Rexorcist's Forum Replies

"Easy wins" seems like a poor choice of words, though.

But we can still but heads to find some fair way to do this without sacrificing the integrity of the clan system.  Maybe I see it a little differently since I'll listen to any metal genre, but if Daniel and Ben wanted to draw attention to the Hall, then it's still an important part despite being so small.

But there should at least be a temporary period for people to be able to get the Halls done if it needs help.  And it might make more sense if any aforementioned special condition for voting on the album may only apply to people who have actually reviewed it, and only if it's necessary, that way there's more protection.

And like I said, it would only be temporary, and it would only be for the active users who are contributing to the site.  But if that's not really possible at all then I've more or less decided which one I'll join.

Sixth months is WAY too long.  Besides, my mood changes every month or so.  Why don't we make it either two or three?

Don't get me wrong, this isn't a plea to include demos.  The first music site I joined wouldn't allow EP's or bootlegs.  But this makes for a decent discussion since there are so many.

The issues are valid.  Then I have a different suggestion.  Metalforum allows users to change their username three times a month.  What if we're allowed to change our fourth clan once a month?  Just until we get more popular here.  And this only applies to those who have a fourth clan, such as you or Ben.  Depending on how much free time I have, it may be around a month before I'm able to lock in all three threads, but for the most part.  But I think if this is the case, the first clan that needs my votes is either The Fallen or The North.  There are some things I definitely have to say about some of the albums submitted to those categories.  Of course, I've only heard about five of the Fallen albums and ten of the North albums.  But I'll get onto the Early Thrash challenge the moment the Lamb of God album I'm listening to ends.  I've rated a few of them, but I've only reviewed two or three so far.

Cool.

Then I have another proposition.  Since a big issue concerning the hall of judgment's progress is the lack of users therein, maybe we can cut down on the tumbleweeds another way.  Let's give every album inducted in the hall one month to complete, and the winning votes take over for that judgment unless there's only one vote.  I guess a minimum of 5 (3 at the extreme) should do it, that way there's either a 2-1 or a 3-2 victory.  In the event of a tie after one month, users who have completed three list challenges and locked in three clans have the right to vote on that specific hall regardless of their clans, but they'll have to review it on Metal Academy before anything else.  And after another week or so, the judgment is made, and if there is still a tie, the result is no.  This should give people a little more motivation to write reviews.

Of course, this should only be temporary due to the lack in activity.  However, I noticed that a full page of forum posts I hadn't yet read were taking over the recent posts section, and that didn't even cover all of the posts.  That's a good sign.

Would I get to change my fourth, though?  I may not want to stick with that fourth forever.

Participation in the Hall of Judgement only helps if the member understands & appreciates the clan well & are willing to explore the release in question with an open mind. Otherwise it can just as easily be a hinderance to the accuracy of our genre tagging. There's no point in someone that doesn't really like or understand the symphonic metal genre making calls on a symphonic metal record & that's the whole point of the Metal Academy clan philosophy. It's actually our differentiator over the competition.

I guessed that.  I'm honestly in full support of this issue, of course this is also why I find it hard to decide what my fourth will be.  Ideally, whatever has the biggest range for me to participate in.  After literally 2,000 metal albums, the process of selecting one out of six mathematically twice as hard as selecting three out of nine, and I kinda of feel that pressure.

Oh, I see what you’re saying. Sorry. I forgot you have to complete your existing clans before attacking a fourth. Consider it locked in.

Thanks.  But something tells me this is not a recurring theme here, is it?

Quote:

"Completion of any Clan Challenge will "lock in" that clan for that Metal Academy attendee. Note that completing any Clan Challenge will achieve this, so you don't have to complete them all for any particular clan. Once you've locked in all three of your starting clans, you can lock in a fourth one to add that clan to your profile. That's right, you can earn yourself a fourth clan!"

So what does "lock in" mean?

I've reviewed all 25 of the Early Days of Power Metal list, and I made sure they were in-depth, at least a good paragraph or two long, and carried much of my personal judgement.  So how does the "lock in" thing work?

If Rising actually did become non-metal, what would that have meant to the clan list they're featured in? Seems like it might have been weird to have a non-metal release be important for a challenge.

