Talk:Metalcore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 2024

This is all wrong. Metalcore started in the late 2000s.  Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.19.122.181 (talk) 08:00, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Decline in popularity

Many bands have started to either break up or move away from this genre.

Examples of change:

Examples of break ups:

Critiques have also started to negatively review Metalcore albums. Albums by Woe, Is Me and Attack Attack! for example have been very negative before they broken up. Should there not be a new section in history to say that from 2010s onward, the popularity of this genre has started to decline? - SilentDan297 talk 16:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

No disrespect to your claim, as there is plausible merit to the concept of metalcore's declining, this is a unsupported claim. You need reliable sources specifically claiming metalcore is declining to include it into the article. I would argue that it is hitting points of popularity. That perhaps Asking Alexandria & Of Mice & Men may have changed, they still are very much metalcore groups and continue to grow in size. This is also neglectful of very popular and very successful records (from 2013 alone) like Disarm the Descent, 8:18, Sempiternal and Common Courtesy. The latter two bands, Bring Me the Horizon and A Day to Remember are at extremely high points in their popularity, perhaps even some of the highest metalcore has seen since the explosion of Killswitch Engage and As I Lay Dying over 10 years ago. And as for breakups, only two of those (Attack Attack! and Bleeding Through) are bands of significant legacy, in music it's typical for bands to break up- and looking at the details of their acclaim- some of these bands never reached that far. (and in personal opinion, The Bled wern't metalcore but that's irrelevant).Jonjonjohny (talk) 17:12, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough, and non taken. - SilentDan297 talk 18:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Cultural origins

What do you guys think should be listed under this? I have created it to state "Late 1980s and early 1990s", as the arguably first metalcore album, Hogan's Heroes' Built to Last was released in 1988, and other bands, in my opinion, defined the genre in the upcoming years. However, "Mid 1980s" was proposed instead to correspond with Hogan's Heroes' formation and the recording of their demo tape in 1985. I have now made it into a compromise, "Mid to late 1980s", but I would like to see a consensus reached on this. You can read the related discussion here on my talk page.----MASHAUNIX 19:26, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

When something starts it starts . Wikipedia as a learning tool should always reflect just that . The most accurate information for Anyone who wants to learn about a topic , genre, company etc. Black Sabbath" is One Band who is regarded in music history as starting heavy metal . Hogans Heroes "demo" was on thanks lists of National Metal and Hardcore Based bands . Those demos made it around like an album would via tape trading . They still were influential . Its their 1985 time period that has a Mention in "American Hardcore" book by Steven Blush . If the demo wasn't "around" like an LP it wouldn't have made it in any book . Also when something starts it "starts" . Apple computers , for example, was started in a garage not when they had Worldwide or National Distribution . The start date is in the Garage . same demo is right here under performer "H" or under Song by letter "C" "corporate life" and letter "D" Drugs" . http://www.americanhardcorebook.com/punk24/

68.39.152.45 (talk) 20:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Even if it goes by first national and Worldwide release what does it says Songs "With the exception of, "Built to Last", "Inner Strength", and "Change", all of the material for Built to Last was written before 1987." 10 of 13 songs written Prior to 1988 . I personally am Fine with Mid to Late 80s . However it may be Quite more Accurate as Mid 80s . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Built_to_Last_(Hogan%27s_Heroes_album) 68.39.152.45 (talk) 21:14, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

clean/unclean vocals

There is a discussion about this here that might be of interest to some. Karst (talk) 22:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Genre influences

According to the arcticle, the only 3 influences of Metalcore are Extreme metal, Hardcore punk and Crossover thrash. first, Extreme metal? There's many styles of extreme metal, such as Doom metal, Black metal, and Avant-garde metal. I already know these 3 did not influence Metalcore very much, since it's too fast for doom, and not satanic enough for Black metal. If I had to list the influences, I'd say Thrash metal, Death metal, Hardcore punk, crossover thrash, and nu metal. There has been a significant influence by nu metal on the genre. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Mice_%26_Men_(band)#Musical_style explains as much

