Talk:Screamo

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Screamo article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

2005 conversation

I probably wouldn't be of much help in writing anything about screamo but the introduction paragraph, particularly that second half, needs to be re-written. Hoagssculptor 04:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the entire last part of the page, its an opinion editorial piece, about the degredation of punk culture, not something that belongs in an encyclopedia entry about what screamo music is.

I'm confused here. In 1995, Portraits of Past was considered a hardcore band/"emo"/etc. Yet the people who created this page claim that modern "screamo" bands have no connection to hardcore even if these "screamo" bands are playing music that is identical to the mid 90s emo/hardcore sound? Pg 99 steals so much from PoP style. All of this lacks a consistent logic and denies history. It's just as bad as pop-punk and indie rock being tied to the history of the emo/hardcore scene of the 90s. If some of you bother to go through your back issues of HaC, you'll see the term's sparing use as nothing more than hyperbole. "Chaotic hardcore" indeed. Need we not forget that Orchid wasn't doing anything that Uranus, Drift, and One Eyed God Prophecy was doing years before? This is just sad.

This is ridiculous. I have both Rites of spring, swing kids, embrace, Envy, Saetia, and Thursday, Thrice, and From Autumn Ashes on my Ipod. I know what the genre is now, what it used to be, and I know what bands like Circle take Square are doing. The fact is, like the term Gay, the meaning of the word has changed in modern times. However, the distinction between what most people think of Screamo now, and what people who know what screamo was. Is new screamo is not a movement. Thursday and Underoath do not share the same influences (infact thursday calls Husker Du, and at the drive in influences which are more closeley tied as early 90's emo-core, post hard core ). Rather The term screamo is a catch call phrase that is applied to any band with screamed emotional lyrics, heavey guitars, and use metal core break downs. I've acknowledged this in the article, someone else can clean it up but the fact is guitarworld, and most music magazine call bands like Poison the well Screamo now, whether or not you think its "correct". As a nuetral article this should acknowledge all things screamo refers to or two articles should be made, that talks about Screamo as a movement in the 80s and 90s and now. If nessacary this should... Go to higher ups. Also this article needs citations. Fourfa can be used as a source for most of the article. I've added in the section of what the term screamo is sometimes used for, with out editing the majority of the article. If someone else wants to clean up, my grammar it might be worth it.

stop making things up. Let screamo be what people think screamo is. Let hardcore be what people think hardcore. Music was not meant to be over anaylized in genres, and ripped apart. Just because underoath is "comercial", doesnt mean they arent good. Let music be music and stop over anaylizing everything good there is in this world.-written by a 16 year old girl

"Next, underoath will be Classical music as well, because a group of teenagers will declare it that"

It's not overanalyzation of music at all. Screamo is a specific thing, a specific kind of music. When people wrongly say bands like Underoath are screamo, and then they are told they're not, they all get defensive and say "Genres don't matter anyways." Genres are used to specify a very certain kind of music. Just because your favorite Hot Topic/MTV2 band isn't a legitimate screamo band doesn't mean there isn't a set definition to what screamo is. It just means you don't know what it is. - Firexstorm

Screamo is a very definite genere. It's not "people think it is" it's what it is. This isn't existentialism here. If you don't know any of the listed bands, chances are you don't know what screamo is. Underoath is alternative rock with screaming. That doesn't make them screamo. - Kidgorgeous

I think the most legitimate defense of the use of this genre title is in that all these bands are linked by a shared history, aka Hardcore and specifically pre-Sunny Day Real Estate style emo/emocore (I'm not getting into that destinction). I remember going to a punk party a few years ago and half shamefully admitted I have been mostly been listening to screamo, then probably listed Saetia and Hot Cross. The kid I was talking to laughed and simply laughed, agreed that those bands were good, and said "I listened to screamo when it was still called emo" by which he meant way back in 97 (can we remember that far?) before emo became a mainsteam phenomena. Now I am not saying that a band like underoath isn't punk rock or whatever, I am saying that they have more shared history with a band like Thursday who are called "extremo" or "screamo" in terms of what kind of emo heritage if any I'd give them. I would probably just out and out call them metalcore. Jacib 12:51, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly this article needs a lot of work, because it is mostly saying what it isn't and then listing bands, without offering context or history. Jacib 12:51, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If the entire world thinks that Thursday is screamo, except for a few stuck up music genre elitests, then who is right? If everybody calls crap like Atreyu and Throwdown Hardocre even though it's metalcore, then why are they wrong, if EVERYBODY except for a few identify them as hardcore?

