![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
All Death metal fans who are experienced in making portals please help create the Portal:death metal as i am not that experianced in making portals i will need your help thank you Headbanger44
The history section really deserves an addition about what happened in the first 20 years of the new millenium. Death Metal did not end in the 90s and is still alive with many active bands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.209.218.209 ( talk) 20:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Look, this is quite frank and may be an incendiary comment but the page on black metal is really really long while the death metal one is short. For someone new to Death Metal, they should know all about the genre, and it's controversies - there are bound to be quite a few! Also, this genre is arguably more well known than Black Metal (I've done a poll, this is original research, I know, but 98% of people have heard about death metal, yet only 56% have heard about black metal)and therefore this needs more info. Anyway, I know very little about the basic death metal movement, being more of a punk myself (I only really like the music, and don't follow the scene except for the black vs death stuff), but i feel that Death Metal deserves a better page than what it has. Any thoughts? Afifanno1 ( talk) 16:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Also, sorry, we need to DEFINE the genre. The page needs to be a bit clearer, with some clips from legit bands like Possessed, maybe have some from melodic ones like Children of Bodom, and explain the difference between Black Metal and Death Metal because, to be honest, there doesn't appear to be a whole lot apart from the vocals and lyrical themes. That's just me though and let's make DEATH METAL become a FEATURED ARTICLE! Afifanno1 ( talk) 16:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
what complexity? 79.173.229.147 ( talk) 11:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
--
I'm at a loss what to make of this claim, as jazz-fusion is without a doubt the least complex form of jazz there is. The Death (and other) metal I've heard, while eschewing verse-chorus, don't do anything more complex so much as just different. I also wonder at the level of musical education of whoever wrote the whole article. Have they heard the atonal compositions and theories of the Second Viennese School, for just one example, which predated Death Metal by about 80 years and is far more complicated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.44.133 ( talk) 05:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
If that's how you see it, I think you're on your way to proving my point that what's complex to you ain't complex to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.44.133 ( talk) 02:09, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
...How so? Morbid angel by 1989 was creating some of the first virtuoso music in this genre while Death was still fairly simple by this point. Same goes for Atheist.
His solos, mostly. Death's music was fast since Scream Bloody Gore, but Schuldiner infused melodic elements in his solos with his death metal rather than the more atonal approach of his contemorarires.
I think Paul Masvidal and Sean Reinert should be credited for helping Chuck Schuldiner with "Human". —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.228.54.8 (
talk)
06:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
"Death metal is an extreme heavy metal subgenre. It is well known to be a very bad genre of music, with unnecessary screaming." Vandalism?
Yeah. I reverted it. Prepare to be Mezmerized! 23:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
"In the late 1980s and early 1990s, death metal gained more media attention as popular record labels like Earache Records and Roadrunner Records began to sign death metal bands at a rapid rate."
another case of vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.13.55.249 ( talk) 18:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
No, and if it is, its definitely not obvious. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 01:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
It really seems like this article tries to play down the importance of Possessed, calling them a Thrash Metal band and claiming Death established half of the things that Possessed already did two or three years earlier. Possessed's Seven Churches and their Death Metal demo were the first pure Death Metal works and this article tries vehemently to deny that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.147.162 ( talk) 20:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Either way you put it Possessed was death metal at one of its earliest incarnations as was Mantas. To argue who came first is irrelevant. Navnløs 22:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I listed Black metal as a stylistic influence in the music infobox. This is because there is no doubt that early black metal bands like Venom (band) and Bathory (band) had an influence upon death metal almost as much as thrash. Also, if you listen to early Possessed, widely considered to be the first death metal band ever, it sounds to me almost like black metal and I know others who agree. Navnløs 23:40, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Eh, I see the points everyone is making and understand. It might be more correct to make it "early black metal" or "First Wave Black" or something, but I think that other than adding confusion we don't need to be quite that specific and should perhaps just leave it the way it is. No? Yes? Navnløs 18:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
If we can get a solid source about BM's influence, it may be noteworthy. I keep having to revert the edits by Logical Defense simply because he slips his BM influence phrase right in the middle of a cited statement, which is very misleading.-- Wick3dd ( talk) 03:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually we already had this conversation and everyone agreed. It's a fact. There is no doubt at all that early black metal influenced early death metal bands GREATLY which means that black metal influenced death metal. It's not that much of a stretch. Just listen to early Possessed or early Death. As to w/e Logical Defense is doing, I have no idea what that's about, but I have always found Logical Defense to be a great contributor to many many metal related articles. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 18:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh his statement is true. I am not doubting BM's influence. He just needs to get the sourcing right so it is not misleading. -- Wick3dd ( talk) 18:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I think you have a valid point about MA, Kameejl. My objection was that the band were mentioned too many times as being at the genesis of the movement, and that would be incorrect. I felt there should be a line of sorts between Slayer, Possessed and Mantas/Death on the one hand, and the latter 80s bands such as MA. I remember Terry Butler, Chuck & I being invited by Dave Vincent to come see MA in 1989 and they were just getting off the ground. Alternately, Obituary were already getting popular in Florida by that time and Roadrunner was having success with them. In fact, other Florida acts were all being launched at the same time, and MA was but one of that second wave. In any event, I've not touched your edit. best, A Sniper 14:16, 06 November 2007 (UTC)
I see much talk of Slayer and Death here, but not much of Carcass. Surely such a key influence should be mentioned? -- Wick3dd 07:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
They created goregrind. Big difference. But then again, they did help create melodic death metal w/ their album Heartwork, so you might be justified. But I wouldnt put them on. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 01:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
That was what I was referring to. Many people list them as a key factor in melodic death metal. -- Wick3dd ( talk) 01:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure that Carcass should be listed in the main article, but they should definitely be included in the Goregrind sub-genre section, they created Goregrind! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.154.22 ( talk) 20:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Please speak out here [2]. Lots of people are listing this site as a source for various articles, but time and time again it gives invalid information. Please weigh in to make sure wikipedia does not get filled with false information. Hoponpop69 ( talk) 04:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Huh? OTEP is nu-metal. They just have screaming vocals. A common misconception. Festering Rat Corpse ( talk) 23:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
I got rid of the subgenres without articles. If you disagree, revert it and leave a reason here. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 23:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
All right.
"Also, the black metal page lists some subgenres that do not have their own pages, I believe." No, I checked. All of their listed subgenres have articles.
"You should know what I'm talking about." I do. No big deal, though. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 20:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
"Alright no need to get uncivil." Sorry if I came across as uncivil. I didnt mean to come across as such.
"...brutal death metal still belongs in this article." All right. I understand. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 18:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Too be honest I think a better approach than listing endless sub-genres is to focus on regions/scenes/producers (I think someone else mentioned this too). This gives a far truer representation of what death metal really is, what it sounds like, and where it came from. The two obvious main regions for death metal are Florida and Stockholm. But you could also mention Chicago, Gothenburg, Finland, UK, mainland Europe... All of these scenes had distinctive sounds that were very much based upon the resources available to them in their local areas. You could talk about the various sub-genres within these geographical sections, for example 'melodic death metal was common in Gothenurg', etc. Robotiq ( talk) 21:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Do most of you think this is a real genre? I ask because I nominated the deathcore article, and if we end up keeping it, I think we would have to add it on this page. I encourage all of you to go to the deathcore page and view the arguments, maybe submit your own. I would appreciate more help on this. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wick3dd ( talk • contribs) 02:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Bands like Day of Suffering, Barrit and Suicide Nation were releasing deathcore way before any of the bands listed in this section (about 1997). Going back further still, some of the old Nuclear Blast bands like the Righteous Pigs were definitely releasing deathcore in 1990 (There was also a German band called Deathcore too). In summary, I'm not sure this is a 'real genre', but the links between death metal and ****/punk have been clear from the very beginning (Entombed/Nihilist, for example), and this needs to be made more explicit in the history section. Robotiq ( talk) 21:47, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
It is sadly a real genre, but it is in no way and in any form Death Metal I say it should not be on this page. Scabrosus ( talk) 21:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 9/28/2010 Scabrosus.
