Talk:Technical Death Metal

message: I fixed up this article a lot.  I will be editting the band page a lot and be watching it if things are changed or added that are false.  I'm also going to work on how to minimize the metalcore references.--Daevin 19:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Majorly re-vamped 

message: DO NOT add no name bands. I am removing any band without proper linkage - why? Because this page gets badly spammed with false inofmration. And please don't change 'tech metalcore' to 'brutal technical death/grind' because I hate seeing that and usually people are just promoting their bands. --Ryouga 20:29, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Band list 

message: Tech metal needs to be removed and all info needs to be divided between Technical Death Metal, Progressive Metal and Math Metal/core.  Tech is more of a descriptive term while the three subgenres listed have an actual scene that have very few connections to the others, other then they are technical.  Any thoughts?
: I have cleaned it considerably. Edit out whatever you want, or improve it if you can. --Ryouga 01:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion for cleanup 

message: ...are not "tech metal".
 It is widely agreed that Mudvayne are a nu-metal band. I don't care if they call themselves "math metal". (I believe) it was Korn who came up with the term "pimp rock"...and we all know what genre they belong to...
 The Dillinger Escape Plan is metalcore. Certainly not "technical metal".
 Whoever's idea it was to merge a few sections together obviously made a bad move, as it seems to have drawn much confusion to this article. -Danteferno
Mudvayne may be considered math metal (they do sometimes use time signatures other than 4/4 and 3/2), but they certainly aren't "tech". Gofur 19:25, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mudvayne and The Dillinger Escape Plan... 

message: I removed questionable and outright erroneous additions (probably to pad the admittedly rather meagre list) like:
:Gordian Knots [sic]
:Nile (it's more straight-forward modern brutal death metal)
:Suffocation (old-school brutal death metal)
:Psychotic Waltz (progressive metal)
:
:I also added Behold... The Arctopus, one of the more important up-and-coming technical metal bands.
:
There are a few more I find a bit questionable, but they're fine for now until someone can add some more actual technical metal bands to this list.
I realize it's difficult to really classify this genre, because the style-forming bands really didn't sound that similar. What they share isn't immediately recognizable but subtle. The epithet "technical" is also somewhat subjective, since in many times it's tied to *difficulty to perform*, and that varies between musicians (and what non-musicians think; see: people claiming Zero Hour to be technical, when in fact their music in actuality is very simple).
Dying Fetus is not a "tech metal" band. They are Death Metal with math/tech/hard core influences.
:
I would define technical metal as metal that incorporates a variety of styles or techniques to create unpredictable music.  The technical term is most easily ascribed to death metal because it is most clearly defined in that genre.  Progressive seems to be an inter-changable word for technical when speaking of the general metal genre.  There are actually two distinct schools in death metal: avantgard and tempo.  The tempo goes best with the main names in technical death metal like Cryptopsy or Necrophagist while the avantgarde style would fit best with bands like Cynic or Alarum that have a certain mellowness that maintains the technicality in a way unique to its style.--Daevin 06:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bands 

message: "It is characterised by a show of skill"
Can this be elaborated on?  Is it that the focus of the music is often on a particular show of finesse (eg: a solo) or what?  Right now it might be read as "Tech Metal is more skillful than other bands."  Maybe just a little ambiguous; I'm out of my depth with this genre though (this wikipedia article is the first I've heard of it), so I'm refraining from editing. GeorgeBills 04:31, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Show of skill

message: I've tagged this article as needing a cleanup. It's also been added to the Wikipedia:Cleanup list. The article is definitely not encyclopedia material, although it does have the potential. Pertinent information needs to be kept together and it needs to flow. Also, is there anything that can be done with that list? Perhaps it could be turned into a category. Categories have automatic alphabetization and automatic grouping. :) Cparker 02:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup