Radagast wrote:
cweed wrote:
Furthermore, I remember where I came up with this idea in the first place...I was browsing through a metal magazine awhile back (it may have been Metal Hammer, I can't remember) and they were talking about the best albums of the year, divided by genre...one genre they included was "Battle Metal," which had a bunch of the bands that were previously mentioned (although I think their definition went on to include bands like Amon Amarth and Korpiklaani, which don't quite fit the "Battle Metal" mold that I suggested).
To try and use Metal(core) Hammer as any form of validation for using Battle Metal as a genre is pretty weak.
It's that shitrag of a magazine that is trying to push Battle Metal as a real genre, when all they use it for is a catch-all that includes the folk and power metal bands they deam cool enough. Their poster boys DragonForce are Battle Metal but they still constantly put down other Power Metal bands that play the exact same style.
It wasn't my intention to use Metal Hammer to validate why Battle Metal should be a genre, I was just saying I think that's where I got the idea because I disagreed with alot of the bands they had tagged as "Battle Metal," (like I said before).
The reason why I'm proposing "Battle Metal" as a legitimate sub-genre for categorization is because I believe that there are enough bands now with similar musical styles and sounds that would fit the mold for a "Battle Metal" categorization. "Battle Metal" seems like an appropriate enough sub-genre name because the epitome of this style can be heard on Turisas' first album, "Battle Metal." We've seen this before with other bands, like Venom with "Black Metal," Possessed with "Death Metal," etc. Obviously, one could bring up a counter example with Exhumed's "Gore Metal." Gore Metal isn't recognized as a legitimate genre because it's usually just Death Metal or a mix of Death Metal and Grind with lyrical themes of, well, gore.
I'm not saying that "Battle Metal" is a genre that needs to be applied immediately. Even I don't use the term "Battle Metal" when talking about these bands. What I am SUGGESTING, however, is that the genres used in categorizing these bands that I would dub "Battle Metal" don't really work. Ensiferum, Turisas, Equilibrium, etc., these bands are categorized as Viking Metal, or Viking/Folk Metal, and yet they sound wayyy different than the original Viking bands like Bathory (Viking-era, obviously) Enslaved (circa "Eld"), Einherjer, Mithotyn, etc, and yet all of these bands are (or were) considered Viking Metal bands, thus making the term "Viking Metal" kind of sketchy.
I believe "Battle Metal" works because for one, all of the bands I've mentioned that I would consider "Battle Metal" sound very similar. Secondly, we're not talking about a handful of bands that would be considered "Battle Metal." There's already a significant number of these groups that all play this "Battle Metal" style- epic keyboards, very melodic, upbeat, well-produced, gang vocals, etc. (you guys know what I'm talking about!).
Lastly, I'm not really how to say this without providing an example. Alestorm is a band that sound quite similar to Turisas, but they don't sing about Vikings, they sing about pirates. Obviously, if two bands play significantly similar styles, it makes sense to categorize them into the same genre- for example, if you heard Severe Torture for the first time, you'd say, "Wow that sounds alot like Cannibal Corpse." If someone else asked you what Severe Torture sounded like, you would say they're a death metal band. Even if Severe Torture's lyrics were about subjects other than the macabre (hypothetically), musically the style of metal they play is still death metal. So why is it that Alestorm, who are musically quite similar to Turisas, are labeled as "Folk/Power Metal?" It's because they don't sing about Vikings! If they sang about Vikings, they'd most likely be considered by Metal Archives as a Viking/Folk Metal band, like Turisas. Thus, Alestorm call their style "True Scottish Pirate Metal." If you search the Archives for "Pirate Metal," you won't find anything. If you search for bands that sing about pirates, you'll indeed find a few bands that can all apply to the genre of "Pirate Metal," except their musical styles differ too much, thus making the term "Pirate Metal" kind of bogus as a legitimate genre. Even if "Battle Metal" does become a legitimate, recognized genre one day, Alestorm would still probably call themselves "True Scottish Pirate Metal," but their style of metal would be considered "Battle Metal." Conversely, if Turisas didn't sing about Vikings, does that mean that they too would be awkwardly tagged as "Folk/Power Metal?" That doesn't make sense.
Damn. Didn't realize this was going to turn into a novel. Hopefully what I'm saying makes sense. I suppose all I'm suggesting, since this is, after all, the "Suggestions and Complaints" section, is that perhaps it's time to consider that this certain crop of emerging bands is the beginning of a new metal genre. Who knows what the status of metal genre categorization will be five or ten years down the road, but for now, I'm just calling to attention that applying the "Viking Metal" or "Viking/Folk Metal" tag to these new bands is becoming increasingly flawed. I'm not suggesting that "Battle Metal" needs to become an internationally recognized metal genre immediately, but that I believe that it is definitely an appropriate tag for these new bands, and if the name sticks then I believe it will make categorizing these new bands alot less awkward.