So if in another thousand years, after civilizations experiences another dark age, and archelogoists find the ruins of the Sistine Chapel ceiling, and deicde it was a comic book, does that mean it was a comic book? GiveBlood 9:37 AM, July 11, 2005.

This is what screamo was first, and what it still is. Everyone just keeps mislabeling it as something it's not. chainy July 12th, 2005

Surely the person who first coins a word is the person who is using it correctly as they are the person who has come up with the word and the meaning. Therefore Screamo should be a genre defined in sound in the same way today and in the future as it was originally meant. If i was to try and redefine the word "Hello" on wikipedia say as a trem refering to the construction of a tank, I think that their would be great outrage. Therefore why should people feel that they can tell people off for being elitest for being outraged at someone trying to redefine something that means alot to them. Most the people here are only trying to define the genre in the way it is meant to be (the original way) because they are truly passionate about the genre, and don't want to see it warped into something their not passionate about. Plus sub genre names are meant to help people to find very particular styles of music, and these days people are trying to use it to define a very broad range of music which all sound greatly diffrent, and can all be described by other genre names. A) this completely defeats the point of subgenres and B) its a bit greedy to want to use more than one sub genre to describe a band (unless of course their a fusion of genres). -Lester Drake September 14th 2005

this article is written so poorly... that i don't even know how to complete that sentence. by merely following the links (as we wikipedia users do) you will find that there are all sorts of inaccuracies and contradictions in it, as well as the many broken wikipedia rules. should it be deleted? Dreamer.redeemer 22:36, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I had an idea regarding this page, which I have detailed at Talk:List_of_screamo_groups#What_to_do_with_this_page.21. I was wondering if you could take a look and tell me what you think. I'd like to clean up these articles a lot and I think this might be a step in the right direction. Alexforcefive 22:38, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"misused very commonly"

well, i do believe that screamo is totally misused!!!!!!! it doesn't have anything to do with EMO!! yeah maybe it's lyrics is close to EMO... but hell no, it's not EMO... some thinks screamo came from SCREAM and EMO... no it's not... screamo are the bands from the branch of hardcore in 1990's... and it's totally cool... hearing screams from the beginning till the end... if some thinks ATERYU is sreamo, better think twice!! =p ====> i'm only a 14 years old high school girl, and if you think that i'm wrong, so sorry.. just tell me! ym= samurai_x0718 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.53.57 (talk) 10:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If a use is very common, who is to say it is a "misuse" rather than an alternate meaning? What are we, the Académie Punkaise? -- Jmabel | Talk July 8, 2005 17:58 (UTC)

you can call the stuff that comes out of you back end crap or turd, but it doesnt change a thing

ok you guys must have no life coming on to some website talking about whart screamo is and isnt. you guys probally dont know what screamo is you guys are probally one of those posers who go on google and type in screamo bands and how to be emo and follow the instructions but you guys are probally computer geeks and emmo isnt a style its a type of music for all you posers and fags who think emos a stle

"Screamo" is a generic term first used widely in publications such as Heartattack and Maximum Rock N'Roll to describe bands from the late 90's such as Orchid, Reversal of Man, Jeromes Dream, etc. that basically were playing what could be called "chaotic hardcore." Because the term "screamo" is a much better catchphrase for larger publications, it was easily adopted and widely misused by other publications such as Alternative Press, SPIN, etc. to describe bands that basically play either mid-90's style emo/emotional hardcore such as Thursday or even bands such as Atreyu that play dumbed down metallic hardcore. The word "screamo" is a completely stupid term, and one that I would go so far as to call derogatory when attempting to describe the bands that were initially referred to (see above) using this categorization. Nevertheless, the term has long been co-opted for use in the jargon of the general public and as such has lost any significant meaning when used to describe anything. Think of it like this, "grunge" was a word used to describe bands as different as Nirvana and Pearl Jam. It literally holds no meaning anymore, nor did it really ever. By the way, everyone that has posted here previously should seriously stay in school and learn how to use the English language correctly as I assume that is what language you predominately speak. There is a big difference in meaning between there, their, and they're. I saw one of these words used above correctly and then again incorrectly in the SAME SENTENCE. If you want anyone to take your discourse seriously, please learn proper grammar. -Anonymous

Blessthefall are a mega screamo band!

let me guess.... all these people critisizeing are like 14 15 16 yrs old. or they just like to argue. it's music you like or you dont like it.

