Talk:Nu metal

Archives
Archive 1

List

Hi, all. What happened to the list of nu metal bands? It used to be up here and was a pretty big list.

This seems like a hard genre to define, but what I listen for the most is the guitar sound, as opposed to rapping vocals. I hear the nu metal guitars always down-tuned, and there is usually a lot of use of palm muting between chords. Also, the tempo is usually moderate and will never go as fast as say, thrash or death metal. The guitar parts usually have a certain "groovy" style to them as well. The music is usually in a verse-chorus-verse-chorus-breakdown-chorus-chorus format. These are some reasons why I do not consider Deftones nu-metal, but I do consider them an influence on the genre.

Just an interesting tid-bit to add: I've noticed in a few nu metal bands that the guitarists sometimes hunch over really low when playing. I first saw this in Korn with the guitarists Head and Munky, and later in Coal Chamber, Finger Eleven, Flaw, and then Linkin Park.

And about Slipknot and Mudvayne. I have heard these bands be called nu-metal many times, but their guitars and drums sound much faster. As well, the vocals in their debut albums were more aggressive sounding than most other nu metal bands. There was no melodic singing in Slipknot's first album that I can recall except the chorus in "Wait and Bleed." But even that was more aggressive than nu-metal's vocals. They seem to have emerged around or just after nu-metal's popularity, but I do not consider them nu-metal. For the record, I like nu-metal. I also like thrash, black, death, doom, and all other metal genres.

Thoughts?

66.68.210.69 06:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to add nu-metal to the list of genres listed in the box to the right, (can't give the technical name for it, sorry) but I won't add it myself since many consider Mudvayne Nu-metal yet the label isn't there. I draw the conclusion that there has been a discussion about the subject and it's been decided to not label them even part Nu-metal. If however this is just an oversight or an inconclusive discussion I just wanted to revitalise it, 'cause I love Mudvayne but no matter how great they are, an artist doesn't decide what to call the music he plays unless it's 100% original. I use the terms Nu-metal and Alt. Metal as synonyms since most people don't have a clear idea of what either means so it's easier, so I don't know if it's necessery, perhaps I'm just splitting hairs here.

Aggressive rock

ur moms a man I've heard that aggressive rock is the technical term for nu-metal (also as aggro-rock), but I haven't found any other site besides wiki that even mentions the genre in detail. What is it/is it relevant/should it be added or mentioned here?

Well, if there's no other source verifying the use of the term, I'd say nothing is relevant and nothing should be added or mentioned. -Unknownwarrior33 19:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Is a band like Incubus or Linkin Park really all that aggressive? The bands aren't metal either for the most part, most of them are just hard rock.Theunknown42 01:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Linkin Park is aggressive vocally, along with having LOUD PARTS, and is Incubus even nu-metal?

I'd say Incubus are nu metal, and I like them. They thank Korn in the liner notes for Afungus Amongus and S.C.I.E.N.C.E., so I think that's a fair indication they're nu metal. Certainly a little more on the progressive/creative side, and with some clear ska/skate-punk/funkcore influences, but definitely nu metal on their early work. As for being aggressive, no, not really. And Linkin Park is angsty most of the time, not really aggressive. --Switch 16:47, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Precisely, Linkin Park's music features also RAP VOCALS (umpf!)! -- Egr (talk), 10/20/2006

Nu-metal can't be correctly described as Aggressive rock since it's metal and not rock. Many bands are being (my dick curls like a pig's tail) described as nu-metal when they're really just not metal but heavier than rock music is traditionally. Real Nu-metal has metal influences, though a lot of people would probably argue that not even they do 'cause of this and that and "true metal" here and there. What the fuck ever, all in all, Nu-metal as a genre is unreliable 'cause it leaves too much to be intepreted by the individual, hell we have enough controversy over death and heavy and more "easily described" genres. But one thing I can say for certain, if it's labeled "Nu-metal" it's Metal of some kind, not "Aggressive Rock". That's a term slapped on by people who like to say Nu-metal isn't Metal 'cause it makes their music better...or something. If there is such a thing as Aggressive Rock it's rock-based and aggressive, that's all we can say for certain right now.

JUST WANT TO DROP A couple of pennies in here - I am heavily influenced by Smashing Pumpkins and Pixies. My music winds up sounding bluesy/folksy. An artist cited as an influence DOES NOT equal the citing artist being in the same, or even similar, genre. Chino Moreno has cited Weezer as one of his influences (not to mention The Cure, Duran Duran, and Depeche Mode) *[see http://www.mysticgames.com/famouspeople/ChinoMoreno.htm, at least, but I've heard it/read it in other places too]. Listen to Wilco, they have a song in which the lyrics reminisce about "playing Kiss covers..." [Heavy Metal Drummer, from "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot"]. Kiss is also cited as one of Weezer's infuences at http://www.albany.edu/~nk2352/zine/Noelle.htm (and in their song lyrics on the "Blue Album" - I forget which song). Cheap Trick is mentioned on that same site as a Weezer influence. Does that put Weezer, Cheap Trick, Wilco, Kiss, and the Deftones in the same genre - or any of the same genres, for that matter? Na-ah...

Agressive Rock is the stupidest sub-genre I have ever heard & it does not need its own page, nor should it be said that its the "technical" term for nu-metal. Angst Rock I could understand if it was used in a derogatory way but the idea that there is a style of rock or metal agressive enough to call agressive metal that does not fit into another metal sub-genre is completely absurd.--Fukhed666 10:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

archive?

this is a very long talk page... and btw, there's alot of side comments on nu metal which have nothing to do with this article... if we want to include views and opinions on nu metal, we should be finding magazine articles and artist quotes that give solid proof that some people think this, or others think that. just scanning thru this talk page, i dont theres much productivity... Blueaster 02:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Archived to prevent the unnessecary chatter down to a minimum. — Moe Epsilon 04:16 September 13 '06

"It also has some sonic similarity with death metal"

Totally untrue, POV, and vague statement.... Death metal consists of double bass/blastbeats, extremely fast rhythm guitar and bass, death grunt/growled vocals. Nu-metal (as the article states) consists of 4/4 drumbeats or synthetic beats, guitar and bass with influences from rap, funk, or grunge, and usually rapped, screamed, or monotone vocals. Fans and bands of both genres usually want nothing to do with one another. The article thus contradicts itself big time with any mention of death metal. Each time this obviously questionable bit is removed, it is put back in. Why? Would someone mind explaining? Or is the comparison just an "inside joke"? --Danteferno 18:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I must agree, Korn have said, I seem to remember, in some interview that they tried to mix hiphop with Death Metal. If you listen to Korn you sure as hell don't hear Hiphop as it is in it's pure form. Neither do you hear anything close to Death, it's a mix. Two things thrown together usually end up in something that's alike neither. Yes many Nu-metal bands have death-INFLUENCES but that's not the same as playing the same thing. Then we might as well keep on talking about how Death bands listened to Black Sabbath when they were young.