It is a different genre from death metal. I think it should have its own page. What would make something not a real genre? Mason092 ( talk) 06:54, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
I've read all these death metal subgenres, I did found one error in Brutal Death Metal: Cannibal Corpse. Can I ask who put CC in B Death Metal? They have nothing to do with BDM, they are one of the best known and leaders on Death Metal. If someone does not agree, tell it here, but before that, compare CC to Krisiun for example and listen other BDM bands and compare to CC, you'll know what i mean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.217.246 ( talk) 20:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I hadn't seen that there before. I definitely agree with you. --
Wick3dd (
talk)
23:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Logical Defense, please stop adding onto a cited source. If you doubt the source, look him up on Wikipedia. He is legit and, arguably, has done a ton more research than anyone editing this article.-- Wick3dd ( talk) 03:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
First off, I did not add that source. I just keep this article sane, I don't contribute new info. Second off, I did not say to use Wikipedia as a source. I said to check out his article if you want to see whether he is legit. Third, my problem is not your argument. What you did was slip it in the Sam Dunn quote, even though his quote does not support what you said. Get a source, and add it in a separate sentence. Just say something like "However, other people say x". Thanks.--
Wick3dd (
talk)
02:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I was wrong there actually. I hadn't paid much attention to your statement. Here is what you need to do, add your source right after the BM statement and put the Sam Dunn one before it on the thrash statement. I think that should work fine.--
Wick3dd (
talk)
18:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok so I completely realized what you were saying the other day. Somehow I got you mixed up with some other users (the Bill Zebub one for one). I feel like a complete moron right now. I hope you will forgive me, as I have had a week with finals, helping my friend with legal problems, and dealing with an alleged alcohol violation. I have not had the time I wanted to look into everything. I apologize for being militant about something I had failed to research. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Wick3dd (
talk •
contribs)
20:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Someone in the archive looked as if they were going to attempt a comprehensive rewrite of this article, something that is sorely needed. The biggest problems lie in the section following 'late history', and in particular the endless subgenre-isation (is that a word? You know what I mean). Whilst it may be interesting to focus to some extent on regional differences (and perhaps that could use a subsection itself) the list of fusion genres is fatally flawed due to lack of sources and original research. As an example, I've been listening to death metal for over 15 years, and whilst it is possible I've completely missed the concept of 'slam death metal', it seems unlikely as I'm well aware of the bands listed under this banner. Do we have a reliable source for this? There is a similar problem over on the grindcore page, and there were problems over at black metal for a while (oddly enough 'war metal' and 'mincecore' don't qualify as real genres, more advertising tools). I don't want to just jump in and delete, say, the slam death metal section, but unless it gets properly sourced (i.e. not from a band's Myspace or your mate's review site), I'm afraid that's what needs to happen to it. Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 15:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I will look into it once finals are over. I would agree that this page needs much work.-- Wick3dd ( talk) 23:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Why don't we generalize a bit more? Prog, death/grind, and blackened should be easy to source. The rest are just subgenres of subgenres. We could maybe mention the different playing styles, but even that would be hard to source. -- Wick3dd ( talk) 20:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
In light of this discussion, I've made an attempt to merge the strongly similar "technical" and "progressive" death metal subsections. Why they were ever seperated, after a good read through, it's highly questionable. Logical Defense ( talk) 22:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
It's also worth mentioning, in my opinion, the notion that some bands hybridize death metal with numerous other metal/**** subgenres, not just in "death n roll"... acid bath, soilent green, sepultura/soulfly/cavelera-conspiracy. 128.59.34.156 ( talk) 00:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
What is policy round here regarding which bands should be included as examples within the subgenre sections. I'm specifically referring to the inclusion of a band like Between The Buried And Me. I'd deleted on grounds of notability and it has been re-added, admittedly with a citation to demonstrate that they do indeed play some form of progressive death metal. However, the rest of the section is talking about bands of a calibre like Pestilence, Gorguts, Atheist, Edge of Sanity, Opeth and the like. This is not meant as a subjective statement... their notability is reflected by their inclusion in books like 'Choosing Death' by Albert Mudrian and prominent placings in things like the Terrorizer and Zero Tolerance magazines death metal specials, and Terrorizer's retrospectives of the 80s and 90s. My feeling therefore is that bands like BTBAM lack notability, and in order to justify their inclusion a source should be provided not to confirm their genre but to explain why they are notable. As such, I'm deleting them again, until someone can provide such a source (and will do so with other bands of this nature). However, feel free to discuss it with me here. Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 16:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I re-added BTBAM. Not because I like them, but because they have been there. Remove the Fatal Effect. Keep it the way it has been for awhile. We have the bands down, no need to add more.-- Wick3dd ( talk) 23:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
It should be slimmed down and a few sentences should just be added to Brutal Death. Inhumer ( talk) 01:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree, surely this is just modernised brutal death metal. Too many sub-genres on here. Robotiq ( talk) 21:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
True, but it must be mentioned somehow because there are a lot of festivals just based on brutal death/slam -- 84.74.144.72 ( talk) 17:56, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Anyone have that article from Decibel from a few months back? Inhumer ( talk) 02:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed someone combined technical and progressive death metal. I totally agree as these terms are sometimes used interchangeably and the genres have a big deal of traits that overlap (and we have no sources). However, I am concerned readers will think the 2 genres are completely synonymous, and that isn't 100% correct (some DM bands are never called technical (Opeth comes to mind), while others are never referred to as progressive (Origin/Cryptopsy)). I adjusted the prose to feature both genres, without making a clear distinction between the two. Please review the following rewrite I did. Kameejl ( Talk) 10:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Technical death metal and progressive death metal are related terms to refer to bands that are particularly distinguished by the complexity of their music and the virtuosity of their musicians. Common traits are abruptly changing, sometimes chaotic song structures, uncommon time signatures, atypical rhythms and unusual harmonies and melodies. Bands described as technical death metal or progressive death metal usually fuse common death metal aesthetics with elements of progressive rock, jazz and/or classical music. While the term technical death metal is sometimes used to describe bands that not only focus on complexity but also on speed and extremity, the line between progressive and technical death metal is thin. "Tech death" and "prog death", for short, are terms commonly applied to such bands as Cryptopsy, Edge of Sanity, Opeth, Origin and Sadist. Cynic, Atheist, Pestilence and Gorguts are examples of a bands noted for creating jazz-influenced death metal. Necrophagist and Spawn of Possession are known for a classical music influenced death metal style. |
I like it. But like you stated, the terms are not always interchangeable, and though you mention this slightly, I think there should be a little more (like a sentence) about how they are not always the same. You could even mention what you just said before about Opeth and Cryptopsy. Otherwise, It's great. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 19:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
We already had this discussion, which was started by me, and we all agreed that death metal was influenced by early black metal. I still agree with the assessment. However, not that it needs changing, I should point out one thing. Death metal was indeed influenced greatl;y by early black metal, but not all early black metal bands. In fact, only a few, I would say, influenced the death metal genre. Bands such as Mercyful Fate probabaly had little to no influence on death metal. The only bands that really had an impact on the dm genre were probabaly Venom, Celtic Frost, perhaps Hellhammer and I doubt whether Bathory had an influence or not. Just thought this was worth pointing out. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 19:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Why should all BM bands need to be an influence? Not all thrash bands where an influence. Kameejl ( Talk) 20:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Tiamat were black metal NOT pure Sacandinsavian death metal! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.155.119 ( talk) 17:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
You're a moron. Listen to Sumerian Cry, The Astral Sleep and the Treblinka demos. All are clearly death metal in the Scandinavian vein, similar to early Edge of Sanity. If you still disagree, I'd advise you to get your ears/head examined. 205.174.170.153 ( talk) 13:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
That band is officially marked as a black metal band. End of story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.31.197 ( talk) 16:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Black Metal/ Death Metal, it was all pretty interlinked back then Robotiq ( talk) 21:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
There is one thing. It is black colour for infobox. It isn't very important, but I think most of people would agree, that it looks much more apposite. Why? Heavy Metal includes bands such as Led Zeppelin or Jimi Hendrix and Sepultura or Mayhem. These bands are musically pretty really very different, so these subgenres should have another colour. I added it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Music genres/Colours as black for "Extreme Metal or Heavy Metal subgenres". It is 100% allowed to do it. But some people (unlogged) just have a problem with it and delete it unreasonably as a POV making pure edit war, what is POV by itself. So I would collect some people that want black for "Extreme Metal or Heavy Metal subgenres", which would help to keep it...--Lykantrop ( Talk) 11:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
I am leaving it. There are too many stubborn bungholes and big bloodthirsty edit-warriors. Typical metalheads... But why is their problem with black?--Lykantrop ( Talk) 21:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
On the verification issue, every band page I've seen on MA has an external link to one of four sites: the band's official site, the band's MEEEspace site, the band's page on something like Rock Detector or the band's page on their record company's(/ies') website. The fact that they exist is verifiable, and in the case of bands who's record label site is included on the archive, it is also verifiable that they play metal or played metal. So...what exactly is it that isn't verifiable here? As far as genre goes, Encyclopaedia Metallum is basically a data collector of already verified genre information. I see no reason not to use the site as a source for something this simple. 128.255.179.241 Ours18 ( talk) 21:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
The progressive death metal and technical death metal were moved into one section together as one thing and now I just noticed they have their own sections again. Progressive death metal doesn't even have an article, but technical death metal does (that article needs a lot of work, too) where is described as also progressive death metal. What's up with this change? This is a problem! Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 23:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Although metal purists know/think there is a difference, the term is used interchangeably by the press. F.e. Death, Atheist and Cynic have been labeled both prog and tech. I couldn't name a technical dm band that has no progressive elements and, to play progressive music you need a fair amount of technique. Both sub-genres are so close to each other, even the section's content was practically identical. It's best to have both genres combined, until good sources, distinguishing the two, can be provided. I've searched through a couple of books on (death) metal, without any succes.
By the way, the combined section is addressing this dispute, readers are not misled. I've reverted this section split. Kameejl ( Talk) 13:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I certainly agree that there is a difference between the two but as someone already said they're used interchangeably by the press.
72.138.107.30 ( talk) 00:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
This user has been trolling around after me, and in the process has made some disturbing edits to the Chuck Schuldiner article and talk page. The most startling is a long paragraph on the talk page that attacks the relevance of Chuck (and in a previous edit the relevance of death metal itself) and personal attacks, innuendo and ridicule. I fear this editor will continue the trolling and hit this article, as he/she seems bent on messing with any article I lightly or regularly contribute to. Thanks for any assistance you can offer. A Sniper ( talk) 08:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I think some kind of comment on the popularity of death metal relative to other metal genres is totally appropriate to the article, but the last comment about it added is a bit problematic. Firstly, I'm not sure Metal Archives is a great or appropriate source for the comment as currently phrased, but regardless at the moment it's basically OR (Metal Archives themselves make no comment on the phenomenon, and the numbers simply reflect what's been added to the site). Perhaps a way round it would be to simply state, "Metal Archives lists x death metal bands out of a total of y", with the same source and no other comment? Thoughts? Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 17:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I just don't see why it matters at all. Stating a number of bands just seems a little ridiculous. Popularity is always going to be up to the person pretty much. It's all perspective. You might live in a city where everyone listens to death metal, but that doesn't suddenly make it popular or mainstream. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 21:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Can somebody answer this? They're not that great. Festering Rat Corpse ( talk) 23:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I might have given them too much credit. Their new album got to like #54 on the Billboard 200 charts - some AMG guy was comparing them to Damageplan by saying "JFAC is one of the highest-charting debut albums from a heavy metal act since Slipknot's 1999 debut." Fame doesn't nessicarily equal high charting, I was just wondering why so many teenage kids like that band. On a better note, Children of Bodom's Blooddrunk has recently cracked the Top 30, as seen in the latest issue of Rolling Stone Magazine. Festering Rat Corpse ( talk) 23:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Most of the time, and I hate to say it, AMG has no idea what they're f---ing talking about. Especially with metal. They still lump black and death in the same content description if you look. Pathetic. RexDeath ( talk) 00:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Was by Mantas, the band that would become Death. I woun't won't change it because of the source though. Inhumer ( talk) 01:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Doom metal is another genre influence. Death metal has down tuned guitars and slow passages, too. and the allmusic says that Death metal owes as much to thrash metal than to black sabbath (they choose black sabbath apparently to represent doom metal) If you won't accept that, could I at least ad black sabbath as an influence?
Yeah, you're probably right... There aren't many reliable sources out there anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.5.155.191 ( talk) 15:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Noticed that there's no mention of Nocturnus' contribution to the rise in popularity of electronic keyboards in extreme metal. Think its worth mentioning somewhere in the early history section... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.42.68 ( talk) 22:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Agree, I think Nocturnus started using them on the 'Science of Horror' demo (1988), but if you only count official releases, Pestilence were earlier, on 'Consuming Impulse' (1989) - Nocturnus's 1st album was not released until 1990. Robotiq ( talk) 21:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Was added to the subgenre section. I don't think it's accurate to mention it in that section because a) the "subgenre" is based on lyrical content, which is not a strong bases for a death metal subgenre. There are no genres called pagan death metal, viking death metal, satanic death metal etc.. Any (subsubsubsub)genre can be Christian-themed. b) Only few bands fit the description and the term christian death metal is not used a lot by the press to describe bands. c) It better fits the christian metal article and is described there in detail.
