Talk:Emo

This talk page has been archived. The archive is not chronolgoical. Instead, issues that have been resolved, are no longer relevant or have been on this talk page for a significant time without comment are placed in the archive. Please feel free to shift sections from the archive if you feel they are still relevant. For older discussion please see:

Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3

You may also find older issues at Talk:Emo/Archive 1.

More Emo bands

4 more emo bands to add onto the list of emo band at the moment. 30 Second to Mars, Yellow Card, Alkaline Trio and Matchbook Romance.

Febrauary 16, 2007, Tom Foley

Recent changes

I've noticed that this site has been updated, particularly in the 90's explanations. A lot of it makes a lot more sense now, so well done whoever did that. however, the post 2000 part is still confusing. while it notes that emo became more than just a music style, it still has this ridiculous bit on Dashboard Confessional. Yes i know he has been called "emo" but this surely more than anything shows the disambiguation of the word. This isn't explained properly, and perhaps need clarification, though anytime i have tried to clarify in the past, someone has reverted it. Also this page is on Emo as music, so i would recomend we see more acknowlegdement of the non major label emo bands, especially the European scene, who contrary to the opinion in this article, are still very much around. -- ewe 17/11/06

ok when dashboard confessional came out the word "emo was bandied about, but seriously, who actually calls him "emo" now? it's pretty obvious he is a singer songwriter. this article has some serious problems. it basically acts like since 2000, the only "emo" has been the mtv stuff, this is simply not true, there are many distros and a still thriving emo scene, which has nothing to do with fashion and everything to do with music. I know that some of the close-minded editors of this page want to keep bands that have been reffered to as emo on the site, and thats fair enough, but the fact remains that this is telling only one side of the story.Blue-ewe 11:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Wiki Project Emo Music

I've been following alot of wiki articles on bands in any way related to emo, and the way their pages are edited is not just sad - it's malicious. One second Underoath is post-hardcore, then it's rock, then grindcore with elements of emo - and so forth. I have deliberately started the project on Emo Music aside from already existing project on Punk Music, and within the first week wikipedia regulators brought up if it's relevant and necessary. The final result was "yes" and I was advised to create and post a banner on the top of Wiki article on Emo Music, because the project needs more members and contributors. If you're interested in participating, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Emo, the basic idea is already summed up on the front page. Iceness 14:15, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Alot of misinformation

Alot of these discussions lead me to the conclusion that alot of you are either fed definitions and opinions by the media and or just like to make up some silly ideas and conclusions by yourself ignoring nearly 15+ years of history in punk rock. Emo is not any of the pop-punk bands you see on MTV, such as MCR, Fall Out Boy, Hawthorne Heights. None of them. Nor are bands like Sunny Day Real Estate, The Appleseed Cast and Mineral, they all more or less funnel into Indie Rock. They have very little to do with the genre, aside from the fact that they were influnenced by it. Labels such as Gravity Records, Ebullition and Dischord are largely responsible for most of it's developement. Starting as early as the late 80's with acts such as Moss Icon, Heroin and most commonly asserted the Rites Of Spring. All these bands took Hardcore Punk and shifted it to a more intelligent direction; adding screamed vocals, socio-political lyrics, more intricate guitar work and song structures. As such, all of these bands will more or less remain in obscurity for a number of reasons. A few of which are due to limited record pressings which were done on vinyl and are now out of print and hard to find, little if any promotion by the band's label and their short lived timespans. This still carries on even untill today. Gravity and Ebullition still put out releases as well as somewhat newer labels such as Alone and Waking Records. If you found this enlightening at all feel free to check out these bands to see what it's really about: Heroin, Rites Of Spring, Honeywell, Republic Of Freedom Fighters, Portraits Of Past, The Pine, Shotmaker, Navio Forge, Yage, Funeral Diner, Antioch Arrow, Daitro and Still Life.

