Meshuggah.

Then, the djent genre came from a specific technical/progressive way of doing groove metal or something like that?

Nah I think that's simultaneously too broad and too specific. I think djent, as a genre, came from bands wanting to play riffs like Meshuggah, without regard to any sort of genre criteria. Specifically the off-kilter downtuned many-stringed guitar odd-time chugs with tons of rhythmic emphasis. Meshuggah had some pretty mainstream appeal around the time when djent first started to take hold, so I think there was already enough built-in crossover in the fandom (generally people into strange [by mainstream standards] guitar music) so it was only natural that it'd incorporate some elements of post-hardcore, metalcore, nu-metal, groove metal, etc.; basically all of the more mainstream metal fringe genres that were popular around that time.

What exactly is "medieval metal"? Is it a real thing or an overthought Wikipedia genre?

Not a thing.

Yeah "medieval metal" itself isn't a thing. You could say the term is like "melodic metal". Bands who tend to put late medieval melodies and compositional styles in their songs get that additional label to their genre field on MA. Some bands off the top of my head that do this are Obsequiae and Osgiliath (don't remember the latter being so medieval-sounding though hmm).

Im pretty sure that "medieval metal" is just another name for "celtic" folk metal.

Melodic Deathcore? One magazine says it.

Well, it works just as melodic death or black metal, but on deathcore instead. The riffs are cleaner, more melodic and more acessible than on the regular deathcore music. This song is a suggestive example: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AVLg6Hc--Pg

I sure hope not because medieval music spans far wider than just celtic music.

I know. That just seems to be the way people use it.

I wanted to start a discussion about the various 'epic' subgenres but it was recommended that I post about it here. I was unsure what constitutes putting 'epic' before a subgenre and why some bands get that labels and others don't. Here is my original post:

Industrial Black Metal?

Gothic Black Metal? I looked it up in the advanced search, and some bands came up, but is this a actual genre or is it just a typo of Gothic/Black Metal?

do you just have a sig with my post?

Can you blame him?

Yes I do. There is no rule against it, now is there? I found it to be funny, so I made it my signature.

I'm confused what this post is asking. Is "industrial black metal" a real genre? Yes, it is. What is "industrial black metal?" It's pretty self-explanatory: black metal with industrial elements.

I am finnaly famous

well to give a proper answer we first have to look at the meaning of the word epic.
1. noting or pertaining to a long poetic composition, usually centered upon a hero, in which a series of great achievements or events is narrated in elevated style:
Homer'sIliad is an epic poem.
2.
resembling or suggesting such poetry:
an epic novel on the founding of the country.
3.
heroic; majestic; impressively great:
the epic events of the war.
4.
of unusually great size or extent:
a crime wave of epic proportions.

Epic metal usually touches various elements of these. Compare Manowars dark avenger with say Saxons stand up and be counted.

The manowar song is longer, lyrically and musically it resembles an epic poem as in the music has been written to evoke a more "epic" feeling. While the normal version of a metal genre would be straight to the point, epic metal goes for an atmosphere thats more bombastic and dramatic. The last thing we have to compare it with is "atmospheric" metal and generally atmospheric metal tends to be more introspective and less of a focus on bombast but it still might be quite dramatic.

Can someone explain the difference between Progressive Death, Technical Death, and Brutal Death to me? Would be appreciated.

Also, is Blackgrind considered a thing and can someone give me examples? Early Impaled Nazarene is what comes to mind when I think of that but are there others out there that combine the two even more? Thanks.

First off, I wouldn't say blackgrind is a thing. Blackened death metal is however, which is what I would describe Impaled Nazarene as. Think Mayhem riffs with Deicide vocals.

Progressive and technical death are the same thing. Brutal death metal is usually faster, vocals are extremely low and generally nothing with any semblance of melody anywhere. Examples of brutal death include:
Suffocation -
Mortician-
Cryptopsy-
Cannibal Corpse-
Dying Fetus-

No, they're not. They may seem the same but they're actually different. The rule of thumb is to think of prog death as "complicated" when it comes to song structures while tech death puts more emphasis on the, well, technical flair of the players. Sure they overlap, a lot actually, but they're hardly the same thing.

Blackened Grindcore is a thing (if that's what you mean by blackgrind). Check out Absvrdist.

is Neo Trash a thing?

Neo *thrash isn't really a thing. It's just American (mostly) kids worshipping Exodus, Metallica, Kreator and releasing unoriginal thrash metal. See Evile, Hatchet, Bonded by Blood or Warbringer.

What? No they aren't. Edge of Sanity and Opeth are not nearly in the same category as say Nile and Brain Drill.

Kawai metal, is that even posible?

No disrespect to the Kawai Spectra synthesizer, but no.

But why not? Are you saying that it's simply not metal or that it doesn't exist?

I think the thing about prog's technicality is it doesn't sound as technical as it is whereas literally 'technical-x' sound explicitly more technical than they are -- Brain Drill kinda strings a bunch of finger acrobatics together vs Opeth who you'd prolly find inverting chords, dicking around with scale degrees and such which is in no way obvious usually until you look at the score

Maybe a better way to put it is: Prog generally obscures their technical writing, tech- wears it on their sleeves

Yeah, that's a much better way of saying it, that's more like what I meant. Prog's much more about forming technicality into songs, whereas tech is making music as complex as possible.

To nitpick, you don't necessarily need to be technical to be prog (moreso about song development/composition and integration of influences as well as sometimes general refinement) but it usually goes hand in hand with the bracketed bits. Technicality as more about having the devil in the details - using all the odd percussive, rhythmic, and sometimes melodic internal mechanics going off weird to dictate song direction.

That's definitely a good and interesting point because I think by definition there must be some kind of experimentation in the score for it to be prog in the first place, right? I don't mean unique to the band, but rather experimental in terms of musical writing -- i.e., a thrash metal using only neapolitan chords with no accidentals (or some other weird list of qualifiers that are odd to use in a genre/sub genre and so on)

Eh, lotta prog bands that aren't really breaking new ground. Novelty only takes you so far after all. To me it's more about the components and composition than any sense of newness.

So what guidelines/identifying traits would you say are important or necessary to be progressive then?

To me, progressive tends to mean heavily inspired and/or influenced by actual progressive rock in its execution or emphasizing strange, cryptic song structures and composition usually melding multiple ideas into a single form. Whereas avant-prog wants to blur the outside of the boundaries, progressive seeks to refine them from within (compare say, Gorguts' Obscura to The Chasm in general).

There was a discussion a while back, probably in this same thread, about the meaning of "progressive music". There were basically two fields where in one you would be told that progressive music was music that made the genre drive forward (i.e. progress) while on the other you'd have the basic of what we're saying here; "complicated" music with difficult arrangements and complex compositions but that retain those aspects with the song structure in mind instead of the technical flash or prowess (as opposed to "technical music" which puts the flash upfront). Personally I tend to ignore the first field when discussing genres, though you can argue that a band of xyz genre is "progressive" (by driving that same genre forward). I hope I was able to answer your questions.

The former tends to be inherently flawed anyways; what was progressive today might not be so much a year later but to be fair you could say the same problem exists with avant garde. In that genre's defence however, you could argue that its point isn't necessarily to "progress" but to rather distort the boundaries that separate metal from what's outside of it.

Agreed.