I agree some of the arguing has been biased and what not but you have to realize that it must go through this. This is wikipedia, the final article must be completely neutral and objective, there must be a discussion in order to come to a right conclusion. You can't just erase what screamo is supposed to be and classify it with bands that sound very differently from the original screamo bands, neither can you put "music is music you like it, you like it" or "if everyone says the earth is flat, then the earth is flat!!" on a wikipedia article. It has to be made out of facts, and if there are GOOD -LOGIC- opinions doubting those facts then they should be taken in consideration too. (: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.98.38.154 (talk) 17:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

does majority usage determine meaning?

People who say it does might have a point, but you reduce the term's effectiveness at describing a certain kind of music when you simplify it to being based solely on vocals. As far as I'm concerned if it's not lo-fi it's not screamo. -Liam

Of course it doesn't, it that was the rule then everything with distortion would be death metal or slit your wrist stuff. XdiabolicalX 14:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't, but sadly it does historically. If the majority say pagans are evil non believers and not a word for farmer then guess what? Yeah, as much as its an annoyance I would have to say majority does dictate, however it should be the job of those recording to properly define to re educate the misinformed and point them in another direction. 67.161.166.93 06:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it shouldn't, but that's basically what's happening with Metal these days, where mainstream bands mixing various styles get passed off as "Metal bands" for their harsh vocals and distorted, heavy riffs, even though most incorporate more hardcore/emo/indie than actual metal. Let me put this another way, since when does Metal ONLY have harsh(scream/growl/screech) vocals. Black Sabbath, Rainbow, Rush, Judas Priest, early Scorpions; definitive metal, no screams there(Metallica is Thrash). My point is that we have sub-genres so a faster shouting type of metal is labeled thrash metal and a less structured, chaotic metal with tortured vocals is called Black Metal; because it deviates from the original genre's meaning by a lot. What I'd like to see on this article, is more band interaction and song structure details. Sure, most emo gives a lot of spotlight to the singer(s), which is fine to mention, but a clear(unbiaised) view as to what the instruments usually do would be good.

"as a kind of crescendo element, a sonic weapon to be trotted out when the music and lyrics (every bit as evolved and autobiographically sincere as emo's were) reach a particular emotional pitch"

See what I mean? Some do not use screams as crescendo, and have that type of singing throughout, while others only as verses, or only in sudden time shifts and yes SOME that use it as a climax of a dynamic singing part. Its not as emotionally linked all the time as this guy claims it, and some emo lyrics are more metaphorical than literate, while other bands write lyrics that don't make any sense on purpose, like psychedelia used to do in the 60s/70s.

Trying to inject a small dose of reality into these endless genre debates... majority usage does in fact denote meaning. How exactly did you think any word acquired its meaning? And do words change meaning over time? Yes, yes they do. Now, there are exceptions. Technical definitions do not conform to majority usage or that of the lay. So, to get to the point, give me a sourced technical definition of screamo or for the love of god shut up. Everyone is tired of people saying Genre X is like that because I say so, and if you disagree you don't know what you're talking about. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 23:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Majority usage cannot be allowed to denote meaning. Almost everyone calls dimetredons dinosaurs, and they're not. People call algae moss, but it's not. Screamo is a word that was used first to describe a specific style of hardcore punk. Later popular press used it to label something entirely different. The first definition is what should still stand. If it doesn't, then we'll have to make a new article on "skram" or something to describe what used to be called screamo. There can't be an article that is about two completely different things at the same time. -punkrockrunner

Any sourced information?

This article doesn't cite any sources anywhere, and the "screamo being classified as hardcore" section is an editorial page. Since several people have mentioned that the term and its uses has been tossed about in magazines, they should be cited on the article and any claims should be attributed to the sources themselves. I really know and care nothing about punk or hardcore or screamo or any indie subculture whatsoever, but this is a really bad article. It reminds me of the letters section in maximum rock and roll. Wikipedia is not a source for punk point acquisition. Jimmyq2305 00:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fourfa should be cited now- Oct 2006

Didn't NME invent the term 'screamo' to take the piss out of all the bands who scream badly in their songs?Nightside eclipse 17:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course they didn't. NME is toss. XdiabolicalX 01:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Screamo vs. Hardcore

Hardcore is a chaotic form of music usually incorporating rythem guitar and frentic instuments (drums, guitar, screaming). Whereas screamo has more melodic parts in it which is its affiliation with emo. - Gellister

Hardcore isn't chaotic in the least. Diabolical 14:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on what genre of hardcore you refer to. Metalcore usually is just frenzied screaming like norma jean whereas Melodic hardcore is obviously melodic. Hardcore Punk is generally chaotic - Gellister