Thanks for recapping emo in the 1980s. Unfortunately for you, the term continued to be used in the years after that scene died out. And the first shift had nothing to do with MTV. Sunny Day Real Estate was emo, even if they didn't fit the original emo scene. Poke around on newsgroup posts from the 1990s (via Google Groups) and you'll see what I'm talking about. Emo is and was more than just that original scene, and trying to "purify" the term to describe one thing is disingenuous.

Emo is what it is. It is what people call it. You can wish that we could travel back to 1992 and do it all over again, but that's unfair to the actual history of what actually happened.

• Just please take the damn list of bands that are considered emo, it's causing more trouble than it is and is stupid.-- 4.252.68.213 02:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

And I wish people would stop trying. -- ChrisB 13:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

There is punk, and then there is punk rock. Punk rock is the typical lead male singer voice, backing guitar, drums, bass, etc., usually geared toward younger audiences, with messages that much of their audience can relate to (possibly a source of their popularity). Don't mistake this for punk/ska. Emo is a branch of punk rock in that it generally has a softer, more vocal-driven property to it, and drives toward love/hate and stuff like that. Also, I don't see why people removed my edit on clothing.Di4gram 18:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

There's a difference between "your opinion" and "fact". The difference is, one means nothing, the other is the reason this website exists. There are many phases of the genre. What ties them together is the fact that all the phases of the genre have been as a subgenre of punk rock, and rooted in punk rock culture. What sets them apart is that the followers of the "first wave" were stuck up assholes who got mad if more than 20 people liked the same bands they did, where as the second and third wave were at least socially bareable and didn't write long diatribes on an internet encyclopedia whining and bitching about how, like, emo is soooo sold out these days, and how bands that are like so gay are using the term to describe their awful music to which my musical tastes are like so far superior. Get over yourself. Jeez look what you made me do, I went and broke all the civility rules.--▫Bad▫harlick♠ 09:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

More info

Looking through my back issues of Guitar World today I came across the Fugazi interview. Ian MacKaye talks about emo for a bit:

Guitar World: Rites of Spring and Fugazi are considered to be the fathers of emocore. Do you feel comfortable with that notion?

MacKaye: To be honest with you, it's not a term we use. I actually know its roots. It was originally derogatory--it was used as a straight-up insult. The "emo" tag was short for "emotional hardcore," but somehow it evolved into a legitimate form of music. I mean, the word "punk" was an insult, too, but eventually people started using it because it made sense to them. "Emo" didn't make any sense to us, but later on, bands identified with it. (Perlah, Jeff. "The Independent". Guitar World. March 2002.)

Don't know if this can be worked in, but if you find a place, you can cite it with the information I've provided. WesleyDodds 12:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's something else.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbdh0Qm_5A0

--Phil, 16 Oct 2006

Citations/bibliography

Over the past couple of days, I've started adding direct citations to the article where possible as per WP:Verifiability. Whilst previous versions of the article had referred to sources such as Jessica Hopper's article on sexism, DeRogatis' "Screamo", etc, the references were either non-wikified or merely paraphrases with a note at the end.

Where the article refers directly to another source, I've replaced the previous citation with a footnote as well as having added a few of my own (e.g. for 'revolution summer', articles where bands have cited fugazi as an influence, etc). Before making any more drastic changes with the references, I wanted to see if there was a consensus on style - as it stands now, where there are direct cites those are in footnote format and where a source is more generally referred to, it's left in the old format as a Bibliography.

I'm anticipating adding more references to the article, particularly from Greenwald's book - in light of that, does anyone have any objections to getting entirely rid of the old format of general referencing and moving the article to the more specific footnote style? Idp 20:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Post-emo article?

I was plannig on fulfilling a request for a post-emo article but most of the information that I was going to include seems to be under the "Second Wave" part of this article. I'm not sure it'd be appropriate to create it as post-emo seems(at least from my understanding) essentially the same as the indie-rock/midwestern emo sub-genres. I didn't see any mention of post-emo in this article so I'm not sure as to what I should do. Redirect post-emo to emo, create a new article, add the term or what? This site makes the post-emo/indie-rock/midwestern connection. I know it's not a reliable reference but it's content at least makes some kind of point to consider. --Nefitty 12:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Subgenre of Hardcore Punk?

