Talk:Nu metal

Stop Removing or Altering The Tool References From The Article

Tool have greatly influenced nu-metal - some may not like nu-metal, or like this fact, but it is a fact. There is no mention of Tool being nu-metal themselves, so there is also no need for tacked-on clarifications. This debate reached a reasonable concensus in the "List of nu-metal bands" discussion long ago. -Danteferno

can A Perfect Circle be removed from thelist of nu metal bands then?

I agree... A Perfect Circle really have none of nu-metal's key qualities when you think about it, and Blindside need to go too. musikxpert

Nu Metal is a farcical mutation of True Metal

Lyrically speaking; nu metal lacks the metal philosophy. Nu metal replaces the nihilism so inherent in early metal with its degenerate self-obsessive soliphism. its almost like the rallying unity of early punk compared to the self-pitying whinge punk of today.

Musically speaking; nu metal has some elements of true metal. primarily speaking the dissonance (distorted guitars) and loud obtrusiveness (screaming vocals & double kick drumming). what it lacks is tension and atmosphere. tension; which is so vital to complete a metal outfit. and atmosphere which defines metal (musically & lyrically speaking). most nu metal you hear is bombastic, loud, rebellious, rhythmically organised and just plain "hip". but true metal is not about being bombastic, its about theatricality, unrelenting tension, bleakness and disorganisation in regards to rhythm.

so in conclusion nu metal is a hideous mutation (not in a good way) of true metal. it captures some of the most "radio friendly" elements of true metal and goes from there. catchy hooks, flowing rhythms to "dance" to, and the dissonance.

To each his own. ~ Nu Metal Fanatic-san

Nu Metal is not metal. It is a perversion of the qualities of metal.

Maybe, for your *POV*. Psychomel@di_(s)cussion

Regarding the "Guitar" section

I could pick this article apart but this section bothers me particularly. Please consider what I have to say. I consider just going in and editing this section myself but I thought I'd run it through the talk page first.

QUOTE To emphasize this rhythmic "pulse," nu metal guitarists generally make liberal use of palm muting, a technique which itself blurs the boundary between melodic note and rhythmic attack. Another common tactic is the use of de-tuned strings (in drop-D or lower, sometimes adding a seventh string) whose lower pitch creates a thicker, more resonant sound. UNQUOTE

This makes it sound as if nu-metal invented this style of playing. Trsut me, it didn't. If anything, this style of playing is highly derivative of almost every other style of metal out there. Many, many bands do these things and I feel that this cannot be used to differentiate between nu-metal and other genres. It is just re-explaining something that is already the staple diet of metal guitarists.

I propose it is reworded to something along the lines of...

"In terms of timbre, nu-metal sounds much like any other metal sub-genre. Guitarists make liberal use of typical "metal" techniques such as palm-muting and often de-tune the strings (to drop-D or lower tunings) to create a thicker, heavier and more resonant tone."

I'm sure somebody can word it more delicately than I can, so there it is.

Phorque 12:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

judgement night, LOAD & RELOAD

"The idea of matching up rappers with rockers is not entirely new," writes Rolling Stone. "Run-D.M.C. and Aerosmith did it in 1986 with `Walk This Way,' and Public Enemy joined up with Anthrax in 1991 for a version of `Bring The Noise.' But somehow the concept of musical miscegenation between the two most urgent forms of youth culture music has remained a largely unexploited source of creative exchange."

http://mantle.geop.itu.edu.tr/~onur/hiphop/judgment.html

LOAD and RELOAD represented a significant musical change for Metallica. The band's breakneck metal tempos and layered guitar compositions had largely been replaced by bluesy rock songs, full of bent notes, warm guitar tone, slide guitar, and shuffle and swing rhythms.

Metallica also reinvented their visual image with LOAD and RELOAD: the CD booklet for Load contained many controversial photographs of the band, taken by Anton Corbijn. The band members - who had recently cut their hair - were depicted wearing pimp suits, smoking cigars, and sipping brandy, sometimes wearing heavy makeup..

nevermind the napster thing which made them look like they were REALLY out of touch with new metallers.

these are things that should be considered adding to the article!!!!

what does metallica have to do with nu-metal? Xunflash 19:26, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Where is the ORIGINAL rap+metal?

Where the f**k is the reference to Mike Patton and Faith No More???? These guys really started the whole Rap+Metal thing back in the late 1980s. ok i'm blind. However I see no reference to Anthrax arguably the first rap meets metal tune was done by them. Alkivar 04:21, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It should be noted that nu metal isn't merely the adding of rap to metal, but a range of instrumentation changes as well MrHate 03:34, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

Anthrax began fusing rap & metal in the mid-1980's. John Lydon did some work with Afrika Bambaataa in the early-to-mid 80's as well, and punk seems to be an influence on many of these bands. Beat poetry mixed jazz and folk music with spoken word stream of consciousness.

As rap-metal, nu metal, or rapcore are not metal, they have no place in this article except to dispel the perception that they are part of the community.

---

Isn't Zeromancer industrial? -- Dysfunktion

Are 28 Days really a "notable nu metal band"? -- Sam

Somebody who knows more than me about Ministry, Fear Factory, and other industrial bands should edit this to include the connections between industrial and nu-metal, which have so far not been mentioned at all. leigh 05:45, Dec 21, 2003 (UTC)

Is this a joke?

Who the (censored) wrote this ridiculous article? Numetal isn't metal, it's hard rock with a commercially profitable name. This person should turn off the radio, turn off MTV, grow back some brain cells they've lost, and put a career of journalism out of their mind. Holy ****, I 've never laughed this hard at anything in my life.

Lots of people contributed to the article. I haven't got a clue what is nu metal and what is auld metal myself so can't tell if you are right or they are.

But if you are confident you know what your talking about then please feel free to edit and improve the article yourself. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 16:37, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Nu-"metal" is not metal.. In fact nobody should write it the way you wrote it in the article because nu and metal are words that cannot be connected. Metal is a reaction agaisnt commercializing music while nu is exactly the opposite. People who listen to that music are not metallers. Metallers have true personalities. People who listen to nu-shit are just posers who want to show off from the music they hear. That's pathetic and so not-metal..

I fear for those who don't understand the above.

---

There is so much wrong with this article. I tried fixing it, but the changes I made just got reverted again. If I try again will the same thing happen? Vim Fuego

I can't tell who reverted your edits from the article history, but I imagine it was because of NPOV, a policy that we maintain very strictly at Wikipedia. The opinion that nu metal is not a form of heavy metal and that nu metal guitarists are less skilled than other guitarists needs to be backed up by those who believe it. Tuf-Kat 05:04, May 7, 2004 (UTC)

Ask any person involved in the real metal community and they will tell you that nu metal is only metal in the name.

---

As this article has mentioned like a thousand times, "metal" is an extremely hard term to define. If, as you say, metal is against commercialization, then we'd have no metal bands to listen to (musicians have to make money to). Nu-metal is the name used for lack of a better term. Some nu-metal fans probably don't consider it metal either, seeing as some of the bands that people consider metal are totally ridiculous (hair metal for example), and would prefer "hard rock" or something like that. Xunflash 19:23, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

The problem people like me have is the association of nu metal with metal without making the distinction that it is not a legitimate subgenre.

---

This article is absolutely terrible, not only is it practically unreadable but doesn't seem to contain any useful or infact discernible information what so ever.

I personally think its a result of 3 competing influences, the need to categorize all music into a massive and counterintuitive set of genres and sub-genres in order to give the impression of knowledgeablility. The need to list all your favorite bands, and finally the overwhelming need to attribute all music to Kurt Cobain.--Pypex 17:30, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

"People who listen to that music are not metallers. Metallers have true personalities. People who listen to nu-(censored) are just posers who want to show off from the music they hear."

(Censored) you. I don't listen to "nu-metal" to show off, nobody (censored) knows what I listen to anyway. I listen to it for the guitar hooks and rhythm. You say that metal is about anti-commercialism. Do you think that they just got on the radio or onto a CD because somebody else wanted them to? Hell no. They wanted to get their music and their message out to the world. Everyone seems to think that nu-metal is all about whining, but you metal fans seem to constantly be wining about how crappy nu-metal is. Shut the (censored) up. Even if the lyrics are angsty, who gives a shit? I don't listen to the music for lyrics. Metal's lyrics tend to have all of this anti-religion (censored) anyway. Anyway, some people just (censored) like a song, or a band, or a type of music. You don't have to criticize people's tastes. Are they going to change? Probably not. You can show them what you think better music is, but that doesn't mean it is better overall. 68.4.212.158

Now, now. No need to get profane. I censored your messages because we don't wanna scare anyone. Anyway, I'll sum up everything here in few words-- nu metal is like heavy metal, only never completely satanic and there's more to it than screaming and getting a soar throat and painting your face white (nothing against heavy metal). There's actual verses and choruses and somewhat of a sense of art. Plus, everything's better with a little hip hop added in. You can argue with that. ~ Shadow the Hedgehog

Please tell me that last one was a joke. Anyway, the knowledgeable among us understand that nu metal is not metal. What, do the nu metal fans come one here and are convinced that we just passed Korn and Slipknot up? That we weren't aware of them, so they HAD to contribute. Democracy fails again.

Tool

I've removed Tool (band) because though they may have influenced nu-metal (this is mentioned at the top of the page), they really aren't nu-metal themselves. I've heard "alternative," "hard rock," "prog rock," and "psychedelic" thrown together in the attempt, though.

• I second that. I've heard "art rock/metal" and "math rock/metal" as well. In any case, nu metal is definitely not an appropriate genre. TIMBO (T A L K) 19:11, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Tool is progressive rock. Not metal, but still enjoyable.

Evanescence

Is Evanescence really numetal? It sounds to me more like Rock or even Pop/Rock

Well, some people have criticized Evanescence for being "Linkin Park with a female singer" so I guess that's where the idea came from.

Evanescence had a definate nu metal hit with "Bring Me Back To Life" but their resulting material is indeed more comparable to pop rock. On an interesting note, I once read an interview with the vocalist who said that her record company forced them to use a guest vocalist and rapper in that first single, and it was intentionally done to sound like Linkin Park. MrHate 03:34, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

Yea I'v always considered Evanscence to be a pop/rock band. But that might also be because I really don't understand what nu metal is. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 16:13, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think we should compare and categorized bands based only on intentions or by visual aspects. Instead, we shoud compare their public and the context of their sound. The fact that their guitar/bass/drums/keyboard sound sounds just a lot like most nu-metal bands (except the ballads) is and indicator that they belong to the genre, IMHO. --BlackLynx 21:30, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Nu Metal is a label that has been slung around excessively. Evanescence is simply a very poor quality rock band.

