Talk:Nu metal/Archive 2

Glassjaw?

I would like to ask why are Glassjaw in the article among the list of bands who were the most popular in the genre? Not only Glassjaw never played Nu Metal, as they actually played Post-Hardcore, but they don't even have anything to do with Nu Metal. Could someone either clarify why they are present in the article or delete them from it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.169.165 (talk) 16:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

This Article Needs Work

According to this article, Nu-Metal is some mish-mash of alternative metal combined with Thrash and hip-hop influences.

Fine. But it then goes on to call Disturbed and System of a Down Nu-metal, without ever explaining how they fit into the Nu-metal Tag.

IF we are going to call SOAD and Disturbed Nu-Metal, so be it, but at least define what makes them Nu-metal because so far, there is nothing that fits the original definition of Nu-metal.

D33PPURPLE (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)D33PPURPLE

People need to stop complaining about this Genre

Everybody keeps saying that Nu-Metal doesn't exist or its an insult to the bands that are classified in that genre. Too bad!

All I know is that when I hear a song on the radio and its Nu Metal, I can decipher that it is nu metal from the sound of it. This means that all of the music classified as Nu Metal does have enough of a difference from other genres(Alternative Metal and all those other annoying, way too blunt, terms.)

Also, I would like to know why somebody deleted the part on this article that talks about the comeback of Nu metal(Which if you take a look around, its already happening).

I mean, cmon. Limp Bizkit is back together with thier original lineup, Korn is producing a new album with Ross Robinson(The original Producer that is known as "The Godfather of Nu Metal"), Flymore is a sick new band that resides in this Genre, Spineshank is back together, etc. There are so many obvious signs that Nu Metal is coming back. And its great because I am very sick of this Emo Garbage on the radio. And I'm tried of hearing all this generic metal as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.139.103.133 (talk) 10:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

• That's nice and all, but do you have any statements relevant to the editing/improvement of this article? Maybe any suggestions on adding citations and sourced material to the article so that the discussion of the "musical elements" doesn't sound like something written by someone who was making it up as they were going along? (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 08:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC))

• I cited musical material. But it got reverted, god knows why. I wanted to contribute to making this article better but people need to chill out with the Reverting. It would be better if people would just Look through the actual edit, remove PARTS, and make it better.--75.139.103.133 (talk) 22:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Article status (2009)

You probably know my opinion on the subject of the article from its last deletion nomination. As it is, I've got to say, the article has not improved one bit since it was last nominated. In fact, it has likely gotten worse. There are only a few citations, and major segments of the article are entirely unreferenced. There still seems to be a lot of original research, and it seems to repeat a lot of the same sentences. In the "Mainstream popularity and decline", there is a list of bands tagged as being a part of the first wave of the scene, but there is absolutely no references to back up any of the bands listed (and one of these listed bands is wrongly tagged - some of the others might be as well, but I removed one band that is factually verified as performing against the hardcore punk scene, not the scenes of the various other bands listed). There's absolutely no factual backup for any of the information regarding the supposed characteristics of the genre. Basically, the article asserts that this is an actual genre, but gives readers no reason to believe that this is true. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 01:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC))

Indeed. I have brought this up earlier, but it is apparently too notable to be deleted. The article needs A LOT of work but no one seems to care about it.

The article is horrible but people refuse to have it deleted claiming that it is very notable yet make no effort to make it a decent article. Xanthic-Ztk (talk) 12:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Why does everybody bitch about the greatest things in life? For instance, pepsi blue was great, and everyone hated it. It seems its the same way with Nu Metal.--75.139.103.133 (talk) 12:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

So the article is a mess. What, so tell me, does that have to do with deleting it? ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont |

 ~ 15:34, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, its stupid to even request deletion for an article of a musical genre that has existed for over ten years. Should we delete Post-Grunge as well? How about deleting Rapcore? It would be the same as deleting this article. If something isn't perfect you don't throw it away, you improve it.--75.139.103.133 (talk) 16:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Rapcore doesn't read as poorly as this article does. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 08:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC))

So? My question still stands. You may want to read WP:DP (or, if you already have, read more carefully). ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 07:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

You might want to read this article. It reads like gibberish. If funk rock, a legitimate article, could end up through the deletion nomination process and not make it, why do you think that this article would? None of the statements in this article are verifiable, and the term itself is no longer in use. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 10:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC))

Does that mean we have to delete every article that is "no longer in use". Portillo (talk) 12:52, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

• Neologisms are certainly worth looking into. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 23:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC))

NU Metal is a Genre and deserves respect

I do not understand why so many people are so angry against this term... The same dumb people here on wiki call Korn "Rock". Learn to classify thing PLEASE. PLEASE!