Although the term is not used often and althought it's more of a christian metal subgenre than a DM subgenre, it might be interesting to touch on it's existence. Maybe it's better to add a few lines on it in the Other fusion subgenres section (as it is a christian metal/DM hybrid). Any opinions? Kameejl ( Talk) 12:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
There have been a couple of attempts to insert Slayer into the lede as an example of a pioneering death metal band. The latest had three references. After going through all three, I verified what I had believed: Slayer were influencial on the pioneering death metal bands but were not themselves death metal pioneers. I pointed out in my last edit summary that Slayer are mentioned later in the article as an important influence, as they were. Best, A Sniper ( talk) 18:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, no problem. However, if you talk about reliable sources, Metal Observer (the source of Possessed) is an amatorial site. -- Born Again 83 ( talk) 19:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't Dethklok be inserted into this article somewhere to highlight satire of death metal? Doshindude ( talk) 01:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Mantas (formed in 1983) released a demo in 1983 under the name of DEATH BY METAL ( http://www.metal-archives.com/release.php?id=101903). Mantas has always played the same music (What we consider now death metal)from their beginnings until their break up. Possessed (also formed in 1983) released their first demo back in 1984 under the name Death Metal ( http://www.metal-archives.com/release.php?id=21654) One year after Mantas'first demo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.10.0.152 ( talk) 20:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I think the 'early history' section needs a complete re-write. It focuses too much on the 'big names' of the scene. We shouldn't forget that bands like Terminal Death and Master recorded death metal in 1985. Also, Mutilator (Bra) gets no mention as far as I can see. Their 'Grave Desecration' demo (1985) is possibly the first *pure* death metal recording (you can listen to it on youtube). Necrovore and Autopsy also released pure death metal demos in 1987. Robotiq ( talk) 21:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Understood. Always difficult because Death Metal has such a huge informal history. There are nevertheless a couple of books on the subject, such as the 'Swedish Death Metal' book that was released last year. I dunno if CD inlays and the like could count as references, such as the inlay to retrospective CDs like Napalm Death's 'Leaders not Followers'. If I get around to re-writing some of this I'll bear it in mind. Robotiq ( talk) 00:46, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
In the lead paragraph: "...in part because it does not appeal to mainstream tastes due to its aggressive nature and because the musicians often choose to remain obscure". Really? I don't associate intentional obscurity with the death metal scene. With black metal, yes, but I don't see death metal bands intentionally hiding themselves. Aryder779 ( talk) 23:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Why was the page on deathgrind deleted? It make sense to have it up, considering we have sub-subgenres such as ****ogrind and goregrind still up. Perhaps we could put it back up? CheesePiggy ( talk) 21:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
If anyone wants to contribute to the debate of whether or not to delete the Dr. Shrinker article, please check here Cheers, A Sniper ( talk) 00:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
There are at least three separate sources that consider deathgrind and goregrind to be separate subgenres; the first is Danny Lilker writing in the liner notes to the Grind Your Mind grindcore compilation (I copied the specific part to here. I also cited Zero Tolerance here... two sentences later in the same paragraph, it reads "Related genres [to goregrind] are deathgrind, which sees grindcore and brutal death metal colliding head on (Brodequin, Dead Infection, Pigsty, Alienation Mental), and ****ogrind, the most downright perverted of the lot, often adding a dollop of filthy groove and vocals straight from the toilet (Gut, CBT)." That's Issue 004, p. 46 for reference. Issue #150 of Terrorizer discusses death/grind explicitly as part of its "death metal special" run of issues, and goregrind explicitly in #181 within its "grindcore special". There is no indication that they are talking about the same bands... whilst the first talks to the likes of Mortician, the latter is focussing on Carcass and their soundalikes. I'd have to dig out #150 if you want specific quotes, but the above should be enough to suggest that parsing deathgrind and goregrind in this article is incorrect. Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 14:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Has been deleted per AfD. No sources have been produced for its existence (Metal Archives? Give me a break. Why does no-one read WP:RS?) Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 20:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Words such as melodic, brutal, satanic, epic, awesome and great are all adjectives. People use adjectives to describe things. The difference between melodic death metal and brutal death metal is that there are reliable sources that explictly identify melodic death metal as a legitimate subgenre, not merely a description of some death metal music. For instance, this recent article on the Sydney Morning Herald, a mainstream news publication, states that "death metal has its own sub-genres - technical death metal, melodic death metal, blackened death metal, deathgrind and deathcore." One would think that if brutal death metal is indeed a legitimate subgenre, it would have been mentioned in the same line. An interviewee in that article even states that "death metal is brutal", which would make the concept of a brutal death metal subgenre rather redundant. I have not been able to find any reliable source that explicitly recognizes brutal death metal as a subgenre. I have only been able to find any reliable sources that use the term brutal as a description, just like other adjectives such as satanic, epic, awesome and great. If anyone knows of a reliable source that explicitly recognizes brutal death metal as a legitimate subgenre, please tell us about it. -- Bardin ( talk) 14:10, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
So you're telling me that brutal death metal doesn't exist? Conservoman ( talk) 12:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I am rather amazed that there are people running around claiming that there is no such subgenre as "brutal death metal". I haven't a hell of a lot of research on who is and is not using the term, but I listen to a great deal of metal - particularly death metal - and it is completely unbelievable to me that anyone would the existence of brutal death metal. More later. Myrkkyhammas ( talk) 19:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
This needs to be reopened for discussion. This would be one of those instances where professional original research is required. Mainstream publications don't know anything about anything that is not mainstream. You're not going to find a "reliable" source for this information. However, ask anyone who has listened to extreme metal for more than a year and 99% of them will tell you this is a distinct subgenre. Anathematized one ( talk) 02:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
On this version of wikipedia http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brutal_death_metal , there is a Brutal death metal article that has been sourced, can it not be translated and used? If it existes in one language surly it exists in english as well.
http://www.amazon.com/Learn-About-Brutal-Death-Metal/lm/R2YSFK4D3BE2H4 --- also includes Brutal death. I'll look futher when I have time but surely this genre's existence has to acknowleged. No 'mainstream' sources... jeez I wonder why it could possibly be difficut to find mainstream sources for brutal death metal... 124.180.139.239 ( talk) 11:24, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Brutal death metal has been used as a term well before MA. If brutal death metal doesn't exist as it's own subgenre, neither does technical death metal. A few "mainstream sources" supporting the latter doesn't make it more of a subgenre. It's obvious that technical death metal is far more popular (it's the only death metal that hipsters listen to, for example}. AMG rarely reviews actual brutal death metal, so its no surprise that the term isn't given much recognition there (but I did find this, which mentions brutal death metal as a subgenre. Some more: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Some may only have brutal used as an adjective, but not all). Here are a few from another apparently "reliable" source - 1, 2, 3, and 4. You can also bet that recognized "extreme metal" magazines such as Decibel, Terrorizer and even more mainstream ones like Revolver and Metal Hammer have used the term. Not the best example, but this Decibel article makes mention of it. Here are a couple from Revolver 1 and 2. Hell, there's a mention of on this from the NY Times. Brc2000 ( talk) 14:00, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
the thing with deathcore is it's really metalcore taking bits of death metal and just adding death in front of core like they do with alot of genres. real deathcore is not really consider a sub-genre of death metal because all deathcore did was change the way metalcore singers sang. so instead of screams like metalcore bands they do growls. it is still metalcore in every way musically (writing in majors, lots of breakdowns, etc). there are a few bands that are labeled deathcore but is really just death metal but they label themselfs as deathcore. so that can be why there is a confusion about this genre. this genre is not accepted by most people and musicians as a sub-genre of death metal as it is stated in lots of articles (guitarworld, revolver, and countless magazines and artist interviews. also metalcore was not incorporated in to death metal it was the other way around. also melodic riffs are part of melodic death metal and has become one of the most popular genre of death metal. so if that part is to be kept it should say -
Deathcore: With the rise in popularity of metalcore, some bands have incorporated death metal in to their music. Bands such as Suicide Silence, Salt the Wound and early music from Job for a Cowboy combine metalcore with death metal influences. Characteristics of death metal, such as fast drumming (including blast beats), down-tuned guitars, tremolo picking, melodic riffs and partially growled vocals, are combined with breakdowns.
however the part about characteristics are still wrong as death metal bands were the first to use breakdowns but is now mainly used by "core" bands. this should be moved to the metalcore part of wiki and the death metal section of this should be completely rewritten as very little of it is true. also if you listen to a real deathcore band you will realize that it has nothing to do with death metal. bands like whitechapel, sucide silence, and so on are 100% metalcore youtube born Of osiris and other bands like that and you will understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Retardsrwe ( talk • contribs) 18:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Came across a potentially useful source here. What do other people reckon? Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 14:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone else think that Netherlands should be listed in the regional scenes? - Matt 00:23, 19 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.240.238 ( talk)
There's been a significant number of IPs coming into the article to revert, usually without edit summary, the removal of "brutal death metal" from the article no matter how flawed the section is. There may be an argument for the existence of BDM, but the definition for it is not very clear and, in its current pre-revision state, is contradictory. Suggest a semi-protection?-- WaltCip ( talk) 20:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Why do you people not bother to read other articles? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Forces states, and it is cited, that the Metal Force zine was, contrary to what you may have otherwise heard, the origin of the term death metal and thrash metal. Yet you do not mention this on the death metal article. This would be ok if it was from some off-site link, but it is mentioned on another WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE. One article says one thing, the other article doesn't mention it. FIX IT NOW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.13.52 ( talk) 14:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
The term death metal come from the band death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weezerfan1 ( talk • contribs) 06:37, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Wasn't it Possessed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.240.238 ( talk) 06:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Somebody needs to add Death Rap as a fusion genre on the page for death metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weezerfan1 ( talk • contribs) 06:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I have removed "Z-grade" from the description of the lyrical themes of death metal. While some death metal has lyrics that involve slasher film violence, to call it "Z-grade" seems derogatory and adds nothing to the description. It's better to just say "Death metal's lyrical themes often invoke slasher and splatter movie violence." Mason092 ( talk) 01:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Although many "reliable sources" claim this band is from San Francisco, this claim is not correct. Various interviews from current/former Possessed members point to the band being from the cities of El Sobrante, San Pablo, Pinole, Richmond or El Cerrito, which are 20-40 minutes away from the actual city limits of SF. (Most likely the journalist or researcher was referring to "San Francisco Bay Area", as the journalist is obviously not familiar with the area.) Second, the Slayer influence on Possessed is incorrect and an obvious anachronism. Possessed formed in 82/83 and began writing songs at that time, whereas Slayer's first album "Show No Mercy" wasn't released until late 1983 (and I'd imagine it would take a year or so for the "buzz" to get out - they were still a young band back then.) Band interviews are the best indicator of a band's musical influences, and I've yet to find any Possessed interviews where anyone cites Slayer. The Allmusic source directs to an album reviewer who believes the Possessed album Seven Churches has a Slayer influence, that's it. Not a fact, only an opinion ... so fixed. -- Danteferno ( talk) 19:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
A couple of things I'd like to note. Metal Archives is used as a source in the article a couple of times. MA is all user-supplied content, hence not a reliable source and needs to be removed. The word "often" and other WP:PEACOCK and WP:WEASEL words is used a lot in the article as well. Rather than overusing ambigious phrases, specifiy who said what exactly. I'll rewrite it myself, but thought I'd mention it here if someone has the time to do it before me. Nymf talk/ contr. 20:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
A user is attempting to delete all the Death and Possessed demos on the premise that they are neither noteworthy or sourced. Can folks assist in finding sources that signify their importance? Thanks. Best, A Sniper ( talk) 17:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Having followed the discussions at the various AfD pages, I will have to advise that it is impossible to sway Deletionists from their pre-ordained state of mind. There are different philosophies at play on Wikipedia, ranging from Inclusionism to Deletionism and various others in between. I see no evidence anywhere that Deletionism is meant to be the controlling philosophy that determines the rules for all of Wikipedia, but it is time to admit that they control these debates. It is obvious to people who know about heavy metal history that the demos in question are unquestionably influential and we know that from reading the literature our whole lives. But Deletionists are tough to sway and are convinced or their own infallibility. I suggest that information on the influence of demos in the metal field be added as historical items to each band's biographical article. -- DOOMSDAYER520 ( Talk| Contribs) 02:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Is it just me or is the sentence "the style is characterized by an extremely vocal guttural with lyrics sung in a slow following the guitar riffs and sudden weather changes" of the Brutal death metal section is total nonsens ? Sounds like the kind of phrasing produced by Babel fish... zubrowka74 20:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Soilent Green has never been a deathgrind band and it isn't even listed in its article so I'm removing it from there. The band is refered to in a previous section, where it must be. Gothbag ( talk) 13:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Is that serious ? Someone deleted the section under the rationale that consensus was made that this sub-genre did not exist. Should it be reverted ? (my guess is yes, unless I missed something) zubrowka74 01:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
To the user( Scabrosus) who twice added the comment about poor drumming technique, your edit summary read, "I have noted that the drummers use poor drumming technique along with the fast beats. I can hear the differences because I play drums." That's pretty much the definition of WP:OR, which is exactly what I said when I reverted it the first time. Either find a source for your claim or don't add it again. << Fyrefly ( talk) 22:05, 28 September 2010 (UTC) I don't remember adding it twice, and I did not know that original research was not allowed, seems stupid thou someone did originally do research on anything. Scabrosus ( talk) 22:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC) I'm sorry. Yes, you only put back the information that I reverted from a different user. I got mixed up. But yeah, original research shouldn't be included and I'll let the WP:OR speak for itself as to why that is. And sorry for my attitude earlier today. << Fyrefly ( talk) 02:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
I thought it was clear "brutal" death metal was not a valid sub-genre. It is a way or a style in which death metal can be played but it doesn't even have it's own page, just a redirect to the main page. I'm writing this here because the comment field didn't allow enough space when I did the revert. zubrowka74 16:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Brutal Death is a valid subgenre...just look on french version..WE'ARE IN 2013...we not supposed to argue about brutal death or slam.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.83.158.254 ( talk) 01:52, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I understand not calling it a subgenre, but not mentioning it at all? It's a style of death metal, so shouldn't it be mentioned for completion of information? If the goal of an encyclopedia is to be thorough in explaining a topic, something that typifies the style of hundreds of musicians should at least get a footnote. 24.85.113.197 ( talk) 22:57, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The article described death metal as being characterized by minor key tonality and atonality. What it should be saying is not atonality, but chromaticism, because for the music to be atonal, the guitarists would have to carefully give equal value to each tone, which is highly unlikely and mostly used in orchestral settings. The use of all 12 tones in death metal music is a characteristic of chromaticism, as in, uses the chromatic scale. 144.162.76.185 ( talk) 17:16, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I have no intention to start the umpteenth "Possessed or Death?" debate, but the article has way too much emphasis on Death and Chuck Schuldiner as being the "first death metal band/musician/godfather of death metal". There is one thing everyone can agree on, be it Wikipedia editor or professional music journalist: Death released way more albums than Possessed, was active longer than Possessed, and with that weight alone, was more influential on the death metal genre than Possessed. However, a Google Books search either suggests that the bands pioneered the genre together or that Possessed preceded Death as being the first death metal band. Besides Allmusic - which has always been sketchy with its claims - there's no indication Possessed was a "fast Slayer-influenced thrash metal" band. Just because a journalist thinks a band sounds like it has an influence from another band does not mean a band WAS influenced by other band. No interviews suggest that the band was influenced by Slayer on Seven Churches. Band interviews are key to what influences a band/musician.