EVANESCENCE IS A MODERN GOTH METAL BAND, NOT NU-METAL

Evanescence is a modern, radio friendly version of what is known as Goth Metal. They are not as great as acts like Lacuna Coil but they take the early style of "Beauty & The Beast" Style vocal mixing and tone it down by fronting the band with Clean Female Operatic Vocals, and toned-down male screams. Nu-Metal is a defunct name that hodge podges Rap-Metal, and Industrial Metal, AND EVEN METALCORE into a radio-friendly marketing package so the corporate suits can make a profit without making more labels and make one lump profit. Its a shock to see MOTOGRATER being labeled NU-METAL, because when I listened to their Self-Titled Album for the first time I thought to myself that this is a straight up mix between Industrial and Hardcore Punk/Heavy Metal.

Ah, because of course if it has beauty and the beast vocals, it surely must be metal. To the ovens with you!

Well, Evanescence has been compared to Linkin Park and P.O.D. before, and the lead singer of 12 Stones apparently rapped in one of their songs (I really want to hear that), so I think they've earned their stay on the nu-metal band list. Of course, this is open to plenty debate, just like the age-old System of a Down issue. ^{|phantasy phanatik|talk|contribs|}

evanescence is not metal ot numetal. and they are nothing like Linkin Park.

I must agree with the user above. There is more to nu-metal than supposed lyrical themes, to be firmly categorized as such a band other elements must be notable, such as minor-key riffage, with are not present in the band's music.musikxpert

NPOV meter going off the richter scale

This article is littered with obvious NPOV comments, most sided towards claims that Nu Metal is inheritantly unoriginal and commercialized. If someone better with NPOVizing skills than I would please correct this, it'd be great.--MardukZero 04:51, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Considering some of the comments above yours on this page, you can see the kind of sentiment that we have to deal with here. I agree that the article needs a lot of work (I'd swear it wasn't this bad last time I looked at it... you can't turn your back for a second!), but the POV problems seem to be all over the board. Sigh. It's a controversial subject, like abortion, only the debate seems to be populated largely by angry teenagers... Ah well. Onto my to-do list it goes.-leigh (φθόγγος) 09:24, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)

I have always though of Evenesance as Goth, not metal at all really.

See articles Gothic Music, Gothic Metal and Gothic Rock for how your 'thinking' is wrong. Leyasu 17:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

If there's not a good reason to keep it...

...I will be removing System of a Down, as it is not nu metal (to be more NPOV about it, people do not generally agree that it is nu metal (see the SOAD page), and it really doesn't fit the definition of nu metal given on this page). --gb 09:22, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

SOAD is actually one of the bands I would classify as essentially nu-metal. Guitars: extremely low-tuned, syncopated, and oriented more toward rhythm than pitch, combined with lots of "special effects" like harmonics and scratching. Drums: incredibly syncopated (influenced by hip-hop and eastern music), rarely playing a straightforward pattern for more than a second at a time. Vocals: combination of "clean" singing and frenzied emotional shrieking. Lyrically they are anomalous - the lyrics are often political or psychedelic rather than teenage angst - but aside from that, SOAD are textbook examples of nu-metal. Perhaps the most intelligent and sophisticated band in the genre, but part of the family all the same. -leigh (φθόγγος) 10:20, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Have to disagree with you there. I personally don't hear much syncopation in their music. I can think of some examples where it is syncopated but not overly. The rest of the characteristics you mentioned are typical of most (if not all) heavy metal bands... especially the downtuned guitars. Most bands these days downtune, metal or not :P Text book nu metal: KoЯn, Limp Bizkit, Slipknot. MrHate 10:28, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

It's not a great idea to stereotype or 'text book,' but removing SOAD was a good idea. Not only is their content and style markedly different to how nu-metal is commonly portrayed, they fall more into the category of freak-metal due to the vocal techniques commonly employed by Serj & Daron. musikxpert May 8

Excuse me,...

Excuse me, but why this article's authors are absolutely convinced that Red Hot Chili Peppers have not to be considered nu metal inspirators? (unsigned)

• Because they're not. TIMBO (T A L K) 02:07, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It's possible that they are inspirators, but since no nu metal bands (that I know of) have cited them as influences, it should be left off perhaps. MrHate 03:34, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

I believe Korn have cited them, but I can't back that up.--Undc23 09:39, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• RHCP is far from nu metal. They're alternative rock. Why they'd be listed in the nu metal page is beyond me. While they may have inspired some nu metal bands, they have none of the traits a band requires to be classified as nu metal. -D14BL0 06:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Munky and Fieldy of Korn said they was influences by the Red Hot Chili Peppers

Nu Metal is a joke and not a sub Category of Heavy Metal

This name is given as a joke to poser bands preteending to be Heavy Metal. People don't refer to themselves as Nu Metal.

Of course they don't, it's intended as an insult. Unfortunately, nu metal is the name that stuck with these bands, and that's what they'll be called, even in Wikipedia MrHate 00:27, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

Still not a sub-category though.

Nu metal is not metal, and has no place on the metal page except to clarify the fact that it is not actually related.

Take this page off of the heavy metal music list!!!!!

nu-metal is not heavy metal it is rap with some distorted instruments

Obviously, you've never listened to nu metal -- Dysfunktion 23:34, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

nu-metal is the name "purists" use as an insult for hard rock bands that use rap and dj-ing techniques. Xunflash 17:07, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Latest changes by me

I've tried to improve the article's tone some. If there are substantial disagreements with my conception of nu metal, I'd welcome them. I'd like to see this article become more than just a flame war. -leigh (φθόγγος) 11:27, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Primus Is Not Nu-Metal

I have a question, why is it that Primus is always mentioned in this article. Sure they were definitly an influence on nu-metal, but critics and fans alike say they are Alternative Rock. Explain why the are mentioned besides the fact that they merly influenced these bands.

AFAICT, Primus is mentioned precisely once, as an influence on nu metal. Tuf-Kat

Sepultura's Roots

Sepultura's Roots (album) should be mentioned here. It was a big departure from their earlier thrash-based sound and even has Johnathan Davis sing on a track. From the Roots article itself Roots was a very influential album on the sound of nu metal bands who came later. Along with Jonathan Davis, Mike Patton of Faith No More and DJ Lethal, later of Limp Bizkit, also contributed to "Lookaway".Roots was a very influential album on the sound of nu metal bands who came later. Along with Jonathan Davis, Mike Patton of Faith No More and DJ Lethal, later of Limp Bizkit, also contributed to "Lookaway".

ScratchFace

I've taken ScratchFace off the list of progenitors of nu metal. We don't have an article on them, and a quick search on the net didn't yield anything. Algae 09:55, 14 October 2005 (UTC) Nu Metal is not alternative rock! please change this! note: in the United States it may be considered alternative music(as much music is) but not Alternative rock

Nu-Metal Drumming Reaching "Beyond" Traditional Metal?

The phrase in the drumming section that alludes to nu-metal drumming reaching beyond traditional metal is misleading and derogatory. As per any expert on this peversion on metal, they seem to know nothing of the innovations and sophistication made by "traditional" metal that have reached precedents long before Nu-Metal did. Anyone who thinks that nu-metal bands were the first to incorporate middle eastern or jazz drumming (the latter of which I have yet to see at all in nu-metal) have obviously never heard the likes of Band Of Gypsies, Dream Theatre, Atheist or Cryptopsy.

Oh, and while we're discussing the matter of who introduced what drum rhythms, what nu-metal band has the Celtic rhythms of say, latter-day Blind Guardian or Finntroll?

Too POV

"Nu metal is a controversial subgenre of music. It is sometimes considered a subgenre of metal, but this is a misnomer, as it is actually a highly commercialized form of alternative rock"

---

Controversy is a dispute where there is strong disagreement, every genre, and sub genre of music has it's fair share of haters. Now you could write that term Nu metal is controversial, but the actual music is strictly POV. And a highly commercialized form of alternative rock is just a negative way of saying popular alternative rock, now isn't it?--58.104.20.47 02:17, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

• Literally dozens of forgettable bands that never "make it" are produced and managed on a highly corporatized mandate every year. Not all commercialized bands hit their intended mark and become the popular sucess their label would like them to be.

'Highly Commercialized' isn't necessarily a negative. Also, nu metal is not metal, so this comment is accurate.

Highly commercialized is an inaccurate way to describe some nu-metal bands. As for the genre itself, it's a branch of metal, as you'll see if you look to it's true roots.musikxpert May 8, 2006

2003?

I was reading 2000s and it says that in 2003 Nu-Metal became "dated"...yet there is no information on this article about it? Flyerhell 06:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Question

I know I'm going to sound stupid but oh well. What exactly is Nu Metal, as you guys put it.? I am so confused. Many people say a certain band is Nu Metal and then people argue it's not. I am just so confused and it would be of much help if someone could clear up this. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 16:15, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I'll help you out, if you still want to know. Nu-metal is a genre generally surrounded with controversy, but the true, basic elements of the genre are as thus: Down-tuned guitars (taken from metal, which explains why the word is in the genre's name, sometimes with 7-string guitars) Minor-key riffage Although it is far too frequently stereotyped, many of the bands also sing about angst or pain of life, sometimes in distorted vocals. It's fair to say KoRn invented nu-metal with their debut, although the genre was later influenced by Limp Bizkit, who brought rapping into it in 1997. musikxpert May 8, 2006

Merging

I have put in the for the article of Rap Metal to be merged into this one, as the Rap Metal article is essentially repeating information on this article with more detail. This should also help people such as 'TearAwayTheFunerealDress' who are struggling to understand exactly what is and isnt Nu Metal. ~~Leyasu

Disagree - Numetal has a "pronounced hip hop influence, and guitar technique which is often different from other metal genres." and rapmetal "institute(s) the vocal and lyrical form of rap.". Hip-hop is not rap, in the same way that numetal is not Rapcore. --– sampi (talk•contrib) 04:01, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Disagree - Agreed with Sampi, there are vital differences and Linkin Park are most certainly not Rap Metal, whilst they are often considered to be Nu-Metal (despite the ambiguities of whether any band is of said genre).

Agree - Rap metal and nu metal are the same things, and neither are proper metal genres. I defy anyone to name real differences between the two and definitive artists from each.