This.  Maybe the lists themselves do need to be updated, of course, for anyone who's reviewed albums that would be kicked off or replaced after the update, that could pose a problem if they need to review more than 25 albums for the same list... unless of course each user could keep a recorded score of the list, so that they don't lost "points" if an album they reviewed is replaced.  Of course, this is only in the event that a list needs to be updated.

From what I looked up in the halls section, this marks the first finished hall for the Fallen.

Alright.  I got a few noms prepared already.

I don't remember that.  I remember it being pretty samey, but then again it has been a year.  Still, whatever speed tracks are on that album might be very good, but stylistically they're market brand.

Currently listening to Rage - Black in Mind.

Lemme share with you some Metalforum usernames: Goatmaster General, Relentless Oblivion, Sheol, Surgical Brute, Macabre Eternal, True Belief and Father Alabaster.  You'd think they'd have something better down for the ranks, especially if we implement them here where there's a clan system.

Actually, I wouldn't mind if each clan had different names for the ranks.

I found myself on an Embryo binge today, since I'm in need of a bit more jazz fusion.

Clan Legends sounds way more metal.  Metalforum actually has a ranking system depending on some sort of point system.  There are 14 titles, apparently.  But they're lame ones like Newbie, Apprentice, Explorer, etc.  Right now I'm "Enthusiast."  What the hell is that?

Finally!  I get to represent a punk genre that isn't forced under another metal tag like crossover thrash!  Also, I don't think I'll be joining the revolution for my fourth clan when I get the right to a fourth one.

It's an interesting suggestion thanks Vinny. I assume that the idea will also encompass the polar opposite functionality so that I can filter the forums to show only my beloved genre-tag related threads? :) Would the ability to simply filter out the Hall of Judgement forum suffice?

In that case, to avoid tediousness among users there would have to be two separate filters where one of the two is a special case specifically for that subforum, and the other applies to single threads.  There's no real reason to filter out any other entire subforums.

True but considering the staff is very limited, there may be other potentially more important features to include and program first.  Even RYM has a million things to do and they have a staff of around 200 moderators, but only two developers.

No need to get snarky.  If you think of a good enough conversation then people might post on it 

Why not start a few new threads of your own?

I was mostly speaking from the mindset of Heavy Metal Maniac.  But still, speed is more about that attitudinal energy, which is The Pit's signature trait.

Then lemme take a crack at it.  First, lemme say that I'm 100% what you said about the difference between thrash and speed.  Take bands like Exciter.  Each song is basically an attempt at being a fast and energetic hard rock song, which is basically the most generic form you can takes.  ADX falls in this category as well.  Power metal is different in the sense that it's a much more anthemic and dramatic genre, where as thrash is almost entirely about riffage, which is where technicality comes in as well.

In the context of neoclassical metal, it doesn't require the bombast of symphonic metal and is much closer to a progressive sound than it is to a power sound.  But because there was never a scene, the term can get loose.  A good outlier would be the difference between two different albums: Under the Force of Courage by Galneryus which is more focuses on the complexity that classical has shown before, and Dawn of Victory by Rhapsody, which is more focuses on the vibe and sound of classical in general in a more cinematic way.  Basically, the difference between speed and thrash is mostly the same difference between symphonic and neoclassical: presence vs. technicality.

At least this is the basic rundown of how I see it.  Now power metal is RELATED in the sense that it can attach itself to these four genres like it was nothing.  Power thrash is a relatively easy combination to make, as proven by early Iced Earth, Imagika and Parodox.  However, as far as comparing relations goes, power metal doesn't often get confused with anything except the US brand, which is less bombastic and more focuses on heavy metal roots.

I don't think it's interchangeable with thrash at all.  Despite that, because of its direct attitude, I believe it belongs in the Pit.  Power metal albums are mostly focuses on melody and drama, but speed and thrash are both focuses on attitude, even though rhythm and jams are a bigger part of speed metal.  Besides, we already have one clan taking five genres, I don't think we need another.

Personally, I have always viewed speed metal as the evolutionary step between heavy metal and thrash metal, so I'm kind of on the fence with this one and feel that both The Guardians and The Pit have a valid claim on it's inclusion. Maybe as it was birthed within The Guardians remit though, then they have the stronger claim, but I could be persuaded either way.