If Wikipedia needs anything it would be non-condescending editors....--75.139.107.252 (talk) 10:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Deletion

If this article gets nominated and actually deleted, I'll just take the backup of it and put it up again. I dont want to insult anybody but it is very difficult for me to understand how your minds work sometimes....--75.139.107.252 (talk) 08:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

If you put this page back up because it gets deleted, than it will just get deleted again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.22.112.54 (talk) 17:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

I'd like to thank whoever updated this article with new information. Very informative and accurate. Keep it up!--75.139.107.252 (talk) 21:44, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Disturbed

In the Mainstream Popularity section, it mentions Disturbed as being one of the members of the first wave of nu metal bands. I thought Disturbed became popular at the turn of the century with its major-label debut The Sickness. Is there a reason that it is listed where it is? Obamamaniac (talk) 22:40, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

In regards to bands changing their sound

Although some nu metal bands have changed their sound I think this article takes it too far, for example Korn and Slipknot have not changed their sound from nu metal to something totally different, Korn is still nu metal and Slipknot is still mainly nu metal. Same thing with System of a Down, there sound has not relatively changed either. Mudvayne were barely nu metal and have had the same sound since. However, I believe Papa Roach and Disturbed should be the only nu metal bands mentioned as having dramatically changing their sound from nu metal to something else and possibly Staind. In regards to Linkin Park they have always been more alternative rock than most the typical nu metal band and have only switched to primary genre being nu metal and secondary genre being alternative rock to now being primary genre alternative rock and secondary genre nu metal so I wouldn't really say they have abandoned their nu metal sound.Xx1994xx (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

In regards to bands changing their sound

Although some nu metal bands have changed their sound I think this article takes it too far, for example Korn and Slipknot have not changed their sound from nu metal to something totally different, Korn is still nu metal and Slipknot is still mainly nu metal. Same thing with System of a Down, there sound has not relatively changed either. Mudvayne were barely nu metal and have had the same sound since. However, I believe Papa Roach and Disturbed should be the only nu metal bands mentioned as having dramatically changing their sound from nu metal to something else and possibly Staind. In regards to Linkin Park they have always been more alternative rock than most the typical nu metal band and have only switched to primary genre being nu metal and secondary genre being alternative rock to now being primary genre alternative rock and secondary genre nu metal so I wouldn't really say they have abandoned their nu metal sound.Xx1994xx (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

• I removed the statement. I'd also like to point out that there are sources stating that System of a Down is not nu metal. (Sugar Bear (talk) 21:51, 18 February 2010 (UTC))
• Well System of a down isn't necessarily nu metal as being their primary genre but they were definitely part of the nu metal movement although they are mainly experimental/alternative metal, kind of like how Alice In Chains is mainly alternative metal although they were part of the grunge movement.Xx1994xx (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:27, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

Heavy metal genre?

There seems to be some debate about wheather nu metal is a genre of heavy metal. If its not, then why is it in the heavy metal template and why is it discussed on the heavy metal article? Portillo (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Heavy metal genre?

There seems to be some debate about wheather nu metal is a genre of heavy metal. If its not, then why is it in the heavy metal template and why is it discussed on the heavy metal article? Portillo (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Heavy metal genre?

There seems to be some debate about wheather nu metal is a genre of heavy metal. If its not, then why is it in the heavy metal template and why is it discussed on the heavy metal article? Portillo (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Heavy metal genre?

There seems to be some debate about wheather nu metal is a genre of heavy metal. If its not, then why is it in the heavy metal template and why is it discussed on the heavy metal article? Portillo (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Heavy metal genre?

There seems to be some debate about wheather nu metal is a genre of heavy metal. If its not, then why is it in the heavy metal template and why is it discussed on the heavy metal article? Portillo (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Heavy metal genre?

There seems to be some debate about wheather nu metal is a genre of heavy metal. If its not, then why is it in the heavy metal template and why is it discussed on the heavy metal article? Portillo (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Heavy metal genre?

There seems to be some debate about wheather nu metal is a genre of heavy metal. If its not, then why is it in the heavy metal template and why is it discussed on the heavy metal article? Portillo (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

-because it's a misnomer. it was a term used by journalists to refer to a post-grunge and alt. rock that incorporated influences from funk and hip hop. i don't see in any way how that qualifies it as 'metal' just because some idiot in a journalistic office who had no musical knowledge regarding heavy metal decided to call it so and it stuck.

meteora

would it be worth mentioning that Meteora, Linkin Park's 2nd album, was still successful in 2003, after alot of nu metal dropped in sales? Claycrow (talk) 19:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

California

It's not relevant to mention bands coming from California. The heavy metal music article doesn't try to trace heavy metal's origins to England.--WTF (talk) 23:06, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

It's just one sentence and it's sourced like. If there is sources stating a more a more specific origin for metal than "England and America", then that could be added to that article. Munci (talk) 12:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Nu metal sounds angry?