Disagree - Rap metal was influenced by bands such as Rage Against the Machine before nu-metal was 'invented,' plus nu-metal was invented before Limp Bizkit brought rapping into it's defining characteristics by KoRn, who made strong use of the melody over their metal guitars on their first album.musikxpert May 8, 2006

The Metal Controversy

Once again, it appears that another nu-metal fan has attached the label of metal to this genre of music. I honestly cannot understand how this happens over and over again. Nu-metal began as an insult amongst metalheads against commercial hard rock bands that tried to pass themselves off as 'metal' to appear more brutal. They were labelled this way to show how little they had to do with metal (thus the nu prefix). Unfortunately, this caused the genre to be linked to metal by the reasoning: 'nu-metal has the word metal in it, thus it must be metal'. The word 'insecure' has the word 'secure' in it, however, it doesn't mean the same thing. Once again, I, like many of the other people on this site will draw everyone's attention to www.metal-archives.com. This is without a doubt the most extensive and best site for metal band information. Let's look at the listed genres: Black ~ Death ~ Doom ~ Electronic ~ Folk/Viking ~ Gothic ~ Heavy/Traditional ~ Orchestral/Symphonic ~ Power ~ Progressive ~ Speed/Thrash. No mention of nu-metal here. None of the bands listed on this page will appear on the site either. Odd. The majority of metal websites will not list nu-metal as a subgenre of metal and those that do will often post up that the genre has more in common with hard rock than it does metal, probably to simply stop the incessant waves of people wanting to label nu-metal as a metal genre. I think the biggest reason for the mistake, however, is that nu-metal, to mainstream listeners, sounds heavy. Heavy music is traditionally defined in our culture as being metal. The problem is that metal is not just about heavy music. Look at power metal. Sonata Arctica has much more in common with metal than Slipknot or Korn, but it is a much lighter music, for the most part. Personally, I like metal, rock and some nu-metal (some System Of A Down for example). I no longer see nu-metal as a necessarily derrogative term, but it is one that is different from metal and it should be treated as such. Not being metal doesn't take away from the music as so many people on this site seem to think, fighting desperately to keep the myth alive, to make their music sound more punishing or whatever. This needs to end already. Nu-metal is not metal. It takes one or two things from the genre (heavier music, downtuned guitars), but barely scratches the surface of anything else. Vocals are different. Drums are different. There are no palm-mutings, no riffs or solos in nu-metal. The vocals, drums and most of the guitarwork for nu-metal is obviously hard rock inspired (or, for the vocals, sometimes Rap/hip-hop). How does it become a metal genre from this small relation? It doesn't.

I, personally am not a fan of Nu Metal. Also, Metal-Archives openly refuses to list Nu Metal because the sites core creators dislike the genre, and thus dont want it listed. Fact remains it still originates from metal and as such is a fusion of metal and Hip Hop influences. Thus, wether you like the genre or not, neoglism, biased POV, and personal like/dislike, will not, and cannot, be allowed to dictate the factual accuracy of any of Wikipedia's articles. Thus you will have to accept that the genre is a form of Metal, as it is of Rock and Hip Hop music. Yesm the article could be made better. Yes, the article should point out the influence of mainstream rock and commercial hip hop in the genre. Yes, it should point out this is a fusion of two different forms of music. No, it should not be biased as to anyones opinions as can be seen at [this link]. I will look over the article and copyedit minorly (im not good with spelling, ta da) for anything i can see as being POV. ~~Leyasu

Incorrect. It is not listed at MA because it is not a form of metal. It draws it's primary influence from alternative rock, not metal, and this is why there's so much argument over it. People who know what it is don't like that it's being labeled as metal and people who like it refuse to admit that they don't listen to metal because it's "kool!" so they won't let it be argued as what it is, a form of rock. This is factual accuracy, not that nu-metal is a legitimate form of metal. Harvested Sorrow 16:15, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

It is listed under Fusion Genres. As mentioned, the article should be edited to explain the influence of Alternative rock music within the genre, and as such should probally have the rock template added. The reason it is mentioned in the metal template in Fusion Genres is because it fuses basic, watered down elements of metallic songwriting. I agree with your view, but factual accuracy says otherwise. Thus it is listed under Fusion Genres because of its association with metal. Leyasu 17:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Nu metal is not metal. MA refuses to admit it not because of dislike (though that may be) but due to the fact that it is not a form of metal. The term 'nu metal' was a way to achieve commercial success through making the music seem more dangerous through it's percieved relation to metal.

It was a branch of metal when it was created and was intended to be that way.musikxpert May 8, 2006

Nu-Metal is Metal

Well i listen to both and find both highly influencial (Some Nu-Metal bands suck though)

If it wasn't Metal then why is it called Nu-Metal not Nu-Rock

Noobs

As has been stated numerous times before, because it was an insult from metalheads, detracting some bands music as basically fake metal. That's where you get the name 'numetal'. Just like the word 'insecure'. It doesn't mean 'secure' just because the name is in it. That's why you have to look at the *whole* word...

Noob Ilyon 07:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Reply:

Most Nu-Metal i'd agree with you there

but not bands like Korn,Slipknot,Mudvanye (Why are they even on the list) are simply Metal not Nu-metal

btw sry if i suck at this..im new at Wikipedia

Steve_69

Ok ill try to summon this up in a nutshell. Nu metal is characterized by its usage of simple composition encompassing elements from various metal genres, hip hop, and alternative rock. Nu Metal mixes these in a varity of ways, leaving each band sounding highly different to the next. The one consistant within the genre is the Angst driven lyrics (From broken relationships, family values, schoolyard politics (try Teenage Issues)) and simplified use of synthezising genres.

Slipknot for instance, combine the guitaring and drumming of Thrash metal, with Rapping about 'Teenage Issues' and keep everything pretty simple.

Linkin Park use the same rapping technique, using light keyboard motifes like that in Doom Metal, with bass and drumming centering around 4/4 hip hop patterns, the guitaring being used as a rhythm.

Kittie, take much of their influence from Alternative Rock, the bands composition being the same as that of Alternative Rock, and incorperating 'Teenage Issues' lyrics, double bass kicks, an imittation of 'death vox' and other traits from metal genres, all of these in minor use.

This is three bands. The genre is quite the alchemy and is very loose in sound. It is one of the few genres that DOES have a loose sound, most notable by its fusion esque. As such, i suggest reading articles Rap Metal and Alternative Metal as these are both stubs of what belongs in the Nu Metal article. Leyasu 11:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

What about Nu-Metal now? What do you guys consider Disturbed, Godsmack, Taproot, Trapt and bands like that? None of them have rap or "hip hop" in it. It's still considered nu-metal, so yea!

Why not nu-rock?

Ironically I would imagine the existence of New Rock footwear - so popular with some nu-metal fans, may have contributed to the choice of monicker. I'm sure we wouldn't like to call something DM-Ska or Burberry-dance or Rbk-rap, so steering away from any brand confusion seems like a possible, if questionable, factor.

And yes I know that some New Rock wearers hate nu-metal, and vice versa. Just a thought, OK? :) Skewer 12:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

As i do the review, ill put it into the common misconceptions part im drawing up if its something that comes up sometimes. Leyasu 14:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

"Notable Nu-Metal groups"

The section headed "notable Nu-Metal groups" points at an (intended) list of all nu-metal groups. This really isn't the same thing. The section should either list notable groups or have it's name changed. 202.45.98.81 01:33, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Noted in kind and duely changed. Thank you for the contribution. Leyasu 03:32, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

why is everyone arguing over what this is? I am sorry but bands like Coal Chamber, Korn, Otep & Slipknot are not alternative, if you want to put that Nu Metal is somewhat a form of Alt Metal that is fine, but it is not alternative rock, and you are obviously not a true metalhead if you believe that. Look, I love Metal, Hair Metal, Glam Metal, Some Thrash Metal(I hate Death Metal & Black Metal though) and I am sorry, whether you want to admit it or not it is a form of Metal, just because you see yourself as a "metal purists" does not mean other people do, and I will continue reverting this back to Heavy Metal unless: It is merged with Alternative Metal(I do not believe it shoulld be merged with Rap Metal) or until you can admit, that, it, is in fact, Metal

Suggestion: Reverting things is not going to solve anything. The proposed merges have been suggested due to the names all being the names for the same thing. Let me also point out, the opinion of a user of Wikipedia as to wether im a 'metalhead' bears no importance to me, as i find such things infantile and dull. Im Ley Shade, i have vast knowledge in a handfull of subjects of intrest to me. That is all. If you have suggestions to improve the article, please make them in kind. If not, then please refrain from petty threats, abusive comments, and schoolyard politics. The spirit of Wikipedia is to make better articles all around, not further ones ego. Leyasu 16:00, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Nu-metal isn't Metal

A "metal" band is a band who has at least 8 out of this 10 properties: Remember. You can skip only one of this: and you are inside Metal

You can skip two, and you are in the border

1 - It has a "metal" sound (well, we all know that sound)
2 - It´s not mainstream. At least it doesn´t try desperately to be mainstream
3 - It´s aimed at a "Metal" audience (not to all people, like pop does)
4 - It has a "serious" attitude. Sometimes you can expect a bit of humour and happiness without falling in... er.... "fiesta, fiesta!". you know....
5 - They play (and record) for the sake of playing and recording music. Like: "Hey Í play the guitar. Are you a drummer? Fine! let´s start a band!
6 - Its music does not have lyrics with common topics you can found in radio (speaking of being happy, dancing, being sad) Most of the metal songs speak from Magic and Science fiction to Satanism and horrendous deaths. Any topic but the first ones, with few excepions.
7 - It´s traditional: I mean: A metal band is a Rock band. You can expect some little modifications (a choir, a violin, some orchestra) but no more.
8 - It´s extemporal. Its sound can change because of technology, but most of the time you can´t guess the release year of a song you don´t know. It doesn´t follow trends. Proof of this: Are you looking for a "yyy" band in a store? You find their 1st, 4th and last album all like new. Try this with a pop artist. Only the last sells. The rest are old.
9 - It has a strong live activity. Playing almost all weekends.
10 - It has, or tries to have, a stable formation and work like a team. It includes one-man projects: its musicians frequently do some lyrics and music. Non-metal music stars do all the "artistic" work and then hire some musicians before each big show.

So:
Some "ambient music" hasen't got any "metal" sound, but you can say it´s metal.
You can say Helloween is not serious enough but it´s still metal.
Apocalyptica does not sound "metal" and they aren´t a rock band, so they are in the border (it depends of your taste) Ayreon comes here too
He we go: Nu metal tries to be mainstream, follow tendences, mostly has common lyrics and plays to benefit from the media boom. It´s also aimed at the regular young people so, it isn´t metal.

---

I studied music for years darling. I studied the composition and creation of genres for two years. Also, there is no list that says 'you have to do this, this and this to be metal'. That doesnt work, as many bands regarded as metal, outside of Nu Metal, do less than half of the things listed above. So lets go through the list and each fault with it, for your education.