Sign you comments using four tildes ~~~~, Metalcore isn't technically Hardcore, it's Metalcore. Not to mention there are numerous different styles within Metalcore itself which makes it to broad to define specifically. Most Hardcore Punk is simply structured. Screamo is really quite easy to find a simple structure in too. Diabolical 17:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Screamo has hardcore roots it was originally called hardcore emo but then they shortened it to emo... then when emo became the new stuff like Armor for SLeep and Dashboard Confessional (which is called post-indie emo) we transferred the name to screamo so yes screamo has hardcore roots but hardcore is still much more simple. Screamo has a ton of emo elements but nice try. Keep studying. Gellister 18:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Gellister[reply]

No one changed the names, are you trying to say there is some sort of presiding council over Emo & Screamo? Hardcore emo was bands such as Heroin. Emo was used almost 5 or 6 years before these bands started. And you've just made up a new term which doesn't make sense in "post-indie emo", there is however a sub-sect that can be labelled "post-emo indie" though it was in existance from the early 1990s and is not what you elude to. Diabolical 00:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually yeah. I am actually very well studied in the history of emo and I know where all these things come from. Emo was originally what we refer to now as "screamo" because stupid people like you believe that a genre never gets changed in meaning over time (look at what metal is concidered now as opposed to twenty years ago). Emo was orginally from DC and moved to florida and then to San Francisco. It was an offshoot of hardcore that included screaming and soft sung vocals. Then as post-emo indie (I accidentally switched it up earlier) came out in midwest (hence it's nickname mid-western emo) came out and gained it's popularity much more quickly than regular emo so the term "emo" got transferred to mean post-emo indie. Now we refer to what was originally emo as "screamo". Better study up more buddy because i seem to have a lot more behind my facts than you! Gellister 18:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)Gellister[reply]

Yeah, because Rites Of Spring really sound like what's now called Screamo. Diabolical 21:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately yes that's what most people would call it but I recognize that Rites of Spring falls under other emo related genres (aren't they hardcore emo?). I was just trying to distinguish how people came up with the idea that stuff like Jimmy Eat World and Spitalfield are "emo" becuase history says that they legally are just post-emo indie. Sorry if I offended you I was having a bad day. I'm willing to take knowledge if it seems legit Gellister 22:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)Gellister I have what I call "emo days" where I pretty much hate the world and today at school was one. Sorry for the rudeness. Gellister 22:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I would say that Screamo and Hardcore have a similar relationship as Pop-punk and emo. Of course, in screamo, the breakdowns are used more sporadically. Kung Foo 11:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

uh no gellister, Rites of Spring are emotional hardcore punk, shortened emocore. Then their are bands based on this genre that aren't exactly hardcore punk, like Moss Icon,were emo. Hardcore emo is emo with screaming and a few more changes, but same lyrics. When indie emo came, people called a revival of hardcore emo, not emotional hardcore, screamo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.189.82 (talk) 07:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion Vs. Fact

In my opinion a genre is to be determined by the owner of the CD, or by the band. I don't think you can really specifically LABLE a type of music. When you get into the sub-genre's and shit, then you aren't really getting anywhere... Your just telling me that its a certain type of music.

Itunes likes to try to tell me that AILD (As I Lay Dying) is Alternative & Punk, but I totally disagree. I believe AILD to be a posthardcore, metalcore band.

you can't LABLE music anymore than you can LABLE a person. Rawr I'm Scene. 05:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Demonhunter10

And you can't spell, but I'm sure that in no way invalidates your point. Blackmetalbaz (talk)

That's like saying an indie band putting grindcore as their Myspace genre makes them grindcore, but it doesn't. Just because the band is uninformed about their genre, does not make them right. Ambrosia- 16:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, like the poeple that think that AFI is emo, just cuz of their hair (which isn't emo even)

Discontinuity between articles

There is a disconnect between this article and List of screamo groups. There are bands listed here that are not listed there. On top of that, the east coast scene of the late 90s, early 00s has basically been ignored in this article while listed on the other article (Saetia, Circle Takes the Square, City of Caterpillar, Orchid, etc). Unfortunately, sourcing for this sort of information is hard to come by, and this article already lacks sources.

Also, I feel that the lead should acknowledge the popular appropriation of the term. It isn't wikipedia's place to decide what is The True Screamo when there are verifiable sources labeling pop-bands as screamo. I think having an article about the underground genre is find, but the paragraph about "misconceptions" seems like someone's personal opinion, as opposed to verifiable research.