The stylistic origins section lists genres that metalcore grew out of when it first appeared, i.e. in the late 1980s. Whether doom or black metal had much influence on this early form is disputable, but reliable sources suggest metalcore to be a fusion genre of extreme metal in general (and not just of thrash and death) with hardcore punk, and the article is based in these sources, not the opinions of editors. Nu metal could not originally influence metalcore, because it didn't exist back then.--MASHAUNIX 21:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Is post-hardcore is one of the influences of metalcore?User talk:Siahaankingdom 09.17,22 February 2015 (UTC)
The sources used in the article don't indicate that it originally influenced metalcore. I think the 2 genres only came to be related later, with bands like Underoath.--MASHAUNIX 16:06, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

removing NWOBHM when its Clearly mentioned in the article, and replacing it with "bands" (list of bands) when "bands" is already there in the "see also"

Removal of one link, NWOBHM in "other topics" which is clearly mentioned in the article in favor of a List you (this editor) made being in "other topics" and already in "see also" is helpful How. Again ? not understanding. They Both can be there and are. Work on something useful. You got your list in see also. A list is not a "topic" its a List. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 20:20, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

A list of bands is typically included in the other topics field for genre articles, for example in featured articles such as heavy metal music or punk rock. This is IMO done because such a list is directly relevant to the genre and readers should have easy access to it. NWOBHM is mentioned in an article, but not in a way that would justify including it in this field. If you think it is a key source of influence, argue for including it in stylistic origins.--MASHAUNIX 12:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
No NWOBHM doesn't need to be in stylistic origins. This needs consensus. With No Sock Puppets. A List isn't a topic. Your list, you created, is already in the "See also". Plenty of easy access to that. Its right on the page. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 12:21, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
In that case, do you suggest we remove the same lists from the same fields in heavy metal music and punk rock? Since these are featured articles and have had lists of bands linked from the infobox for a while now, it would seem the consensus is that such lists should be included.--MASHAUNIX 12:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
I suggest you take one issue at a time. Stop Reverting me, use the talk page, don't use any sock puppets and establish consensus. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 12:33, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm not using any sock puppets. I'm discussing the issue with you now. Please explain your stance. Do you think lists of bands should never have a place in genre article infoboxes?--MASHAUNIX 13:19, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Didn't say you are. Said don't. "Stance" is as above. NWOBHM doesn't need to be in stylistic origins. This needs consensus. With No Sock Puppets. A List isn't a topic. Your list, you created, is already in the "See also". Plenty of easy access to that. Its right on the page. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 13:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't matter whether that I created the list. Genre infoboxes always include a list of bands under "other topics" if the list exists. This has been done for a long time (as evident from the featured articles I have linked), and you are the only one who opposes it. Please explain why.--MASHAUNIX 17:42, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Do you read what it says above. its pretty clear. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 17:45, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
A topic isn't a list. About you're comment "Genre infoboxes always include a list of bands under "other topics" if the list exists." it took two seconds to find this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_metal CombatMarshmallow (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Not literally "always", but it is common practice, and in my opinion, correct. Why couldn't a list be a topic? The other topics section of the infobox serves as a place to include links to other articles that are directly relevant to the genre, and not mentioned somewhere else in the infobox. This is so that the reader can see that these articles exist and follow the links to them if they wish. A list of bands is as relevant to a genre as any other article. Why should the reader not be given easy access to it from the infobox? What are the advantages of not including it?--MASHAUNIX 16:56, 18 July 2015 (UTC)


A list is not a topic. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 17:43, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

"shai hulud"

This reference is Promo for them and 10 other bands. Like usual "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mashaunix" is edit warring. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 14:57, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

This is Not what wikipedia is about.

reverting despite inaccuracy

Other topics

References

In the lead

Mathcore

Infobox image

Hogan's Heroes photo

extreme metal???

origin of the term

"Metallic hardcore"

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI