Music Genre Explanations

Perhaps Black Metal is the best example of why even established genre names can completely mislead you or mean completely different things.
Black metal is originally a content-related term, not a specifically musical one. The first Black Metal bands could sometimes easily be assigned to already existing subgenres. Thrash, Punk etc. However, they tried to distinguish themselves from the representatives of these genres, especially in terms of content, and created a different, particularly blasphemous or satanic image.
The term then made a leap over the content, especially in Norway, into the designation of its own sound. The style of typical Norwegian black metal was also taken up by bands like Borknagar, Einherjer or Enslaved, who clearly distinguished themselves from the typical diabolic character in terms of content, but still belonged to this scene. To emphasize this, terms like Pagan Metal or Viking Metal came up. But these were again aimed at the textual content of the bands. So these bands were Black Metal at the same time, but also not.
To make it even more complicated, many black metal bands began to evolve very quickly. Compositional skills and mastery of instruments took on a level that makes a comparison between, say, Venom or Satyricon seem ridiculous - both black metal bands in one sense or another.
As long as a band propagates Satanism and uses tremolo picking, blast beats and screaming, it can be quite easily classified as "orthodox black metal". Everything else then suddenly depends on the listener's point of view and whether they prioritize lyrical aspects or a specific sound. And thereby defines for himself where the boundaries to other genres lie. A distinction that is therefore mostly extremely subjective and depends on a gut feeling.
An extreme example could be Revereorum ib Malacht. In terms of content, they belong to Catholic Christianity, musically much more Industrial / Noise than actual Metal, but atmospherically in the ears of many Black Metal.

This might be a bit easier in other genres, but it often has a lot to do with subjectivity. For example, the term "Modern Metal". It doesn't really mean anything, but spontaneously many people can relate to it. But which bands you classify in this genre is again very subjective. They are more groove-oriented bands that don't play exactly according to the script of well-known genres like thrash metal. So it's rather a catch basin for modern bands without a classic genre drawer.

But basically the scholars are already arguing about where metal starts and rock ends. As long as this is not clarified, one does not even need to begin to define exact genre boundaries. :-D

I gotta admit this thread got really interesting.

Tobi Elektrik wrote:Perhaps Black Metal is the best example of why even established genre names can completely mislead you or mean completely different things.
Black metal is originally a content-related term, not a specifically musical one. The first Black Metal bands could sometimes easily be assigned to already existing subgenres. Thrash, Punk etc. However, they tried to distinguish themselves from the representatives of these genres, especially in terms of content, and created a different, particularly blasphemous or satanic image.
The term then made a leap over the content, especially in Norway, into the designation of its own sound. The style of typical Norwegian black metal was also taken up by bands like Borknagar, Einherjer or Enslaved, who clearly distinguished themselves from the typical diabolic character in terms of content, but still belonged to this scene. To emphasize this, terms like Pagan Metal or Viking Metal came up. But these were again aimed at the textual content of the bands. So these bands were Black Metal at the same time, but also not.
To make it even more complicated, many black metal bands began to evolve very quickly. Compositional skills and mastery of instruments took on a level that makes a comparison between, say, Venom or Satyricon seem ridiculous - both black metal bands in one sense or another.
As long as a band propagates Satanism and uses tremolo picking, blast beats and screaming, it can be quite easily classified as "orthodox black metal". Everything else then suddenly depends on the listener's point of view and whether they prioritize lyrical aspects or a specific sound. And thereby defines for himself where the boundaries to other genres lie. A distinction that is therefore mostly extremely subjective and depends on a gut feeling.
An extreme example could be Revereorum ib Malacht. In terms of content, they belong to Catholic Christianity, musically much more Industrial / Noise than actual Metal, but atmospherically in the ears of many Black Metal.

This might be a bit easier in other genres, but it often has a lot to do with subjectivity. For example, the term "Modern Metal". It doesn't really mean anything, but spontaneously many people can relate to it. But which bands you classify in this genre is again very subjective. They are more groove-oriented bands that don't play exactly according to the script of well-known genres like thrash metal. So it's rather a catch basin for modern bands without a classic genre drawer.

But basically the scholars are already arguing about where metal starts and rock ends. As long as this is not clarified, one does not even need to begin to define exact genre boundaries. :-D

I love this; the history and the evolving of terms and music. I think this is where I became un-relevant over time. In the early '90s, from my understanding Vengeance Rising was basically the epitomy of a thrash band back when there wasn't alot of anything other extreme metal forms yet (yes, Megadeth had thrash albums out but I was not aware of them yet--I grew up in a household that was only allowed to listen to classical and Christian music). With my mind stuck with the view of VR as the benchmark for "thrash", I didn't allow my understanding to change as metal progressed. When TandN diversified and began Solid State, I expanded my thinking and added "hardcore" to my genres, but I still considered Embodyment and Extol as "Thrash". I didn't grow with the times.

