Alternative Metal: Does it exist or not?

[Bloopy]

It exists as a genre or a label of some sort so long as someone finds it useful to categorise a grey area between alternative rock and metal. I guess alternative rock is so broad that it's not surprising if the bands don't always share characteristics. Personally I gave up even trying to distinguish which bands are 'alternative'. I think of sludge as a metal genre and Melvins as an early sludge band, so file them under metal. I'd file all the others you listed under rock.

 

[CiG]

Melvins are more accurately considered a proto-sludge band I would say. I don't think they're metal, if they are it's minimal compared with how punk they are.

 

[Satanstoenail]

Melvins are pretty unclassifiable. I think they're more metal than punk though.

You don't know that, I'm very open to being proven wrong. But yes, I'd prefer comparisons.

Really? I was joking tbh. I'm not going to do that.

The problem here is that there's no real way to prove whether they are a metal band as it's a subjective opinion at the end of the day. I can't calculate the percentage of metal riffs times hip hop flourishes divided by metal aesthetic. In my opinion, a song like this:



is a metal song from start to finish, and I don't know how anyone can think differently. But obviously you do.

 

[CiG]

I suppose some of the riffs kind of sound like they could be groove metal, but that was it. More similarities with a band like Fudge Tunnel or old Helmet.

 

[Burzum_Maiden]

Melvins are kind of unclassifiable, yes. They are fans of metal, but have said in the past that they have more in common with Black Flag than Black Sabbath. Like many of the Seattle 'grunge' bands, they have more punk influences than metal, but have an undeniably heavy sound. That's where it gets difficult.

 

[Burzum_Maiden]

I suppose some of the riffs kind of sound like they could be groove metal, but that was it. More similarities with a band like Fudge Tunnel or old Helmet.

That further confuses the point as Helmet are often considered to be alternative metal. If alternative metal doesn't exist, can nu metal? It is very heavily influenced by the so-called "alternative metal" bands. I suppose it can, but it's all subjective.

 

[CiG]

I don't think of them as metal in any fashion, so it only confuses fools who don't know what metal is.

 

[Satanstoenail]

I suppose some of the riffs kind of sound like they could be groove metal

Are you talking about the song I posted?

 

[CiG]

Are you talking about the song I posted?

Indeed.

 

[Satanstoenail]

The reason I ask is because that song only contains like 2 riffs really.. The main riff just changes dynamically for most of the song. So I'm curious as to what you mean by that statement. Which riffs?

 

[CiG]

Oh well I went on to listen to more tracks from that particular album, so I was talking generally.

 

[Satanstoenail]

Rrrrrrrriiiiiiiight.

 

[CiG]

I listened to "Clown" and "Divine" specifically.

 

[Burzum_Maiden]

I have a hard time with all of these bands, hence the reason I agree with Bloopy on this one. It's a bridge between two umbrella terms, alt. rock and metal. Bands like Helmet fit into neither, so they are kind of in the middle of the spectrum if you get what I mean. Some bands lean more towards one, e.g. Helmet are more metal orientated, whereas Alice in Chains are slightly more rock orientated (although they do have an undeniably dark, sldugy sound), but they both have bits of both (as well as other styles too).

 

[CiG]

I would say the complete opposite is true, Helmet lean much more towards rock, or specifically punk, whereas Alice In Chains lean more towards metal, or more specifically proto-metal.

 

[Burzum_Maiden]

Fair enough. I must admit I'm not well acquainted with Helmet, so I can't disagree there as you know more than me. However AiC are a diverse band, as they proved with SAP, Jar of Flies and their MTV Unplugged album, which obviously lean more towards alt rock and even folk rock on a few songs on Jar of Flies. I suppose the majority of their stuff is close to early metal/proto-metal.
In saying that, I find Soundgarden to be closer to metal, at least on their early albums. They sounded very similar to early metal/proto-metal bands such as Zeppelin and Sabbath on their first three LPs. They moved away from it on Superunknown and even more on Down on the Upside, but it's still present in their early output. BUT they were more influenced by punk, and I find their music to be more punkish personally.

 

[CiG]

Definitely agree with you about Soundgarden.

 

[Satanstoenail]

I'd say AiC and Soundgarden are about even in terms of metal influence used in their sound. Helmet are a hard one, the drop tuned off-time heavy riffs are more metal than punk, but they're delivered with a more punk feel.

 

[CiG]

Helmet's first album is definitely the hardest to label for me. It has a metallic edge but it's punk too. It's almost like an extension of the first Flipper record or something.

 

[Burzum_Maiden]

I'd say AiC and Soundgarden are about even in terms of metal influence used in their sound. Helmet are a hard one, the drop tuned off-time heavy riffs are more metal than punk, but they're delivered with a more punk feel.

They may be even in terms of metal influence, but Soundgarden incorporated more punk than AiC; and of course we can't forget about the days when AiC were a Guns N' Roses style of hard rock/glam metal. Funnily enough the five or so songs they recorded in studio were better than most glam bands' entire careers, with the exceptions of Guns, Van Halen (if you count them as glam), and other early bands like Motley and Quiet Riot.
Edit: That glam sound also carried onto Facelift, although it wasn't quite as obvious there. I would consider them on the very soft side of metal, especially in the early days, definitely one of the heavier bands from Seattle.