Most genre representing albums

[CAIRATH]

People are just obsessed with turning everything into A vs. B, and they'll argue this shit til no end even if it makes no sense at all.

I think it's more that some people are obsessed with inventing new completely pointless genres when those bands already neatly fit into existing and more well-defined ones.

Viking metal is just as pointless as calling Agalloch "forest metal". Sure you can call that a genre, but why does it need to exist when it doesn't really give you any indication of the sound of a band that belongs to it (which is the case with viking metal, since bands from folk metal, black metal and even melodic death metal are lumped into that 'genre') and when there are existing genres that the band already fits into that do?

There's just no need for it to exist. Same with forest metal, battle metal and probably a few dozen other genres that people seem to have conjured up for no reason.

 

[Hell Awaits Us All]

arguing over genres is a massive waste of time

 

[skeptik]

just because a band is viking doesn't mean they aren't anything else.

But what the fuck is 'viking?' It seems as though most of the time it's an incorporation of folk elements. That's my problem with the term, besides the fact that it's a catch word to help record labels sell cds.

 

[Hatebreeder]

But what the fuck is 'viking?'

Metal about vikings. It could cover any genre.

 

[skeptik]

So then Death Metal is any Metal about death?

 

[Hatebreeder]

So then Death Metal is any Metal about death?

No, because death metal has become a very widespread genre. Viking metal is still relatively new and there is no "viking metal" band that doesn't mention vikings in some way. Death metal has long since grown out of its roots.

 

[Hell Awaits Us All]

well morbid angel never really wrote lyrics about death

they were one of the first artists

 

[skeptik]

No, because death metal has become a very widespread genre. Viking metal is still relatively new and there is no "viking metal" band that doesn't mention vikings in some way. Death metal has long since grown out of its roots.

You can't hold one genre to different criterion from another if you want it to be a legitimate genre.

 

[Dazed and Brutal]

Neo-Classical: Children of Bodom

 

[Hell Awaits Us All]

LOL necrophagist is a far better neo-classical band than COB

 

[Dazed and Brutal]

arguing over genres is a massive waste of time

Not even nearly as massive as your biceps, am I right?

 

[Hell Awaits Us All]

Not even nearly as massive as your biceps, am I right?

or my delts

 

[Manic Ferocity]

Read that really, really carefully and over and over again until you understand that a 'genre' of music doesn't even have to be based on sound, nor does it exclude a band from belonging to any other 'genre.' [{QUOTE]

You have very poor logic. You are basically saying that any band can logically fit under any random genre of music it feels like without considering what the initial sound of the genre is.

I have yet to hear a valid arguement from you idiots who think viking metal is a genre and yes it is based on sound otherwise we wouldn't be arguing over genres of music which just so happen to be sound in a structured format.

 

[Demilich]

You can't hold one genre to different criterion from another if you want it to be a legitimate genre.

Yes you can. The problem here is trying to hold all genres to a universal set of criteria, such as sound-based qualities exclusively. Viking metal is metal about vikings. Death metal is defined on its own merits, in much the same way, and at times the two may overlap, but since the genres in question describe DIFFERENT QUALITIES about the music, this is perfectly fine.

I find it laugable when people go on and on about other people creating useless genres and categories. I for one find that if I find a category useful, and can explain its use, that any idiot who wants to judge me for this can fucking stuff it.

And "viking metal" is a useful category to me and lots of others, because lots of people want to listen to metal about vikings. Thats the beginning and end of the issue as far as I'm concerned.

I mean, I could whine about how avant-garde isn't a valid category because it should represent a forward-thinking, groundbreaking mentality and not a particular sound, but I'd just be some fucking whiner and nobody who knew shit about the avant-garde would bother listening much because they know what avant-garde is and why they use this terminology.

 

[Manic Ferocity]

Yes it would because it still sounds like Bach.

 

[Manic Ferocity]

Yes you can. The problem here is trying to hold all genres to a universal set of criteria, such as sound-based qualities exclusively. Viking metal is metal about vikings. Death metal is defined on its own merits, in much the same way, and at times the two may overlap, but since the genres in question describe DIFFERENT QUALITIES about the music, this is perfectly fine.

I find it laugable when people go on and on about other people creating useless genres and categories. I for one find that if I find a category useful, and can explain its use, that any idiot who wants to judge me for this can fucking stuff it.

And "viking metal" is a useful category to me and lots of others, because lots of people want to listen to metal about vikings. Thats the beginning and end of the issue as far as I'm concerned.

I mean, I could whine about how avant-garde isn't a valid category because it should represent a forward-thinking, groundbreaking mentality and not a particular sound, but I'd just be some fucking whiner and nobody who knew shit about the avant-garde would bother listening much because they know what avant-garde is and why they use this terminology.

The term "viking metal" is pointless because all the bands labeled as such can be put under other genres the only difference being that they have viking themes. If you wanna use that pointless term then go ahead but that doesn't change the fact that Amon Amarth is melodic death metal and Bathory is black metal.

 

[Thoth-Amon]

LOL necrophagist is a far better neo-classical band than COB

Probably but both are meh IMO.

 

[Demilich]

The term "viking metal" is pointless because all the bands labeled as such can be put under other genres the only difference being that they have viking themes. If you wanna use that pointless term then go ahead but that doesn't change the fact that Amon Amarth is melodic death metal and Bathory is black metal.

You're just proving my point and making yourself look like an ass. If you don't like a genre tag, shut the fuck up and let people use it if you want. Obviously it isn't completely useless if so many people use it effectively, you're just being a complete knob and trying to prescribe what others think. I like "viking metal" and so do lots of other people, and it isn't gonna go away no matter how many losers whine about how it doesn't exist.

 

[Manic Ferocity]

I just said people could use it if they want despite how stupid it is in my last post.

 

[skeptik]

I would consider "Viking" a theme as opposed to a bonafide genre, like Running Wild playing Traditional/Speed/Power Metal with a Pirate theme. That's just me, I don't like to recognize "Viking" as a genre. But I don't think that makes me a loser or an idiot.