• 1 - It has a "metal" sound (well, we all know that sound)
  

Sound doesnt define genre. Sound of a genre is founded by the composition of that genre, which often results in a similar sound to bands. In some genres of music, a stereotypical sound is prescribed. Metal is catagorised in sound by the 'metallic' sound of its nature, in comparison to other genres. Your point is half right, however, it is a pretty foolish one, as all metal genres sound inheritantly different.

• 2 - It´s not mainstream. At least it doesn´t try desperately to be mainstream
  

This statement doesnt work, because many bands with the Heavy, Hair, Black, Gothic, Thrash and Symphonic genres of metal, are what is considered 'mainstream'. Popularity, has never, and will never, from any musical perspective, define a bands genre. Some Classical musicians are extremely well known, others arent. To say lesser known Classical musicians are not Classical musicians because they are not well known is folly, and the same principle applys here.

• 3 - It´s aimed at a "Metal" audience (not to all people, like pop does)
  

First, most metal bands aim at several audiences, including fans of metal, rock, and other music that the individual band may be influenced by. In other cases, bands dont target any influence at all, and play solely for their own enjoyment. Another misconception of yours, is that pop doesnt aim at a target audience of everyone, and a few months work in the music buisness would show you that.

• 4 - It has a "serious" attitude. Sometimes you can expect a bit of humour and happiness without falling in... er.... "fiesta, fiesta!". you know....
  

A) Green Jelly is a metal band. B) Green Jelly has no seriousness to them whatsoever. This is two points that flaw what you said here. Edenbridge, are a metal band. Edenbridge, are reknown for being highly upbeat in their music, and highly happy. Not all metal is downcast and miserable, a great amount of it is actually upbeat and and happy.

• 5 - They play (and record) for the sake of playing and recording music. Like: "Hey Í play the guitar. Are you a drummer? Fine! let´s start a band!
  

This contradicts the point you made in 3. If they are playing for a target audience, they are not playing for the sake of the music. Also, several metal bands, dont play solely for their enjoyment. Nightwish is a metal band, a very common one. Nightwish recently fired their vocalist, Tarja, because she didnt play music for any other reason than money. Metallica, also announced they were only intrested in money during the closing down of Napster. Not all metal bands play solely for the sake of playing. Remember: Human nature, and the nature of the individual, cannot be enslaved by ones own thoughts.

• 6 - Its music does not have lyrics with common topics you can found in radio (speaking of being happy, dancing, being sad) Most of the metal songs speak from Magic and Science fiction to Satanism and horrendous deaths. Any topic but the first ones, with few excepions.
  

Edenbridge make several refrences to being happy, as do the band Fairyland. Dancing is also heard of throughout metal bands, in various contexts. Morbidity, which includes being sad, is a lyrical prerequisite of the Doom Metal genre. Take note of the fact that all three are done in metal genres.

• 7 - It´s traditional: I mean: A metal band is a Rock band. You can expect some little modifications (a choir, a violin, some orchestra) but no more.
  

Again wrong. Fusion genres have happened for year. Metal bands are not rock bands, either. They use rock instruments, yes. Metal bands, are very different in style to each other. Black Metal is very different to Power Metal, as that is different to Hair Metal. Many genres change and merge over time. Many additions are made to bands, that keep a core basis in one genre. A fusion genre, of any two genres, is counted as being both of what it is fused from. Modifications in the worlds metal scene, and musical depictation of genres, has happened for over a century. It is foolish to say that their is little change. Your desires do not alter the past, and do not define the world.

• 8 - It´s extemporal. Its sound can change because of technology, but most of the time you can´t guess the release year of a song you don´t know. It doesn´t follow trends. Proof of this: Are you looking for a "yyy" band in a store? You find their 1st, 4th and last album all like new. Try this with a pop artist. Only the last sells. The rest are old.
  

This is nothing to do with trends. Many metal bands have trends, most commonly the oldest bands have the oldest material. Sometimes some artists are better stocked than others, depending on individual music stores. Also, you have to remember, is that Pop Music and Metal Music are marketed in very different ways, and their two musical worldwide scenes are extremely different. The metal community, all around the world, has been more established as musical collectors, who will collect and remember their favourite works. With bands making a lot less money, hence the need for continual sales of older works. Pop music is designed to make a big hit, make big money, and then be onto the next big thing. Pop music is marketed to be constantly changing, and is marketed for those people who arent devote musical collectors. The marketing however, still doesnt define the genre of a band. Nu Metal may follow a very pop marketing scheme, but that doesnt change what it is.

• 9 - It has a strong live activity. Playing almost all weekends.
  

Most well known and established bands, do not pay almost all weekends. If they did, they would not have time to travel for tours, or to record albums, or spend time with their respective familys. This is again a foolish statement, and is no way an actually fact about bands.

• 10 - It has, or tries to have, a stable formation and work like a team. It includes one-man projects: its musicians frequently do some lyrics and music. Non-metal music stars do all the "artistic" work and then hire some musicians before each big show.

The Beatles, a non metal band. Did they hire musicians before their shows? No. Did they only do the artistic work? No. Pop bands, orchestras, rock bands, punk bands. Bands of all genres, work as teams. Many non metal musicans write their own music, with a case in point being young star James Blunt. Pop music also features one man projects.

Fact: Genres are defined by their musical properties, not by their audience or a given persons like or dislike of a band. What you have said reeks of infantile nonsense. It has no literary, or musical value. To be honest, without trying to sound offensive or mean, you do sound like a teenager, with very little knowledge about music and its definations. As such, i suggest you take some music courses and intergrate yourself into the metal community for a few years, so you better understand things, before making a hate spree against a genre you dislike. Leyasu 09:12, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I am a teenager, but I did copy that from a friend because I agreed with it. Whilst some may think Nu-metal is actual metal I tend to disagree, based on the fact that this genre tries to be mainstream, I am a fan of Metal and I believe Hair metal shouldn't be Metal either, just hard rock. Nu-metal bands main concern are money for the most part, Metallica is no longer a metal band as of recently, they have become a modern rock band after the past few years. But no matter what I think, it really is a matter of opinon, not fact. Yourself an "expert" on music as you said, seems to think Nu-metal is metal, fine I respect that. But myself and countless other metalheads tend to disagree with you, since it basically goes against everything we believe metal is to stand for. The lack of guitar solos also help in our opinon, but if you listen to various genres of Metal, Folk/Viking/Death/Black/Neo-Classical etc, you will hear a similar sound, you really don't get this with Nu-metal, well from all of it I have heard, but you are the music expert here listening to music for two years, and I have only been listening to heavy metal almost all of my life, so I expect you will disagree with this, do you find it fun to flaunt around your whimsical musical intelligence to teenagers often? Regardless, Nu-metal does have loud guitars and yelling vocals, and to the mainstream media that is metal, so I guess in a media sense Nu-metal is metal. I however, do not and will never consider it metal, How can bands like Korn be put in the same genre of bands like Morbid Angel? But I am one of those believers, and I don't believe it's all a matter of fact it's opinon, if you are a casual listener of music you might consider Nu-metal, metal. If you are an actual Metalhead you don't. Different Strokes for different folks, good points however. You say Tomato, I say Tomahto. Cliches all around, and apolgies for my rambling and my repitition. I am offically indifferent on Nu-metal, I hate it, I don't listen to it and that's all that matters. Just wanted to see what responses that would receive.

Darling, let me clarify what i said. "I studied the composition and creation of genres for two years." I have been working in the metal community a lot longer than that. I have worked with several bands from several genres, and come into conflict with many. I personally, have no love for Nu Metal. However, this is an encylcopedia, not a place to show off ones personal view on something. Also dear, to point something out, if your indifferent to something, you cant hate it. Korn is Nu Metal, Morbid Angel is whatever form of Metal they are. It is mentioned in the article, how Nu Metal got its name, its origins, and other such related topics. Also realise what i said about what genres are defined by. As the articles states, as i have pasted below, i think applys to you.

• Some heavy metal fans do not consider nu metal a form of heavy metal music at all, arguing the genre is too diluted from what they consider "true" heavy metal. Nu metal guitarists, for example, typically forsake traditional metal guitar technique, such as soloing and often use riffs quite different from those most commonly associated with what is expected of metal bands.

• It is also not commonly accepted as metal because of the lyrics that usually deal with what teenagers face because some metal fans feel that metal is about strength, not weakness. Other heavy metal fans reject these arguments, citing rock music's long history of incorporating disparate elements--including jazz, experimental music and world music, out of curiosity, genuine appreciation for other musical genres, or both. Moreover, little objection has historically been raised to doom metal (a genre which lacks high-speed guitar pyrotechnics) or power metal (whose high fantasy image is often less threatening than nu-metal angst). It is possible that some of the anti-nu-metal backlash might be due to the genre's significant success as a popular music genre. In general, the rise of nu metal, as with most genres fusing other metal genres, has helped to cause severe divisions in the worlds metal communitys and remains a source of much animosity and debate among heavy metal fans.

Ok lets not lie, i did chalk that up from a template im going to be posting for something else in short time. But the point remains the same. Please realise that, altrough you may dislike something, it holds musical charecterstics that define it as such, and as so, it is that. It holds defining qualities of metal, defining qualities of Alternative Rock, and defining qualities of Hip Hop. Thus, it is a fusion genre. It is not a direct form of metal, but a fusion of metal + x. As such, it is a form of metal, as much as it is a form of something else. Leyasu 03:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Merge Draft

I whipped up a quick draft of an article that merges Alternative Metal and Nu Metal. Its by no means, perfect. By no means, brilliant. But it is the best i can do in 20 mins of rushed time. The link is Here. I tried my hardest to keep as much of the original wording of both articles, which included a bit of chopping, hacking, and mix and matching (it says pretty much the same thing, but with as much as the original wording as i can keep). Its not the best thing ever, but it sevres its purpose as a rough draft. For any comments, please post them here. Please make editiation as is seen fit by people, as to make the article the best it can be, rather than making it seem like im seemingly lording over Wikipedia. Leyasu 03:56, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

The main issue I have is that very few alt-metal bands before the late 90s (alt-metal and nu-metal do overlap a great deal from that point forward, but are not mutually exclusive) actually can be considered "nu-metal" (namely Korn). It certainly is the direct predecessor, much like Protopunk is to Punk rock, and in that case, there are still separate pages. The terms overlap, but are not synonymous. In particular, the section "Sounds constructs and lyrics" and other references to musical conventions still only refer to nu-metal conventions which are drawn primarily from only a few alt-metal bands (Helmet, Korn, RATM, and a few others).