The beginning statement of the article calls this a "subgenre of Hardcore Punk"

While I agree there are similarities, if only that during their times they were considered "fringe," but listening to the two may change the mind of whomever decided emo was the subgenre of punk.

Punk has a more aggressive, sort of violent sound. That was the defining characteristic, the angst.

But emo lacks the same aggression, and indeed many lyrics in the music even talk of shying away or breaking under pressure and aggression.

Also, punk was highly notable for its lack of mainstream success (rather its off shoots of metal and hardcore were more successful and notable), emo has a very broad audience.

In that same light, we have to take into account the people of the music (which really is what creates the genre). Punk was made up of, in terms of both musician and audience, "outcasts and low-lifes." Generally they were people to be repulsed. Parents shunned Punk rockers and society never gave punk a mainstream success.

Emo, on the other hand, can be described as people "imitating" punk rock. The popular joke goes that emo kids (as indeed, the broad audience is very young) believed in Fight Club a little to much and WANT to be called outcasts or different. The musicians are either typed as being "money-whores" (some of the bands are nothing but MTV prop-ups for money, as it were), or kids who make believe serious problems and angst.

Punk rockers actually HAD those problems, or they were "real" in terms of severity. Emo on the other hand see's bands creating these problems for themselves, TRYING to sound like Punk.

Maybe I have misunderstood the definition, but since when were imitaters a "subgenre" of anything?

Emo's success has only come in recent years, and bands like Rites of Spring could be pretty visceral. Emo is clearly descended from hardcore punk, as the connections to the DC hardcore scene described in the article illustrate. WesleyDodds 04:12, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

People seem to just reject the facts that emo was directly birthed by hardcore punk. When Ian Mackaye wanted to form Embrace he wanted to write lyrics on a more personal level than all of the other hardcore bands out at the time. The music was the same. He was just smarter.

hoobastank/blue october

here is the line i just snipped from the article: "This is displayed by pitiful lyrics such as: "How could this happen to me?" from Simple Plan, "And the reason is you" by Hoobastank, and "Hate me" by Blue October." without getting into pointless debates of what emo means this week, i'll just point out that i have never in my life heard the latter two bands called emo and the word is not anywhere on either of their pages. and while pitiful in this context could mean "full of self-pity", it also could be (and would probably be read as, in either case) very POV. --67.168.139.10 10:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC) oops, that was me --dan 10:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Listing bands without citing sources

For the list of bands that are popularly regarded as Emo, the standard should be that if the band's entry doesn't list it as Emo genre, some verifiable citation should be given to list it here, instead of just having a blanket comment that says all of them are verifiable without giving a citation. -- JHunterJ 17:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Give me a break. AllMusic covers every one of these with the exception of From First to Last. AFI and Hawthorne Heights don't have their profiles listed as "emo", but they each have albums that are. Whether or not AFI is considered emo is one of the biggest ongoing debates within their fanbase.

I mean, seriously - is that hard to go to Google, type in the band's name and "Emo", and find sources? Do we really need to cite each and every one of these? Do we then need to go through and cite every OTHER band in this article for being emo? -- ChrisB 02:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's the point of WP:CITE, especially if some editors want to delete something other editors want to keep. AllMusic would be a good cite, it sounds like. -- JHunterJ 02:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Citations are generally a good thing in my opinion. I've added a note with some external links so I could remove the unsightly tag. Feel free to improve it. I used last.fm but allmusic should work as well. Cedars 07:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Allmusic.com is a better cite, because genre terms on last.fm are selected by users, sometimes indiscriminantly. WesleyDodds 19:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

This article is named after a short "nick-name" used orally, I think it should be called Emo-Rock to be more precise. --Septentrion 10:35, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Nope, "emo" is the commonly-used genre term. I don't know anyone who calls it "emo-rock". WesleyDodds 19:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Are we just naming random bands and adding them to the list of "emo bands?" Bowling for Soup? Sum 41? Are you serious? Spuddy 17 06:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

3rdwave consensus?