I think we should edit the characteristics. Add something. I have looked at some nu metal songs. Plenty of them sounded very energetic or angry.

 Not done − Wikia sites are not admissible as reliable sources, and neither is original research – Confession0791 ^talk 03:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Grunge and alt-metal?

"It is a fusion genre which combines elements of alternative metal with other genres, including grunge and hip hop."

You cannot combine "grunge" and "alternative metal". Alternative metal combines "alternative rock" and "heavy metal", "Grunge" is a subgenre of "alternative rock", therefore "alternative metal" already fuses grunge and metal. Therefore, nu-metal cannot combine grunge with metal. If you want references go to the Wikipedia pages of "alternative metal" and "alternative rock". Metalfan72 (talk) 17:36, 21 May 2012 (UTC) grunge and alternative rock are the same thing, and alternative metal already fuses metal with alternative rock, so i'm replacing grunge with industrial in that line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by I call the big one bitey (talk • contribs) 20:01, 3 August 2012 (UTC) Do you realize how that proposition sounds? Alternative rock is an umbrella term. All encompassing. If it's not the current commercial sound or a previously established Genre (punk) then it is alternative rock. Alternative metal is also an umbrella term. There are no Musical characteristics to either genre. Grunge while loosely defined is defined. Nu Metal is one such Alternative metal Genre. There have been combinations of nu metal with grunge. Such a combination is exactly what you are speaking of as impossible.198.45.184.25 (talk) 10:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Pop rock in origins?

This sounds iffy. There's only one source for this addition, and it seems to me that this was added without consensus. Secondly, the source appears to be an essay by a student, which is really not a reliable source. Thirdly, the term "pop rock" does not appear anywhere in the text of the essay. Rather, it compares the vocal style of some bands in the genre to pop music, rather than pop rock. Also, a comparison, especially by a student, does not equal a genre having "origins" in this genre.

Nu metal's origins lies in alternative metal, as many of the bands in this genre started out in the alt-metal scene, and many alt-metal bands, like Faith No More and Mr. Bungle are cited as influences on nu metal bands. Other genres may have influenced these bands, but the genre largely originated in alt metal. But it might not be constructive to debate the meaning of the phrase "stylistic orgins". My main complaint here is that pop rock is a dubious addition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.150.196 (talk) 19:24, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Criticism and controversy

Nu metal has often been criticized by people who have been familiar with old school heavy metal and heavy metal subgenres. It has been referred to as not "true" metal and the genre had controversies and fighting over the genre being heavy metal or not. While Korn are the pioneers of the nu metal genre, here is what they had to say: "I remember when were coming out we were fighting being called a metal band because we weren't a metal band, we were something that wasn't classifiable," Davis says. "Then they came up with 'nu-metal' but that's still cheesy. It's frustrating."

why thrash metal and hardcore punk cannot be added to stylistic origins ???

if the fragments from the article are like this:

"Bands associated with nu metal derive influence from a variety of diverse styles, including electronic music, funk, glam metal, gothic rock, grunge, hardcore punk, hip hop, industrial metal, jazz, post-punk and synthpop.[1][2][9][14][15] Nu metal also derives influences from multiple sub-genres of heavy metal including rap metal, funk metal, alternative metal and thrash metal.[1][2][9]" and

"By the latter 90s, nu metal bands were playing a combination of thrash metal, hip hop, industrial, hardcore punk and grunge.[1]"

so why it cannot be added?? i want to know, if there are sources used (look at numbered sources 1, 2 and 9 (at the article, not talk page), so it must be added. --82.139.5.13 (talk) 09:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC) nu metal is influenced by groove metal aka post thrash metal, and that already covers the thrash metal/hardcore influence in nu metal therefor there's no reason to add thrash metal or hardcore to stylistic origins — Preceding unsigned comment added by I call the big one bitey (talk • contribs) 11:08, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

You are correct in saying that there are sources which support the inclusion of hardcore punk. This was changed by the following user: [1] and I do not know why. Munci (talk) 18:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, But you forget about thrash metal. The source numbered 1 (from Allmusic, at article)and 2, 9 also names it as influence --82.139.5.13 (talk) 12:33, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah sure add it if you want. Munci (talk) 07:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Gold Cobra and 2010s nu metal

After Limp Bizkit just declared they are over on NME it uses this quote: "Last December, Limp Bizkit said goodbye to their old record label, Interscope, following poor album sales from their last LP Gold Cobra". This is contentious with the text in the 2010s history section: "Gold Cobra, was a commercial success, selling 63,000 copies in the United States and peaking at number 16 on the Billboard 200 and the album has received mostly positive reviews. [2] Jonjonjohny (talk) 22:52, 17 August 2012 (UTC)