drums) and Sunn O)))/Khanate, at least on their last two releases, and maybe there are even some similarities to Earth on the first one?). I am not complaining, really, just wondering. Here is the link to their bandcamp http://thedevilandthedesertwanderer.bandcamp.com/album/superstrings-and-desert-sands-ep. Thanks.

They sound nothing like the Sunn I heard. They're ambient drone. In fact I am amazed that anyone would even consider submitting such a blatantly non-metal band on this site. If some Sunn albums sound like this band, do you think they're on the site because of those albums? Do you think Metallica is there because of Load?

I was indeed considering doing a drone purge from this site, though. I bet a lot of it is just ambient noise and slipped through the cracks over the years.

I'll take that in consideration. Thank you for your quick answer and your patience.

Hello,

I have written here before about my band Atheria a few months ago. it got rejected THAT time because i did not made CDs/copys of it - meaning there was no physical release.

So today i jumped in on the site again and to my joy(there for awhile) i noticed that you ("finally") approved bands which have VALID DIGITAL RELEASES. I guess moderators here finally came to the awareness that the situation is not as it was some years ago! I guess some of you understood that there is MORE MANY bands today, and not all of them can have physical releases AS IT IS TODAY, either by a label or made by themselves and so instead they go for RELEASING THEIR music FREE(for example...) upon the net - a digital release with other words! Or is it not!? and have i got it wrong?! Cause mine was rejected some minutes ago here from someone called "Porman"(nice name). This is the answer i got, a sentence from the email:

"Please read our rules about needing evidence of existence of a valid release; there is no evidence of a such a release. If this band has indeed released anything (either a physical release, or a valid digital release) AND you can show us proof, you can resubmit it again."

Ok, so i dont understand what this guy(someone else?) is after?! I read the rules, and this is a release that has it all checked on your points. Was it maybe because i did not wrote links to some blogs that have my release for downloading???? Cause i wrote in the "additional info" box that ONE can find the release uploaded on some blogs. I did not post any links cause i guess YOU guys check this out by yourselves???? Or maybe not? So i paste all the links to some blogs which i find in Google by myself:

http://luciferian-luciferianmefisto666. ... ngdom.html
http://mortuus-in-somnis.blogspot.se/20 ... om_18.html
http://darkport.org/2012/12/atheria-ech ... -2012.html
http://moonlightgate9.blogspot.se/2012/ ... -2012.html
http://getmetal.org/black-metal/28523-a ... -2012.html
http://plixid.com/2012/12/19/atheria-ec ... -2012-mp3/
http://www.bunalti.com/?p=248872

http://metalarea.org/forum/index.php?sh ... try1409585 (this is metalarea - they post regular info on bands, as this site for example)

AND i am adding that it is actually only the "Luciferian blogspot" which got my approval for uploading my release! All the rest came afterwards in a couple of days - and i am flattered BUT i might change my mind considering that my EP is on so many blogs.....but thats another matter. So i am guessing the problem is within the "Official distribution" section.......? If so please tell me what it is now cause i dont get it. Thank you.

PS. Anyone, should i resubmit with some links to sites/blogs which have the whole release up or what.......?

You sure?


You mean other than the first one?



You didn't even bother including the links? What, you expect mods to do the Googling? That's not how it works. You do your own homework. Besides, your album being shared on a bunch of blogs does not even qualify. You said so yourself, they are doing it without your approval. How is that valid distribution if it's basically piracy? I don't know enough about Metalarea to determine if it can be considered a serious digital distributor, but from the looks of it, I'd say no.

Then why in the ####### dont someone write that in the rules aswell?!! that its not OK by your rules regarding releases being shared on a blog/site?! I am sorry if being so angry right now, but honestly some here on this site makes it like a circus here!

"You said so yourself, they are doing it without your approval. How is that valid distribution if it's basically piracy?" Ee e whats your point??!!! Its MY release, stay to the main subject/question here of mine! And Metalarea is not a digital distributator, i did not said that! i just paste the link as info.

To conclude. What was it then? - me not pasting some links to some sites/blogs, OR maybe because a site/blog is not approved?! And if so, then what is MISSING then cause i still have not figured it out what is missing. Is there any other sort of site that i do not know? IF SO, please do tell me in the next answer - thank you!

...What? Again, the rules clearly state:



So, this blog is not a digital distributor, and you are not hosting the album on your band's official website. You already know this. And yet you come here and complain... why?


Er... Both. When you try to add a band, it's your responsibility to include all the necessary information for the moderators. Since you didn't the first time, Porman was correct in returning your submission. But, since your band's album is not, at the moment, considered a valid release by our rules, then you needn't bother resubmitting.

I don't know how it can be made more clear. Digital albums are accepted when they meet the requirements listed. Yours doesn't. What, exactly, is difficult to understand?

Vad har mitt användarnamn med saken att göra?

Oh i see i must drag answers out of you further! Ok i got that a blogspot is not an official distributor, but some others where sites to be precise but i guess since they look(?) like blogs it does not count??

PAY ATTENTION to my final main question now, again!:

1. WHAT is an approved serious digital distrinutator according to you - name the site-s!!

2. So you are saying that if i have an official site(cause i dont have any now, but i have a facebook and a youtube account for info at the moment) with a a plug in program that plays the whole album(?) on this official site, it would be approved???

Vi har snackat förut tror jag! Iaf. Kan du berätta kort o gott vad det är som fattas tack!

Bandcamp is accepted, and it's free to set up an account.

Varsågod!

Well thank you then. That was the answer i looked for! So bandcamp is the only valid according to MA, or are there more sites you can mention?

Actually, it's not that simple. See, we don't list distributors by name because this list can change and should not be taken as an automatic ticket for entry.

That said, BandCamp is usually valid, but the album must be purchasable (or free) to download. Some bands have their albums on Bandcamp for streaming only, and that is not a valid digital release (since no one can acquire the album legally that way). We have rejected a few BandCamp-only bands which were stream-only. Youtube is not acceptable either since it's stream-only.

Same for Amazon, iTunes, CDBaby, and the likes, which are usually valid (assuming all other requirements are met), but common sense should be used. Ask yourself this: can I acquire the album legally (for, say, my MP3 player) from this source, and if so, is this source strongly likely to remain available within a few weeks or months? If the answer is yes to both, it's a good sign that it's a valid digital release. Since blogs would be a "no" for both questions (except Metalarea but that's still a grey area), we won't accept them.