In just a little bit, I plan on overhauling the "History" section of this article with more accurate information, but just thought I post this, first, for discussion. Thanks, -- Danteferno ( talk) 15:20, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
To be frank, I don't listen to any sort of metal...so I'm a bit out of my musical comfort zone here, but I have reverted all edits and restored the deathcore section of the article. After doing independent research, I have determined that it would appear as though deathcore is a valid subgenre that has a good following. Finding a citation or two for the section might prevent a repeat of the edit war that has been occurring. Food for thought. --Tymun ( Contact Me - Contribs) 01:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
-But death metal bands were using breakdowns before deathcore even existed. Suffocation, At The Gates, to name a few. JWULTRABLIZZARD ( talk) 10:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Why brutal death metal there isn't in the list of death metal subgenres? -- Der Künstler ( talk) 21:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Lol simply put; "brutal death metal" is not a genre • GunMetal Angel 02:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
slam death metal lol, if we create a wiki article for that genre we might as well start making pages for every imaginary last fm genre
This stuff needs to be cleared up.
Subgenres are: melodic death metal, technical death metal, progressive death metal, and brutal death metal (which is being entirely dismissed, sadly). These are subgenres on the basis that they do not incorporate any specific genre into the death metal formula, but rather alter the formula itself with "objective techniques".
Fusion genres include: deathcore, blackened death metal, doom/death metal (sometimes called funeral doom), deathgrind, and death'n'roll. These are fusion genres on the basis that they combine aesthetics of other established genres with the death metal formula, instead of altering it with "objective techniques".
Goregrind is not a subgenre, but not entirely accepted as a fusion genre of death metal either, it is rather a subgenre of grindcore than anything else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.150.32.140 ( talk) 19:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
According to the AV Club, Dethklok's first two albums are "the highest-charting death metal albums of all time, bringing a whole new audience to the genre." This should probably be addressed on the page here. As of late 2003, the best-selling group was Cannibal Corpse. [7] Aryder779 ( talk) 17:12, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
I would like to use the words "bands" or "artists" instead of "acts" because the former don't lead to misconceptions, whereas the latter may also be used to indicate a circus or theater performance, e.g. in the sense of a theatrical play having four or five acts. This (the use of "bands" rather than "acts") would also apply to articles about musicians or bands, provided many Wikipedia articles about pop music artists list related artists as related "acts". What do you think? -- Fandelasketchup ( talk) 14:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Death metal guitarist use low tuned guitars!
Ok... now while I highly agree that "brutal death metal" is not really a genre versus "death metal" since there's really not much at all that warrants it being its own thing besides maybe just heavier riffs and guttural vocals, but I really think slam death metal should have its own article and very soon with the rise of peak it's at, enough big publications are going to write stories about it. I mean maybe slam wasn't a genre 7 years ago, but it sure is a genre now! I mean look; how can you even really compare this to this, and let alone call these two things the same thing? Even a twelve year old who has never been exposed to anything metal could agree there is definitely a difference in death metal and slam death metal. If technical death metal can be its own thing, then slam definitely deserves to be. Second Skin ( talk) 09:30, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Death metal's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "AllMusic":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Since when is death metal even remotely rooted in hardcore? Yes, it's often fused with it, but there are simply no stylistic similarities at all. Early death metal is, first and foremost, really just glorified thrash metal. Much like how grindcore is souped-up crust punk/hardcore. And even though there's a source stating it, it's just incorrect. It's not true, the earliest forms of death metal have absolutely no hardcore in them whatsoever. Listen to Death, Mantas, Possessed, Sepultura and Morbid Angel and tell me there's hardcore there? There's none, you won't find it. Hardcore should be removed. Also, no, bands that "influenced" death metal weren't playing hardcore either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.80.1.126 ( talk) 13:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
first i removed the above bands from the pioneers of Death Metal and replaced one of them with Autopsy and this ref which proves that not only are one of the pioneer of Death metal but also are pioneers of Death/doom. [1] BUT someone removed Autopsy and the ref and restored the Cannibal Corpse & Deicide. now i place 2 Citation needed in front of them,so if anyone knows a ref for them,place them in front of them or i am going to remove them again,if anyone restore them without ref again,i will remove them again,same work i did with Sodom page,which i placed " black metal (early)" several times with 2 refs in front of it but someone always removed it,i continued placing that until s/he stoped.
References
Dearth Meatball — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.84.215.202 ( talk) 20:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Death metal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=113803When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@ ABC paulista I don't see what there is to discuss. What is the disadvantage of mentioning in the infobox the vocal technique that, as evidenced both in this article and in its own article, is definitive of death metal?-- MA SHAUN IX 16:17, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Death metal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:09, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
@ Second Skin: The first source clerly states: For those who aren't familiar with the slam death metal genre, here's a quick summation. The genre evolved from the '90s New York death metal scene, incorporating elements of hardcore. It's not so focused on guitar solos and blast beats aren't so important; it's more about utilizing mid-tempos (and you can't forget the breakdowns), palm-muted riffage, the occasional surprising element of hip hop-inspired vocal and drum beat rhythms, and a healthy dose of growls and grunts. Oh -- and this genre takes the macabre of death metal to the extreme. So all of your changes and band additions are unsourced, thereby being innadequated for this place. Even Brutal Death metal isn't listed here as a subgenre because of a lack of valid sources. ABC paulista ( talk) 15:58, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
hardcore punk grouo Discharge sounds like proto death metal oin 1982. forget metal bands that were then - it's like girls singing compare to this Discharge – Protest And Survive (1982) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAiLqQ8Xics Sergey Woropaew ( talk) 13:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
I propose an edit to the section " Subgenres and fusion genres" to change the current bulleted list to a list of subheadings underneath the main heading "Subgenres and fusion genres". This would allow redirects to the specific subgenres' headings instead of the current trend of sending redirects to the general "Subgenres and fusion genres" section (which could possibly be confusing to users unfamiliar with Wikipedia's redirect system or those who don't know to scroll down to find the specific genre they were looking for). Why would we want the link "[[Death metal#Subgenres and fusion genres|Slam death metal]]" to redirect to " Death metal#Subgenres and fusion genres" when a simple reformatting of the section would allow other articles to link to the more specific " Death metal#Slam death metal" so that users can more easily see the genre they clicked through to read about? — Tha†emoover†here (talk) 04:26, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Technical Death is derivative of Prog but are nowhere near the same subgenre. Nile and Opeth sound nothing alike.