Can we gain consensus that the 3rd wave of emoness (sorry, I suck at terminology) is a genuine part of the Emo subculture? Because it would seem to me that the anti-emo crowd will use the "modern emo isn't REAL emo" excuse to vote for removal of that part of the article, simply because they hate "modern emo". Consensus would help us fight this kind of dispute in future, once and for all ending the question of whether or not it has a right to be included in this article (we would be able to just cite this discussion in whatever archive it ends up in each time it crops up, saving hours of arguing with stubborn people who have closed minds). I'd like to hear your views, whether you're for/against inclusion, and some supporting facts or evidence. Thanks. --91.84.32.248 07:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Apologies, apparantly my browser signed me out for no reason. The above message was by me: --▫Bad▫harlick♠ 07:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA nomination

This article is promising, but is not yet at GA quality. My main reason for failing it is that it is very myopic -- while it's great as a detailed guide to all the bands involved in emo music, it's pretty uninformative about anything besides certain bands. It really needs more context on the culture and criticism associated with emo, and above all, the sound of the music! There's hardly a word in here about what characterizes emo musically, which makes it pretty confusing for someone not already immersed in the genre.

Other issues with the article:

• References are sparse, and many debatable claims are made without any source
• No images or music samples at all
• The "Backlash" section is a useless mishmash of trivia

Twinxor t 10:23, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

You know, a major element of the article is the fact that what constitutes "emo music" is nearly impossible to identify. Bands within the same time period often have next to nothing in common. Jejune sounds nothing like Texas Is the Reason, who sounds nothing like the Promise Ring, who sounds nothing like the Get Up Kids. So trying to come up with a specific genre sound would be counter to anything journalistic.

Also, the culture has very little to do with the music, hence why it's included in a separate article: Emo (slang). And I still question the need for criticism sections in genre articles. Hip hop and Goth are equally as criticized, yet there's very little in those articles regarding it. (The goth article doesn't really address it, save to more or less defend the genre against it, which isn't great.) Criticism of a genre is typically thrown out by those who dislike it, and it's easy to find someone who dislikes something about any genre. Some people think folk music is bland and overthought - do we need a criticism section for that? (Especially in this case, where most people seem to dislike emo because it's "gay".)

I'm not saying that this article should be a GA. But some of your arguments for failing it don't really make sense. Having said that, I agree that this article needs more references, and I agree that the Backlash section blows. (I don't like the Backlash section at all, given the above.) -- ChrisB 19:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you should worry about discussing culture, but I think some of the comments from the good article point-of-view are correct. The article needs more references, more discussion of the sound of the music, possibly music samples and images and a better backlash section. Despite not being able to define a sound for the entire genre, you can still talk about music for individual waves or clusters of bands. Right now the article talks about "indie rock" like sound of the second wave and the "hardcore punk" like sound of the first wave. But these might be difficult for some people if they don't know anything about "hardcore punk" or "indie rock". Cedars 00:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Additional External Link

Ok, I added an external link for emoscene.com, but was told to bring it up in discussion to gain approval before adding it, so I am going through the proper channels.

It's a free website, sort of a DIY alternative to Myspace. It offers blogs and is a community site exclusively for emo kids. I don't know of any other site that does this, so I think it's an appropriate resource to be included in this article. So I'm opening to discussion whether or not to include it. Thank you for your time. 68.82.246.123 03:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)slipxaway

It's not about emo music itself, so it doesn't belong. WesleyDodds 09:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, it's not a notable website regarding the subject. As I've mentioned several times, check WP:EL to see what Wikipedia allows as far as external links are concerned.

In particular, from "links normally to avoid":

1) A page which only provides information already in the article, or which does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes a Wikipedia:Featured article.

3) A page that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked.

5) Links intended to promote a site...

7) Links to blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace), or discussion forums unless mandated by the article itself.

