I've been following this debate for a while now and, without having heard the band, I was on your side after you claimed that there was only one ballad on the album... but listening to those tracks you've linked, they're obviously influenced a lot by modern hard rock (especially in the choruses, which don't have metal riffs, just big chord progressions). Maybe calling it plain "rock" is somewhat misleading, but yeah, I wouldn't say "no rock in there whatsoever" in a million years.

That's like saying bands like Stratovarius and Hammerfall are rock too because they're not riff-driven, but driven by vocal melodies. A lot of people mention power metal influence in S45's music because of their catchy and clean choruses, because it's not exclusive to rock. The other bands that fall into the "Melodic Groove Metal" subgenre here on MA, like Soilwork, Scar Symmetry (which sounds almost identical to S45), and The Unguided, all use the same "clean catchy vocals in the chorus" style, and none of those bands have "rock" in their genre listing. We're either looking at an inconsistency between these bands or an error in S45's genre.

No, we are looking at an inconsistency in your argument. Now, while I admit I am no expert in what we here call "Melodic Groove Metal" a.k.a I don't listen to it. I'll be running this on an individual basis for the band, as is the proper way.

First, we (the archives) accepts bands purely on riffs, as it is the riffs that defines the genre. Vocals have nothing to do about it. Stratovarius and Hammerfall are on the site because of the riffs and they are labeled so because of the riffs. Second, we evaluate via a case by case basis. It doesn't matter what Unguided, or Scar Symmetry, or Soilwork sound like. All that matters is Solution .45's sound. Also, your argument for this vocal melody thing comes out of nowhere. I don't know how your logic grabbed "vocal melodies" from Clannfear's argument of "The guitars are influenced by modern hard rock, especially in the choruses". Vocals be damned. If Solution .45 was a purely instrumental band, the label would stay the same. The songs you linked have an overarching hard rock influence in the GUITARS, as Clannfear said, especially in the chorus. Which I agree. (Actually it is not just the choruses. I can hear a good amount of hard rock in the regular riffs by itself. "The Close beyond" sounds just like a hard rock song with harsh vocals)

This argument is closed. No one will be changing Solution .45's genre and remove rock from the genre. I am willing to change Solution .45's genre to add Hard in front of rock.

Dealt with. This band turned into a group that plays background music for Belly Dancers. This would happen in Corte Madera for fucks sake. Godammit Marin County.

I think Decapitated's genre needs to be changed. Their first four records fit the Technical Death Metal tag, but Carnival is Forever pretty much ditched the technical elements for a death/groove sound, and the new song seems to be going in the same direction.

Carnival is Forever full album:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRQ184YtDIQ&list=PL4D2A6FAC2BB5EFEB

New Song "The Blasphemous Psalm to the Dummy Creation God"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fdd6eUCAOCw

Maybe Technical Death Metal (early), Death/Groove Metal (now)?

^
Maybe wait for the new album to come out to make a proper separation of waters?!

Let's see what the new album entails. It is possible I suppose.

Gwar are listed as 'Various'... Come on guys, i think this leading Metal website could be a bit more accurate the that! Gwar are definitely Thrash Metal, also Crossover and Alternative Metal could be added as well. There is also Comedy Rock/Metal and Shock Rock/Metal, but i dont think those are as necessary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_TPAWNo2Vc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80vvKDghEt8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oxtkx8Hjrg

http://www.spirit-of-metal.com/groupe-g ... -l-en.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwar

Listen to all that Thrash/Crossover/Alternative Metal! (i have to provide links as apparently its too hard for mods to type in 'Gwar' in YouTube).

No need for that attitude. It's indeed not too difficult for us to look up that band for ourselves (not always for lesser known bands, though...), but since it is you requesting a genre change and you have a (hopefully) coherent notion of what you want changed based on which albums, it's your job to provide what is needed.

I'm passingly familiar with Gwar, thrash/crossover/rock or something. The "Various" tag is not something we want to use lightly, so I will look into this and check their discography.

Gwar switched genres with every album for like their first ten. They've been consistently thrashy since 2004 but they still almost never stick to one sound between albums. I'll give a more detailed analysis after work.

While there is certainly a shift in style, I think technical death metal still covers it alright. It is preferable to keep a genre simple unless there's a fairly major change.



You just mentioned at least five genres, and that doesn't include punk (Hell-O) and groove metal (parts of Bloody Pit of Horror), as well as some heavy metal at times. It's somewhat in line with what to expect for a band whose identity is more visual than musical and has had a ton of lineup turnover over 30+ years. They took a lot of different turns through different eras with varying songwriters - the stuff Cory Smoot wrote could pretty easily be recognized as being from a different songwriter with a different background.