Finally, the paragraph about rare records seems off topics. It could easily be made concise, maybe a sentence or two. Anyway, just a few thoughts.-Andrew c 00:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note

I don't know if it matters to anyone who regularly visits this page, but a bunch of screamo band articles recently got pinged as A7's. If this genre intends to continue having much of a presence on Wikipedia, someone is going to have to start digging up some sources on the screamo underground. Chubbles 23:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

origin

i thougth that screamo is something like emocore (emotive hardcore punk) mixed with chaotic hardcore and grindcore —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.30.225 (talk) 17:28, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

it is... at least that's what i thought --Sheish 6 Sheish (talk) 03:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TotallyDisputed

I tagged this as factually incorrect because someone has turned it into a fanboy's opinon piece. I guess we're just going to have to wait until the books are published about screamo for this article to be worth a damn. Chubbles 16:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who would write a book on an obscure hardcore punk subgenre?69.249.253.77 00:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OR

the page still contains a lot of OR and needs to be sourced. The GUITAR WORLD article may be useful, regardless of its poor writing and factual inaccuracies some which border on WP:REDFLAG. but it does not back up the OR claims and certainly can't remedy the POV problems. --Neon white 00:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ask

Johntegrity. he knows what needs to be done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.8.59.109 (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

nevermind. i was wrong. it was not his time. others must guide screamo wiki now. farewell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.8.59.109 (talk) 21:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Screamo article plagurized the "Emo" article

Regardless of how short this article is, I noticed that it plagurized the "emo" article. The place where the author describes the "San Diego" hardcore scene and the New York/New Jersey scene and the CBGBs was taken right from the "emo" article, with slight modifications too slight to be recognized as original. Look it up for yourself.

24.2.43.248 (talk) 17:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)Kellentaco[reply]

There is no ownership of articles on wikipedia, therefore there can be no plagiarism. Considering screamo has it's historical roots in emo it's no surprise that the articles have similar history sections. --Neon white (talk) 19:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New to it

So, I was a fan of Hardcore Punk (hardcore or punk for you guys that can't figure that out..) and bands like SSD, Black Flag, and Die Kreuzen. Recently, I got into bands like Saetia, Envy, Circle Takes the Square, Gospel (I think they can be catogorized as screamo, anyway) Iwouldsetmyselfonfireforyou, pg.99 and etc. So, to clear everything up. THOSE are screamo bands. They're are at least four hundred others you can listen to. Most of them are from the mid-90s probably.

Underoath and Thursday are pop-core, a pop post-hardcore genre. But then again, you can also call Underoath metalcore. Still not close to an emo band. So, I just got into it, and I already knew what it was... If stupid scenekids (aka "emo" kids) would stop saying its screamo, they're wouldn't be so much confusion.. 66.204.133.158 (talk) 14:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Hunter[reply]

Not sure what your point is. --Neon white (talk) 20:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i totaly agree with Hunter --Sheish 6 Sheish (talk) 03:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stupidness

Although old hardcore punk music was actually pretty good, it unfortunately changed into the post-hardcore genre. My point? I'm reccomending that the screamo article be merged into the post-hardcore genre article as screamo is post-hardcore. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're completly WRONG, screamo is NOT post-hardcore, two very different generes, post-hardcore has a more lighter sound, while it is very "mainstreem", to call it somehow. Screamo is more heavier and takes influences from other "odd" music, like grindcore or jazz, screamo is to emo what mathcore is to metalcore--Sheish 6 Sheish (talk) 03:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

well, all the emotional hardcore bands +Fugazi,Quicksand,At the Drive In,Drive like Jehu, Hot Water Music Braid, and Texas is the reason are post-hardcore, and they aren't "very mainstream". Originally, post-hardcore was underground.Don't tell me Fugazi sounds "mainstreem". blizzard, that makes no sense. What does ur 1st statement have to do with the 2nd? Nothing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.189.82 (talk) 10:10, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