A case can be made that nu-metal and alternative metal should share the same page, but I feel such a page would have to involve heavy reworking. I know this is just a rough draft just to give everyone an idea of the merged page, but the current structure of both pages does not lend them to easy merger right now. WesleyDodds 06:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Scanning over the Nu-metal article again, I realize there's precious little about the history of the form itself. Oh, there's loads of info about its roots and musical traits, but next to nothing about anything after 1998 or so. What about the Family Values tour or Woodstock 99? What about its dominance of radio and MTV for about five years or so? The way it's structured now, I don't think I'd object to Nu-metal being merged into Alternative metal (instead of vice versa) with nu-metal listed as a substyle and a short Nu-metal page still existing to explain the usage and controversy behind the term (as well as possibly containing the "Sounds constructs and lyrics" section, since it does apply to that particular brand of music). A notice would be placed at the top or bottom of the smaller nu-metal article directing the reader to click on Alternative metal for more detailed information.

While I still think they should be two different entries, I think this approach would be workable and appropriate. Thoughts? WesleyDodds 06:40, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

My thoughts, as i see them:

• If you have information like Woodstock and MTV Dominance, get editing, and put it in the article.
• Alternative Metal is not a reknown name, that you can say to near anybody, and they will know. Say Nu Metal, almost everybody knows what it is. Nu Metal is the name used by most everyone, Alternative Metal being a pet name used by 'some' people, like yourself. Would it be viable to create a 3 paragraph article simply to say Goth Metal is an abbreviated version of Gothic Metal, that bands and heavy fans in the Gothic Metal scene dislike?
• The rough draft was made by simply adding in what little was in the Alternative Metal page, into the Nu Metal page. If there was more in the Alt Metal page, there would of been more to merge in on the draft.
• Bands you claim are Alt Metal have no influence from Alternative Rock most of the time, and are openly listed and named as Nu Metal bands, all around the world. Korn is already mentioned in the Nu Metal article as being proto-typical of a Nu Metal band. Most of the worl regards Korn as one of the best Nu Metal bands there is. The same with RATM, SOAD, and countless other bands you claim are Alt Metal. SOAD even said themselfs they are a Nu Metal band.
• (Edit) Ive just seen what youve done with the Alt Metal page. Thats good, very good. Influences, dont define genres, at all, period. Soundgarden is also listed on the grunge article. Now what ur putting, sounds like a case of bands that combine rock genres, with nothing to do with metal. This isnt a good case for your argument, as if Alt Metal was an actuall genre, it would be comprised of bands not in other genres, and bands that are actually metal.

Thats my points and views on what youve said. Leyasu 07:30, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

On Soundgarden, their classification as alternative metal is based on metal traits, while present in all grunge bands, that are deeply more pronounced than say Nirvana or Mudhoney. In fact, Soundgarden and Alice in Chains were marketed as metal bands before grunge entered the mainstream (both were also nominated in the metal category in the Grammy Awards). Musical genres aren't rigid, and often overlap (for example, a band like Husker Du can be classified as hardcore punk, alternative rock, college rock, and indie rock), and there is nothing that says a band cannot physically play more than one style or fit under one heading.

Additionally, I must apologize as I am editing the Alternative metal page very gradually and not in one fell swoop as I intended, as I am currently working on more important projects right now. I keep adding bits and rewriting text as I review the page every time I see it, so I'm trying to address all the concerns with the page to the best of my current ability. WesleyDodds 08:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Editing the article slowly is fine. But its still vague, and undescriptive. Your basically just filling out the history for Nu Metal, on a different article. One contains the history, one contains the defination, hence why they appear as one article split in two. Thus in the end, what u finish editing, will probally only be merged anyways. Leyasu 11:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Isn't "alternative metal" any heavily metal-influenced genre with other (non-rock/blues/jazz/classical) influences? If alternative metal is the polar opposite of "true metal", that's what is implied. Are Fear Factory, Primus and Body Count nu-metal? They're certainly alternative metal, but not necessarily nu-metal.

I think mister anomynous user, your as lost as i am. Im also unsure of what the description of Alternative Metal is. And im also waiting on it. As such, at the minute, ive started prepares to merge the two articles, leaving Alt Metal alone as an article due to WesleyDodds working on it. If you wish to see what i have done to this article, see both the Revision section on this talk page, and the Page History for the Nu Metal article. Leyasu 09:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

2003 was about the time numetal was no longer "cool"

Above: I was reading 2000s and it says that in 2003 Nu-Metal became "dated"...yet there is no information on this article about it? Flyerhell 06:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, no source, but that is about the time numetal lost ground to Emo and pop-punk.

It's no longer cool to like Limp Bizkit, regardless of what people say. Their 2005 album tanked and nobody gave a darn about it. Even System of a Down are less popular.

That is a matter of opinion and not a matter of fact. Trend here in England still has many teenagers as hooked into Emo and Pop Punk as they are Nu Metal and Alternative Rock. Its surge of popularity might of died, and yes it might no longer be the most fashionable form of music on the planet. But, it is by no means 'dated'. And as such, the article is going under major revisions both by Aj Ramierz and Myself. As such, your comment has been noted, and we will look into including this in the article come a full revision of it. Leyasu 02:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. I still stand to my assertion though: numetal is dated, as in no longer trendy. Just like hair metal was during the Grunge era, despite not being totally dead.

No Numetal in early '00s?

To my knowledge there were only like five big numetal bands in the late 1990s. The early and even mid 2000s, up to about 2004 and even today to a lesser extent are FULL of numetal.

I don't really remember it being huge until 2000/'01 with Linkin Park, Papa Roach, and Disturbed.

   linkin park formed in 94 or something?

Impenetrable phrase

"After Nirvana frontman Kurt Cobain's death in 1994, the viability of other bands in the grunge scene would follow". What the heck is that supposed to mean? -- Jmabel | Talk 03:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I said the same thing why bring Kurt into this?

Pop Metal?

Why on Earth does 'pop metal' redirect to here? Pop metal is stuff like Def Leppard and Scorpions and between heavy metal and glam metal. I have never, ever heard anyone refer to nu metal as 'pop metal'.

Pop metal should redirect to glam metal. Or, better yet, glam metal should be a section under a pop metal page... but that is a discussion for another time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.28.67 (talk • contribs) 24 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Concur. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

It does not matter either way. "Pop metal" is an idiotic made-up term, a neologism which we were able to eliminate from the Wikipedia and which was being used to define bands such as Nightwish by a biased anon. The consensus on VfD was for it to redirect to nu metal, so that was done. Just leave that redirect be. Does it make the genre less worthy if a redirect nobody uses points to it? I don't really think so. Just let that "article" rot. --Sn0wflake 05:27, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Pop Metal is used to define 'any' metal band of 'any' form that is considered large, popular, or otherwise well known. This the 'redirect' should say this, and and have the Metal Genre Footer on it for easy access of the genres. Then it can rot, while being poked with sticks. Leyasu 09:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

You can't change VfD consensus unless you promote a new consensus by means of an AfD or in this case maybe a RfD... or promote wide consensus on the article's Talk page... something along those lines. The center of the discussion is quite simple: "pop metal" does not exist. It's a junction of the terms popular music and heavy metal music, but not one anybody uses, so perhaps it woulod be best to just put it up for Redirects for Deletion. --Sn0wflake 21:36, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

What i meant is the article, or stub as the case would be, should simply point out that the term isnt a form of metal, and is simply used to mean 'any' metal band of 'any' form that is considered large, popular, or otherwise well known. Leyasu 02:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Pop metal is a form of heavy metal music already established, most well known in acts like Queen. Calling nu-metal "pop metal" is just reactionary to its mainstream popularity. Nu-metal, while popular, rarely has elements of pop music in it.

This article is a joke

Ok, so basically Nu-Metal= Rap vocals? Thats ridiuclous. The bass player is the hero? U can't even hear the bass riffs most of them play as they are only playing the roots along with the rhythm guitarist.

You call Korn Nu-Metal? Slipknot? Mudvayne? Rapped vocals? This is a ridiculous article that gives a totally ridiculous analysis of the genre as a whole.

Read article Alternative Metal and you will see why this article needs serious editing, and serious merger with Alternative Metal. Leyasu 07:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Have to disagree. Alternative metal was being influenced by key bands long before nu-metal was around. musikxpert May 8, 2006

Revision

As is clearly noticeable, i have made several changes to the article. I am performing a complete revision of this article of its current state, in preperation for what seems is going to be a merge with the Alternative Metal article. This edit so far is the first step in several, majorly refining edits to this article. As such it is by no means complete or inclusive of the work that needs to be done. Below is a list of pressing issues i found while editing what ive done today.

• Removed Slaps Style From Bass: Is there a way of describing what this is? I myself didnt have any idea what the fuck it was. Can the editor who contributed this, please explain what it is, so it can be in the article and clearly understandable?

Thats it. Any help would be appreciated, on things that need to be worked on for the article, as editers such as myself and WesleyDodds sometimes do need to have the problems pointed out, for us to be able to commend them. Leyasu 07:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I still object to a merger, due to reasons previously stated. Anyone who has an opinion either way should voice their opinions. WesleyDodds 09:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

So it turns out you can search for keywords in books through Amazon.com. Consequently, it turns out that Ian Christe's [Sound of the Beast: The Complete Headbanging History of Heavy Metal uses "nu metal" and "alternative metal" as two distinct terms. Now we have a published reference that says they are two separate things, which stands against a merger. WesleyDodds 09:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Now we have a book that ues both terms. However we have a book we dont know the contents of to say what it says. We also still dont have a defination of what Alternative Metal is, other than the first Nu Metal bands, that are not referred to as derogetoraly (ok i spelled that wrong, deal with it). Leyasu 10:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll pick it up when I can; it looks like a worthwhile purchase anyway. And the definition for Alternative metal is in the first few paragraphs of the article; not all genres/labels are defined so specifically. WesleyDodds 10:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. Ok this is how i assume things to work, bearing in mind im stoned right now so my writing ability is zero.

• Subgenre = A form of music, defined by several traits unique to itself. Often a subgenre is a division of something else. Bands in a subgenre are unique specifically to that subgenre, by containing all the defined elements of that subgenre. As such, all bands will have a clear link by the defination of traits that makes the subgenre, a subgenre.

• Pet Name/Grouping Name = A name given to group several bands from across genres together, due to a common trait. This can range from odd tempos, to lyrical themes, or even record label. Bands often have little in common musically, but have a key trait that is not found in any of the subgenres they are from.

If Alternative Metal is a pet name for any Alternative Rock/Metal bands that take influence from Alternative Rock and Metal, then i can understand and accept it. But that means its a Pet Name, not a subgenre, and would have to be removed from the heavy metal template, unless a 'Common Groupings' would be listed.