"Technical death metal (also known as tech-death, progressive death metal, or prog-death)[134] is a subgenre of death metal which employs dynamic song structures, uncommon time signatures, atypical rhythms and unusual harmonies and melodies. Bands described as technical death metal or progressive death metal usually fuse common death metal aesthetics with elements of progressive rock, jazz or classical music. While the term technical death metal is sometimes used to describe bands that focus on speed and extremity as well as complexity, the line between progressive and technical death metal is thin. Tech death and prog death, for short, are terms commonly applied to such bands as Nile, Edge of Sanity, and Opeth. Necrophagist and Spawn of Possession are known for a classical music-influenced death metal style. Death metal pioneers Death also refined their style in a more progressive direction in their final years. Some albums for this subgenre are Hallucinations (1990) by the German band Atrocity and Death's Human (1991). This style has significantly influenced many bands, creating a stream that in Europe was carried out at first by bands such as Gory Blister and Electrocution.[135][136] The Polish band Decapitated gained recognition as one of Europe's primary modern technical death metal acts" 2604:6000:9382:5600:5D3D:6D9E:5AC9:2C1E ( talk) 04:05, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Do we really need a disambiguation for a largely unknown film that took $2500 at the box office? Random name ( talk) 15:41, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
@ Korn:, in the book Death Metal Music: The Passion and Politics of a Subculture, by Natalie J. Purcell, it is stated that Deathgrind, Goregrind and Pornogrind are styles that mix Death metal with Grindcore, but no "hierarchy" is established between them, so grouping them the way you are doing without sources backing it up is considered original research, and exceptional claims require exceptional sources. The book might not be used in this article in particluar, but it's used in each respective article as source. ABC paulista ( talk) 17:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Persons ask why metal I love. 73.34.107.203 ( talk) 01:49, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Yeah metal is not dead. Still lives on. 73.34.107.203 ( talk) 01:53, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
All Death metal fans who are experienced in making portals please help create the Portal:death metal as i am not that experianced in making portals i will need your help thank you Headbanger44
The history section really deserves an addition about what happened in the first 20 years of the new millenium. Death Metal did not end in the 90s and is still alive with many active bands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.209.218.209 ( talk) 20:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Look, this is quite frank and may be an incendiary comment but the page on black metal is really really long while the death metal one is short. For someone new to Death Metal, they should know all about the genre, and it's controversies - there are bound to be quite a few! Also, this genre is arguably more well known than Black Metal (I've done a poll, this is original research, I know, but 98% of people have heard about death metal, yet only 56% have heard about black metal)and therefore this needs more info. Anyway, I know very little about the basic death metal movement, being more of a punk myself (I only really like the music, and don't follow the scene except for the black vs death stuff), but i feel that Death Metal deserves a better page than what it has. Any thoughts? Afifanno1 ( talk) 16:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Also, sorry, we need to DEFINE the genre. The page needs to be a bit clearer, with some clips from legit bands like Possessed, maybe have some from melodic ones like Children of Bodom, and explain the difference between Black Metal and Death Metal because, to be honest, there doesn't appear to be a whole lot apart from the vocals and lyrical themes. That's just me though and let's make DEATH METAL become a FEATURED ARTICLE! Afifanno1 ( talk) 16:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
what complexity? 79.173.229.147 ( talk) 11:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
--
I'm at a loss what to make of this claim, as jazz-fusion is without a doubt the least complex form of jazz there is. The Death (and other) metal I've heard, while eschewing verse-chorus, don't do anything more complex so much as just different. I also wonder at the level of musical education of whoever wrote the whole article. Have they heard the atonal compositions and theories of the Second Viennese School, for just one example, which predated Death Metal by about 80 years and is far more complicated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.44.133 ( talk) 05:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
If that's how you see it, I think you're on your way to proving my point that what's complex to you ain't complex to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.44.133 ( talk) 02:09, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
...How so? Morbid angel by 1989 was creating some of the first virtuoso music in this genre while Death was still fairly simple by this point. Same goes for Atheist.
His solos, mostly. Death's music was fast since Scream Bloody Gore, but Schuldiner infused melodic elements in his solos with his death metal rather than the more atonal approach of his contemorarires.
I think Paul Masvidal and Sean Reinert should be credited for helping Chuck Schuldiner with "Human". —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.228.54.8 (
talk)
06:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
"Death metal is an extreme heavy metal subgenre. It is well known to be a very bad genre of music, with unnecessary screaming." Vandalism?
Yeah. I reverted it. Prepare to be Mezmerized! 23:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
"In the late 1980s and early 1990s, death metal gained more media attention as popular record labels like Earache Records and Roadrunner Records began to sign death metal bands at a rapid rate."
another case of vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.13.55.249 ( talk) 18:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
No, and if it is, its definitely not obvious. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 01:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
It really seems like this article tries to play down the importance of Possessed, calling them a Thrash Metal band and claiming Death established half of the things that Possessed already did two or three years earlier. Possessed's Seven Churches and their Death Metal demo were the first pure Death Metal works and this article tries vehemently to deny that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.147.162 ( talk) 20:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Either way you put it Possessed was death metal at one of its earliest incarnations as was Mantas. To argue who came first is irrelevant. Navnløs 22:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I listed Black metal as a stylistic influence in the music infobox. This is because there is no doubt that early black metal bands like Venom (band) and Bathory (band) had an influence upon death metal almost as much as thrash. Also, if you listen to early Possessed, widely considered to be the first death metal band ever, it sounds to me almost like black metal and I know others who agree. Navnløs 23:40, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Eh, I see the points everyone is making and understand. It might be more correct to make it "early black metal" or "First Wave Black" or something, but I think that other than adding confusion we don't need to be quite that specific and should perhaps just leave it the way it is. No? Yes? Navnløs 18:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
If we can get a solid source about BM's influence, it may be noteworthy. I keep having to revert the edits by Logical Defense simply because he slips his BM influence phrase right in the middle of a cited statement, which is very misleading.-- Wick3dd ( talk) 03:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually we already had this conversation and everyone agreed. It's a fact. There is no doubt at all that early black metal influenced early death metal bands GREATLY which means that black metal influenced death metal. It's not that much of a stretch. Just listen to early Possessed or early Death. As to w/e Logical Defense is doing, I have no idea what that's about, but I have always found Logical Defense to be a great contributor to many many metal related articles. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 18:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh his statement is true. I am not doubting BM's influence. He just needs to get the sourcing right so it is not misleading. -- Wick3dd ( talk) 18:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I think you have a valid point about MA, Kameejl. My objection was that the band were mentioned too many times as being at the genesis of the movement, and that would be incorrect. I felt there should be a line of sorts between Slayer, Possessed and Mantas/Death on the one hand, and the latter 80s bands such as MA. I remember Terry Butler, Chuck & I being invited by Dave Vincent to come see MA in 1989 and they were just getting off the ground. Alternately, Obituary were already getting popular in Florida by that time and Roadrunner was having success with them. In fact, other Florida acts were all being launched at the same time, and MA was but one of that second wave. In any event, I've not touched your edit. best, A Sniper 14:16, 06 November 2007 (UTC)
I see much talk of Slayer and Death here, but not much of Carcass. Surely such a key influence should be mentioned? -- Wick3dd 07:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
They created goregrind. Big difference. But then again, they did help create melodic death metal w/ their album Heartwork, so you might be justified. But I wouldnt put them on. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 01:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
That was what I was referring to. Many people list them as a key factor in melodic death metal. -- Wick3dd ( talk) 01:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure that Carcass should be listed in the main article, but they should definitely be included in the Goregrind sub-genre section, they created Goregrind! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.154.22 ( talk) 20:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Please speak out here [2]. Lots of people are listing this site as a source for various articles, but time and time again it gives invalid information. Please weigh in to make sure wikipedia does not get filled with false information. Hoponpop69 ( talk) 04:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Huh? OTEP is nu-metal. They just have screaming vocals. A common misconception. Festering Rat Corpse ( talk) 23:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
I got rid of the subgenres without articles. If you disagree, revert it and leave a reason here. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 23:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
All right.
"Also, the black metal page lists some subgenres that do not have their own pages, I believe." No, I checked. All of their listed subgenres have articles.
"You should know what I'm talking about." I do. No big deal, though. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 20:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
"Alright no need to get uncivil." Sorry if I came across as uncivil. I didnt mean to come across as such.
"...brutal death metal still belongs in this article." All right. I understand. Prepare to be Mezmerized ! :D 18:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Too be honest I think a better approach than listing endless sub-genres is to focus on regions/scenes/producers (I think someone else mentioned this too). This gives a far truer representation of what death metal really is, what it sounds like, and where it came from. The two obvious main regions for death metal are Florida and Stockholm. But you could also mention Chicago, Gothenburg, Finland, UK, mainland Europe... All of these scenes had distinctive sounds that were very much based upon the resources available to them in their local areas. You could talk about the various sub-genres within these geographical sections, for example 'melodic death metal was common in Gothenurg', etc. Robotiq ( talk) 21:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Do most of you think this is a real genre? I ask because I nominated the deathcore article, and if we end up keeping it, I think we would have to add it on this page. I encourage all of you to go to the deathcore page and view the arguments, maybe submit your own. I would appreciate more help on this. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wick3dd ( talk • contribs) 02:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Bands like Day of Suffering, Barrit and Suicide Nation were releasing deathcore way before any of the bands listed in this section (about 1997). Going back further still, some of the old Nuclear Blast bands like the Righteous Pigs were definitely releasing deathcore in 1990 (There was also a German band called Deathcore too). In summary, I'm not sure this is a 'real genre', but the links between death metal and ****/punk have been clear from the very beginning (Entombed/Nihilist, for example), and this needs to be made more explicit in the history section. Robotiq ( talk) 21:47, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
It is sadly a real genre, but it is in no way and in any form Death Metal I say it should not be on this page. Scabrosus ( talk) 21:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 9/28/2010 Scabrosus.
