Jump to content

Talk:Heavy metal music: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 99: Line 99:
: I'd vote for Led Zep, Deep Purple then Black Sabbath, as the last one is the first 100 % metal band. [[User:Zubrowka74|<font style=" text-decoration: none; font: normal small-caps bold 11pt Arial, Sans-serif; color:#88CC88">zubrowka</font><font style=" text-decoration:none; font: normal bold 9pt Arial, Sans-serif; color:#002200">74</font>]] 17:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
: I'd vote for Led Zep, Deep Purple then Black Sabbath, as the last one is the first 100 % metal band. [[User:Zubrowka74|<font style=" text-decoration: none; font: normal small-caps bold 11pt Arial, Sans-serif; color:#88CC88">zubrowka</font><font style=" text-decoration:none; font: normal bold 9pt Arial, Sans-serif; color:#002200">74</font>]] 17:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
::For the record: I totally agree with that and it would be my preferred order.--<span style="font-family:Black Chancery;text:grey 0.3em 0.3em 0.1em;">'''[[User:Sabrebd|<span style="color:blue;">SabreBD</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Sabrebd|talk</span>]]) 17:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
::For the record: I totally agree with that and it would be my preferred order.--<span style="font-family:Black Chancery;text:grey 0.3em 0.3em 0.1em;">'''[[User:Sabrebd|<span style="color:blue;">SabreBD</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Sabrebd|talk</span>]]) 17:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

== Progressive Rock ==

Considering that pioneering band [[Black Sabbath]] had a definite [[Progressive Rock]] influence and early bands like [[Deep Purple]] and [[Judas Priest]] also had definite prog influences shouldn't Progressive Rock be listed as one of the stylistic origins? Other music genres have like ten different things listed as origins, so why should Heavy Metal be limited to just [[Blues Rock]] and [[Psychedelic Rock]]? It's not like those are even cited.

Revision as of 10:59, 25 February 2013

Featured articleHeavy metal music is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 10, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 5, 2003Featured article candidatePromoted
April 4, 2007Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article

Metal bands world map

I think this deserves a place somewhere in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.37.161.22 (talk) 11:38, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To me it looks rather unnecessary and we have pretty much summed up the situation in a couple of sentences.--SabreBD (talk) 17:06, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with SabrebBD(talk), this seems out of place and non-cohesive with the article. DaemonsTool(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I think the problem is that it may not be representative of real figures, since it only uses information from a manually compiled (I think) encyclopedia. InverseHypercube 22:24, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It does indeed seem to be manually compiled. Also, the info is credited to Encyclopaedia Metallum, which 1) is user generated, and 2) excludes a lot of bands that would be considered metal in mainstream opinion.--¿3family6 contribs 00:36, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Modern metal

I've seen some bands labeled at this before, i made an internet research and there are some sites, forums and comunities labeling metal bands as this. What editors think, is this the born of a new sub-genre? Nicrorus (talk) 02:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am all in favour of keeping the article up to date with the latest trends in the genre, but it sounds as if those sources wouldn't pass WP:RS. There is an inevitable time lag that we have to accept while the terminology makes it into major magazines and the handful of reliable online sources. If those sources are available it may be possible to construct something. If not we will have to wait.--SabreBD (talk) 06:08, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And even so, "modern metal" refers to a time frame and not to a sub-genre in the same way as NWOBHM. Modern metal is just heavy metal in the current context. zubrowka74 17:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How can we codify?

As an example is this similar to these fictitous genres?

  • Country music with 4 string banjos
  • Western music with 4 string banjos
  • Country music with 5 string banjos
  • Western music with 5 string banjos

It seems to me that there are three ways to classify metal that can cross over.

  1. Type of instruments and how they are played.
  2. Lyrics
  3. Voicing styles

If a band combines death in one with thrash and goth in two others, would that be three genres? This may make a good thesis for a music student to create new codified genres and let the cultures decide how to name them. It seems that any band can create a new combination, and thus for every band it creates a new genre. Two examples I can think of are the earlier bands Boston and Electric Light Orchestra, there are many more. Did these radically new styles create new genres? I should have mentioned at the top, that I personally lump it all into a few categories. Rock, heavy metal rock and a term I call 'head banger' with absolutely no intent that in offfends. I only use it in small circles. I could say much more, but I will let others digest what I have said so far.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:14, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jimi Hendrix Experience

Should they also be included among the first heavy metal bands in the lead? Jagged 85 (talk) 20:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the Experience are usually seen as blues rock and a precursor to heavy metal, rather than one of the first bands.--SabreBD (talk) 07:41, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But "Purple Haze" is considered an early heavy metal song, so why shouldn't the Experience be considered a metal band? Jagged 85 (talk) 05:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably because it is possible to have a song identified as HM or proto-HM without the band being seen as a HM band.--SabreBD (talk) 08:47, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blue cheer changes

The attempt to change the lead, without evidence, to increase the apparent role of Blue cheer clearly has no consensus among editors on this article. However, I am opening this thread as an alternative to the concerned ip, as an alternative to edit waring and as an opportunity to explore any relevant issues. Feel free to raise them here.--SabreBD (talk) 13:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So you opened this cause you wasn't sure about Blue Cheer being metal..? In my opinion and from what I have read they are metal.186.31.129.64 is right on what he wrote about Blue Cheer being undoubtedly the first. the article should be reverted back to his version.--75.65.123.86 (talk) 06:48, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I opened this thread to give you the opportunity to put your case. It is important to understand that your opinion is not sufficient, especially to a major change to a featured article, which must follow reliable sources. There are other issues with your edits, not least that they are in the lead of the article, which is a summary of the main body and not a place to put controversial theories. This is a major change and as such needs consensus, which you clearly do not have. If you want to achieve that you need to put your case here, indicating your reliable sources and then convince editors of there validity.--SabreBD (talk) 08:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just make one thing clear i'm not 186.31.129.64. I thought what he wrote made a lot of sense, especially about Blue Cheer being the first metal band. You're right he shouldn't have posted it in the lead.--75.65.123.86 (talk) 09:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Order of bands in lead

I cannot quite believe that I am having to open a thread on this, but since my revert was reverted here it is. I am suggesting we go back to the order of Led Zep, Black Sabbath and Deep Purple. I believe they have that order because Zep were the first to adopt a "heavy" sound, which then influenced the other two.--SabreBD (talk) 08:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd vote for Led Zep, Deep Purple then Black Sabbath, as the last one is the first 100 % metal band. zubrowka74 17:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For the record: I totally agree with that and it would be my preferred order.--SabreBD (talk) 17:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Progressive Rock

Considering that pioneering band Black Sabbath had a definite Progressive Rock influence and early bands like Deep Purple and Judas Priest also had definite prog influences shouldn't Progressive Rock be listed as one of the stylistic origins? Other music genres have like ten different things listed as origins, so why should Heavy Metal be limited to just Blues Rock and Psychedelic Rock? It's not like those are even cited.