If Alternative Metal is a subgenre, then it needs to have its key traits defined, and explained. Again, gothic metal/symphonic metal are good for templates. This then, would have a list of bands and history associated with it, and would remain on the heavy metal template.

I hope you understood what i meant, coz im too stoned to talk very coherently at the moment. Leyasu 12:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a simplistic dichotomy you have set up. Subgenres aren't particularly unique, since they dont't exist in vaccuums; musical influence affects musicians in varifying and hard-to-quantfy degrees. Music isn't an exact science, since classificaion largely is a subjective experience. Additionally, many genres are described as movements or overrarching labels rather than concrete aesthetic formats, for example New Wave of British Heavy Metal, Post-rock, Post-punk, protopunk, New Wave music and so on. Musical classification has as much to due with public perception as it does with structural guidelines, scales, and instrumentation. That may not be the best way to do things, but that's how things really are. The fact is that such groupings are common in music history, and by your insistence on combining Nu metal, alternative metal, and rapcore into one article without acknowledging the distinction, you are subscribing to the same mindset you claim you are against.

Unless you can find others who will agree to you on a merge, I see no better option than to remove the merge proposal tags once I integrate the available sources. However, you should any sources (published/professional sources take precedence over fan sources unless they are unavailable) that say otherwise so we can integrate them into the articles in order to reference any debate that may exist. WesleyDodds 09:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

To that, i suggest an RFC. Also the point was to combine the articles into one article, not to claim they are all the exact same thing. Much like Opera Metal should be merged into Symphonic Metal, and mentioned as a variant of it. As Gothic-Doom was merged into the Gothic Metal article, and is mentioned as a variant of Gothic Metal and Doom Metal. That is the general purpose. To do the same thing with these three, has as been done with those articles. Also, again, by Wikipedia's rules, the article Alternative Metal must designate something as something, that doesnt repeat other articles. At the minute, i have heard argument that its Nu Metal and Progressive Metal. And also argument that its neither, and is the acclaimed 'Avantgarde Metal'. As i said, i kept the descriptions of each thing pretty simple. The merge tag stays until the RFC is done, and a consensus is reach on the best course of action. If the articles arent merged, im cool with that, but that means that Alternative Metal needs to define something, and 'Rap Metal' needs to have a sudden boom of bands, because at the minute it consists of about 10.

(Edit) I forgot to mention it. I studied genres for two years in my music training. Genres are defined by musical charecterstics, not what people wish things were. A genre is a name given to a paticular way of doing music, not a movement. NWOBHM = Movement. Thrash Metal = Genre. There is a difference. Leyasu 09:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I've studied music too. Still, the definitions used in music theory do not necessarily apply to everyday life. People name things and group things depending on their own viewpoitns and opinions, and then other people pick up on them. Really, do Britpop bands have all that much in common with each other, especially prior to 1995? And what kind of name is Britpop anyway? You have neo-glam bands, the New Wave of New Wave, arty pop acts, and anthemic bloke-rock like Oasis, and pretty much the only connections they have is that they are defiantly British and generally came from the indie scene. But such classification are used, and Wikipedia exists to provide information on these topics, whether or not they can be considered "real" musical genres.

Both the terms alternative metal and nu metal are used, and there's information on both of them. Unless you're willing to write out an explanation as to why they are similar to the point that the articles need to be merged that can be inserted into an article (which might even be irrelevant depending on if the resulting article is too long, and it would have to be split anyway) as well as provide sources, consensus leans on my side on the issue.

I welcome sources and thorough additions you may have to add to these articles, but please consider the issue from the opposing viewpoint in order to further strengthen your own argument. Please list your sources now, and let's try to end this issue satisfactory once and for all. I know you have things you'd rather edit, and I'd much rather devote more time to filling out Timeline of alternative rock, myself. WesleyDodds 10:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually these pair are two of my more keen articles. Consensus also doesnt lean in your favour.

You want an explanation? You got it, ill keep it relativly simple and blunt:

• Alternative Metal is two coined name.

• One usage of the term refers to bands within the Nu Metal genre, that forsake large quantities of Hip Hop influence and instead draw influence from Metal Genres and Alternative Rock Genres. A similar name to define between Nu Metal bands that use heavy hip hop influence is 'Rap Metal'.

• The second usage of the term is relative to metal bands that do unorthodox things in their music, normally not akin to metal genres. These bands are also known as Avantgarde metal bands.

Actually, in writing that, i came up with a better soloution. Merge the Alternative Metal page's contents into the Nu Metal page. Then on the Alternative Metal page, write what i just put, in a more descriptive and defined manner. That actually solves the problem for the most part.

As for sources, then you would that the general metal community doesnt use the genre Alternative Metal. As seen, it is used to refer to bands across genres. Similar usage of these names are Epic Metal, and Dark Metal. They are used to associate bands due to one commonality, even though they all belong to different genres.

So i still agree with the idea of merging. But slightly changed, to merge the page's contents into the article, and then explain what the term endoes, as i mentioned above. Leyasu 15:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Quick Notes:

1. By "consensus" I mean the two other people who disagreed against a merge on the Alternative metal talk page. That's not much of a consensus (as I have stated before, people really aren't talking about this), but if we push the issue, that's what we have.

2. The metal community does not determine whether or not genre pages are merged. The metal community has its prejudices, after all, and certainly people from outside of metal (and even outside of music) have their own observations that need to be factored in

3. We could also argue that "nu metal" is a coined name,; it mainly came into usage to group together bands considered to be revitalizing metal in the late 90's. And if we were to view alternative metal and nu metal as the same thing, alternative metal seems more prevalent a term in commercial and classification circles. WesleyDodds 12:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok let me give you a sample lay out for my idea.

• Nu Metal (Header)(Overview)(Explain what it is)(Explain usage of terms Rap Metal and Alternative Metal)

• Rap Metal (Subsection)(Explain the sounds and constructs and stuff)(Explain about it being Nu Metal with Rap elements)

• Alternative Metal (Subesection)(Do the same as above)(Explain about it being Nu Metal with no rap elements, and influence from genres of metal and rock)

• History (Beginnings)

• History (Split Alternative Metal and Rap Metal historys (See gothic metal for example of Gothic Metal and Gothic-Doom split))

• Common Misconceptions/Trivia

• External Links/Etc

Thats generally what i mean to do. Then leave a redirect of Alternative Metal and Rap Metal to it. That way your not changing either of the terms, simply grouping them all to be accurate, fair, and stop confusion, appearance of neoglism and dissassociation.

I hope u get what i mean to do now, with the example format. Leyasu 13:33, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. I'd say nu-metal is a subgenre of alternative metal, not vice versa. Alternatve metal means the following to me:

• Metal bands that do unorthodox things in their music, normally not akin to metal genres. Including genres like nu-metal, funk-metal, Prog metal, noise metal, folk metal, etc.

From the Metal Music page, i cite this.

• Alternative metal is a cross-genre term used to describe metal bands and metal influenced bands, which some fans consider to be unique or experimental, as well as bands of the nu metal genre that lack hop hop influence.

That means, its not a genre. And genres of metal are not genres of Alternative Metal. It means its a term used to group Nu Metal bands that use minimum to no Hip Hop influence, and bands from various other genres that do things that are not typically standard of the genre they are in. It also makes reference to Alternative Rock bands whom use a lot of metal influence in their music. Thus, a near complete rewrite of the page is needed, unless it is in fact my original assertion, and that is a name used by fans of Nu Metal bands, to differentiate between Nu Metal bands with hip-hop influence, and those without. Leyasu 04:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Er, Faith No More and Rage Against the Machine have a notable hip-hop influence. I've never read anywhere that alternative metal is simply Nu metal bands without hip-hop influence. And please stop inferring that it's just a title concoted by Nu Metal fans. Actually, the mroe I look at it, the less Nu Metal is actually a set genre. WesleyDodds 05:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Then what exactly 'is' Alternative Metal? Im still waiting on an answer, and this is after almost a month. And so far, the more ive looked into it, the only people ive found using at are those who distinguish one form of Nu Metal from another over some very minor conspicercy, or those that group Alternative Rock bands with a lot of metal influence into one place. Again, see above as to my view. Leyasu 06:27, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Leyasu, I'm concerned. I imagine that many people who edit on WP believe themselves to have a deep grasp of their chosen topics. I also imagine that this belief comes from study, experience and one's surroundings. You have repeatedly shouted down eager Wikipedians, accusing some of being like teenagers and basically telling them they are wrong.

From what I can see, your penchant for working on articles about the most intricate doom/gothic/black/pagan/other metal genre varieties is not necessary for the debates on Nu and Alternative Metal, because these disputed areas are hard to pin down (since they lack overtly specific features, such as lyrics about trolls/lords/etc).

My concern is that your work on the darker end of metal implies you would hate to hear people voice the attitude "it's all gothic, innit". Similarly, it is a bad idea in some people's eyes to say "Helmet, Primus and Slipknot, they're all Nu Metal". Your understanding of genres cannot be presumed to be any better than mine, an anonymous newbie's or whoever, so please stop using it as a weapon.

As you said above, "Genres are defined by musical characterstics, not what people wish things were." Primus and Linkin Park share few, if any, musical characteristics. Nu Metal does indeed have characteristics, but the characteristic of Alternative Metal would appear to be music containing a unique stylistic deviation from other Metal music of its era, to create a style which may or may not have been popularised since its conception. Some people seem to like rap & metal combos, almost 15 years after RATM (arguably) cemented the style in place. Nobody copied Primus...! Alternative Metal should be treated and defined as the disparate scatterings from around the fringes of Metal as a whole, by definition without a similarity in sound, because their differences are what make these bands comparable to one another - the one thing RATM & Primus share is the fact that they pretty much broke the mould at the time.

I admit I find the whole debate a little pointless, since I too would rather see some things become merged information for easy access, but in this case I see a glaring difference and you are the most vocal campaigner for the merge and associated rewrites. If you feel the need to contribute to these specific sections (as is your right), please refrain from such hostility towards other posts. If you can't or won't be calm, civil, and constructive, perhaps this topic should be left to others for a while to see if it improves without the current heckling. - Skewer 12:48, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I apologise if i come across as to be using my own study as a weapon, as that wasnt my intention and i do feel bad that ive come across that way, regardless, thank you for telling me i come across that way, ill try to bear that in mind in future.

Alls im asking is that a defination is given, that draws a distinction. Its like someone saying 'A Male pig is not a Pig, but i dont know how'. I explained this already, and i believe that Wesley is working on it, so im waiting for his revision of that part at the minute. Leyasu 18:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

My take on all of this...