Copied from your talk page:

As this has been discussed already, I'll try to be simple:

• As the link shows, a citation has been made by WesleyDodds.
• Fear Factory are a death metal band often labelled as nu metal, and are a major influence on nu metal. Other death metal bands, such as Sepultura and Slayer, have been cited as influences on nu metal by nu metal bands or musical commentators.

Fear Factory were only briefly death metal, as were Sepultura; Slayer are thrash, not death metal, and none of above explains how the nu-metal genre has "sonic similarity" to death metal.

• Static-X are a nu metal band often labelled as death metal.

Cite your sources, please.

• Korn cite Cannibal Corpse, a death metal band, as an influence.

Again, cite your sources, please.

• Apart from these links, the sonic similarity between guitar styles (if not musicianship) of nu metal and death metal is very prevalent.

This is not the first time you have tried to remove any mention of "death metal" from the nu metal article, and when one attempt is stopped, you convert to another reason to make the same edit. Your clear bias has no place in the article. --Switch 19:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

You haven't proved anything. You stated that Fear Factory started as death metal, you made an unsourced claim of a nu-metal band being called death metal, and then another unsourced claim of a nu-metal band citing a death metal band as an influence. Whether these are true or not, you have not explained the "death metal" sonic similarity nu-metal has. This: "the sonic similarity between guitar styles (if not musicianship) of nu metal and death metal is very prevalent." explains nothing and is obviously POV. I'm not pushing "bias" in the article, only defending fact. And death metal having sonic similarity with nu-metal is not fact. BTW, the only persons who kept the "death metal sonic similarity" connection in were you and WesleyDodds (who never answered the points made). The previous user who reverted the edit did so only because he didn't agree with the edit summary [1], and an earlier user who reverted this edit is now perm. banned from Wikipedia. (Ironically, the banned user did not cite any sources to the edits he made.) --Danteferno 22:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

According to most critics, Fear Factory's music is still based firmly in death metal, apart from their last two albums, but with industrial elements. They still tour mostly with death bands supporting. You can check their own article, or their official website, or their reviews on Amazon, or their MTV area, or thei Allmusic biography. All describe the band as fusing electronic/industrial influences with death metal. Sepultura, similarly, started infusing alternate influences, but for most of their career, kept their music rooted in death metal. Slayer, while not technically death, are considered the starting point for the genre.

Static-X are called "death metal", or described as a fusion between death and some form of electronic music, mostly disco, on Amazon (Wisconsin death trip), RateYourMusic, this, and the frontman himself has said their current sound is a "culmination of every type of genre I have ever done", "from acoustic songs to speed metal/death metal stuff".

Korn cited Cannibal Corpse as an influence on the episode of Rage they guest programmed, and played one of their videos. It has been reported by other users that they did the same on Headbanger's Ball, though I wouldn't know personally.

Anyway, I don't know where that citation went, but there was a citation up there at one point. I'll try to dig it up, but that stuff isn't easy.

Please note that Korn's song "Ball Tongue" (Ball Tongue (song) main riff is directly ripped from a death metal song Korn (album) {please view the links wich contain this info}

I fail to see how Fear Factory having once been death metal, or touring with death metal bands has any bearing on nu metal being related to death metal (which it is obviously not). If you actually listened to real death metal, i'm pretty sure you would see that Static-X is most certainly in no way affiliated with the genre. --75.73.204.83 21:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I actually think he made it pretty clear. Death Metal has very strong influence in nu metal. I don't see how it isn't clear XXLegendXx 12:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Why is Tool mentioned on this page?!?

Tool does not belong on this page. Tool and many of their fans take serious offense to being grouped into this category. It is not appropriate.

The article doesn't say they're nu metal. It says they influenced nu metal, which they did. --Switch 11:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Why is Stuck Mojo not mentioned?

They pioneered this fuckin genre when everyone else was still in nappies!

I've never heard of them. Are they nu metal? Or od they more properly belong in the alternative metal category? Nu metal isn't generally thought to have started until the early-mid nineties with Korn and Deftones. I have never heard them, but maybe someone else here has. --Switch 11:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Precisely, Stuck Mojo are rapcore, not nu metal. They were among the first acts to fuse rap and metal, but can't jump into nu metal because they have come way before. --Egr 20:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

P.S.:I'm convincing that "nu metal" doesn't exist, and has been invented by hip hop detractors.

Deftones

Anon. user with IP 69.141.3.45 keeps removing any references to Deftones from the article. As they were one of the earliest formed bands (forming in 1992) to become one of the bigger nu metal groups, and are almost universally considered nu metal (at least their early work) - stop it.

Deftones were a nu metal band. A very prominent one, almost synonymous with the genre, and as far as I know, the earliest. Either the anon loves them and wants them to be distanced from the term "nu metal" or hates them and wants them removed from any and all articles, but I don't care. Stop adding your bias to the article.

If you persist, action can be taken to have you banned from editing this article. --Switch 10:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Can someone do something about this guy. He is also deleting the Deftones references to the mallcore article. While the band list is obnoxious (And I have added a few bands as well), they are a nu metal/"mallcore" band. If bands like Fear Factory and Tool can be put on that list and kept there, there is no reason why the Deftones should get special treatment.Outlaw-Viper 03:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

He is also removing the statement that Deftones helped instigate nu metal from the alternative metal article. If anyone has a book on nu metal, that would be a big help. I thought it wouldn't be an issue, but he's claiming POV for associating Deftones with nu metal in any way at all. We're going to have to find a credible source - probably a book - and give proper citations. --Switch 03:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the anon, though. Nu-metal is obviously some loose, derisive term/label, not an actually genre. It is not even included in Allmusic.com as a genre. Just look at the guidelines for "nu metal." Right at the beginning, it basically states that there ARE NO guidelines. Your so-called "Nu metal" includes everything from Limp Bizkit to Disturbed to Static-X, but really, none of these bands sound alike. And obviously hip hop influences are not a defining factor, since plenty of supposed "nu metal" bands have no hip hop influences (not to mention the fact that there is already a genre called rapcore.) So what is nu metal? Can anyone tell me? I'm NOT a fan of any of the bands that are on this page, but I am a fan of the Deftones. And I must say, you have to be some one who has never heard the Deftones and goes only on vague assumptions to even associate them with most of the bands cited as "nu metal." Limp Bizkit? Linkin Park? No way, they sound NOTHING like any of these bands. The Deftones started in 1988, experimenting with different sounds before even such "esteemed" bands as Rage Against the Machine were formed (Who, by the way, are never referred to as nu metal, but sounded similar to many artists you term as "nu metal" and had great influences on the supposed "genre") So if RATM can get away with simply being mentioned as an influence, why can't the Deftones. Just because they were touring friends with Korn does not make a band "nu metal." Look at most real reviews by real critics, and they will most likely state that Deftones are "experimental," "not nu metal", or "above nu metal." But yes, they should indeed be mention as an influence on "nu metal," since they have influenced many of the bands you label "nu-metal." Oh, and what the hell is mallcore? People need to get a life and stop making up stupid genres with which they clump bands they have never even heard. How are the Deftones (or even Tool) mallcore? Tool is a little cliche at times, but hardly for little teenage girls and mallrats. And I have never even heard of a mallgoth listening to the Deftones. Linkin Park and Evanescence, yes, but not the Deftones. Regardless, this is all opinion and observation, but it is also the opinion of countless music critics. "Mallcore." Ha! I'm not defending any of the bands on the mallcore page, because I am not a fan of any of them. But seriously, what makes you think your "fav band" is any better? You think you're "alternative?" You think you're "hardcore?" No, you are an elitist. - Callmarcus 31 October 2006

"Nu-metal is obviously some loose, derisive term/label, not an actually genre. It is not even included in Allmusic.com as a genre."

Actually, it is a genre. It was obviously not derisive back in the late nineties when bands were calling themselves "nu metal", and when the term was being used to hype acts by record labels. It became derisive because it was a trend, in much the same way as "emo" is now derisive and no-one wants their favourite bands to be called that either. "Nu metal" is also considered a small subgenre on allmusic (Which by the way is not a good source); read their page on "Alternative metal". While you're at it, read the Wikipedia article on it too; it makes clear what nu metal is.

"The Deftones started in 1988, experimenting with different sounds before even such "esteemed" bands as Rage Against the Machine were formed..."

Rage were part of the LA alternative scene that largely influenced nu metal, including Jane's Addiction, RHCP, et cetera. Those bands were alternative rock and alternative metal, not nu metal. Deftones were one of the bands influenced by that scene that started making heavy alternative music with a combination of those influences - hey, that's what nu metal is.

"Just because they were touring friends with Korn does not make a band "nu metal." Look at most real reviews by real critics, and they will most likely state that Deftones are "experimental," "not nu metal", or "above nu metal.""

You a young one? Nu metal was not a derisive term when Deftones started getting mainstream attention. All this bollocks about "above nu metal" is revisionism; a lot of nu metal releases won critical acclaim (including those by Deftones). If you remember back to the late nineties, a lot of bands were "nu metal" and didn't reject the term; some openly embraced it. I remember Deftones being placed cleanly in the nu metal category without any difficulty. There are also plenty of nu metal bands with experimental, talented music; (həd) pe in their early days, Slipknot, Mudvayne and others, though I don't like them, are talented, original musicians. Are they "above" nu metal too? What about Korn? They were certainly innovative, so does that make them "above" nu metal?

"And I have never even heard of a mallgoth listening to the Deftones."

I have. I wouldn't call them "mallcore", whatever that exactly means, but they were certainly trendy enough to have everyone listening to them a while ago. So were Tool, who are also not "mallcore". I don't love the Deftones a whole lot, but they're in no way a bad band and I quite like some of their work.

"You think you're "alternative?" You think you're "hardcore?" No, you are an elitist."

Well, I do listen to a lot of alternative rock, so I guess you could say I'm "alternative". I listen to punk too, and I have a Black Flag patch on my jacket, so I guess you could even say I'm "hardcore". Generally I don't have a genre bias, I just like the music that I like. As for being an elitist, I'm pretty open on the classification of punk rock, certainly being one of the less elitist people on that genre. I should probably remind you not to make any personal attacks.

The point is, nu metal has become a derisive term and people will retaliate when a band they like is labelled with it. You admit it yourself; you don't like nu metal bands, but you like Deftones. That's your personal bias affecting the article. You've also said you've never heard a critic call Rage nu metal. Well, I have heard critics refer to Deftones as nu metal (even if they do say things like "by far one of the better nu metal bands"), very often back in the day. Deftones are very widely considered a nu metal band, but their fans will retaliate and exclude them, just like Slipknot, həd (pe), Mudvayne, Disturbed and countless others. Despite what their fans say (usually that the bands are "better than nu metal", "talented so they're not nu metal" etc. - shock!), these bands were almost universally considered nu metal before the term became an insult. --Switch 04:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

If you need more evidence, I googled Deftones "nu metal". The results are kind of in favour of Deftones being nu metal. See here: Deftones are considered nu metal above Limp Bizkit. Deftones and White Pony are tagged as nu metal above some of Korn's albums. The list isn't perfect, with a lot of alt. metal making the list, but they tend to be a lot lower. here a critic says "There are also a couple Nu-Metal bands that really aren't that bad, namely, Deftones" - a statement typical of critics' views of the band. Here we get "Deftones are nu-metal, they're just *shock, horror* good nu-metal". This site has Defs listed under "nu metal" even as a commercial site! "Bands that can be categorized under the guise of nu metal include Korn, Deftones, Slipknot, Incubus, Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit..." comes from this page, where they're listed as prime examples. Another commercial site also lists Defs as nu metal. In fact, apart from Wikipedia (which says that a certain critic says other critics "reserve a special place for Deftones above or at least away from the rest of the turn-of-the-century nu metal", implying they are nu metal but people don't like to admit it), ALL the sites on the first page describe Defs as a nu metal band. If that's anything to go by, seeing as there are 233,000 pages, they are nu metal. We haven't had a single "not nu metal" or "above nu metal" yet.

Further, A specific search for Deftones "not nu metal" yielded under 300 Ghits. Deftones "above nu metal", Deftones "superior to nu metal" and Deftones "better than nu metal" got only 15 hits between them, most not even referring to Deftones when they said the specific phrase, but saying efs are nu metal once again. (eg. "Nu-metal isnt that bad ,I actually like the deftones first 2 albums, I also like... ... ...metal is in fact 99.9999999% superior to nu metal."). Your claim that Deftones are not mu netal instigators is not supported by the facts. --Switch 04:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I was not personally attacking you. Sorry if you took it that way. I was addressing anyone who felt the need to lump bands in derisive genres, such as mallcore. I agree with some of the things you say. However, how is something on amazon.com created by a user and NOT a critic more important than something on Allmusic.com created by a critic (or Rolling Stone for that matter, who have also stated that the Deftones are unlike most turn-of-the-century metal bands. I'm not a big fan of Rolling Stone, but that's not the point)? I am not insane enough to deny that they have a significant influence on what people consider "nu metal," but I don't really think they should be labeled as "instigators." Regardless of what some kids on the internet say (or what you and I think), the Deftones have been making music before the nu metal boom, and most of this music sounds very little like anything a stereotypical "nu metal" band creates. - Callmarcus 5 November

