What's with the lack of any metal bands being tracked by Metacritic?
It's not a lack of reviews. A look at Opeth's recent Ghost Reveries shows a plethora of reviews from All Music Guide, Alternative Press, Pitchfork Media, PopMatters, Stylus Magazine, Sputnikmusic, and more. Same goes for bands like Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree, and others.
Is it a lack of being mainstream? The music I see being added on the site today seems to be mostly indie rock/pop--most of which you'd never hear on the radio. Bands like Dream Theater and Opeth are nearly household names to anyone with a passing interest in that type of music.
While I have enjoyed the lack of metal dominating every discussion (see: RYM, almost any other music community on the web) you do have a point. Hey Music Editor, what gives?
------ Peanut Butter Pudding Surprise!!
Posts: 1970 | Location: ATL-abouts. | Registered: 24 October 2006
I've kind of wondered the same thing. We've had similiar discussions before, too. I believe there was a "Why Is Metacritic so Indie?" thread, which I can't seem to locate now. Anyone know where that one is?
The best explanation I have is that you've gotta appeal to your audience. We don't have a lot of metal fans that come around here. You could argue that they might if MC started including some metal, but I agree with Chamberk to some degree - it seems like you can discuss metal at many other places. There also is a Metal discussion forum here if you're interested, jasonn. (This should be moved there, by the way.)
I agree that skipping releases from Dream Theater and Opeth does seem a little bit extreme. Those are two of the most important and well-known metal bands around.
Posts: 1376 | Location: Valparaiso, IN | Registered: 01 July 2006
Originally posted by less_success: I've kind of wondered the same thing. We've had similiar discussions before, too. I believe there was a "Why Is Metacritic so Indie?" thread, which I can't seem to locate now. Anyone know where that one is?
_____________________________ Weep to Water the Trees.
"This is my main concern with Obama; what if he has been groomed since childhood to blend in with the zionists and infidels? What if he has been led along by a radical islamic terrorist organization and positioned to become an influential politician?
What if Obama gets into White House and turns out to be some crazy muslim terrorist? What do we do then? We'll be pretty screwed. It could happen." -- by some fucking nutjob
Posts: 1996 | Location: The Noog, TN | Registered: 08 April 2007
Originally posted by less_success: The best explanation I have is that you've gotta appeal to your audience.
Well Metacritic doesn't have a problem appealing to every imaginable audience by covering virtually every movie that's being released as well as virtually every video game, irregardless of genre.
You can always go to the Metacritic Music editor and ask for them to add an album. I believe MC also pays a lot of attention to what we discuss and since not much metal is discussed (I listen to a fair amount but not enough to discuss it with any degree of knowledge) then they aren't going to cover that much Metal. There's a lot of music out there.
And p.s. they cover pretty much every mainstream movie imaginable, notice that it lacks a lot indie films: because they're obscure!
Originally posted by Jglass: Well, it's been said before:
You can always go to the Metacritic Music editor and ask for them to add an album. I believe MC also pays a lot of attention to what we discuss and since not much metal is discussed (I listen to a fair amount but not enough to discuss it with any degree of knowledge) then they aren't going to cover that much Metal. There's a lot of music out there.
And p.s. they cover pretty much every mainstream movie imaginable, notice that it lacks a lot indie films: because they're obscure!
I've sent quite a few PMs to the Metacritic Music Editor (via the Contact Us link at the top of the page), including plenty of links to reviews of the aforementioned bands and many more.
There certainly is a lot of music out there. Just as there a lot of movies. And games. And while Metacritic definitely can't cover those indie films due to obscurity, the same excuse can't be used for the exclusion of the metal genre. I could understand if we were talking about obscure bands or out-of-print, limited-edition releases.
The loosely-defined metal genre is quite significant and Metacritic's ignorance of it is somewhat baffling.
Originally posted by mark f: I guess you missed this thread?
There is a new Metacritic Music Editor. Do you want me to forward those two requests above or anything else?
I caught the thread awhile back, but I don't see how that pertains to this.
If you could forward the new editor this, that would be great. More important than giving the editor specific artists, albums, and reviews though, is to let him/her know that Metacritic should take a bigger initiative in establishing reviews in genres other than "Indie/Rock" (metal particularly).
Yeah, I'd love to see more metal reviews, such as in South Africa, Iraq...sorry, couldn't resist. Seriously, though, even some "major" metal bands, for example, Pig Destroyer, Cephalic Carnage, and Agorophobic Nosebleed are nowhere to be found here. There are also some indi-metal/noise groups that I'm really surprised haven't turned up yet. Parts & Labor comes to mind, and that's from a fairly major indie label. What gives?
Well, let me take a shot at answering myself. I think the reason is less to do with MC, and more to due with the lack of review sources for metal bands. How many can you think of? There are some websites dedicated to reviewing metal, but I suppose these are not "official" enough for MC to compile. Pitchfork actually does a decent job of reviewing metal bands (usually the good ones, but not always). The other major reason for lack of metal coverage on MC may simply be that there is a lack of quality metal compared to other genres. I say this as a metal fan. I can count on one or two hands the metal bands I know of that are actually worth keeping track of. I already listed a few here.