Perhaps it could be narrowed down to something like "Hardcore Punk (early), Crossover/Thrash Metal (later), Various (throughout)" but listing the general tendencies sort of defeats the point of listing it as various because it's so varied.

Anyway, back on a computer so it's a lot easier to post:

With Gwar, they started off as an undeniably pure punk band, so there's genre number one. With Scumdogs of the Universe* they shifted to a heavier style, but it was still rather "commercial" in a sense. That album was all over the place, with the first four songs swapping between a punky metal song, a practically thrash song, a hard rock/light metal song, and a virtually riffless comedy song. And that's just the start of the album, it goes all over the place as it goes on, and America Must Be Destroyed wasn't too far behind with being a really heavy shock rock record with heaps of metal and punk thrown in. This Toilet Earth throws punk back in the forefront, and Ragnarok is... well I'm not sure since it's one of my least listened to (other than "Crush Kill Destroy", which is one of the best songs they ever penned), but from my memory it's a lot like Scumdogs in that it's just all over the place with comedy songs and skits all throughout. Carnival of Chaos goes back to being mostly punk with those bizarre, meandering comedy songs again, We Kill Everything sucked so bad that I got rid of that album years ago and never went back for it, but judging by what I've read around the place, it was kind of an amalgam of all the punk, metal, thrash, shock rock, and comedy bits from all the previous albums. Things didn't start to get coherent until Violence Has Arrived when it was pretty uniformly some blend of thrash/heavy metal for the whole album, and War Party staying thrash the whole way except for that one punk song sang in French. Beyond Hell got even heavier by adding some of that groove that Zodi mentioned, but on the whole just being a heavier reimagining of the previous album. Lust in Space, Bloody Pit of Horror, and Battle Maximus all follow the same idea of just being pure thrash/heavy/groove metal albums with all the wacky comedy and punk of the early days being almost completely absent.

So, what you can make a case for is that they had about a four or five album stretch of staying coherent thrash/heavy metal (thanks largely to Cory Smoot, I reckon), but the first seven or eight albums were all wildly different from one another and trying to peg year ranges on all the different sounds they played (not toyed with, but full on owned) would be an absolute nightmare. So I suppose you could say something like "Various (early) / Thrash/Heavy Metal (later)", but certainly not "crossover". I know crossover is technically correct when talking about a blend of hardcore punk and thrash metal, but it carries a specific connotation of sound that Gwar never held, so I feel it'd be pretty misleading.

BUT! As luck would have it, there was an interview with Jizmak released like four hours ago where he says the new material and stage show is meant to go back to the older days when it was complete anarchy with a fuckload of characters all singing different songs, moving away from the tight metal band with lots of gore that they'd morphed into over the last decade. So assuming he's completely right (and he well could be, with Mike Bishop taking over vocal duties, the band is certainly going to have a wildly different sound (need I remind you what he sounds like?)), that'd just signify that we'd need another retooling of their genre whenever the new album comes out.

tl;dr - My current vote is to just keep it at "Various" since their early years were so insanely complicated and overall they rarely stuck to one sound, but I wouldn't be upset if the consensus came down to "Various (early) / Thrash/Heavy Metal (later)".



* - I initially typed Scumdongs by accident and laughed like an idiot because I'm an adult

I vote to keep the current genre and have BastardHead write a biography for the additional notes. Seriously.

I am not too familiar with early Gwar, and i only was really talking about their modern stuff as that is what i know better. Its just i thought i could give a better description than 'various'. I am not trying to get what i personally think they are added, as i am not to knowledgeable on them, i am just suggesting it be updated. Anything involving Thrash/Crossover/Hardcore Punk should work. i am aware they also have traits of Groove, Heavy, and Shock Rock, but they are less predominant and not as necessary.

Hardcore Punk (early), Crossover/Thrash (later) seems good to me.

Sounds good to me.

I'll do it if TUA does one for Buckethead

Why does the 'wrong music genre' report option even exist if mods keep telling me not to use it? If i have a better suggestion for a bands genre, whats wrong with using the option given to me that allows me to make said suggestion?

And why do mods seem to easily dismiss suggestions without even thinking them through? and if you disagree with my suggestion then challenge it, dont imperiously close my report without giving me a reasonable explanation why.

And if ONE mod doesnt know much about a band, please do not close a report because ONE mod personally does not know what genre they are.

eg. **''Some of these bigger bands really require more than one mod's input, I am not that familiar with King's X myself.'' - Diamhea

> This report has been closed.**

Pathetic. Completely illogical, why dont you simply leave the report for other mods who actually know the band to see then? you are not the only mod.


Id be happy to make my case in this thread after multiple mods have read my report and there is a genuine debate, not if ONE mod disagrees or ONE mod doesnt know much about the band.