I was going to say that no, I wasn't offended, but sometimes you have to be careful on Wikipedia, and I think a music fan's opinion is as valid as a critic's, sometimes more so, but I've tried to type this several times over the past few days, so I'm not going into much detail now. I'm just going to point out, Cleveland scene, SeattlePi, Sputnik music, Ringsurf and Silver Dragon records cite Defs as "nu metal" in just the first two pages of a Google search. As far as I can see, the vast majority of sources are describing Deftones as a nu metal (or nu-metal, or numetal, or nü metal, etc.) band, whether you want stringent criteria for reliability or not. Either way, they belong on the list of bands who instigated the genre. Some people don't want them to be called nu metal, but the same can be said for almost every other band that has ever been called nu metal. They should be mentioned in the list of instigators as much as the others should. --Switch 12:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

The Deftones were as much an inspiration for "Nu metal" bands that they can be lumped with Korn, RAtM, Tool, and Fear Factory as "Nu Metal Inspirators." While I don't think nu metal is metal or a genre at all, I also don't think it is "mallcore." Mallcore came about as an insult name for nu metal because metalheads don't think its metal. In recent times however, some of them believe it to be the "true" name for nu metal with no explanation other than the fact that there isn't anything better to call it. The Deftones are heavy alternative rock like Korn, Limp Bizkit, Mudvayne, Slipknot, Disturbed, Static-X, Sevendust, and P.O.D. This heavy alternative rock gained popularity and was mislabed "Nu Metal" by the mainstream. In recent times metalheads want nothing to do with the genre and neither do alternative rock fans. If you have seen the mallcore talk page I don't think the band list should be there, but since it will remain, there are people who think the Deftones are "mallcore" along with bands like Fear Factory, Tool, Limp Bizkit, and P.O.D.(Bands that shouldn't even be on that list).Outlaw-Viper 01:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

SOAD

Why is the music described as almost always containing rap elements, but System of a down is a front leader in the genre? They have no such element, but are some of the best known as Nu Metal.

Well, many people do not consider SOAD nu metal, and most nu metal bands do have rap elements. -Switch ^t 07:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Nu-Metal doesn't mean rap+metal/rock. If that were the case the only nu-metal bands would be Limp Bizkit, POD, Linkin Park and Crazy Town. Most Nu-Metal is groove oriented and rhythmic, and outside of some bands not very technical. The reason SOAD is considered nu-metal is because in the metal community they're not considered "metal" enough and nu-metal is the "best" label.Outlaw-Viper 11:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

That's irrelevant. Even if it isn't integral to the genre, most nu metal bands do have hip hop elements. Including Korn, Mudvayne, (hed) PE, and others, not just "Limp Bizkit, POD, Linkin Park and Crazy Town." More, if nu metal only meant "rap+metal/rock", the Beastie Boys, Anthrax, Everlast and many, many other bands would be "nu metal" though they aren't. SOAD are widely not considered nu metal, and what the metal community thinks is largely irrelevant. They don't play traditional metal, so I don't see why the metal community would be the best judge of their genre. Most music critics have them pegged as hard rock, alternative metal, experimental rock, even progressive rock and various other things. Regardless of whether SOAD are nu metal, most bands do have rap elements, just as the article says. -Switch ^t 12:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I consider SOAD a nu metal band not because of what the metal community thinks, but due to the fact there is not a lot of cohesion in the genre, it almost as if anything goes. Also, "rap elements" needs to be defined more. Most Limp Bizkit songs do not sound like hip-hop so an explanation of these "elements" needs to be done. It also needs to be said that funk is more vital to the genre rather than rap. A nu-metal bands success rides on the talents of the bassist and drummer, although there are exceptions to this rule. Also I don't give a damn what the metal community thinks because outside of metal they know very little of other music genres. It seems nowadays the term nu-metal means almost anything anybody wants it to mean within reason.Outlaw-Viper 00:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

As harsh as it sounds...

I think that the criticism section should have a little more to it, since this is one of music's most ridiculed genres in recent years, yet there are just a few sentences in the article.Adamravenscroft 14:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree personally, but almost as soon as nu metal stopped beeing 'cool', people stopped writing about it. I think if we can find some sources, it should be fleshed out a lot more, but there's not much on it we can use apart from the MTV article already in there. -Switch ^t 11:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that the reason this particular genre has come under such scrutiny is mainly to do with the enormous cultural differences, which is a huge factor in today's society. While you could say the majority of people may like Hip-hop and Pop, there is still that everlasting rock fan group, regardless of the "ridicule", that has been given only from people who are interested in different music genres.

Wouldn't it be more useful to figure out why the genre is ridiculed and who exactly is ridiculing it? Is it the mix of genres and influences drawing more critics than would normally pay attention? It "seems" to be universally ridiculed but different groups probably have different reasons for ridiculing the genre. The genre is not exactly a "purists paradise" so that might be one reason.Outlaw-Viper 07:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

people make fun of the genre because it sucks and it gives a bad name to real metal. most of the people who listen to nu metal are mall goths. isn't that common knowledge? TightKid 06:43 pm, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Saying something "sucks" and it gives a bad name to "real metal" and mainly mallgoths listen to it needs proof, no? The genre has mostly died out with the "true metal revival" and the prominence of other genres. If you were to seriously think about this you would see your assumptions are for the most part incorrect, seeing as a mallgoth would probably be more apt to listen to Dimmu Borgir, Cradle of Filth, or any number of "true metal" bands before they would listen to Limp Bizkit or POD.Outlaw-Viper 10:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

first of all, dimmu and cradle are seen as very mainstream and frowned upon in the metal community, cradle of filth more so than dimmu borgir. while there has been a bit of a true metal revival, it hasn't been big enough to hit mtv. i think that nu metal's huge popularity has been replaced by metalcore. when you start seeing faggoths wearing trivium shirts instead of korn shirts, you know that's happened. TightKid 03:36 pm, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

POV/verify issues in criticism section

I've placed both tags on the criticism section, as right now, it reads like OR, and a slanted OR at that. To wit, the following statements lack any verification:

• The mix of styles led to some criticism that nu metal was no longer related to traditional metal.
• Rap is often used in nu metal, and fans of mainstream rap didn't always respond well to it.
• In recent times the genre has received increasing derision from the metal community for various reasons
• and the term "mallcore" is used by many as a term for insult and as well as a synonym by some for the genre, believing it to be the "true" name for the genre.
• The term "False Metal" is also used with the slogan "Death to False Metal" as a type of battlecry.
• Categorization of specific artists as "nu metal" is difficult, an issue made more prevalent in the online community by traditional metal fans who take offense to the term.