It is a different genre from death metal. I think it should have its own page. What would make something not a real genre? Mason092 ( talk) 06:54, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
I've read all these death metal subgenres, I did found one error in Brutal Death Metal: Cannibal Corpse. Can I ask who put CC in B Death Metal? They have nothing to do with BDM, they are one of the best known and leaders on Death Metal. If someone does not agree, tell it here, but before that, compare CC to Krisiun for example and listen other BDM bands and compare to CC, you'll know what i mean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.217.246 ( talk) 20:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I hadn't seen that there before. I definitely agree with you. --
Wick3dd (
talk)
23:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Logical Defense, please stop adding onto a cited source. If you doubt the source, look him up on Wikipedia. He is legit and, arguably, has done a ton more research than anyone editing this article.-- Wick3dd ( talk) 03:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
First off, I did not add that source. I just keep this article sane, I don't contribute new info. Second off, I did not say to use Wikipedia as a source. I said to check out his article if you want to see whether he is legit. Third, my problem is not your argument. What you did was slip it in the Sam Dunn quote, even though his quote does not support what you said. Get a source, and add it in a separate sentence. Just say something like "However, other people say x". Thanks.--
Wick3dd (
talk)
02:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I was wrong there actually. I hadn't paid much attention to your statement. Here is what you need to do, add your source right after the BM statement and put the Sam Dunn one before it on the thrash statement. I think that should work fine.--
Wick3dd (
talk)
18:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok so I completely realized what you were saying the other day. Somehow I got you mixed up with some other users (the Bill Zebub one for one). I feel like a complete moron right now. I hope you will forgive me, as I have had a week with finals, helping my friend with legal problems, and dealing with an alleged alcohol violation. I have not had the time I wanted to look into everything. I apologize for being militant about something I had failed to research. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Wick3dd (
talk •
contribs)
20:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Someone in the archive looked as if they were going to attempt a comprehensive rewrite of this article, something that is sorely needed. The biggest problems lie in the section following 'late history', and in particular the endless subgenre-isation (is that a word? You know what I mean). Whilst it may be interesting to focus to some extent on regional differences (and perhaps that could use a subsection itself) the list of fusion genres is fatally flawed due to lack of sources and original research. As an example, I've been listening to death metal for over 15 years, and whilst it is possible I've completely missed the concept of 'slam death metal', it seems unlikely as I'm well aware of the bands listed under this banner. Do we have a reliable source for this? There is a similar problem over on the grindcore page, and there were problems over at black metal for a while (oddly enough 'war metal' and 'mincecore' don't qualify as real genres, more advertising tools). I don't want to just jump in and delete, say, the slam death metal section, but unless it gets properly sourced (i.e. not from a band's Myspace or your mate's review site), I'm afraid that's what needs to happen to it. Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 15:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I will look into it once finals are over. I would agree that this page needs much work.-- Wick3dd ( talk) 23:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Why don't we generalize a bit more? Prog, death/grind, and blackened should be easy to source. The rest are just subgenres of subgenres. We could maybe mention the different playing styles, but even that would be hard to source. -- Wick3dd ( talk) 20:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
In light of this discussion, I've made an attempt to merge the strongly similar "technical" and "progressive" death metal subsections. Why they were ever seperated, after a good read through, it's highly questionable. Logical Defense ( talk) 22:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
It's also worth mentioning, in my opinion, the notion that some bands hybridize death metal with numerous other metal/**** subgenres, not just in "death n roll"... acid bath, soilent green, sepultura/soulfly/cavelera-conspiracy. 128.59.34.156 ( talk) 00:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
What is policy round here regarding which bands should be included as examples within the subgenre sections. I'm specifically referring to the inclusion of a band like Between The Buried And Me. I'd deleted on grounds of notability and it has been re-added, admittedly with a citation to demonstrate that they do indeed play some form of progressive death metal. However, the rest of the section is talking about bands of a calibre like Pestilence, Gorguts, Atheist, Edge of Sanity, Opeth and the like. This is not meant as a subjective statement... their notability is reflected by their inclusion in books like 'Choosing Death' by Albert Mudrian and prominent placings in things like the Terrorizer and Zero Tolerance magazines death metal specials, and Terrorizer's retrospectives of the 80s and 90s. My feeling therefore is that bands like BTBAM lack notability, and in order to justify their inclusion a source should be provided not to confirm their genre but to explain why they are notable. As such, I'm deleting them again, until someone can provide such a source (and will do so with other bands of this nature). However, feel free to discuss it with me here. Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 16:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I re-added BTBAM. Not because I like them, but because they have been there. Remove the Fatal Effect. Keep it the way it has been for awhile. We have the bands down, no need to add more.-- Wick3dd ( talk) 23:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
It should be slimmed down and a few sentences should just be added to Brutal Death. Inhumer ( talk) 01:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree, surely this is just modernised brutal death metal. Too many sub-genres on here. Robotiq ( talk) 21:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
True, but it must be mentioned somehow because there are a lot of festivals just based on brutal death/slam -- 84.74.144.72 ( talk) 17:56, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Anyone have that article from Decibel from a few months back? Inhumer ( talk) 02:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed someone combined technical and progressive death metal. I totally agree as these terms are sometimes used interchangeably and the genres have a big deal of traits that overlap (and we have no sources). However, I am concerned readers will think the 2 genres are completely synonymous, and that isn't 100% correct (some DM bands are never called technical (Opeth comes to mind), while others are never referred to as progressive (Origin/Cryptopsy)). I adjusted the prose to feature both genres, without making a clear distinction between the two. Please review the following rewrite I did. Kameejl ( Talk) 10:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Technical death metal and progressive death metal are related terms to refer to bands that are particularly distinguished by the complexity of their music and the virtuosity of their musicians. Common traits are abruptly changing, sometimes chaotic song structures, uncommon time signatures, atypical rhythms and unusual harmonies and melodies. Bands described as technical death metal or progressive death metal usually fuse common death metal aesthetics with elements of progressive rock, jazz and/or classical music. While the term technical death metal is sometimes used to describe bands that not only focus on complexity but also on speed and extremity, the line between progressive and technical death metal is thin. "Tech death" and "prog death", for short, are terms commonly applied to such bands as Cryptopsy, Edge of Sanity, Opeth, Origin and Sadist. Cynic, Atheist, Pestilence and Gorguts are examples of a bands noted for creating jazz-influenced death metal. Necrophagist and Spawn of Possession are known for a classical music influenced death metal style. |
I like it. But like you stated, the terms are not always interchangeable, and though you mention this slightly, I think there should be a little more (like a sentence) about how they are not always the same. You could even mention what you just said before about Opeth and Cryptopsy. Otherwise, It's great. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 19:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
We already had this discussion, which was started by me, and we all agreed that death metal was influenced by early black metal. I still agree with the assessment. However, not that it needs changing, I should point out one thing. Death metal was indeed influenced greatl;y by early black metal, but not all early black metal bands. In fact, only a few, I would say, influenced the death metal genre. Bands such as Mercyful Fate probabaly had little to no influence on death metal. The only bands that really had an impact on the dm genre were probabaly Venom, Celtic Frost, perhaps Hellhammer and I doubt whether Bathory had an influence or not. Just thought this was worth pointing out. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 19:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Why should all BM bands need to be an influence? Not all thrash bands where an influence. Kameejl ( Talk) 20:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Tiamat were black metal NOT pure Sacandinsavian death metal! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.155.119 ( talk) 17:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
You're a moron. Listen to Sumerian Cry, The Astral Sleep and the Treblinka demos. All are clearly death metal in the Scandinavian vein, similar to early Edge of Sanity. If you still disagree, I'd advise you to get your ears/head examined. 205.174.170.153 ( talk) 13:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
That band is officially marked as a black metal band. End of story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.31.197 ( talk) 16:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Black Metal/ Death Metal, it was all pretty interlinked back then Robotiq ( talk) 21:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
There is one thing. It is black colour for infobox. It isn't very important, but I think most of people would agree, that it looks much more apposite. Why? Heavy Metal includes bands such as Led Zeppelin or Jimi Hendrix and Sepultura or Mayhem. These bands are musically pretty really very different, so these subgenres should have another colour. I added it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Music genres/Colours as black for "Extreme Metal or Heavy Metal subgenres". It is 100% allowed to do it. But some people (unlogged) just have a problem with it and delete it unreasonably as a POV making pure edit war, what is POV by itself. So I would collect some people that want black for "Extreme Metal or Heavy Metal subgenres", which would help to keep it...--Lykantrop ( Talk) 11:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
I am leaving it. There are too many stubborn bungholes and big bloodthirsty edit-warriors. Typical metalheads... But why is their problem with black?--Lykantrop ( Talk) 21:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
On the verification issue, every band page I've seen on MA has an external link to one of four sites: the band's official site, the band's MEEEspace site, the band's page on something like Rock Detector or the band's page on their record company's(/ies') website. The fact that they exist is verifiable, and in the case of bands who's record label site is included on the archive, it is also verifiable that they play metal or played metal. So...what exactly is it that isn't verifiable here? As far as genre goes, Encyclopaedia Metallum is basically a data collector of already verified genre information. I see no reason not to use the site as a source for something this simple. 128.255.179.241 Ours18 ( talk) 21:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
The progressive death metal and technical death metal were moved into one section together as one thing and now I just noticed they have their own sections again. Progressive death metal doesn't even have an article, but technical death metal does (that article needs a lot of work, too) where is described as also progressive death metal. What's up with this change? This is a problem! Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 23:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Although metal purists know/think there is a difference, the term is used interchangeably by the press. F.e. Death, Atheist and Cynic have been labeled both prog and tech. I couldn't name a technical dm band that has no progressive elements and, to play progressive music you need a fair amount of technique. Both sub-genres are so close to each other, even the section's content was practically identical. It's best to have both genres combined, until good sources, distinguishing the two, can be provided. I've searched through a couple of books on (death) metal, without any succes.
By the way, the combined section is addressing this dispute, readers are not misled. I've reverted this section split. Kameejl ( Talk) 13:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I certainly agree that there is a difference between the two but as someone already said they're used interchangeably by the press.
72.138.107.30 ( talk) 00:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
This user has been trolling around after me, and in the process has made some disturbing edits to the Chuck Schuldiner article and talk page. The most startling is a long paragraph on the talk page that attacks the relevance of Chuck (and in a previous edit the relevance of death metal itself) and personal attacks, innuendo and ridicule. I fear this editor will continue the trolling and hit this article, as he/she seems bent on messing with any article I lightly or regularly contribute to. Thanks for any assistance you can offer. A Sniper ( talk) 08:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I think some kind of comment on the popularity of death metal relative to other metal genres is totally appropriate to the article, but the last comment about it added is a bit problematic. Firstly, I'm not sure Metal Archives is a great or appropriate source for the comment as currently phrased, but regardless at the moment it's basically OR (Metal Archives themselves make no comment on the phenomenon, and the numbers simply reflect what's been added to the site). Perhaps a way round it would be to simply state, "Metal Archives lists x death metal bands out of a total of y", with the same source and no other comment? Thoughts? Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 17:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I just don't see why it matters at all. Stating a number of bands just seems a little ridiculous. Popularity is always going to be up to the person pretty much. It's all perspective. You might live in a city where everyone listens to death metal, but that doesn't suddenly make it popular or mainstream. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 21:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Can somebody answer this? They're not that great. Festering Rat Corpse ( talk) 23:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I might have given them too much credit. Their new album got to like #54 on the Billboard 200 charts - some AMG guy was comparing them to Damageplan by saying "JFAC is one of the highest-charting debut albums from a heavy metal act since Slipknot's 1999 debut." Fame doesn't nessicarily equal high charting, I was just wondering why so many teenage kids like that band. On a better note, Children of Bodom's Blooddrunk has recently cracked the Top 30, as seen in the latest issue of Rolling Stone Magazine. Festering Rat Corpse ( talk) 23:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Most of the time, and I hate to say it, AMG has no idea what they're f---ing talking about. Especially with metal. They still lump black and death in the same content description if you look. Pathetic. RexDeath ( talk) 00:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Was by Mantas, the band that would become Death. I woun't won't change it because of the source though. Inhumer ( talk) 01:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Doom metal is another genre influence. Death metal has down tuned guitars and slow passages, too. and the allmusic says that Death metal owes as much to thrash metal than to black sabbath (they choose black sabbath apparently to represent doom metal) If you won't accept that, could I at least ad black sabbath as an influence?
Yeah, you're probably right... There aren't many reliable sources out there anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.5.155.191 ( talk) 15:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Noticed that there's no mention of Nocturnus' contribution to the rise in popularity of electronic keyboards in extreme metal. Think its worth mentioning somewhere in the early history section... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.42.68 ( talk) 22:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Agree, I think Nocturnus started using them on the 'Science of Horror' demo (1988), but if you only count official releases, Pestilence were earlier, on 'Consuming Impulse' (1989) - Nocturnus's 1st album was not released until 1990. Robotiq ( talk) 21:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Was added to the subgenre section. I don't think it's accurate to mention it in that section because a) the "subgenre" is based on lyrical content, which is not a strong bases for a death metal subgenre. There are no genres called pagan death metal, viking death metal, satanic death metal etc.. Any (subsubsubsub)genre can be Christian-themed. b) Only few bands fit the description and the term christian death metal is not used a lot by the press to describe bands. c) It better fits the christian metal article and is described there in detail.