Temple of Blood wrote:Black "metal" is dark but not guitar-riff based for the most part.  It's mostly just chord progressions droning on and on.

It's more about image and "making a statement" than actual sound waves, which makes it closer to punk music in that way.

I think this is a fair description, though I would argue that some (though definitely not all) black metal does have an emphasis on guitar riffs. In fact, I think the "riffiness" of black metal is a key difference between the albums I enjoy and the albums I don't. Albums that go for a wall of sound and/or drown out the guitars underneath constant keyboards or drums, or that just play basic chords and have no memorable riffs, really aren't my thing.

CrimsonWarrior wrote:

Temple of Blood wrote:Black "metal" is dark but not guitar-riff based for the most part.  It's mostly just chord progressions droning on and on.

It's more about image and "making a statement" than actual sound waves, which makes it closer to punk music in that way.

I think this is a fair description, though I would argue that some (though definitely not all) black metal does have an emphasis on guitar riffs. In fact, I think the "riffiness" of black metal is a key difference between the albums I enjoy and the albums I don't. Albums that go for a wall of sound and/or drown out the guitars underneath constant keyboards or drums, or that just play basic chords and have no memorable riffs, really aren't my thing.

Some black metal is definitely riffy, and the genre as a whole has a lot of potential.  BM was frankly a breath of fresh air when death metal had painted itself into a corner.  

But at least 95% of what is called "black metal" is just not riffy or metal at all.  Probably because of their hyper-focus on ideology & ideology and not actual music.

^^^^^

I would check out the No Life 'Til Metal site.  Scott Waters is a metal fan from way back. He can help define genres.

A lot of what is classified as hard rock was once considered metal and still should be as that was the building blocks of metal today.  Much of what has come since are sub-genres that do not define the metal scene at all.  

I would start with the infancy of metal and go from there.  It will be a lifetime of studying great music to say the least!

alldatndensum wrote:I would check out the No Life 'Til Metal site.  Scott Waters is a metal fan from way back. He can help define genres.

A lot of what is classified as hard rock was once considered metal and still should be as that was the building blocks of metal today.  Much of what has come since are sub-genres that do not define the metal scene at all.  

I would start with the infancy of metal and go from there.  It will be a lifetime of studying great music to say the least!

Thanks, I'll check it out, alldat!

I still love reading NLtM

Kerrick wrote:Kreyson - Mi Jo, A Vy

One of my favorites of theirs.  They've been silent for a while but I guess are touring again.  Hopefully we'll get a new album from them!  Their last (from which this song is on) is some of their strongest material IMO.

As a test case, what genre is this? The Metal Archies labels it as power metal / heavy metal. 

To me, there are too many shouted/gutteral vocals for it to be heavy or power metal, and there are a few times (3:03ff) where the guitarwork seems like groove metal or some form of a more modern style.

I would call it heavy metal with some Disturbed influences.

^That's quite a different take than I would've expected!  I'm not familiar enough with Disturbed to comment there, but I always considered Kreyson to be somewhere in the heavy/power metal realm, dipping into rock some on their middle-career albums.  That song isn't particularly representative of their typical sound, so maybe the full album in context would help.



And here's their first album:

I wouldn't call the first song "power metal" at all.  No more so than other vanilla metal bands like Grim Reaper or something.

I did listen to a dozen or so songs on YouTube after I listened to this one and I could see where the power/heavy metal moniker would come from. I really enjoyed these guys, Kerrick!

But I see what you're saying, ToB and Kerrick. This particular song has an edge to it that puts it slightly outside of the mainstream power/heavy metal genre. I'm not familiar with disturbed either but I soon will be!

^FYI Disturbed is a secular nu-metal band, definitely not Christian-friendly.  You might recognize their hit "Down With The Sickness" that got a lot of radio play back in the early 2000s or whenever it came out.

Kerrick wrote:^FYI Disturbed is a secular nu-metal band, definitely not Christian-friendly.  You might recognize their hit "Down With The Sickness" that got a lot of radio play back in the early 2000s or whenever it came out.

They played it so much I got sick of the sickness.

CrimsonWarrior wrote:No one can rightly claim that Stryper has ever made a black metal album, lol.

Wonder what that would sound like