The frequent use of "some" and reference to unspecified critics is classic weasel-wording to try to get around POV and verification requirements. A criticism section is fine, but it should contain cited comments from actual music critics or other recognized experts, not "Some fans say..." commentary. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not an official editor or anything, but hopefully I can offer some advice to make it more neutral. For one thing, metal-archives.com, the massive on-line catalog of all metal bands, past and present, does not contain any entries for any nu-metal bands. And, in the section where they outline what types of bands should not be submitted, refers to the genre as "mallcore." As for the general criticism and the idea that it's not related to actual metal, these ideas are sort of "common knowledge" among metal fans, so I'm not sure there's a single source that you can refer to citing this, but there are tons of articles on other web pages and message boards that show that this attitude and criticism exists (for example, the "mallcore" entry on urbandictionary.com or http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/columns/junkyard/131_ways_to_tell_if_you_are_a_mallcore_kid.html). I don't mean to say these sorts of things should be used as de facto proof that the criticisms are true, just that they, and the "increasing derision," exist. As far as facts to actually back up the clains, the aforementioned absence of any of these bands from the metal archives is actually pretty strong evidence. In addition, there's the fact that the nu-metal sound emphasizes attitude while anything considered to be true metal emphasizes musicianship and technicality (admittedly, I can't think of any way to cite this). 69.204.98.242 21:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I disagree slightly with your last statement - doom metal, for example, and a lot of early bands like Led Zep and Sabbath put a lot of emphasis on mood and atmosphere as well as musicianship. But it is true that nu metal is probably more musically akin to hip hop and punk than "metal" in the traditional and more accurate sense. Nu metal generally is very simple to play and the vocals play a large part, even in the more experimental bands of the genre. But citations for this kind of thing are hard to find, because no one writes it, because everyone knows it. But Wikipedia won't accept that. ~Switch ^t 15:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

• Despite the subjectivity of the topic, I think it's worth mentioning that the genre has received a lot of criticism from within the metal genre itself. Many other metal bands actually ARE very outspoken against nu-metal, saying it's "fake" or that the bands "cashed in" to the popularity of the sound and that they all sound the same. Just because the people who say it aren't being objective, doesn't mean we can't be objective about putting it into the entry. 74.70.171.36 01:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Article Structure

When I was reading the article, I thought that everything between the second paragraph and the contents box should be given its own "Origins" paragraph right after the contents. Looking at the history section this was the case at one time and was changed for some reason. I quite like the in house Wikipedia format style of: introduction, contents, main article. I just wondered why it was decided against in this article. ClarenceAtomkraft 17:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Constant edit wars

Can someone please stop this edit war between Inhumer and some annonymous guy in the paragraph that talks about Korn. The sentece is constantly modified with "death and thrash metal bands" and then with "thrash metal bands" and on and on... --Dexter_prog (talk • contribs • count) @ 23:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

A propisition for the edit wars

This is fairly straight-forward: ban him. He does nothing but vandalize and has no place on Wikipedia. Until he's planned, I think there should be some sort of unofficial group that reverts every one of his edits. I'll join, Inhumer's pretty much in there by default.

I don't know the procedure for banning someone, if anyone has any pointers I'll gladly nominate him. He's vandalized my user page before. Ours18 20:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Add the Hip-Hop external link...thing..

I'm not sure of wording, but it is considered a part of the Hip-Hop family as well as the Metal, so why not throw it in there for good measure? Qubeh 12:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Rapcore merge

Every time rapcore has been added to Template:Heavymetal it has been removed with no apparent reason other than 'nu metal sufficiently covers rapcore'. If this is the case, rapcore should be merged into this article as it is superfluous. --90.240.102.48 20:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Unsigned rant

Why is it that NONE of you can make a discussion of how the music sounds, or whether it is true Metal or not? Wrap your mind around this: I hate DEATH METAL but everytime that I bring up something about how much I like SlipKnoT(this is an example) than I get Slammed for not being a REAL METALHEAD, and this is by the people that listen to Black Metal and Death Metal, the worst excuse I have EVER heard for music, yet I don't go to Wikiped's Death Metal article, and slam that

Isn't this a bit off topic? I really don't see much slamming in this article. I think that is what you're implying is the problem. Could you point out the areas which are problematic? --Wildnox(talk) 23:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Aggro Metal Should have its own Category

Check out the Soulfly Website. Scroll down to the news item titled "AFTER THE SLAUGHTER" AVAILABLE MAY 1st! . Marking Dark Ages sound like a pop rock record seems pretty thrashy too me :) I hope the lyrics don't deterioriate to mega-negativity (Schizophrenia / Beneath the Remains) or even passive-satanism (Bestial Devestation / Morbid Visions) --GreatInca 19:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Unnecessary bits?

i thought these bits could apply to any genre so should be deleted. Anyone agree? Nu metal bands, because their style was not clearly defined, were often considered within multiple other genres. For example, Korn crosses into alternative metal and funk, Linkin Park into rapcore and Disturbed into heavy metal. Defining the term Categorization of specific artists as "nu metal" is difficult, an issue made more prevalent in the online community by traditional metal fans who take offense to the term. Nu metal began as a mix of different genres, so the definition is not solid. Linkin Park's Meteora, for example, is listed as nu metal on Wikipedia, "Rock/Pop" on MP3.com[5], "Alternative" on AOL Music Now[6], and three different genres (Rock, Metal, and Alternative) on Metacritic[7] Munci 10:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Linkin Park Greatest Seller In Genre ? I'm Not Gonna Touch the page i dont reallt care cuz nu metal is dumb and im glad Kid Rock got out of it,but Kid Rock has outsold Likin Park sorry to inform you.Don't know what his worldwide sales r but he's sold 24 million roughly in the U.S. alone to Linkin Park's 17 million so I figure he's outsold them worldwide as well.I think Limp Bizkit has outsold them has well.

Linkin Park sold more than 17 million - 20 million just with Hybrid Theory. Kid Rock was never nu metal anyway. He was Rap rock which is different. There is often overlap between the 2 but they are not the same. Munci 18:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Meteora and Hybrid Theory are both nu metal. I listen to Linkin Park more than any other band and I can tell that both those albums are nu metal. I saw something on this page talking about Minutes to Midnight so I'll remove that. Also, Hybrid Theory has sold over 24 million, and Meteora has got over 21 million sales.

With regards to percussion

By no means am I a musical "expert" of any order, though I do listen to some bands considered "nu metal" - Korn, Slipknot, and the Deftones. I have heard, in none of the above, rap-inspired percussion in most songs. I must state that, in addition to "nu metal," I listen to heavy, thrash, industrial, and alternative metals, along with other genres of Rock, and have noted the beats and drumming to be far more similar to those aforementioned than rap. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amerikaner (talk • contribs) 00:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

[the rap influence of nu metal was vocal mostly, korn, slipknot and deftones used to "sing" in a way only rap/hip hop bands did before]

Popular = Bad = Nu Metal?