If you want to run a website, please do it rationally and democratically, being on this website longer or having more points does not mean you have higher authority on Metal than anyone else. I am not trying to be a deliberate nuisance, its just mods are NOT immune from criticism, and are perfectly capable of logical flaws and fallacies, which will be challenged.

Dude, you see the box that says "Source/evidence/proof/sample URL(s) (RECOMMENDED):"

You are supposed to put links to the music to justify why you think they should be changed. Most of us don't have time to go through an entire band's discography, so that is why if you think a genre is wrong, supply us with links, we aren't going to spend our time hunting for band songs. King's X is progressive? Prove it. Give us some early songs, some later songs, and if they are progressive, we shall change it.

Just facilitating a wikipedia link isn't enough. It is like saying "IT SHOULD BE THIS WAY BECAUSE THIS SITE SAYS IT", unlike wikipedia we try to be precise with the genres. Do some thinking, mate.

Here are some examples of "Wrong Genre" that do it right.
http://www.metal-archives.com/report/vi ... 9/show/all
http://www.metal-archives.com/report/vi ... 0/show/all

Pfff, sometimes even the bands themselves describe their music as something, but sound completely different.

So a link pointing towards a bands Facebook page isn't quite going to cut it either.

Im sorry for assuming that the mods actually know anything about the metal bands they close the reports of. Ill admit i should of linked songs, but just because a song has not been linked does not mean you should instantly dismiss the suggestion. Read it, if you know the band well, think about it. If you dont know the band well, dont close the report.

''unlike wikipedia we try to be precise with the genres. Do some thinking, mate.'' - you have Gwar listed as 'Various', i dont know what your definition of 'precise' is.

Check your tone at the door, bro. I have been more than patient with you and tried to point you in the right direction pertaining to your queries. I am not dismissing your suggestions at all, simply suggesting a medium more conducive to productive conversation. Look at the Gwar debate; I think we got somewhere with that one with multiple people chiming in. You oftentimes suggest genre changes for larger bands without providing much in the way of sound samples or reasoning. Please understand that some moderators are more active in the band queue, some in the report queue, etc. I handle most of the report queue. Why do you think that I am the only one who has responded to your reports? The "Wrong Genre" report feature gets plenty of valid use, but also plenty of abuse by people not providing enough proof or simply citing that "the band calls their sound X." This happens so often that I have a copy-and-paste response at the ready elaborating: "It doesn't matter what the band calls it, the staff here makes the final determination regarding the genre listings. You would be surprised how often bands misrepresent their sound, consciously or otherwise." Think about that.

Another post like that, Liam and you're getting booted off the forum. You're in no position to tell anyone what to do.

"Another post like that, Liam and you're getting booted off the forum. You're in no position to tell anyone what to do"

Moderators are not immune from criticism. If i find a mistake or logical flaw made by one i will not hesitate to point it out. And banning me would be another example of you abusing your power. If you cannot handle criticism then im sorry but you should not be a moderator.

So, If you are familiar with the reported band, read the report rationally, dont just dismiss it just because a song has not been linked, if you disagree with the report, challenge it. I will link more songs in the future. But if you dont know much about the band that is reported, dont close it, the report might have a point.

If there is a genuine debate and discussion between users and moderators then i will come here, but to make the initial report i will use the "wrong genre" option.

They close bogus and unhelpful reports, regardless of whether they know the band or not.

Yes, yes it does mean that. The burden of proof is on you.


That's not how it works here. And if you persist in telling the staff how to do their job, I will remove you from this site for being an annoying nuisance.

Also:

All that whining right after BastardHead and Zodi posted lengthy, detailed explanations about Gwar.


Except there hasn't been a mistake or "logical flaw". You've posted idiotic nonsense with a particularly rude and whiny tone, nothing remotely constructive, so banning you is not an abuse of power, it's simply a cleanup act. One more whiny post from you and that's exactly what's going to happen.

Edit: that was posted while I was typing:

No. To repeat: do not tell the staff how to do their job. Especially not in such an authoritarian tone. In other words: fuck off.

I was requested to come here to request a change for the genre for the metalcore band For Today.

Please remove "melodic death metal" from their genre, just keep it as metalcore. "Melodic death metal" is totally redundant since metalcore is already an existing genre because of melodeath anyway. That's like changing Black Sabbath's genre on here to "Heavy Metal/Blues Rock" because heavy metal came from blues rock.

Sound samples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcfQQLnD1aQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIbopoFfrK8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaDSvzFZqoI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htgs2mstOlI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEJd02jxvzQ

Original report: http://www.metal-archives.com/report/view/id/485576

...metalcore didn't come from melodic death metal, though. There are plenty of examples of metalcore bands that were around before it became commonplace to mix metalcore with MDM, like Converge, Zao, Botch, and Earth Crisis.