A key outlier for me is jam factor vs. riff factor.  Thrash metal tends to be less melody-oriented and focused on a more evil or just malevolent presence than speed metal, which is closer to the original heavy metal spirit, like hard rock on steroids.  The Angel Dust debut either switches between the two or merges them, and it makes for a good exercize in determining which is which, especially if you go right for the next album which is almost entirely absent of thrash.

But.... Grin is their best album! (hides to avoid immediate backlash)

Honestly I couldn't give a crap about the backlash over stuff like that, especially since this whole "signature album" rule is broken often, especially by The Beatles.  Sometimes it;s a war between two albums, like Cocteau Twins' Treasure and Heaven or Las Vegas.  Plus, my favorite Coroner is No More Color and I'm kinda disappointed in the Beatles cover on Mental Vortex.

Plus, all the Coroner albums are good enough to justify a "favorite album" comment, and in Grin's case, if someone likes groove more that thrash, or is just tired of straight thrash, it makes sense.

Coroner is back together and working on new studio material.  Is anyone else as hyped s I am?

THese guys are incredible thrashers.  This is a Pit essential if you ask me.

Thank you for the apology.

To be fair, the system is all about walking fine lines because of the overlap in genres becoming unpredictable.  For example, take Hell II's incredible usage of sludge, doom and drone with hints of death and black.  With its major genres, it's the perfect album for The Fallen.  And then we have a mix of power metal and thrash metal on Burnt Offerings, boasting mild symphonic, prog and doom and death influences.  It likely fits in both the Guardians and The Pit (no way Dante's Inferno is power instead of thrash), but it also takes atmospheric influence from key genres of the Horde and the Fallen.  When a band like Fleshgod comes around, that's when things get technical and the discussions begin.

Of course, I can't speak for Apocalyptica, but I was thikning along the lines of the high-energy music of Dawn of the Dragonstar by Twilight Force and the symphonic power sounds of Galneryus.  The heaviness of death metal mixed with the high symphonic focus brought the same feeling somewhat to life, thus through heaviness the similarities are found where they likely shouldn't be found.

This reminds me of a movie I saw which surprised me with how well it handled two completely different genres and combined them so seamlessly: gritty film noir and children's cartoons.  Roger Rabbit.  The key factor in combining the two was violence.  The scene explaining Bob Hoskin's disdain for cartoons in the bar said it all.

Rexorcist, if you read the notes on that Hall entry you'll find that it was never in question that "Agony" is a Symphonic Death Metal album. The Hall entry was really about whether a record like "Agony" should reasonably sit in our heavy/power/symphonic/neoclassical metal clan alongside the likes of Nightwish, Within Temptation & Epica (not to mention Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Helloween & Blind Guardian) or not.

The way I see it, that's essentially the same thing.  And I DID read the notes.  Plus, you seem to have forgotten above the notes that says, "This change would also remove the Symphonic Metal genre from this release."  I'm perfectly fine if you create a symph-death metal genre, and for some time I've questioned why the phrase isn't very common.  But I also feel that the album catered to me needs as a Guardian by changing its brutal tech death behavior from the debut and the EP to an attitude somewhat closer to what I expect from modern symphonic power bands that focus on heaviness.  It catered to my needs, so I voted not to remove the genre.

Having said that, I'm not against a symphonic death metal tag.  But I do believe that FGA has become something different from most death metal, and just different enough to consider.

Also, don;t take this the wrong way, but I;d prefer it if you didn't assume I didn't read something again.  Not everyone will read things the way you do, and there was never anything that stated I didn't read the post or that I got the idea that someone said it wasn't "symph death" as opposed to "symph."  Phrases like "misuse of the Symphonic Metal genre" makes that pretty clear.

Voted to keep symphonic on that one.  There might only be one instrument handling the symphonic genre, but the tone and focus of the album is centered on that violin's symphonic behavior.

Don't take this as bragging, but I've heard over 10,000 albums in the last ten years, that's how you can make a judgment.  It might not be the MOST ACCURATE judgment, but it's still an educated one, especially since .  But to be fair, I never said that you thought it was a metal album, as I guessed you had admitted to that when my eye caught the "For fans of" section, but I can see how that message would come across concerning my phrasing, so I'll admit to poor phrasing.  Basically, with enough fixation on genre differences themselves, (something at the front of my mind with all music I listen to), and with enough practice, you can form a basic idea of what the album is like in your head.  However, all I really needed in this instance was whether or not this was metal.  Hell, I'm even listening to a non-metal album by an avant-garde metal band who posted this as black metal, when it's closer to dark ambient with black ambient influences: Cycle of Emptiness by Kitties of Death, and I'm sorely disappointed in this as a market-brand ambient album with no special traits.  It's obviously pretending to be metal, and clearly isn't.  It has it moments of OK atmosphere and that's it.  22/100.  Gonna let Ben know not to include this one whenever he puts the band up here.  But that was just the example.  Basically, I can take that sound, read what people have said, audiate it with more new age attached and boom.