Screamo should be merged into the post-hardcore article per Text and Overlap. The two articles should be deleted really, but that's another matter. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These are both notable and very seperate articles, i can't see much in particular that links them. You will need to provide a better reason for proposing this. These pages clearly do not contain the same info, therefore claiming there is an overlap is false. --neonwhite user page talk 05:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with neonwhite on this.Inhumer (talk) 17:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. Used in different contexts to describe separate, but at times overlapping, musical characteristics. Chubbles (talk) 18:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Chubbles. ~Ambrosia- ^talk 20:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. Post-Hardcore involves much more singing, while Screamo is focused entirely on screaming, with very little vocals. Two noticeably different musical genres. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coocooforcocopuffs (talk • contribs) 23:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support - per text and overlap. What don't you people get? Screamo is a sub genre of post-hardcore. Per Text the Screamo page has such a short article that it should be merged into post-hardcore. Maybe not so much on overlap but look at what Chubbles said: "Used in different contexts to describe separate, but at times overlapping, musical characteristics." Well gee! DUH!!! "at times overlapping" is a good enough reason for a merger plus the fact that Screamo is a short article and a sub genre of post-hardcore. I'm not asking the articles to be moved, only that the Screamo page should be merged into a small sectiong of the post-hardcore page as a sub-genre. Many music pages do this. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 00:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's already been made clear that the text, quite clearly does not overlap. Neither article so much as mentions the other. There is no sourced info linking these two subjects in any way. Neither article is a stub both are of substantial length. --neonwhite user page talk 02:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I believe that it is possible that the proposer's personal distase for this music is interfering with his appraisal of the situation. Particularly, the statement that "The two articles should be deleted really, but that's another matter" and that it was "unfortunate" that post-hardcore followed punk rock give me pause in considering the legitimacy of this merger proposal. I could possibly understand an emo-screamo merger, but I do think there's a significant body of material on both such that they merit separate articles. Chubbles (talk) 02:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's unecessaty to speculate on motivations. If it is based on a personal POV then experienced editors will likely note the lack of valid reason and oppose a merge. --neonwhite user page talk 02:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. This is a real definition of screamo: Loud music (that is often chaotic and somewhat uncontrolled) that in many cases, include lyrics that deal with depression, stress, murder, and other related topics, with most of the song being sang through screaming. Definition of Post Hardcore: These types of songs come in a more melodic variety, meaning that post hardcore songs have a melody that is easy to pick out, unlike the screamo genre. Not only that, but most Post hardcore songs that I have heard don't use screaming through most of their songs. If we merge these two articles, we will only be merging very different genres that have huge differences. I think that it is best to keep this article separate from the post hardcore article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.70.234.10 (talk) 05:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. They're two completely separate genres. You can't claim that screamo has turned into post-hardcore when there's still bands making screamo in it's original sense. Whoever proposed this clearly has no idea what they're talking about. EznorbYar (talk) 12:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. I think that the person who has proposed this merger doesn't know what the true

meaning of emo and screamo is. This is not suprising seeing as mainstream media seems to like to use screamo to label just about any band that screams. I don't belieive that user has bad intentions, though, I'm sure if they heard a real screamo record they'd agree that there are characteristics that set it apart from post-hardcore and other genres. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.219.248.46 (talk) 06:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. They're two different genres. 67.164.53.111 (talk) 07:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. They're two different genres. Screamo evolved from emo, which evolved from hardcore. Post-hardcore evolved directly from hardcore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akkeri (talk • contribs) 02:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. They're non-overlapping articles. Both genres evolved from the same thing, however are both totally different genres at the same time. There is nothing in these articles linking them together, and there is no reason the articles should be deleted either, they are of reasonable notability and do not go against any Wiki policy.Guitar freak91 (talk) 05:09, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as most people agree that screamo deserves it's own page, I think we should put an end to this discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.219.248.46 (talk) 08:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. Bands like At the Drive-In and Fugazi have very little to do with Screamo. 19:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.133.194.247 (talk)

Strong Support Saetia is a post-hardcore band. Circle Takes The Square is post-hardcore. Screamo is a type of post hardcore. Post hardcore= music that derived from the Hardcore punk genre. So, yes. Post-hardcore bands can also be screamo bands. There IS a direct link to the two genres.*

In the early 1990s you would have been right, but now that Post-Hardcore has evolved it is now a genre with characteristics, screamo does not meet these. Besides, if we follow your logic than Grunge is Post-hardcore, because it developed from hardcore punk.

Screamo came from emo, didnt it? And emocore and emo are post-hardcore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.189.82 (talk) 00:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Screamo Band List

Well since no one can agree what exactly "screamo" is... maybe some of our esteemed colleagues can agree on a few bands that might fit the bill. And who's to say that any certain "screamo" band won't transcend multiple genres? Most good music does. On the other hand, if this list is allowed to grow I personally believe that it will become more apparent what musically literate people consider legitimate entries... and irrelevant ones. Go crazy kids, go crazy. 199.67.140.154 (talk) 19:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Billy Blanks[reply]

This link could be a possible starting point, I personally agree with most of the bands that are stated.

http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=140750

  hey, i made that list. go me. -- Maycomb County  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.249.20.73 (talk) 14:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Underoath

why is underoath here? they don't even play screamo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.164.93.64 (talk) 02:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Screamo, the art of molesting your vocal chords?