Forgive me, I'm new, and I probably shouldn't start out telling you all that, but I wanted to let you all know exactly how this looks to a "new reader" who doesn't care much for this "heated" debate and thinks it's highly if not entirely political.

You are trying to group together a bunch of artists which shouldn't really be grouped together, except as follows.

Basically you are taking alternative metal artists which also mesh well into other genre's and calling them all 'nu-metal' and trying to seperate them from the 'straight' alternative metal artists.

My suggestion would be to make this article one which says just that - that it isn't really a genre so much as a term used to describe alternative metal artists who also fall or lean slightly towards other genres as well, such as rapcore or grunge or hard or funk rock or punk.

I studied genres for 2 years. I know a bit more about what a genre is. If you need to see what genres are and are not when it comes to metal, see this article Leyasu 13:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

For the last time, people...

Nu metal is not metal at all, but heavy alternative rock. There is simply no debating the fact. Nu metal is a form of alternative rock, not a subgenre of any form of metal, no matter how you look at it. Unless you want to change the rules of metal, yourselves, please stop classifying nu metal as such.

Bands that are metal:

• Megadeth
• Blind Guardian
• Sonata Arctica
• Gamma Ray
• Machinae Supremacy
• Iced Earth
• Apocalyptica (An example of how senselessly thrashing a guitar isn't required to be metal)
• Etc...

Apocalyptica isn't a metal band - it's a cello quartet playing metal songs. --BlackLynx 22:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

They're very metal, indeed. "Metal" isn't defined by the instruments you play, but how you play it. Apocalyptica keeps true to the fundamentals of metal. -D14BL0 08:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Bands that are not metal:

• Adema
• Crossfade
• Korn
• Mudvayne
• Slipknot
• Thousand Foot Krutch
• Etc...

Listen to all of these bands, and you will definately notice very distince differences between them. -D14BL0 06:53, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

By your assertion, Gothic Metal, Doom Metal, Symphonic Metal, and many other such forms of metal wouldnt be metal either. Again, neoglism isnt excepted on Wikipedia. Your argument is represented in the article, but musical fact overides personal neoglism. Leyasu 13:36, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Not true. I didn't say anything of the sort. How my original comment would claim that the genre examples you listed aren't metal is beyond me.

Then again, metal is a complex genre. I can't think of a single person who could possibly know a definite definition of the genre, that could give a point balnk "hit or miss" response to band examples. To understand metal requires developing a feel for the power behind the lyrics and music. This trait isn't shown in most nu metal bands, which is why they're not considered metal. -D14BL0 08:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Genres are defined by their characteristics, not how much dedication, personal merit/energy or feeling their is in the lyrics or music. As long as a band meets the characterstics of something, then it is that. Nu Metal uses elements of varying metal genres with various pop/rock genres. Thus its a fusion-genre. It is not wholey metal, nor wholey anything else. Discriminating against it because it doesnt fit wholey into something you like, doesnt agree with your view, or plainly just because you dont like it, is called Neoglism. Ley Shade 08:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

What he's saying is that nu metal doesn't descend from the same stock as true heavy metal. Dysfunktion 22:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

That is a fair comment, however true is a neoglism i dont accept. I will however agree, that it did indeed not start from the same score of origins as most of the cumulative metal scene, which reflects in its very different and easily accesable nature. Leyasu 01:04, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

What I see on this discussion is a lot of biased comments towards the terminology of the name. IMO, Heavy Metal fans should learn that it is or isn't "Metal" just because they like it or not. What about Funk Metal? It's a perfectly acceptable music style, as well as Nu-Metal. However, both genres have far less elements of "true metal" than Power/Gothic/Doom/Black Metal is because it has other influences than metal. Calling Limp Bizkit "Metal" would be a HUVE mistake, on the other hand, calling it "Nu Metal", wouldn't, because they WERE, directly or indirectly, influeced by the "true metal" bands. And I said "directly or indirectly". They are borrowing Metal elements, they're not taking the entire concept or misleading metal fans by considering thenselves or being considered "nu metal". THX :D --BlackLynx 22:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I second BlackLynx who couldnt of really put it anymore simply. Leyasu 22:47, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

D14BL0, please stop trying to "rebel" this is an encylopedia. Saying "Unless you want to change the rules of metal, yourselves, please stop classifying nu metal as such.".. is ironic and then saying Megadeth is a metal band, Thrash is influenced by Hardcore punk which the first metal bands were not, just as Nu-metal was influenced by hip-hop which the first metal bands were not.

If nu-metal isn't metal, neither is Megadeth or Thrash. They are both subgenres. Metal is a subgenre of hard rock, bands include; Black Sabbath, Led Zepplin, Blue Cheer, Deep Purple, and others, you may need to cast aside your Iced Earth albums and discover these bands before you understand what metal actually is. - Deathrocker 18:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Good points... this is an encyclopedia and metal has many branches, nu-metal definitely included in one of them. KoRn's debut album, which is credited with creating the genre, clearly makes use of many metal techniques, hence it also being listed in one of the 50 'heaviest albums of all time.' musikxpert May 8, 2006

Maxcap's edits

I tried to condense the article a bit, the "definition" section was pretty redundent with the "history" an "musical" traits sections, so I moved a bit of it into the history section, and renamed that section "overview".

I also tried to trim down the multiple references to the controversy over whether or not it is "metal", I feel that it makes the article more neutral. If someone can find good sources, the controversy might deserve it's own article. maxcap 02:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

A very proficient and well done edit. Perhaps you could do the same with the instrumental definations as well? Leyasu 02:49, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll see what I can do about that section. maxcap 02:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

MegaDEATH?

Please change to Megadeth. I think it would be fair enough to add, also, that a lot (most?) of True Metal fans do not like and/or consider this genre to be Metal at all.

The article isn't a soapbox, and wikipedia isn't written for "true metal" fans, it's written for everyone.It's mentioned a few times that peolple try to distance themselves from the term. A seperate article regarding the controversy would be nice if it can remain neutral. maxcap 03:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The idea for all these articles is to try and write them from a general objective perspective. These arguments about "true metal" are usually ridiculous. And everytime someone uses the phrases, I can't help but think of a cheesy Manowar album cover (people familiar with bad album covers probably know which one I am referring to). I can understand the usage of "conventional heavy metal", "traditional metal" or even plain old "heavy metal" in relation to other forms of metal, but the construction of true metal largely strikes me as being used in order to render what is not "true metal" as somehow "not right". I'm no fan of nu metal (I stopped listening to Korn around 2000) but here I am putting aside my distaste and trying to improve the article. WesleyDodds 10:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

They might be ridiculous, but the fact is that "True Metal" is a term widely used by many fans of the Metal genre, with the purpose of disagreeing with what "is not right" to them, namely rap and alternative fusions with Metal.

Stating that a lot (maybe not *all*) of "Traditional" Metal bands and listeners don't consider the nu-metal genre to be Metal is not a subjective matter, it is just a fact. A researcher of the Metal genre would probably would like to know this kind of information. There is a clear distinction between what is considered "True/Traditional/whatever" Metal and nu-metal. The label "True" Metal (in the original post) was just a way to distinguish between both genres which are clearly different. Call it "Traditional" or whatever you like, it is only a way to make the difference clear. It also true that a lot of Metal listeners *do* believe in the term "True Metal" and that it IS used, and that doesn't either compromise the article at all... it is just something that it is true, whether you like it or not or find it ridiculous. I don't ask that the article talks thrash about the nu-metal genre (that's not the point at all) nor that it says that "True" Metal rules the planet; but perhaps it would be nice for someone interested in the Metal culture to know about the general opinion of the "Traditional" Metal audience and musicians. That would favor "everyone" not just the "True Metal fans". Perhaps gathering a few resources (quotes) from band members from bands like Opeth, Death, etc. about the subject would help? Again, the objective is not to insult the nu-metal genre, but to make clear a general point of view from many musicians/fans of the "other" Metal genre.

There is no claim in the article that nu metal is true metal, or that it's fans and artists claim it. And it is listed in the fusion genre section of the genre box, which should be enough to set it apart as being "impure". I really think the "controversy" deserves it's own article, if someone can dig up reputable sources.maxcap 02:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Ill bring this up to Wesley, as he is working with several users on the general Metal article, and this 'True Metal' argument is one that ostracizes many forms of metal, not just Nu Metal. Ill speak to him about it sometime in the next few days. Leyasu 03:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

H.I.V. MC

Why do Korn and Deftones continue to be considered nu metal inspirators if Jonathan Davis and Chino Moreno don't rap? And, more important, why do I find Mike Shinoda the most unpleasant frontman in the history of rock (GO TO SLEEP, FORT MINOR!) ?

The problem is that there is a common perception that Nu metal = hip-hop influence. Surely a lot of Nu metal bands have it, but the term is more to describe a new wave of metal bands rather than specifically those with hip-hop influence, so it's not an absolute.

Anyways, Korn clearly bases their rhythms on hip-hop grooves, and have had guest appearances by Fred Durst and Ice Cube on their records. WesleyDodds 05:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Soulfly weren't Nu-Metal just because Fred Durst rapped on a track for their debut, it was their sound. I think the "hip hop influenced rhythm" argument is just plain wrong, since bands like American Head Charge (released a single, Just So You Know, with 13/8 timing!) really don't stick to this.

I think a better summing up, which I'd like to see integrated if anyone can be bothered, is that Nu Metal bands tend to have little mid range in their sound, using artificial harmonics and pitch shifting guitar effects to create a discordant, often extremely high pitched top end. The low end of the sound tends to involve playing minor-key melodies based on a sequence of individual notes, transposed into "power chords" (5th chords), often at high speeds enabled by a 1-step-downtuned bottom guitar string. This makes seemingly intricate chord work no more difficult than barring 3 strings with one finger at a time (Comparable to Keith Richards et. al. using open E tuning etc., especially for slide guitar use).

This sound is often juxtaposed by one or 2 slower, more peaceful & melodic tracks on an album (see Fear Factory, Mudvayne etc.). Feel free to call this wrong, then listen to a few seconds of Korn (Good God), Mudvayne (Death Blooms), American Head Charge (A Violent Reaction), Adema (Shoot the Arrows), and so on and so on... It's a common thread.

