What genre is St. Anger?

TheHeavyMetalCat wrote: This is going really off topic here. But to throw my opinion in I think we should use the more common name. Which is Heavy Metal.

Warthur wrote: What the site calls itself doesn't control or affect the fact that "metal" and "heavy metal" are used as synonyms by a lot of people, though. Are we naming the genres to be clear to us, or to be clear to new people stumbling across the site?

Having a sub-genre called just melodic metal wouldn't solve the problem though. It might make it even worse.

An issue with the current setup is that some have tried to push bands like this into power metal. If we has melodic metal we might get the reverse start to happen.

There's no perfect solution to this, which is why I stand by that we should stick to what is most correct. And that's just having Heavy Metal on Metal Music Archives because the site itself is not called Heavy Metal Music Archives (which would justify the current name).

Plus if there's a group of acts in there which a) have a recognisable, distinct common sound and b) aren't really following the traditions of the heavy metal subgenre that sounds like an argument for melodic metal as a subgenre. Especially if they describe themselves that way.

I see your point, but some collabs have in the past objected to the more modern sounding (so called melodic metal) bands being placed in the sub-genre for not being 'traditional enough' which in my view is wrong.

But more to the point, 'heavy metal' on its own is the more used name. I know some prefer to say traditional heavy metal to differentiate from the genre as a whole, but it's more correct to say 'metal' is the genre as a whole and 'heavy metal' is a sub-genre.

We're talking about a re-name only, not a change in how the sub-genre is run.

Hey just so we're clear on something (not saying that anyone has implied anything) I didn't start this topic to contest the album's placement on MMA. It's just that so many different sites list the album as a different genre and I was curious about what everyone thought. I actually assumed the collab version of this discussion would have been done long ago and that thrash had been settled on.

Though as no one here does consider it thrash maybe it should be moved.

I see it as alternative metal myself. Alternative means "outside the norm" but not weird enough for avantgarde or progressive. While nu metal may have been an influence it's not that either becaue they keep some ties to thrash compositional approaches even if the familiarities had been deemphasized. I actually like it better than most as well, much better than the 90s output after the black album

666sharon666 wrote: We've been talking about asking M@X to drop the 'traditional' part of the sub-genre's name. Just have Heavy Metal. There's a lot of stuff including many modern bands that definitely aren't alternative metal that fit there, so dropping the traditional part of the name makes a lot of sense.

We've been talking about asking M@X to drop the 'traditional' part of the sub-genre's name. Just have Heavy Metal. There's a lot of stuff including many modern bands that definitely aren't alternative metal that fit there, so dropping the traditional part of the name makes a lot of sense.

I'd take St. Anger in heavy metal over thrash metal any day. I'm more neutral on the heavy vs alternative argument though. Either one works for me.

Edited by 666sharon666 - 14 Feb 2017 at 9:27am

Speaking from a point of experience as well as considering the time frame the album was released in, St. Anger is not alternative metal. Thrash isn't correct either though. Personally what I'm leaning towards is plain Heavy but I'm not exactly qualified to speak on the behalf of something like groove mainly because of my similar lack of knowledge. Khaliq may be able to better explain his feelings towards his groove opinion but that aside trad. is my personal best bet.

Trad is just more all encompassing than alternative metal, especially seeing as in 2003 alternative metal was still a derivative form of it's more recent self, with more post-grunge and alternative rock elements. Sure it's more diverse now but in the early 2000s alt metal was actually quite stagnant. Traditional goes back much longer and similarly can have many diverse sounds lumped under it. Just my opinion.