When I first started listening to For Today, I honestly didn't even think they had a page here. Upon listening to all of their stuff, their first album or two are metalcore with massive swaths of melodeath in them, not unlike most of As I Lay Dying's catalog. From about Breaker onwards they're much more on the -core side of the metalcore fence. But ask yourself, if we're gonna differentiate, are we really gonna say something retarded like "Melodic Death Metal/Metalcore (early), Metalcore (later)"? No, that's silly. They've been metalcore from the start but they've gotten steadily less metal as time went on. "Melodic Death Metal/Metalcore" is by far the most logical thing to put there since it's both A) accurate, and B) all encompassing.

Plus, like MC said, not all metalcore has melodeath as the metal part. Generally, especially on this site and with most modern metalcore (particularly the Christian kind like For Today), yeah, it's gonna be melodeath, but they're not mutually inclusive, so it doesn't hurt to point it out, especially with a band like this that used it so prominently for a while.

So what is the consensus about Gwar? I know that it was decided that Various would stay in the genre field, but does someone have a condensed expansion on their genre for the additional notes? The Liam kid from earlier is filing reports on them again.

Those are HARDCORE era of metalcore; As I Lay Dying, Heaven Shall Burn, Shadows Fall... they all come from melodeath

Well, the consensus is that BH will beef up their additional notes. ... Right, BH?

And Fedja comes from thrash, it's not mutually inclusive. And so you're also gonna tell me that the hardcore era of metalcore is just hardcore despite having metal in the title? Let it go, "melodic death metal/metalcore" is perfect for For Today for reasons I already outlined.



Shut up! You're not my real dad!

Yeah I'll do that, but only when Liam shuts his mouth and learns that you can't just waltz in with a shitty attitude, call the mods lazy good-for-nothings, and get your way via sheer attrition.

Tu quoque. I have never called mods "lazy-good-for-nothings'' Suggesting a more accurate genre description than 'various' is exactly what this thread is for, and suggesting that moderators actually back up their reasons for closing reports is called criticism. Something that no one is immune from, moderator and user alike. You can call it 'bad attitude' if you like but it makes no difference, as i have made a valid point.

Dude, We closed the book on the Gwar issue. Don't bother bring it up again. If you want to be Sisyphus do it on a different forum. So when you make another report when we have closed the book on the issue isn't "calling out criticism" or "making a valid point", previous mods have made their point. Hell, bastardhead brought you an album by album genre breakdown. This isn't "making a valid point" or whatever. It is just being a cockroach.

You went back to the Gwar issue, i was using it as an example for how i am giving "suggestions and complaints", not calling mods "lazy good for nothings" as BastardHead falsely accused me of. And making a valid point is asking mods to back up their reason for closing reports. I back up my reasons for making the report, why cant they do the same?

...but it isn't really a valid point. My reason for closing the report is that I told you to post in this thread so multiple people can chime in. I am trying to assist you in getting a quicker/more founded response. We don't get paid for this, you know, and 600 entries in the report queue is actually relatively small. If you want your reports to just sit there and collect digital dust, continue with your current attitude.

I'm giving you a last chance to redeem yourself since I'm having a good day so far.

If i make a lengthy report with a detailed description of both the band and the genres backed up by the entire discography then i expect it to be considered. I have given my proof, if you genuinely disagree, surely its not too hard for you to disprove it? Otherwise you just appear stubborn and biased.

Take a look for yourself:
http://www.metal-archives.com/report/vi ... /show/mine

Ah, but sweet summer child, we ARE stubborn and biased. I don't think you understand at all how things work around here. You speak of "democracy" and "rationality," as well as "challenging" mods and mandating that we partake in discourse and debate with you to "prove" or "disprove" points of argument one way or another... but that's not us. We have no interest in those things. The site has a set of guidelines that we adhere to; we make judgments based on those guidelines and our judgments are final. We, the staff, are judge and jury and you are simply a petitioner. Nothing more and nothing less. If you fail to give us the information we need, your petition will be sent right back to you. If we go through your petition and decide not to make any changes based on it, that is our prerogative.

It's very clear to me, at least, that lacking that understanding you wouldn't be very successful here.

EDIT: That said, how we operate among one another as staff is our own business. We operate as a team; we communicate with one another; we seek rational judgments, consistency and best practices based upon our guidelines; and we encourage consensus among us. However, that's between us.

http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Dir ... 3540307689

So I actually submitted this one when I was new, and just threw a bunch of genre names into the form cause that's what the band's Facebook said. The genre seems like it could be simplified, because their music isn't entirely that diverse. Musically, it sounds like commercial groove metal, with a healthy dose of southern rock vocals. "Groove/Southern Metal" or "Groove Metal/Southern Rock" seem like more appropriate choices than "Groove/Stoner/Doom Metal".