Wikipedia articles are not intended to be used as directories of related websites. WP:EL is specific about this. -- ChrisB 17:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi, i just reverted the vandalism on this by a private ISP. I reccomend that this article be locked. For some reason somebody with a private ISP is raging against emo -- Doc Strange 14:18 2 November 2006 (UTC)

People connect emo with suicide etc

I was surprised not to read anything about how emo music got connected to suicide and other stereotypical nonsense. I know it's not true, but after some record company giving away razors to people who bought two emo albums it's important enough as a stereotype to make it into this article, no? -The preceding signed comment was added by Nazgjunk (talk • contrib) 17:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Relevant article: Emo (slang). -- ChrisB 00:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

"New" emo

I know this sounds a bit radical, but I suggest we "create" a new genre/term, tentatively called "Emo-pop" or "Bubblegum Emo" or some such thing to describe songs that have more recently become associated with the term emo - pop-punk inspired songs with poignant lyrics and rich, sometimes whiny vocals. I hope that this would provide a way to clear up a lot of confusion, and also inspire music websites to consider using the term in order to differentiate. Download.com, for example, has a section for emo that includes an music that could be described by the term, thus it is quite diverse and hard to find a certain type. Kame2000 19:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting... maybe. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 19:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm agree ,the emopop sounds really accurate, it takes account of the pop and the emo part of the music, I will like to see to some kind of sub-genre for the second wave emo, maybe indie-emo ?, this way we will have emo -> indie emo -> emopop 200.116.17.142 04:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, I think that, if we can, we should create articles for Indie Emo, and non-pop punk related bands and songs would fit into emo metal. Or we could also create an emo punk page and this could be the main page summarizing all of them. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 14:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Out of respect for the original style of emo music and so as not to mess up all sorts of so-far correct categorization, I would think that "Emo" should continue to be defined as emotional hardcore and that Indie-emo and Emo-punk would be subgenres of indie, emo, and punk. Kame2000 18:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The history?!

Who wrote that crap? something about cutting (which is a huge problem and needs to be discussed elsewhere) and someone being "stupip" I needs changed.

chris shepherd (12-6-06) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Christofershepherd (talk • contribs) 02:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Oberst/Hot Topic/Goth

I think some "credit" should be given to Bright Eyes for popularizing it. Also someone should consider including the Hot Topic stereotypic fasion and Emo's connection to gothica. Discuss. User:Girls gone docile 15:18, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

This Page in General

Personally, as an opinionated young man, I think the page for Emo is very bad and misinforming. The "waves" of emo, post-emo etc. Emo is a specific genre of music, just like Hardcore Punk is. The idea that both Swing Kids and Weezer are emo is terrible, considering they are two very different bands, playing two very different styles of rock. Ian Mackaye and Guy Piccioto established what emo was, separating themselves from the violence of yesterday's hardcore and writing personal lyrics to play along with the obvious hardcore sound. Emo has evolved since just like hardcore, but the sound and ethics are relatively the same. Taking Back Sunday is a modern alternative band classified as emo. Hot Cross are a modern emo band retaining the same fast, hardcore punk sound with passionate and thoughtful lyrics to run with the music. Do you understand? Bands like Taking Back Sunday, Weezer, and Jimmy Eat World are all modern, mainstream alternative bands, not to be confused with a word already defining a genre. It is misclassifications like these that make people like myself who actually do listen to emo scratch our heads and think "What on Earth?"

Emo by today's standards

The "Emo" music of today is considered the whiney crap about life. The mellow rock is actually post-emo indie rock, that's what is now associated with Emo. In all truth the original Emo is a Hardcore punk offspin we now refer to as screamo.

Emo should not be a music genre!!!!!

Emo as a term for music is the stupidest thing I've ever heard!It is so stupid because everyone sings, writes, and plays with emotion! So what if someone sings, writes, or plays it a little more than someone else.Some bands are also criticized cause they sing about wrist cutting. Their bringing awareness to it and their experiences just like someone who writes a song about being an alcoholic or druggie or abuse. And some bands are called emo for having a certain style of cothing or wearing makeup and are criticized for it. Has anyone ever heard of fricken glam metal!!? they wore makeup and womanly clothes at times(some still do). But they're not called emo. They're looked up to by millions of people and different generations of fans. Not one band or singer, sings without emotion!