I REALLY dont see what ANY of the fuss is about. "Nu Metal" is just as a legitimate form of metal as Black or Thrash, its just not as heavy. People dislike Nu Metal because it's popular. Bottom Line. Thats what happens. In five years, maybe more maybe less, Metalcore will possibly be looked down upon by the metal community. Its no different than when fans loose interest in a band for "selling out". If a band makes ANY money off of a record they are selling out. People like to take pride in the music they enjoy, it makes them feel special; like its their's and noone else's. But when lots of other people start sharing interest its makes the music a little worthless to that individual; like having to share a possesion with millions of people. Thus the band from there on out is a "selling out". Its happened to Metallica, Greenday, and MANY other previously well appraised bands. The case of Nu Metal is no different. In the mid to late 90's through the very early 00's Nu Metal was the premier fresh music that metal heads of ALL kinds enjoyed. There were some bands, however, that did give the genre a bad name; i.e. Limp Bizkit (although i personaly am a fan of their earlier work), much like Poison for Hair Metal. Then Metalcore burst onto the scene, almost overnight Nu Metal lost its worth. Relentless, powerful guitar riffs and raw screaching vocals like noone's ever heard, combined with something newe called a "breakdown", whats not to love? Metalcore is a powerful new force in the metal arsenal. Metalcore seemed to have errupted so fast however that Nu Metal was left in the dust, though it still limps on; Korn still kicks on pretty well and Linkin Park continues to sell millions of records. There seems to be a repetition of history. The very same thing happened in the late 80's with grunge. Hair Metal was the thing of the 80's, then Grunge came along and blew it right out of the water. Now little is left of that musical style, other than perhaps the Darkness or Veins of Jenna and possibly even Dragonforce. But overall the genre died, due mostly to the spawning of a another, fresher sound. There is noone to blame. Times change as does music. Many people have trouble accepting this all-to-real fact and as long as there is music to listen to, there will be people arguing about it. All that im saying is if someone doesnt like a band or a type of music, that persons opinion, in NO way, calls into question the legitimacy of the style or abilities as musical artist. Metal is the heaviest thing in music and there will ALWAYS be subgenres. None of these subgenres are better than the other they make the music lareger and more diverse. Whats Metal is Metal, regardless, and thats that.

I always say the same thing when it comes to situations like this, i say "fuck the haters". The truth is i dont care if limp bizkit are low iq, you know what? because most likely im low iq! in the sense that im working class, just like fred durst, i can relate to alot of his lyrics, and i dont care if "true metal" fans (whatever that means exactly) care. Listen if you like numetal, dont listen if you dont like it Portillo 04:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

missplaced comments

I removed a lot of text that seemed to serve no purpose other than to promote a laymans casual observations of nu-metal while trying to seem unbiased when it was in fact not. There are many bands referenced on this page that have little to do with nu-metal such as lostprophets and chevelle. the whole page needs a good clean-up Alex 16:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

shouldn't we have criticism on all music pages? Like a section on pop that says "Some Metal and Hiphop fans and fans of other sorts of music sometimes think pop sucks because it's sissy music. They say things like "that sucks" and "I hate pop" which indicates that pop sucks and that they hate it." I mean, come on, it's obvious some biased person put up the criticism section to weaselword in their dislike of being associated with Nu. I'm gonna remove the whole thing until somebody can start citing magazine articles, press releases or something like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.67.127.181 (talk)

-- removed text -- "Abstract or obscure lyrics are nearly non-existent in nu metal songs, which is a major deviation from the earlier alternative and grunge lyrical styles. Similarly, nu metal lyrics normally lack the aggression of those of most metal genres." This is what I commonly refer to as "bullsh't". For the aggression part just look at Primer 55 (for example "the big fuck you"), Spineshank(pretty much every song), Mudvayne(under my skin), korn(right now, all my hate) and those are just examples from a relatively diverse group of nu metal bands. as for abstract lyrics there are many sections in songs or entire songs from many bands that make little to no sense unless you understand the context. Some one is trying to put down nu-metal over the lyrics. POV

Term Origins

I almost certainly remember reading somewhere that the term "Nu Metal" came from an abbreviation of "Neutered Metal" - This was in a magazine or something, a source that seemed reliable. I'm definetely looking for a citation for that before editing, as I figure all hell would break loose if I didn't - Can anybody help me on this?--KWaal 06:04, 01 August 2007 (UTC)

Mike Patton

I feel this should have already been placed up on here. But referring to the vocals section of Nu-Metal; Mike Patton of Faith No More, Mr. Bungle, etc. has been cited as a definite influence by System Of A Down, KoRn and SlipKnot's Shawn Crahan. All these bands have a certain FNM influence, as I know does Ill Nino and deftones, and many others who I can't off-handly name. Would it be possible to add him to the vocal influences of Nu-Metal?

Nu Metal isn't metal

It is closer to rock music than true heavy metal. Go to any good heavy metal message board and the experts there will say so. Most nu-metal bands know not to say they're metal because they get flak for it; most will correctly identify themselves as hard rock. The simplistic musical structures and commercial ideology inherent to nu-metal make it a subcategory of rock music, unlike orthodox heavy metal.

• I agree. (68.153.178.5 17:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC))

What are you talking about? Nu Metal is definatly metal. It may not be metal most metal fans like but it's metal. What experts post on heavy metal message boards? Dudes who sit in their bedrooms talking about their favorite bands? Orthodox heavy metal started out and alot still to this day have very simple musical structures. Just cause they have commercial ideology also flaws your argument... metallica?????? XXLegendXx 12:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Congrats; you've definatly just proved the point of alot of metal fans who object to nu-metal. What credentials do you have which place you above the status of "dudes who sit in their bedrooms talking about their favourite bands"? Kflester 11:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC) (oh, and I don't have any xXxXxs in my name)

The way I see it, its a band-by-band case. Some bands like Slipknot (a lot of it), Deftones, and System of a Down, they are metal (except maybe SoaD, more hard rock). But some bands, like Limp Bizkit and Korn arent metal at all. Oh yeah, NEVER use Linkin Park and metal in the same sentence. Please. And yes, I am a metalhead.Prepare to be Mezmerized! 01:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I generally like nu metal and I agree that it (or at least most of it) is not metal but just because they don't do solos so I'd say System of a Down and Slipknot's Subliminal Verses are metal but Slipknot's self-titled and Iowa and KoRn are not. It has nothing to do with this crap about "an inherently commercial ideology". Sure, some nu metal bands are quite popular and considerably more so than bands of extreme metal genres but just because of that in itself is no reason to say they do not belong to the same genre. Would you say Chamillionaire is not a rapper but the Flatlinerz are rappers just because Chamillionaire sells more cds? Munci 15:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thats a good point, but I would say that Chamillionare is a rapper, because rap has that "inherently commercial ideology". Prepare to be Mezmerized! 02:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah that's true, Emcee Lynx is bigtime commercial. Look, no genre is defined by whether or not it has an "inherently commercial ideology". Crass and the Buzzcocks are both punk, Metallica and Poison are both metal, Promoe and 50 Cent are both rappers, Melvins and Silverchair were both grunge, Ednaswap and Britney Spears are both pop, and so on. Some fiercely independent nu metal band from Liverpool are still nu metal. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 09:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I never said that rap (or nu-metal) was "defined" by a commercial ideology. I just said that rap tries to be popular (w/ Emcee Lynx failing, and Chamillionare succeding).