Posts: 736 | Location: Ain'T it stiLl obvious? | Registered: 22 August 2006
Originally posted by ezkcdude: Yeah, I'd love to see more metal reviews, such as in South Africa, Iraq...sorry, couldn't resist. Seriously, though, even some "major" metal bands, for example, Pig Destroyer, Cephalic Carnage, and Agorophobic Nosebleed are nowhere to be found here. There are also some indi-metal/noise groups that I'm really surprised haven't turned up yet. Parts & Labor comes to mind, and that's from a fairly major indie label. What gives?
Well, let me take a shot at answering myself. I think the reason is less to do with MC, and more to due with the lack of review sources for metal bands. How many can you think of? There are some websites dedicated to reviewing metal, but I suppose these are not "official" enough for MC to compile. Pitchfork actually does a decent job of reviewing metal bands (usually the good ones, but not always). The other major reason for lack of metal coverage on MC may simply be that there is a lack of quality metal compared to other genres. I say this as a metal fan. I can count on one or two hands the metal bands I know of that are actually worth keeping track of. I already listed a few here.
If you took a look, you'd see that metal bands are getting reviewed just as often, or nearly as often, as other indie bands. Pitchfork, Stylus, Q, Alternative Press, Sputnikmusic, PopMatters, All Music Guide, and many more review metal on a consistent basis. And I'm not talking about the obscure, "grindcore" or "metalcore" bands that you listed above (I wouldn't call them metal to be honest), but mainstream metal bands instead (or as close to mainstream as a metal band can get these days).
If you're seriously calling the bands I mentioned obscure, I'd love to hear your idea of what constitutes the metal mainstream these days...Oh, wait...Opeth and Dream Theater. Dude, you realize it's 2007, right?
Posts: 736 | Location: Ain'T it stiLl obvious? | Registered: 22 August 2006
Originally posted by ezkcdude: If you're seriously calling the bands I mentioned obscure, I'd love to hear your idea of what constitutes the metal mainstream these days...Oh, wait...Opeth and Dream Theater. Dude, you realize it's 2007, right?
You're right. They aren't obscure. I just sort of consider deathgrind/metalcore/grindcore/mallcore music to be the bastard child in relation to metal.
Originally posted by ezkcdude: Well, if we exclude those genres, I'm afraid there's not much quality left these days. Mastodon, Neurosis, any others...?
You're not serious, are you?
My point has little to do with metal and more to do with Metacritic ignoring genres that have a significant musical and cultural impact (popular jazz, progressive rock, and many other genres). Keep the thread on topic, please.
Unfortunately for both of us, I was being serious. In order for music to have a significant cultural impact or any impact really, it has to be good, doesn't it? Metal just isn't that good these days. I suppose you could make the same argument for anything on the radio, though. However, I hear more indie bands on the radio than metal bands. There just aren't many relevant metal bands today. You still didn't give me a list of metal bands you're listening to that are worth my time...
Posts: 736 | Location: Ain'T it stiLl obvious? | Registered: 22 August 2006
Yeah, i'm kind of agreeing with ezkcdude. I don't really see too many relevant metal bands out there right now except for Mastodon, System of a Down, Deftones and....I don't really know who else. There's great bands like Norma Jean, Poison the Well, Dillinger Escape Plan and Thrice that I really enjoy, but they are definitely not for everyone.
Originally posted by ezkcdude: There just aren't many relevant metal bands today. You still didn't give me a list of metal bands you're listening to that are worth my time...
Emperor, Sepultura, Megadeth, Testament, Dream Theater, Fates Warning, King's X, Queensryche, Voivod, Iron Maiden, Clutch, Porcupine Tree, King Diamond, Death, Opeth, Dimmu Borgir, Boris, Lacuna Coil, Blind Guardian, Iced Earth, Stratovarius, and I could go on ...
And who's to decide what's "relevant"? If you turn the other cheek to metal because "there aren't any good bands", then you are clearly a pretty ignorant, at least narrow-minded, little person.
Originally posted by ezkcdude: There just aren't many relevant metal bands today. You still didn't give me a list of metal bands you're listening to that are worth my time...
Emperor, Sepultura, Megadeth, Testament, Dream Theater, Fates Warning, King's X, Queensryche, Voivod, Iron Maiden, Clutch, Porcupine Tree, King Diamond, Death, Opeth, Dimmu Borgir, Boris, Lacuna Coil, Blind Guardian, Iced Earth, Stratovarius, and I could go on ...
And who's to decide what's "relevant"? If you turn the other cheek to metal because "there aren't any good bands", then you are clearly a pretty ignorant, at least narrow-minded, little person.
Dude, half the bands you listed are from the 1980's. You call that relevant? The only band you listed that is still relevant is Boris. I liked Megadeth...20 years ago. You need to move on.
Posts: 736 | Location: Ain'T it stiLl obvious? | Registered: 22 August 2006