Although the term is not used often and althought it's more of a christian metal subgenre than a DM subgenre, it might be interesting to touch on it's existence. Maybe it's better to add a few lines on it in the Other fusion subgenres section (as it is a christian metal/DM hybrid). Any opinions? Kameejl ( Talk) 12:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
There have been a couple of attempts to insert Slayer into the lede as an example of a pioneering death metal band. The latest had three references. After going through all three, I verified what I had believed: Slayer were influencial on the pioneering death metal bands but were not themselves death metal pioneers. I pointed out in my last edit summary that Slayer are mentioned later in the article as an important influence, as they were. Best, A Sniper ( talk) 18:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, no problem. However, if you talk about reliable sources, Metal Observer (the source of Possessed) is an amatorial site. -- Born Again 83 ( talk) 19:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't Dethklok be inserted into this article somewhere to highlight satire of death metal? Doshindude ( talk) 01:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Mantas (formed in 1983) released a demo in 1983 under the name of DEATH BY METAL ( http://www.metal-archives.com/release.php?id=101903). Mantas has always played the same music (What we consider now death metal)from their beginnings until their break up. Possessed (also formed in 1983) released their first demo back in 1984 under the name Death Metal ( http://www.metal-archives.com/release.php?id=21654) One year after Mantas'first demo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.10.0.152 ( talk) 20:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I think the 'early history' section needs a complete re-write. It focuses too much on the 'big names' of the scene. We shouldn't forget that bands like Terminal Death and Master recorded death metal in 1985. Also, Mutilator (Bra) gets no mention as far as I can see. Their 'Grave Desecration' demo (1985) is possibly the first *pure* death metal recording (you can listen to it on youtube). Necrovore and Autopsy also released pure death metal demos in 1987. Robotiq ( talk) 21:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Understood. Always difficult because Death Metal has such a huge informal history. There are nevertheless a couple of books on the subject, such as the 'Swedish Death Metal' book that was released last year. I dunno if CD inlays and the like could count as references, such as the inlay to retrospective CDs like Napalm Death's 'Leaders not Followers'. If I get around to re-writing some of this I'll bear it in mind. Robotiq ( talk) 00:46, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
In the lead paragraph: "...in part because it does not appeal to mainstream tastes due to its aggressive nature and because the musicians often choose to remain obscure". Really? I don't associate intentional obscurity with the death metal scene. With black metal, yes, but I don't see death metal bands intentionally hiding themselves. Aryder779 ( talk) 23:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Why was the page on deathgrind deleted? It make sense to have it up, considering we have sub-subgenres such as ****ogrind and goregrind still up. Perhaps we could put it back up? CheesePiggy ( talk) 21:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
If anyone wants to contribute to the debate of whether or not to delete the Dr. Shrinker article, please check here Cheers, A Sniper ( talk) 00:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
There are at least three separate sources that consider deathgrind and goregrind to be separate subgenres; the first is Danny Lilker writing in the liner notes to the Grind Your Mind grindcore compilation (I copied the specific part to here. I also cited Zero Tolerance here... two sentences later in the same paragraph, it reads "Related genres [to goregrind] are deathgrind, which sees grindcore and brutal death metal colliding head on (Brodequin, Dead Infection, Pigsty, Alienation Mental), and ****ogrind, the most downright perverted of the lot, often adding a dollop of filthy groove and vocals straight from the toilet (Gut, CBT)." That's Issue 004, p. 46 for reference. Issue #150 of Terrorizer discusses death/grind explicitly as part of its "death metal special" run of issues, and goregrind explicitly in #181 within its "grindcore special". There is no indication that they are talking about the same bands... whilst the first talks to the likes of Mortician, the latter is focussing on Carcass and their soundalikes. I'd have to dig out #150 if you want specific quotes, but the above should be enough to suggest that parsing deathgrind and goregrind in this article is incorrect. Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 14:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Has been deleted per AfD. No sources have been produced for its existence (Metal Archives? Give me a break. Why does no-one read WP:RS?) Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 20:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Words such as melodic, brutal, satanic, epic, awesome and great are all adjectives. People use adjectives to describe things. The difference between melodic death metal and brutal death metal is that there are reliable sources that explictly identify melodic death metal as a legitimate subgenre, not merely a description of some death metal music. For instance, this recent article on the Sydney Morning Herald, a mainstream news publication, states that "death metal has its own sub-genres - technical death metal, melodic death metal, blackened death metal, deathgrind and deathcore." One would think that if brutal death metal is indeed a legitimate subgenre, it would have been mentioned in the same line. An interviewee in that article even states that "death metal is brutal", which would make the concept of a brutal death metal subgenre rather redundant. I have not been able to find any reliable source that explicitly recognizes brutal death metal as a subgenre. I have only been able to find any reliable sources that use the term brutal as a description, just like other adjectives such as satanic, epic, awesome and great. If anyone knows of a reliable source that explicitly recognizes brutal death metal as a legitimate subgenre, please tell us about it. -- Bardin ( talk) 14:10, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
So you're telling me that brutal death metal doesn't exist? Conservoman ( talk) 12:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I am rather amazed that there are people running around claiming that there is no such subgenre as "brutal death metal". I haven't a hell of a lot of research on who is and is not using the term, but I listen to a great deal of metal - particularly death metal - and it is completely unbelievable to me that anyone would the existence of brutal death metal. More later. Myrkkyhammas ( talk) 19:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
This needs to be reopened for discussion. This would be one of those instances where professional original research is required. Mainstream publications don't know anything about anything that is not mainstream. You're not going to find a "reliable" source for this information. However, ask anyone who has listened to extreme metal for more than a year and 99% of them will tell you this is a distinct subgenre. Anathematized one ( talk) 02:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
On this version of wikipedia http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brutal_death_metal , there is a Brutal death metal article that has been sourced, can it not be translated and used? If it existes in one language surly it exists in english as well.
http://www.amazon.com/Learn-About-Brutal-Death-Metal/lm/R2YSFK4D3BE2H4 --- also includes Brutal death. I'll look futher when I have time but surely this genre's existence has to acknowleged. No 'mainstream' sources... jeez I wonder why it could possibly be difficut to find mainstream sources for brutal death metal... 124.180.139.239 ( talk) 11:24, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Brutal death metal has been used as a term well before MA. If brutal death metal doesn't exist as it's own subgenre, neither does technical death metal. A few "mainstream sources" supporting the latter doesn't make it more of a subgenre. It's obvious that technical death metal is far more popular (it's the only death metal that hipsters listen to, for example}. AMG rarely reviews actual brutal death metal, so its no surprise that the term isn't given much recognition there (but I did find this, which mentions brutal death metal as a subgenre. Some more: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Some may only have brutal used as an adjective, but not all). Here are a few from another apparently "reliable" source - 1, 2, 3, and 4. You can also bet that recognized "extreme metal" magazines such as Decibel, Terrorizer and even more mainstream ones like Revolver and Metal Hammer have used the term. Not the best example, but this Decibel article makes mention of it. Here are a couple from Revolver 1 and 2. Hell, there's a mention of on this from the NY Times. Brc2000 ( talk) 14:00, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
the thing with deathcore is it's really metalcore taking bits of death metal and just adding death in front of core like they do with alot of genres. real deathcore is not really consider a sub-genre of death metal because all deathcore did was change the way metalcore singers sang. so instead of screams like metalcore bands they do growls. it is still metalcore in every way musically (writing in majors, lots of breakdowns, etc). there are a few bands that are labeled deathcore but is really just death metal but they label themselfs as deathcore. so that can be why there is a confusion about this genre. this genre is not accepted by most people and musicians as a sub-genre of death metal as it is stated in lots of articles (guitarworld, revolver, and countless magazines and artist interviews. also metalcore was not incorporated in to death metal it was the other way around. also melodic riffs are part of melodic death metal and has become one of the most popular genre of death metal. so if that part is to be kept it should say -
Deathcore: With the rise in popularity of metalcore, some bands have incorporated death metal in to their music. Bands such as Suicide Silence, Salt the Wound and early music from Job for a Cowboy combine metalcore with death metal influences. Characteristics of death metal, such as fast drumming (including blast beats), down-tuned guitars, tremolo picking, melodic riffs and partially growled vocals, are combined with breakdowns.
however the part about characteristics are still wrong as death metal bands were the first to use breakdowns but is now mainly used by "core" bands. this should be moved to the metalcore part of wiki and the death metal section of this should be completely rewritten as very little of it is true. also if you listen to a real deathcore band you will realize that it has nothing to do with death metal. bands like whitechapel, sucide silence, and so on are 100% metalcore youtube born Of osiris and other bands like that and you will understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Retardsrwe ( talk • contribs) 18:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Came across a potentially useful source here. What do other people reckon? Blackmetalbaz ( talk) 14:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone else think that Netherlands should be listed in the regional scenes? - Matt 00:23, 19 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.240.238 ( talk)
There's been a significant number of IPs coming into the article to revert, usually without edit summary, the removal of "brutal death metal" from the article no matter how flawed the section is. There may be an argument for the existence of BDM, but the definition for it is not very clear and, in its current pre-revision state, is contradictory. Suggest a semi-protection?-- WaltCip ( talk) 20:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Why do you people not bother to read other articles? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Forces states, and it is cited, that the Metal Force zine was, contrary to what you may have otherwise heard, the origin of the term death metal and thrash metal. Yet you do not mention this on the death metal article. This would be ok if it was from some off-site link, but it is mentioned on another WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE. One article says one thing, the other article doesn't mention it. FIX IT NOW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.13.52 ( talk) 14:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
The term death metal come from the band death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weezerfan1 ( talk • contribs) 06:37, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Wasn't it Possessed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.240.238 ( talk) 06:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Somebody needs to add Death Rap as a fusion genre on the page for death metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weezerfan1 ( talk • contribs) 06:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I have removed "Z-grade" from the description of the lyrical themes of death metal. While some death metal has lyrics that involve slasher film violence, to call it "Z-grade" seems derogatory and adds nothing to the description. It's better to just say "Death metal's lyrical themes often invoke slasher and splatter movie violence." Mason092 ( talk) 01:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Although many "reliable sources" claim this band is from San Francisco, this claim is not correct. Various interviews from current/former Possessed members point to the band being from the cities of El Sobrante, San Pablo, Pinole, Richmond or El Cerrito, which are 20-40 minutes away from the actual city limits of SF. (Most likely the journalist or researcher was referring to "San Francisco Bay Area", as the journalist is obviously not familiar with the area.) Second, the Slayer influence on Possessed is incorrect and an obvious anachronism. Possessed formed in 82/83 and began writing songs at that time, whereas Slayer's first album "Show No Mercy" wasn't released until late 1983 (and I'd imagine it would take a year or so for the "buzz" to get out - they were still a young band back then.) Band interviews are the best indicator of a band's musical influences, and I've yet to find any Possessed interviews where anyone cites Slayer. The Allmusic source directs to an album reviewer who believes the Possessed album Seven Churches has a Slayer influence, that's it. Not a fact, only an opinion ... so fixed. -- Danteferno ( talk) 19:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
A couple of things I'd like to note. Metal Archives is used as a source in the article a couple of times. MA is all user-supplied content, hence not a reliable source and needs to be removed. The word "often" and other WP:PEACOCK and WP:WEASEL words is used a lot in the article as well. Rather than overusing ambigious phrases, specifiy who said what exactly. I'll rewrite it myself, but thought I'd mention it here if someone has the time to do it before me. Nymf talk/ contr. 20:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
A user is attempting to delete all the Death and Possessed demos on the premise that they are neither noteworthy or sourced. Can folks assist in finding sources that signify their importance? Thanks. Best, A Sniper ( talk) 17:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Having followed the discussions at the various AfD pages, I will have to advise that it is impossible to sway Deletionists from their pre-ordained state of mind. There are different philosophies at play on Wikipedia, ranging from Inclusionism to Deletionism and various others in between. I see no evidence anywhere that Deletionism is meant to be the controlling philosophy that determines the rules for all of Wikipedia, but it is time to admit that they control these debates. It is obvious to people who know about heavy metal history that the demos in question are unquestionably influential and we know that from reading the literature our whole lives. But Deletionists are tough to sway and are convinced or their own infallibility. I suggest that information on the influence of demos in the metal field be added as historical items to each band's biographical article. -- DOOMSDAYER520 ( Talk| Contribs) 02:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Is it just me or is the sentence "the style is characterized by an extremely vocal guttural with lyrics sung in a slow following the guitar riffs and sudden weather changes" of the Brutal death metal section is total nonsens ? Sounds like the kind of phrasing produced by Babel fish... zubrowka74 20:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Soilent Green has never been a deathgrind band and it isn't even listed in its article so I'm removing it from there. The band is refered to in a previous section, where it must be. Gothbag ( talk) 13:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Is that serious ? Someone deleted the section under the rationale that consensus was made that this sub-genre did not exist. Should it be reverted ? (my guess is yes, unless I missed something) zubrowka74 01:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
To the user( Scabrosus) who twice added the comment about poor drumming technique, your edit summary read, "I have noted that the drummers use poor drumming technique along with the fast beats. I can hear the differences because I play drums." That's pretty much the definition of WP:OR, which is exactly what I said when I reverted it the first time. Either find a source for your claim or don't add it again. << Fyrefly ( talk) 22:05, 28 September 2010 (UTC) I don't remember adding it twice, and I did not know that original research was not allowed, seems stupid thou someone did originally do research on anything. Scabrosus ( talk) 22:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC) I'm sorry. Yes, you only put back the information that I reverted from a different user. I got mixed up. But yeah, original research shouldn't be included and I'll let the WP:OR speak for itself as to why that is. And sorry for my attitude earlier today. << Fyrefly ( talk) 02:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
I thought it was clear "brutal" death metal was not a valid sub-genre. It is a way or a style in which death metal can be played but it doesn't even have it's own page, just a redirect to the main page. I'm writing this here because the comment field didn't allow enough space when I did the revert. zubrowka74 16:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Brutal Death is a valid subgenre...just look on french version..WE'ARE IN 2013...we not supposed to argue about brutal death or slam.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.83.158.254 ( talk) 01:52, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I understand not calling it a subgenre, but not mentioning it at all? It's a style of death metal, so shouldn't it be mentioned for completion of information? If the goal of an encyclopedia is to be thorough in explaining a topic, something that typifies the style of hundreds of musicians should at least get a footnote. 24.85.113.197 ( talk) 22:57, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The article described death metal as being characterized by minor key tonality and atonality. What it should be saying is not atonality, but chromaticism, because for the music to be atonal, the guitarists would have to carefully give equal value to each tone, which is highly unlikely and mostly used in orchestral settings. The use of all 12 tones in death metal music is a characteristic of chromaticism, as in, uses the chromatic scale. 144.162.76.185 ( talk) 17:16, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I have no intention to start the umpteenth "Possessed or Death?" debate, but the article has way too much emphasis on Death and Chuck Schuldiner as being the "first death metal band/musician/godfather of death metal". There is one thing everyone can agree on, be it Wikipedia editor or professional music journalist: Death released way more albums than Possessed, was active longer than Possessed, and with that weight alone, was more influential on the death metal genre than Possessed. However, a Google Books search either suggests that the bands pioneered the genre together or that Possessed preceded Death as being the first death metal band. Besides Allmusic - which has always been sketchy with its claims - there's no indication Possessed was a "fast Slayer-influenced thrash metal" band. Just because a journalist thinks a band sounds like it has an influence from another band does not mean a band WAS influenced by other band. No interviews suggest that the band was influenced by Slayer on Seven Churches. Band interviews are key to what influences a band/musician.