But back to the point, some nu metal is "metal" (Slipknot, Deftones, SoaD), and some isnt (Limp Bizkit, Korn, Linkin Park (actually, Linkin Park is pop)). Prepare to be Mezmerized! 17:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC) P.S. The Melvins are sludge, the newer Metallica is hard rock.

If you're saying that all artists of a genre are trying to be popular/have an inherent commercial ideology(both of which you have stated above), then you are saying that this is a defining characteristic of the genre and thus the genre can be ""defined"" by a commercial ideology in your eyes. Also,the specific example here, Emcee Lynx, is far from commercial. Munci 15:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

That above statement is called putting words into my mouth. I never said that it was a defining characteristic. I said that thay all try to be popular. Looking through your eyes, thats more of an assumption than me calling it a characteristic. Prepare to be Mezmerized! :D 01:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

No it is not, it is a statement which is true by virtue of what you are saying. If you say that all members of a genre "try to be popular" without exception, then you are saying that this is something which all of the musicians of that particular genre do. If all of them are trying to be popular, then if you heard of a band which was classified in the same genre but do not yet know whether they try to be popular or not, you would have to either revoke your previous statement, assume that the band is trying to be popular, deny that the musician was part of the genre or else hold a contradictory opinion. This is the same sort of assumption used to decide if a musician is part of a particular genre according to their musical techniques. By assuming that all musicians of the genre are trying to be popular, you would be thinking that that is a defining characteristic of such musicians as much as their musical techniques are. I hope you understand this now.

I just realised: the first poster in this section states that "The simplistic musical structures and commercial ideology inherent to nu-metal make it a subcategory of rock music, unlike orthodox heavy metal." Does anyone agree with this person that "orthodox" heavy metal is not a part of rock music? Munci 04:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Heavy Metal has obviously gone past the time where it was merely a Rock subgenre, so I am not sure what you are implying here. But what he meant is that Nu-Metal is closer to today's modern rock (which are offshoots of Grunge and Alternative Rock, which were heavily influenced by Punk, whose ethic was to be simple) than to Heavy Metal like Death Metal, Black Metal, Thrash Metal or even Groove. Also, I do believe the genre itself is not Metal and falsely labeled. The basis of a genre should be the musical composition of the music itself, so when a song is written with a Rock style of composition, obviously it is a Rock song and not Metal nor Rap. Camalus (talk) 07:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't consider it obvious that heavy metal has gone past the time when it was merely a rock subgenre. As far as I know, it still fits all the criteria for being a style of rock music and so it is a subcategory of it, contrary to what the guy above says. I'm not quite sure what you mean by modern rock. I know of some uses of the term as a radio format but modern rock is not a genre. A considerable amount of nu metal's influences are from metal but it has a lot of influences from elsewhere as well. It is not so much that punk's ethic is to be simple so much as that it's style was simple. I'm not sure what you mean by composition. I'm thinking that you might be referring to song structure, perhaps? Munci (talk) 05:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Added Nu Metal Theme

You guys can edit or add anything you want. I just added it because I thought it was missing the theme for the genre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragon-Knight3 (talk • contribs)

Coldwave?

Why see also coldwave? What has coldwave to do with nu 'metal'? Slowgaze 13:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Nu Metal is just plain stupid

Not only is Nu-metal more related to hard rock (and rap for that matter), it's just plain gay. Not that I wanna step on anyone's toes here, since I know how other Wikipedians feel about reporting offensive stuff, and I don't want to be offensive, or reported for that matter, but nu-metal has got to be one of the worst types of music ever. The article should at least say, as it once did (I believe), how much people look down on this genre of music. I have a helathy respect for most types of music, but not this. Hell, I'm a fan of black metal, so there you go. Nu-metal is annoying and almost all metalheads believe so. Mallcore is an abomination. The members of the bands try to act so goddamn cool, partly because of their label companies pushing their mainstream status, and they try to act like they're badass or "evil" or something, when they are absolutely not. Now I know I'm showing serious bias here, but all of the metal world (except the fans of nu-metal)looks down upon nu-metal, hence "mallcore," and I believe this article should reflect that to some degree.Navnløs 22:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Well who cares? George W. Bush is plain stupid too, but should his article be written in a derogatory matter? No. Wikipedia is about information, not POV opinions. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 22:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

You addition to the article was pure OR, so i have reverted your edit. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 23:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say the article should be written in a derogatory manner. It should state the controversy or criticism about it, seeing as what I was saying is a belief held by many. Perhaps, you also didn't notice that I had references for what I said. Yet you chose to revert my edit and claim it was original research. In other articles on wikipedia, such as heavy metal, it states to a lesser degree about what I said, that nu metal was not embraced by traditional metal fans and how their success was short-lived. Never mind the fact that I HAD references. There's a reason why Encylopaedia Metallum, which is used for many references of metal bands on wikipedia, and happens to be the MOST expansive encylopedia of metal bands, REFUSES to allow people to post any nu-metal band to their site. They state that is in fact, NOT metal in their submission guidelines here. The fact is that nu metal is looked down upon by other metal fans (much the way pop is looked down upon, by say, rock fans). Metal fans detest the label of nu metal, suggesting that this music has something to do with metal. This article once stated a little something about this criticism, as I believe it should. Perhaps my edit needed to be rephrased to better state the criicism, but what I had to say in the edit was a valid point.Navnløs 19:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