These guys have ten albums, so they can wait: Keydragon.  I may consider making a worst metal albums ever list, but that won't be for a while so I can wait.

Kitties of Death, please.  I've heard their first five albums, and they suck as much as RYM suggests.  Their sixth album and two EP's released last year aren't on RYM, but they are on the Bandcamp page, and the sixth album is listed on Metallum.

I'm gonna stop you right there at "these vocals can only be found on a black metal release."  Music progresses by combining elements from various influences, so even though I haven't heard this album, it seems clear that that just makes this album an unconventional ambient album.  I am very curious, hover, what albums you're thinking of when you say "better new age releases."

Not necessarily.  I'm just saying that it's more noticable of a change on those two Metallica albums that the bands I listed strayed towards.  Like I said, "The Thing That Should Not Be," "Sanitarium's" first half and the last two songs of MoP bridge that gap.  Sure the band adds more power to their percussion and tone, but "thrashing" is more along the lines of practically every single on "Peace Sell," which we can safely say tracks 1, 2, 5 and 6 focus more on than the other songs.

True but they aren't a very diverse band and their hot albums steer way too close to groove.  I think we're debating different definitions of heavy metal by accident.

Well, I'm careful about debating speed metal as it is a loose term on RYM and can vary depending on the online community.  But I'd attach it to Seventh Son and Black Hand Inn at any time.  Running Wild goes hand-in-hand with Metallica for how brutal their music can be.  Around the internet these guys are tagged as heavy metal.  Metal storm doesn't even consider them power metal.  But Metallica attracts metal fans of various types, and that's why the albums are so special.  We can't deny that the general heaviness of both albums compositions lower and in side A.  Yes, the guitars are heavy, but the band isn't always "thrashing.". On top of that, the bands I tagged are many of the most popular bands in the thrash scene.  I'd even include Annihilator, Pantera and maybe Artillery.  Obviously I'm not counting early Pantera.

While I do disagree, I'm in the camp that considers Metal Church thrash so of course I would, I would like to point out that if Ride the Lightning and Master of Puppets are thrash/heavy records, then quite a lot of thrash records should be in thrash/heavy too.

I think it really depends on how diverse the band gets.  Albums like the first four Megadeths are too focused on thrashing front to back for that to happen, and by Countdown the thrash had been largely forsaken.  The same about thrashing front-to-back is especially true for Slayer, who rarely steered into new territory longterm until they made a straight-up punk album with Divine Intervention.  Off the top of my head, bands whose classics are excluded from this combo include Megadeth up to Rust, Slayer, Vektor, Coroner, Kreator, Sepultura, Voivod and Celtic Frost.  Metal Church is a good example of the combo (depending on who you ask), T0urniquet is definitely both and Overkill is a maybe.  And because US power metal is a direct heavy metal subgenre you could also include Iced Earth by technicality.  I'm almost done with Peace Sells, and from front to back the first thing on its mind is thrashing.  It doesn't really exercise diversity until its cover of "I Ain't Superstitious."  I guess in comparison to most thrash bands, there are only a few bands who bridge the gap.

I might give you Seventh Star, but I've never heard anyone say those other two aren't heavy metal.  Plus, those albums sounded like the were more worried about modernizing than anything.  They were still heavier than another influential metal album at the time (and you can't convince me this isn't metal), Deep Purple in Rock.  It also bridged the fine line between hard rock and heavy metal, but displayed a level of heaviness that most early bands had difficulty reaching, and had already included the more melodic nature that would be seen in ballads and symphonic metal songs of the 90's and onward.

Not necessarily.  The point of rock and metal is to overcome limits and try new things.  Sabbath didn't use new tech, they just toned down the guitars, which anyone could've done.

Yeah, that's pretty fuckin' punk.

So are you saying it's impossible for a metal song to sound like a rock song?  Theoretically?