In just a little bit, I plan on overhauling the "History" section of this article with more accurate information, but just thought I post this, first, for discussion. Thanks, -- Danteferno ( talk) 15:20, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
To be frank, I don't listen to any sort of metal...so I'm a bit out of my musical comfort zone here, but I have reverted all edits and restored the deathcore section of the article. After doing independent research, I have determined that it would appear as though deathcore is a valid subgenre that has a good following. Finding a citation or two for the section might prevent a repeat of the edit war that has been occurring. Food for thought. --Tymun ( Contact Me - Contribs) 01:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
-But death metal bands were using breakdowns before deathcore even existed. Suffocation, At The Gates, to name a few. JWULTRABLIZZARD ( talk) 10:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Why brutal death metal there isn't in the list of death metal subgenres? -- Der Künstler ( talk) 21:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Lol simply put; "brutal death metal" is not a genre • GunMetal Angel 02:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
slam death metal lol, if we create a wiki article for that genre we might as well start making pages for every imaginary last fm genre
This stuff needs to be cleared up.
Subgenres are: melodic death metal, technical death metal, progressive death metal, and brutal death metal (which is being entirely dismissed, sadly). These are subgenres on the basis that they do not incorporate any specific genre into the death metal formula, but rather alter the formula itself with "objective techniques".
Fusion genres include: deathcore, blackened death metal, doom/death metal (sometimes called funeral doom), deathgrind, and death'n'roll. These are fusion genres on the basis that they combine aesthetics of other established genres with the death metal formula, instead of altering it with "objective techniques".
Goregrind is not a subgenre, but not entirely accepted as a fusion genre of death metal either, it is rather a subgenre of grindcore than anything else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.150.32.140 ( talk) 19:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
According to the AV Club, Dethklok's first two albums are "the highest-charting death metal albums of all time, bringing a whole new audience to the genre." This should probably be addressed on the page here. As of late 2003, the best-selling group was Cannibal Corpse. [7] Aryder779 ( talk) 17:12, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
I would like to use the words "bands" or "artists" instead of "acts" because the former don't lead to misconceptions, whereas the latter may also be used to indicate a circus or theater performance, e.g. in the sense of a theatrical play having four or five acts. This (the use of "bands" rather than "acts") would also apply to articles about musicians or bands, provided many Wikipedia articles about pop music artists list related artists as related "acts". What do you think? -- Fandelasketchup ( talk) 14:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Death metal guitarist use low tuned guitars!
Ok... now while I highly agree that "brutal death metal" is not really a genre versus "death metal" since there's really not much at all that warrants it being its own thing besides maybe just heavier riffs and guttural vocals, but I really think slam death metal should have its own article and very soon with the rise of peak it's at, enough big publications are going to write stories about it. I mean maybe slam wasn't a genre 7 years ago, but it sure is a genre now! I mean look; how can you even really compare this to this, and let alone call these two things the same thing? Even a twelve year old who has never been exposed to anything metal could agree there is definitely a difference in death metal and slam death metal. If technical death metal can be its own thing, then slam definitely deserves to be. Second Skin ( talk) 09:30, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Death metal's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "AllMusic":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Since when is death metal even remotely rooted in hardcore? Yes, it's often fused with it, but there are simply no stylistic similarities at all. Early death metal is, first and foremost, really just glorified thrash metal. Much like how grindcore is souped-up crust punk/hardcore. And even though there's a source stating it, it's just incorrect. It's not true, the earliest forms of death metal have absolutely no hardcore in them whatsoever. Listen to Death, Mantas, Possessed, Sepultura and Morbid Angel and tell me there's hardcore there? There's none, you won't find it. Hardcore should be removed. Also, no, bands that "influenced" death metal weren't playing hardcore either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.80.1.126 ( talk) 13:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
first i removed the above bands from the pioneers of Death Metal and replaced one of them with Autopsy and this ref which proves that not only are one of the pioneer of Death metal but also are pioneers of Death/doom. [1] BUT someone removed Autopsy and the ref and restored the Cannibal Corpse & Deicide. now i place 2 Citation needed in front of them,so if anyone knows a ref for them,place them in front of them or i am going to remove them again,if anyone restore them without ref again,i will remove them again,same work i did with Sodom page,which i placed " black metal (early)" several times with 2 refs in front of it but someone always removed it,i continued placing that until s/he stoped.
References
Dearth Meatball — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.84.215.202 ( talk) 20:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Death metal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=113803When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@ ABC paulista I don't see what there is to discuss. What is the disadvantage of mentioning in the infobox the vocal technique that, as evidenced both in this article and in its own article, is definitive of death metal?-- MA SHAUN IX 16:17, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Death metal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:09, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
@ Second Skin: The first source clerly states: For those who aren't familiar with the slam death metal genre, here's a quick summation. The genre evolved from the '90s New York death metal scene, incorporating elements of hardcore. It's not so focused on guitar solos and blast beats aren't so important; it's more about utilizing mid-tempos (and you can't forget the breakdowns), palm-muted riffage, the occasional surprising element of hip hop-inspired vocal and drum beat rhythms, and a healthy dose of growls and grunts. Oh -- and this genre takes the macabre of death metal to the extreme. So all of your changes and band additions are unsourced, thereby being innadequated for this place. Even Brutal Death metal isn't listed here as a subgenre because of a lack of valid sources. ABC paulista ( talk) 15:58, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
hardcore punk grouo Discharge sounds like proto death metal oin 1982. forget metal bands that were then - it's like girls singing compare to this Discharge – Protest And Survive (1982) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAiLqQ8Xics Sergey Woropaew ( talk) 13:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
I propose an edit to the section " Subgenres and fusion genres" to change the current bulleted list to a list of subheadings underneath the main heading "Subgenres and fusion genres". This would allow redirects to the specific subgenres' headings instead of the current trend of sending redirects to the general "Subgenres and fusion genres" section (which could possibly be confusing to users unfamiliar with Wikipedia's redirect system or those who don't know to scroll down to find the specific genre they were looking for). Why would we want the link "[[Death metal#Subgenres and fusion genres|Slam death metal]]" to redirect to " Death metal#Subgenres and fusion genres" when a simple reformatting of the section would allow other articles to link to the more specific " Death metal#Slam death metal" so that users can more easily see the genre they clicked through to read about? — Tha†emoover†here (talk) 04:26, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Technical Death is derivative of Prog but are nowhere near the same subgenre. Nile and Opeth sound nothing alike.
"Technical death metal (also known as tech-death, progressive death metal, or prog-death)[134] is a subgenre of death metal which employs dynamic song structures, uncommon time signatures, atypical rhythms and unusual harmonies and melodies. Bands described as technical death metal or progressive death metal usually fuse common death metal aesthetics with elements of progressive rock, jazz or classical music. While the term technical death metal is sometimes used to describe bands that focus on speed and extremity as well as complexity, the line between progressive and technical death metal is thin. Tech death and prog death, for short, are terms commonly applied to such bands as Nile, Edge of Sanity, and Opeth. Necrophagist and Spawn of Possession are known for a classical music-influenced death metal style. Death metal pioneers Death also refined their style in a more progressive direction in their final years. Some albums for this subgenre are Hallucinations (1990) by the German band Atrocity and Death's Human (1991). This style has significantly influenced many bands, creating a stream that in Europe was carried out at first by bands such as Gory Blister and Electrocution.[135][136] The Polish band Decapitated gained recognition as one of Europe's primary modern technical death metal acts" 2604:6000:9382:5600:5D3D:6D9E:5AC9:2C1E ( talk) 04:05, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Do we really need a disambiguation for a largely unknown film that took $2500 at the box office? Random name ( talk) 15:41, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
@ Korn:, in the book Death Metal Music: The Passion and Politics of a Subculture, by Natalie J. Purcell, it is stated that Deathgrind, Goregrind and Pornogrind are styles that mix Death metal with Grindcore, but no "hierarchy" is established between them, so grouping them the way you are doing without sources backing it up is considered original research, and exceptional claims require exceptional sources. The book might not be used in this article in particluar, but it's used in each respective article as source. ABC paulista ( talk) 17:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Persons ask why metal I love. 73.34.107.203 ( talk) 01:49, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Yeah metal is not dead. Still lives on. 73.34.107.203 ( talk) 01:53, 29 November 2021 (UTC)