The HMM article states this as a note on the side, just like it should be. Your added section on the other hand cut the article here in two halves, one that describes what nu metal is, one that explains "how much it sucks". While we both know the importance of the MA within the community, it is not a reliable source and fails WP:RS, and is therefore not usable to make a point like that within this article. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 19:27, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying that there should be a section of how much nu metal sucks, even if it does, but I do think there should be a section not just about the music, but how it is widely viewed. In the HMM article and many other articles about genres of music it not only talks about the music itself, but how people view the music. All music genres here on Wikipedia have a section about their history, yet this article has none. This article should have a section about its history, which includes how people have viewed this style of music over the years.Navnløs 17:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Yet again, i had to revert your edit. The sentence you added is completely biased original research. Please stop adding controversial content if you can't provide a reliable source. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 21:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I did have reliable sources when you originally reverted my edit. I sourced Encylopaedia Metallum and Ian Christe's book, Sound of the Beast, which is sourced many times over in the heavy metal article here on wikipedia, yet you decided that it was somehow original research and I didn't have sources, when I obviously did.Navnløs 22:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

- "Nu-metal is annoying and almost all metalheads believe so." I know what you mean but many artist put in the nu-metal category are highly respected by many metalheads who actually sell millions of records instead of typing millions of ranting comments on Blabbermouth.net and such. Some bands noticed on here like Korn, Deftones and System Of A Down have actually some really musical intellectual approach to some of their works you obviously don't know about. So don't try to come off as a smart ass, you only bring down yourself if you need to judge others to feel better.86.80.121.33 05:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Generally..

In this is article are alltogether mentinoed about 5 bands all along. This is not good... There are much more important Nu Metal acts.. as form for examle Cavalera's "Roots" and later Soulfly up to for example Machinehead' Nu Metal experiments (as lots of Nu Metal bands are). Actually Nu Metal is a big thing, but this article is very small...--Lycantrophe 11:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Tend to agree. The article sort of makes an impression as it presents a small number of newer acts (actually, those who made the genre much more famous by entering or starting at mainstream media, which has nothing to do with the behinnings of the musical genre) as the perfect definition of what nu metal is. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 12:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Mallcore has never had many bands of its genre. There are about 50 nu metal bands in all...which is pitiful considering any other genre of metal (though mallcore isn't) has hundreds (if not thousands) of bands. Even rapcore and hardcore rap have a ton more bands of their genre. I don't get what people see in Aluminum. Their style of playing is never elaborate and extremely repetitive. And nu metal was never a "big thing," except to its small number of fans. It had its popularity, like glam metal, and now its done...sad, considering glam metal was much more popular and it lasted for much longer, but then again it was much better compared to nu metal.Navnløs 17:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

If you have no intention of contributing to this discussion, please stay out of it. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 18:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Korn on the term nu metal

I put a recent quote to what Korn has often said about being called nu metal. I also did that because the former passage about that needed citation, but that one dated back too around 1996 and no one's gonna find a quote for that one so removed it with this new passage about a quote I did find. (its from Korn's Wikipedia where I also put it)86.80.121.33 05:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

mallcore goths unite!

You guys obviously don't know what you're talking about, certainly you don't know much about metal. No offense, its just that pretty much only 7th graders listen to this kind of music, its something you mature out of (hopefully) just like most little kids like pop when they're young (not that all pop is bad, though after the 80's that seems to be the case). And twsx or w/e, stop trying to be so almighty. You keep saying I didn't have sources, when each time I DID have sources to support my edits, even if the edits weren't perfect. I really should report you actually. I don't care enough about this subject to go on, though, and most metalheads feel the same. They don't acknowledge nu metal as part of the metal "family," just as they don't really acknowledge metalcore as really metal. But none of them cares enough to correct the people who think those genres are metal, becuase usually those people aren't gonna change, or they'll eventually go away, and in the end only true metal will be left, just like always (i.e. glam metal and to some degree funk metal, see Ian Christe's book Sound of the Beast) not to mention most of us could care less because we're too busy enjoying our good music and laughing at those "goth" kids who are pretty much just emos with louder music. w00t.Navnløs 22:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

If I do come across as a little belligerent, I apologize, but it is a little upsetting that I had some great edits, which may have showed a little bias, which someone could have changed, and I had sources and some people don't think that counts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Navnløs (talk • contribs) 22:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

(1. I am not a Nu Metal fan)

2. I exactly know what are you talking about. Well, as I see, you also know that after some time, nobody will know about all this non-quality, non-intelligent bands - "in the end only true metal will be left". So why don´t you just let it happen? There is nothing constructive about what you do in here. It is just wasting time...

I don´t think Nu Metal is a big problem for Heavy Metal at all. Most of "for Heavy Metal problematic Nu Metal" are just some small boys in XXL clothing like limp bizkit (maybe limb pizkit or whatever) or just a mainstream-mass-money-maker linkin park. Ok I agree these boys are quite funny, but who knows them in ten years? Do you think some of these fans read Wikipedia? They will never know how funny they are. However there are really lame bands in every of this "big" metal subgenres. You may defend black metal, but there is just shit too. Nu Metal has just the unluck to be easier missused for commercial than others.

I am not gonna tell you my opinion about metal you like cause discussions about this would have no sense. Some bands are just experiments, progression of new metal, but you just say it is a shit just because it is described as nu metal. Most of "true" metal fans have no problems with this. But what do you think - what does Venom, Bathory, Mayhem, Morbid Angel, Slayer, Sepultura, I don´t know what ever ... what do they have to do when they listen to Nightwish - Manowar - Sonata Arctica - Dimmu Borgir - Cradle Of Filth - Children Of Bodom and all this melodic orchestral symphonic medieval KITSCHY macho "beautiful-but-so-heavy" arranged COMMERCIAL pseudo metal? I dont´t know if they just laugh or cry or want to die or want to kill em' or what.. This is reality but who cares that 10% of all Heavy Metal fans listen to Power metal or whatever and 90% of Heavy Metal fans are getting paroxysm of laughter when the listen to power metal? Who is so bored to write it down to power metal discussion? Where is intelligence of macho-culture or sadomasonecroblackmetal?--Lycantrophe 14:40, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Archive

This is becoming a bit town long. What do you say we archive? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamanadam (talk • contribs) 00:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Controversial Topic?

I put the sign for controversy here, because nu metal has often been degraded and the article vandalized by some of the extreme metal fans. If you wish to remove it, do so and leave a reason for removing it under this topic. Prepare to be Mezmerized! :D 21:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion of its declined mainstream popularity?

Should we include a section on how and/or why nu metal had decline in popularity and also more about its peak? Pathfinder2006 14:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Decline

Should we mention how this genre is dying out? Slipknot attempting thrash metal, Linkin Park, Korn, Papa Roach, and many other bands have left it, and the remaining bands are reclassified out of that group. I think Limp Bizkit is suppose to make a Nu Metal album, but still, should we mention it? On Encyclopaedia Metallum (which is linked to on a large number of Wikipedia articles), it refers to nu metal as mallcore. Should this be noted as a term also used for it? -Allhailtuna (talk) 08:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

If you can write it in an encyclopedic manner and reference it well, please do. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 08:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)