Emo is a long dead style of emotional hardcore punk dumbass

Uh. Say what you want, but Emo *is* a music style, simply because people use it to name some kind of music. The word "emo" doesn't only mean it's emotional, but as the previous unsigned comment points out, "Emo is a long dead style of emotional hardcore punk". Over the "long dead" one might argue, but the rest is fact. -The preceding signed comment was added by Nazgjunk (talk • contrib) 10:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

What to add to emo list

I say add Severity!

I dont not like severity!

Weezer

Personally I think Weezer should be given more credit for what they've done for basically creating the blueprint for the "emo-pop" sound with Pinkerton, and even some of The Blue Album (Say It Ain't So, Only In Dreams). Rivers' confessional, sensitive and honest lyrics on that album along with its raw, punk-ish powerchord driven sound can be heard in every modern "emo-pop" band.

I know "emo" is usually viewed as a deragotory term nowadays and I'm sure theres tons of Weezer fans who will disagree with what I've said. But I don't see whats so bad about saying that a great band basically shaped a form of popular music.

We can't give that credit unless someone else (ie, a reliable source) did. And I would personally challenge that assertion - Weezer (and specifically Pinkerton) were lumped into emo because it sounded similar to the indie emo of the period, not because it defined or established a particular brand of emo. -- ChrisB 17:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with ChrisB. --Diabolical 17:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Weezer? Emo?

Should this genre even exist??

Seriously, every band article that I have visited says somwhere in it that that group is classified as emo, but whenever I look at the disscusion page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subway2008 (talk • contribs)

When ever you look at the discussion page what? Diabolical 22:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about not finishing my argument. What I ment to say was that when I look at a so called "emo" band's disussion page there is always someone who says that that perticular band is in fact not emo, and wants to have that title removed.Akamaru Toshibo 18:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

last fm as a reference? is this a joke

last fm is hardly a site to be taken seriously, and much vandalism and mislabeling goes on there. just look at the page for Kevin Federline, it's been tagged by numerous people as "brutal death metal"

i don't think the last fm reference should be included in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Laggedbehind (talk • contribs) 01:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

That's the whole point, that people are calling stuff Emo that isn't. It can clearly be seen that people are tagging Federline as Death Metal as a joke. --Diabolical 02:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the difference is the Kevin Federline tags are obviously jokes.

Characteristics

I just realized why emo has been disputed alot when put on a band here (particularly third wave bands since emo is currently an insult in modern days) . Since there are no clear characteristics currently, anyone who understands what makes a song emo or not better than me, up for making a section on characteristics.--67.190.8.155 03:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

== Band Examples ==4 A lot of the sources used for genre shouldnt be used, bc it is only the opinion of that sight. A proper source to use could be a band site or myspace where they label their own genre. DevelopmentArrested 22:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The whole point is that most bands that are labelled "emo" are done so against their wishes. That's been the case with the genre from its inception in 1985. Just because a band says they aren't "emo" doesn't make it so. The point is that the term is a media label more than anything else, and every one of those bands has been referred to as "emo". -- ChrisB 04:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

emo people

Accuracy?

I find it fanciful to include the 1985-1994 period inclusively as 'emo music' given that the bands mentioned were not labelled as such. The label came into being at what date exactly? That should be the start period of the genre in the right hand side music-genre table bar, not neo-emo bands that later came to also be classified as 'pioneers' of the genre. 211.30.71.59 12:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Are you serious? Rites of Spring were specifically asked about being called "emo" in a 1985 interview with Flipside Magazine. And there's a fantastic piece of video on Youtube from an Embrace show in 1986 where Ian rants about how stupid he thinks the term "emocore" is.

To answer your question, the label came into being in 1985. -- ChrisB 02:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Um

Why is Coheed & Cambria listed on the page? They're not emo at all lol.