Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Metal Archives 20th Anniversary

metal-archives.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 65 posts

Re: Metal Archives 20th Anniversary

#41

Post by herewulf »

oneepic wrote: post #14

Cool site, I love the detail each band has. I learned a lot about my favorite bands than I did on Wikipedia or similar. Although, I think each album's user reviews are my least favorite part. You will commonly see every review score from 100% to 0% with justification like "I don't get it, it just sounds whiny" but in long-winded review format.

I've read a ton of clever, whimsical (usually highly critical) reviews. The reviews are full of examples of fine twists on the employment of the English language.

That said, I don't pay much attention to them usually. It's pretty easy to judge music simply by listening to it but at least the combined percentages can give you a good idea of which album to start with for a given band.

Re: Metal Archives 20th Anniversary

#44

Post by Tsiklon »

gitrog wrote: post #11
RajT88 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There may not be. There seems to be something obsessive about metal fans to catalog and classify and document. I mean, look at the wiki page on subgenres: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_genres It fills me with awe and giggles.

I wouldn't take that list too seriously. Metal-archives genres tend to not delve into "styles" as much. But there are certainly many distinct sub-genres and one can't exactly argue that Black Sabbath, Dimmu Borgir and Cannibal Corpse sound similar. I agree that the community itself takes the genre thing way too far and it often ends up being pretty funny. Then again, electronic music probably gives metal a run for it…

Ishkur's guide, in both it's modern implementation and earlier java implementation are works of electronic art in and of themselves - An opinionated guide to the infinitely deep and broad world of electronic music.

Re: Metal Archives 20th Anniversary

#45

Post by mistrial9 »

pessimizer wrote: post #36
RajT88 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There may not be. There seems to be something obsessive about metal fans to catalog and classify and document. I mean, look at the wiki page on subgenres: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_genres It fills me with awe and giggles.

Musical genre multiplication and creation is just an internet disease where a bunch of would-be critics put original research on wikipedia and retroactively justify it by referencing one sentence in a 10 year old Slate article by some actual critic of no particular note. Most of the people included in these genres had no idea they were in them when they created the music (because they didn't exist.) Plenty of them st…

as a sound tech at a nightclub, I cornered one of the musicians on break and started listing lists of bands in grouping somehow.. unimpressed, he looked askance and replied "musicians don't talk that way"

Re: Metal Archives 20th Anniversary

#47

Post by twic »

KerrAvon wrote: post #24
AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #12

Ah, yes. The site that has a thousand reasons why the band you're looking for isn't "metal" enough to be in its database, but then has an entry for Rush: https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Rush/1206

It's a little puzzling that Blue Oÿster Cult isn't there. There's a historical case for them and the post-1980's records have recognizable modern metal.

Given how many indisputably metal bands have covered and referenced them, they should at least be grandfathered in.
Post reply on HN