Ok seriously who wrote that does that even belong or is it suseptable for deletion

"Screamo, the art of molesting your vocal chords"

Was on the front page XXxChriscorexXx (talk) 16:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources needed

Per the policy of verification: Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed.

Material has been challenged and removed and needs to have sources provided before it is returned to the article. TheRedPenOfDoom (talk) 10:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genre Misconceptions?

I just had to edit out a fair few inaccuracies in this page, which I would like to bring here just for clarification.
Firstly, whoever said it has elements of Post-Rock has just demonstrated that they've seemingly never heard Post-Rock in their entire life. Post-Rock uses rock guitar styles for non-rock purposes, usually taking influence from Soundscape, Shoegaze, Ambient, Alternative Rock, Experimental Music and Electronic Music. I do not see how the many listed Screamo bands here at all develop these genres into their music. Please learn your genres before making the most absurd comparisons I will ever witness.
Also, another issue is that of Death Metal and Black Metal. Let us just confirm this for the little kiddies, ok? Screaming vocals with intense distortion does not instantly make you a form of Death Metal. Nor does it mean you have influence from Death Metal. Otherwise, by this logic, half the fucking Hardcore + Crust Punk bands out there mind aswell just be called Death Metal. So try comparing any Screamo band to Necrophagist, Death or Nile and then try saying that. You just cant.
Last but not least, Black Metal. I dont know where this mindless speculation came from, but, as regressive and generic as Black Metal is, it is nowhere near the proximity of Screamo. Do you see Aiden singing about sacrificing unholy nordic goats to the blasphemous wintermoon? Or hear Atreyu singing about icelandic satanic doomforests of blackness? No! Even the guitaring, which is basically just tremolo picking the same 5 notes in a minor key, to the feedback, it's far from Screamo.
Thank you, just had to clear up this ignorant mess. Dark dude (talk) 19:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A few bands did(Envy & Funeral Diner to name two) have/have a lot of Post rock influence. You should also learn what Screamo actually is/was.76.117.93.208 (talk) 00:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How on Earth did Funeral Diner have Post-Rock influence??? I dont see them doing any resemblant genres to Post-Rock at all. Shoegaze? Nope. Ambient? Nope. Noise? Nope. Electronic? Nope. Strange timbre? Nope. Almost entire focus onto atmosphere (Soundscape)? Nope. I'm not a hater of Screamo at all, considering I used to be big with the genre 2 years ago, but I can easily say, Screamo does not have Post-Rock influence. Possibly have the sound of one of the elements of post-rock, but by that logic, Sunn O))) and Daft Punk are also Post-Rock. Dark dude (talk) 13:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not nearly to the degree of Envy, but you can hear a little bit of post rock influence in FDs music. 76.117.93.208 (talk) 18:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genres

Why take the origins away?

P.S. it should be=

Stylistic | Emo
origins: _| Hardcore punk
_______.| Extreme metal

Ignore the lines

61x62x61 (talk) 17:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Origins' was the subject of a (slowmotion) edit war between two (or more) unsourced positions. Find a reliable source about the genre's origins and it can go back in.TheRedPenOfDoom (talk) 17:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I realy don't know but it seems really hard to find reliable sources so i'll just post a few tell me what you think [[1]](Unsourced most likely unreliable) [[2]] This seems more reliable however and seems like screamo does come from emo), if you say source numbers two is good i'll write up an origins page =] XXxChriscorexXx (talk) 12:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikis in general are not considered reliable sources and unfortunately, the second source says that this article in Wikipedia is its source, and so that is not allowed as a source, either. TheRedPenOfDoom (talk) 15:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didnt see that part i'll look for some more I hate seeing articles look so lifeless.. I'll be looking for more sources and see if we can make use of any.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.180.33.165 (talk) 22:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it obvious that screamo comes from emo and the word screamo comes from the word "scream" and "emo"? Kurniasan (talk) 15:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There were at least two different groups contesting for what the origins of the style were/are. What is 'obvious' analysis falls under 'no original research' particularly Wikipedia editors taking piece of information A and piece of information B and claiming that A+B=C. Until someone finds a reasonably reliable source, the contested 'style origins' should remain blank. TheRedPenOfDoom (talk) 15:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course its hard to find reliable sources for an obscure punk subgenre.Inhumer (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The origins of the word screamo in "emo" and "screaming" are made clear on the second page of the cited NY Times article, as well as in the Alternative Press article. The background in hardcore punk and post-hardcore is also explained in both these sources. 67.191.153.112 (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gothic rock and screamo