It's no secret that I dislike seeing Mudvayne and A.H.C. grouped in with this field due to my perception of their musical complexity, but as ever, WP isn't a soapbox, I know... It's just a shame that so many non-rap-metal acts get persumed to be just that, because of staccato vocals and a certain invented genre tag. I blame the kids ;) - "Hmmm, how can I sum up all my CDs for quick text-generation conversation? I know, I like 'nu metal and emo', that should cover it." Bleh. Skewer 09:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I was going to staighten out that guitar section a bit, I'm not unfamiliar with the terminology. In regards to tuning and tone (i.e. scooped mids) I think your pretty much right on, except for the "minor-key" bit which wouldn't give you more low end, but make the tonality more somber, alot of metal is minor keyed though. I don't neccessarily know if the use of multiple guitar tracks and artificial harmonics, are defining though, it's not exactly unique to nu metal. The pitch shifting thing (Digitech whammy?) maybe. Of course, I'm in no expert here because I'm no fan of the genre maxcap 13:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I found a source for the guitar stuff, plus some good interviews; gotta love amazon.com's search inside feature. I added the source to the article maxcap 19:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Most nu-metal I listen to is devoid of any hip-hop influences, aside from samples(which are present in many other types of music.) Frankly, the worst types of nu-metal are the ones which have (or continue to have) rapping, especially Linkin Park. 68.4.212.158 20:34, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Those bands you said are not metal...

They would be alternative metal or in other genres.

Nu Metal is not a real genre.

You may continue arguing pointlessly over all of this or you could stop trying to combine a bunch of unrelated bands together in a fake genre.

Fact; Nu Metal is a genre.

Fact; Genres are not defined by wether you dislike bands or disagree with the genre's existance << oh the irony!

Fact; This article shall remain.

Fact; These facts were made by the following user on the following date. Leyasu 01:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Nu metal may be a genre, but it is not a genre of metal.

Correct. Nu-metal is not a genre of metal, but a sidebranch that has become lumped too heavily in stereotype for many blinded metal fans to perceive it as such.musikxpert May 8, 2006

Article picture

I disagree with Korn as the article's main picture. They aren't as representative of the nu-metal sound as some other bands. I propose Papa Roach.68.4.212.158 20:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't even think the article needs a "main picture" (I certianly didn't add the image), but if there's going to be a representaive image for nu metal, it should be Korn or Limp Bizkit. They started the whole thing and have been its biggest bands and influences. WesleyDodds 10:44, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I vote for POD, but that's juss me ;) ~ A Rappa

Korn is one of the most popular nu-metal bands out there, but all the same, there could perhaps be a more sensible choice. Rage Against the Machine and Red Hot Chili Peppers were two of the first popular nu-metal bands, and Linkin Park and Limp Bizkit are (to my knowledge) the two best-selling acts. In response to the previous ideas, I'd like to see Papa Roach or P.O.D. with a pic on this article, but most consider them both to be one-hit wonders (or, perhaps ten-hit wonders). The only band that would be a more sensible choice to display than Korn would probably be the Bizkits, since they seem to be the two most influential nu-metal acts. Any thoughts? ^{|phantasy phanatik|talk|contribs|}

RATM AND RHCP NU METAL??? The former is closer to rap rock, the latter to funk rock, you idiot!!!

Uh, who the hell was that? But anyway, yes, while RHCP were an influence on many nu metal bands, they aren't considered nu metal (first time I've heard them called that, actually), and we have agreed that RATM aren't (you can look at other places in the discussion). Korn or Limp Bizkit are the two best choices. The most popular nu metal band? Or the "definitive"? --Switch 06:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

The most popular nu metal band? Unfortunately, Linkin Park. In fact, due to the perceptions "Nu metal=Rap Vocals" and "Nu Metal=Hip Hop Influences" (they are both very hateful to many) and the sells for their horrible debut album, the exact equation that defines the genre is NU METAL=MIKE SHI*NODA. LP sells even much more records than Korn and Limp Bizkit.

If you're only talking about record sales and mainstream popularity, yes. But many nu metal fans (get this:) derided them as sellouts (I thought it was funny) for reaching commercial success so quickly. Limp Bizkit are more popular to the nu metal crowd, as far as I know. Then again, Korn and Slipknot are more popular still. Unfortunately for this article, all the nu metal kids I know are going emo, so I can't use them as resources any more. I still say Korn (the definitive nu metal band) should stay there. --Switch 03:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry, Switch. I totally agree with you.

i would have said slipknot

WHAT is metal ?

First you should answer the basic question : "What is metal ?" and then dispute if nu-metal is metal. That is the basic problem of this topic - everyone thinks metal is diferent thing :)

btw. I like nu-metal and i dont care if it is or isn't true Metal, it's good music for me (as less comercial metal is, I love Mogadeth, Fear Factory, Sepultura, Biohazard, Soulfly same as Korn, Disturbed, Deftones, Orgy). I don't think I'm poser. I would be poser, if I would stop listening to nu-metal bands just to be "pure" metalist. If its comercial hard rock - ok. I like Godsmack too :)

You are completely right. It's just music, you either like it or you don't.

This is a little joke...

According to some love-obsessed girls, Korn's self-titled debut is bulldog p**p compared to Linkin Park's "Hybrid Theory".

That's true, but only because Korn sucks.

No. They both suck, but anything by Linkin Park sucks far far more.

--203.208.72.234 11:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Do not ask me! By the way, what do you think about Limp Bizkit's "Significant Other"?

Origin of the term

I remvoed this from the article because it seems rather questionable.

The first actual use of the name "Nu-Metal" was a sub-genre category first seen at Rasputin Records in Berkeley, CA during the 1990s, a well respected music store where many bands we know today, have become famous from. Rasputin's was one of the first major record store chains to actively seek hardcore and rare Metal music from around the world (even as far as selling indie demos at retail). When their collection jumped from 1 small shelf with about 2 dozen bands, to 12 shelf long isles with hundreds of bands (both labels and indie), they began to separate the styles of metal they had in stock. From Black, Death, Grind, Thrash, Folk, Power, Industrial and a lot more. As a joke, one of the now ex-employees came up with the "Nu-Metal" sub-genre name that was supposed to stand for "Neutered-Metal", as she said "It's like Metal that had it's balls cut off." because it didn't have all the sounds that would have made it real Metal, thus they used it. Rasputin also did a lot of work on the live scene with many bands (local and afar), getting them known, putting on shows, making record deals become reality and getting them signed on with the store for promotional deals. When local bands that played the the style similar to "Nu", they adopted the sub-genre name and put on "Nu-Metal" shows around the Bay. And thanks to the rising popularity of the fast growing internet at the time, the sub-genre name traveled fast and became used quite liberally throughout the music scene. Since then the "Nu-Metal" moniker officially stuck on with the industry. Very few people back then actually knew where the "Nu" came from or what it was supposed to mean. Most figured it was just a rebellious way of saying "New Metal" as in a new sub-genre. WesleyDodds 12:34, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

True, I'm glad you removed it... the whole thing seemed kind of dubious, more like an urban legend than anything else.--Nargos 17:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

This article and related articles need major reworkings

The Nu metal article is horribly POV. The last sentence of the intro's negativity introduces the subject as bad. Instead, the criticisms should be left to only the criticisms section, which should also be moved further down the page. Additionally, the article makes Korn and Limp Bizkit seem much more important in the genre than they are. The definition of nu metal should be expanded more, and we should define alternative metal, rap metal, and nu metal better to make the articles more cohesive.Theunknown42 22:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I think the Criticisms section needs to be retitled, simply because when I wrote the bulk of the article it was meant to be a straight history and not a separate section. What parts are POV to you? WesleyDodds 03:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Death Metal????

Strange that Leyasu, who herself admits that she dislikes death metal, would insist that there is any influence of death metal on nu-metal. Whne you don't like a genre, chances are you know very little about it. I hate punk rock and hip-hop, myself, but I will also admit that I have limited to no kn owledge about them due to my dislike. That being said, I can tell you that there is absolutely *NO* relation between nu metal and death metal. I have changed it to "hardcore punk", as I feel that it is the most appropriate. If anyone disagrees please state your opinion here: which genere, according to you, would have sonic smililarities with nu metal? --Nargos 03:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted it. The genre doesnt have similarities in scene. It has sonic similarities musically, in the way the guitar is often played. Also, just becaue i dislike something, doesnt mean i know nothing about it. Such a claim is a 'straw man attack', so please refrain from making them outside of open POV comments. Also while i remember to do so, WesleyDodds also cited a source for the claim, which means your not allowed to delete it without provided a contradicting source, as without doing so your violating WP:CITE.Ley Shade 08:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC

Could you show which source claims that nu metal has sonic similarities with death metal? PS: sorry about the attack, I was just in a bad mood last night (I had read the Heavy Metal article and noticed how it was desecrated by Deathrocker), therefore, I wish to keep this discussion as civil as possible. We should both refrain from pulling the "vandalism" and "POV" card. Therefore, I kindly ask you: could you show the the citation of which you speak?--Nargos 17:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

If you message the user WesleyDodds and ask him for it, he should be able to give it to you first hand. Dont worry about the attack, it happens when people are in less than angelic temperments. As i said, ask WesleyDodds for it, if he cant provide yew directly with it, ill go dig it up from the serial vandalism that this page has naturally attracted. Ley Shade 17:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Found the reference. However, I think I just might add a little citation mark to it, so that it may show people that this is not merely Wikipedian inbterpretation. I still disagree that there are sonic similarities with death metal, therefore I say that a citation actually added right next to that statement should be in order. --Nargos 18:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

The citation was there, it was probally knocked off when Deathrocker and Danteferno tag teamed to POV push on the article. Ley Shade 18:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Fear Factory are a major influence on Nu-Metal. So are Sepultura. Slayer are often credited as an influence, although I'm not certain of the veracity of those particular claims. So yes, death metal is definitely an influence. --Switch 09:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, Nargos' snivelling about genres he does not have knowledge of aside. On Headbanger’s Ball, Jonathan Davis (vocalist of Korn) claimed that he was influenced by Cannibal Corpse, and I think he was actually wearing a CC t-shirt at the time. - Deathrocker 21:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Meteora link

Ok, once this article is unlocked someone needs to update the Meteora link to "Meteora (album)". Thiseye 01:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a lot that needs to be done. I need to become a sysop so that I can unlock it. — Phantasy Phanatik | talk | contribs 08:32, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

tool is nu-metal, it's not rock or sometj+hing like it, it's metal...

jesus christ... what's wrong with you.. i listen to tool maybe a year and everywhere i read: "tool is nu-metal" this is the first time i heard that tool is, well, rock... listen to someone who knows about music... ...

Well, there you go ladies and gentlemen. You can't argue those facts. maxcap 15:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

come on guys who says you get to decide what is and isnt 'metal' your opinions dont matter you are probably all pimply faced teenagers like me with no background in music (unlike me). nu metal is metal otherwise it would not have the word metal in its name! not to mention ... come on its totally metal! metal is in the ear of the beholder! rock on \,,/