I've been accused of misinterpreting a source (Jason Heller's "Feast of Reason") by indicating early screamo's eventual debt to Gothic rock. To be clear, the source says "Angel Hair's sound hinted at the theatricality and moral ambivalence of '80s goth as much as it did the cryptic rebellion of Nation of Ulysses; the band even recorded a vessel-rupturing cover of Bauhaus's 'Stigmata Martyr.'" This means that Angel Hair (a prototypical screamo group) owed as much to goth as it did to D.C. post-hardcore, which is a rather strong statement. My reference to later screamo borrowing from new wave alludes to Heller's statement about combining Gary Numan and Born Against. I'd like to include reference to the Rapture and the eventual connection between screamo and dance-punk, but I'm not positive how to do it.

On another note, I'd *really* like to add something about Orchid, who I find to be a crucial later screamo group, and important in terms of combining screamo with thrash and grindcore. Does anybody know where I can get a good source on Orchid? Aryder779 (talk) 14:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grindcore

Ok, I found something on Orchid and added them to the article, but I'd like to say something about how Orchid, the Blood Brothers, and the Locust owe more to grindcore than their predecessors did. Can somebody help with that? Aryder779 (talk) 15:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commerce

hi, I'd like to add something about commercial success - the very first screamo groups were very underground and couldn't have sold much, whereas obviously the new groups like MCR are a gold mine. Where can I find data on Billboard charts? I suspect some of the later first-wave groups (Blood Brothers and the Locust) probably sold pretty well also, though nothing like Thursday and their ilk. Aryder779 (talk) 15:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allmusic description

The description given at the top of the page, from Allmusic, seems to describe the second variety of screamo (the bit about screaming vocals showing up at moments of emotional intensity). The first wave screamo bands just screamed throughout. So I'm thinking of moving that section of the description to the "second wave characteristics" section. By the way, can anybody think of a better way to differentiate, other than "first wave" and "second wave"? I mean, we can't really say "true" screamo or "real" screamo, because that's too prescriptive, and the term was never something the bands particularly advocated anyway. Aryder779 (talk) 21:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Screamo/Use of sources

Aryder779:hi, I wanted to respond to your declaration that I've misinterpreted my source in terms of the Gothic rock influence on screamo it might be a subtlety to indicate that Angel Hair "hinted" at goth, but they also covered Bauhaus, and Swing Kids covered Joy Division (granted, Joy Division is ambiguously "proto-Goth"). We'll just leave the influence as post-punk, and move on. - Now, as to the "second wave" of screamo, what is your problem with my citing Thursday's influences as characteristic? The point that needs to be gotten across is the (rather great) distinction between the first group of screamo groups, and the second, more commercially successful ones, as well as whatever they might have in common that makes the genre name at all viable. Basically, what Thursday and Antioch Arrow have in common is that they both borrow from post-punk (Joy Division) and post-hardcore (Fugazi). Where Thursday becomes radically different is their borrowing from alternative rock like U2 and Smashing Pumpkins. I'll try to put something to that effect into the article. I've gone back and cut some of the long lists of band names down to a few representative candidates -- I think that makes things clearer. - Furthermore, why did you delete my references to the Locust and the Rapture? I mean, I understand that these groups are "post-screamo", but they're alluded to in the article -- the Rapture released on Gravity. The point is to give an indication of what the original screamo scene matured into. - Anyhow, I'd appreciate it if you'd make yourself useful by finding some more sources and contributing something, rather than just deleting my "misinterpretations". Thanks. Andrew P.S. Now that I look at the article again, it says "Angel Hair's sound hinted at the theatricality and moral ambivalence of '80s goth as much as it did the cryptic rebellion of Nation of Ulysses; the band even recorded a vessel-rupturing cover of Bauhaus's 'Stigmata Martyr.'" This sentence means that Angel Hair borrowed as much from '80s goth as it did from Nation of Ulysses. That's actually a pretty strong statement about the relationship to Gothic rock. Discuss this with me on the talk page.

The main problem with what you're doing is that you use one example from a particular band and then go on and use it as a generalisation for the style as a whole. You said "these groups were inspired by...", when it was simply the influences for ONE of the bands. Plus I dont see the need for there to be a specific reference to Thursday. Anyways with that said, you're doing a good job expanding the article as a whole.--SilverOrion (talk) 08:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.219.88.62 (talk) 08:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]