Talk:Death metal/Archive 1

message: I'm no expert here, but surely the first paragraph isn't very encyclopaedic - the bit about simply having to grunt and smash an object and having no skill etc.  This is contradictory to content later in the article which suggests that Death Metal requires a high level of skill.  I'm surprised someone hasn't edited this bit already. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.80.193.160 (talk) 10:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Paragraph 

message: Considering various bands (Cradle of Filth, Lordi, Marilyn Manson, Slipknot, and black metal bands) are falsely identified as death metal by those unfamiliar to the genre etc., would it be safe to mention this in the article? - Dark Prime - 25th June 2006
I first remember the term "Death Metal" being ascribed to Hellhammer and similar bands on the 1984 Noise International comp called "Death Metal". 
See here: http://www.discogs.com/release/476432
- xtian5  13th Oct 2006
: Opeth being mentioned as a Death Metal band can be done away with, as well, as they're only considered DM for their vocals.--Korey Kaczynski 00:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Falsely categorised bands 

message: Its fairly obvious there are many mistakes in this page. The most obvious is Sepultura's exclusion from the key artists list, and their mention as a "thrash metal band". O.o WTF?! 
>>>Yes.  Let's list the mistakes.   1) Death metal is music.   2) People other than pimply-faced, testosterone soaked, teenage boys actually listen to it.  3) It is relevant.
Also Obituary get no mention...
What are you, stupid? Sepultura definitely is thrash not death
metal.
I'm sorry but he's right, Sepultura began as trash and as one of the founding bands progressed into death metal. To have them out of the key artists list is innacurate.
 
please visit this site for some reference material: http://www.anus.com/metal/db/labels.html
here is an exerpt from the site:
" Apocalypticism, which in speed metal bands had been a dire warning, was here a foundational assumption. As part rebel and part insurgent structuralist, metal broke the scale into broad tonal leaps and chromatic rhythm playing where the structure was the message, not the root note to which it was harmonized or the conventions of such construction followed; key is used carelessly if at all at focal points of intersecting themes in motif development, eschewing the cyclic silhouette of rock form. 
This was most clearly defined in the second generation of the new style, which began with Sepultura, Massacra, Possessed, Necrovore and Morbid Angel, whose music was both a radical primitivism and a futurist adaptation of classical theory."
Dismember for example, is a great band yet does not have half of the influencial impact that sepultura had on the development of this genre.
: the anus-site is pretentious and full of shit and certainly not a reliable source. And referring to Dismember, they (and its predecessor) w/ Grave and Entombed spawned that whole swedish thing in the late 80s and early 90s. Spearhead 21:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unqualified Editors 

message: We look at death metal as an artistic movement.
We start with its origins in hardcore and heavy metal, but point out where it differed, musically: narrative form.
We recognize that death metal is not a subgenre of heavy metal, but is substantially musically different, where heavy metal is a subgenre of rock.
Let's see what others think about those. www.anus.com 20:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions

message: If people stopped calling our web page "sub-par," the ANUS crew - who've been writing about death metal for over a decade - would be glad to fix this article.
For the record, I think ALL subgenres of death metal should be placed on this page. These are aesthetic variations without significant artistic or musical differentiation. And, drop NSBM. It's not a genre. It's a political tag, and the sooner people quit getting their panties in a knot over it, the sooner the kiddeez involved will realize the music is shit and bail out. 67.10.73.69 19:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: There is qualified information out there

message: Someone explain to me how this band is crucial to death metal or influential at all.156.34.212.21 01:55, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Bolt Thrower's been around for a long time, and influenced many, but they and I both think they're grindcore. 67.10.73.69 19:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:   BT were along with peers as Carcass and napalm death, the first bands to combine sheer brutality with with death / thrash metal and as such have influenced many other bands. BTW I don't see how any one can few them as grindcore anymore; their last 6 albums surely are pure death metal and have nothing to do with grind. Spearhead 12:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bolt Thrower in key artists

message: if describing death metal as disturbing is POV (I have an extensive death metal collection, BTW) than what WOULD  be a good way to point out that the vast majority of lyrics, if read and understood, would cause an average person to be disturbed? This clear tendancy toward the diabolical, deviant, abnormal, shocking and otherwise bothersome to grandma is an important fact to mention. I would like to hear an alternate suggestion. Are you a death metal afficionado yourself, snowspin? I'd reccomend having a glance at . Sam [Spade] 03:54, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Be sure to mention taht the average person is a fucking moron and a product of what Nietzsche called "slave revolt" (has nothing to do with black people). www.anus.com 03:23, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I have a small death metal collection. I think that, in this case, the situation is similar in methodology, if not scale, to Adolf Hitler and the classic example from NPOV - describe the lyrics, trust the people to say, "Hey. That's disturbing." Snowspinner 03:59, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this is a meta-issue. There are two basic questions, in my eyes. #1. Does any reasonable person disagree? (you may not see this as being of any import, but I might). #2. Is this relevent/needed? I would say that on AH, the repetition was not needed, and that here there is practically no content describing what these fellows care to sing about. I'll do my best to remedy this. Sam [Spade] 04:07, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Much improved. Good edit. Snowspinner 04:12, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  disturbing 

message: How can you say that black metal is closely related to death metal?? All black metal music are minimalistic and very limited in way compared to death metal.
: There is somekind of relation betveen them but not close. Venom is a example. Its more black metal but has many kinds of parts from death metal.
::Except that Venom is much older than modern death metal and musically isn't even related to black metal -- Dysfunktion 20:57, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know WHERE you guys are getting this from.  Venom has nothing to do with death metal.  Black metal was invented by (like many things in metal) Norweigan bands screwing up while emulating Venom (and stealing the term black metal in the process) and thus stumbling upon something new.  Venom isn't really black metal, but get it as an honorary title.  Sort of like Possessed with death metal.
A better statement would be that nlack metal and death metal had similar origins (ex. Venom)but went in radically different directions
The two hate eachother. No metalhead would get them confused. Morbid Angel got bombed by mall trolls in Europe. Also, BM needs some guitar lessons.
Both are EXTREME metal genres, so they ARE much or less related. The end of story. Nothingagainst 07:30, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black metal is not that closely related to death metal! 

message: I think the entry was well written. However i found that in the sub-genre section there was no mention of florida or new york death metal so i have added them. i believe at a minimum and entry on death metal does have to include something about florida especially if it mentions sweden. i also mention carcass's role in gore grind and added exhumed and impaled as they typify gore grind i believe. also i am not sure of slam death metal. i have never heard the term but it may be similar to new york death metal and they could be merged if this is tru. also i have added death thrash. i am not sure if what i wrote is entirely correct so i would like feedback.
also i was looking at the anus.com and it has a lot of detailed facts about the music and vocals. it has been written with a lot of technical details about music theory and more. it classifies the different song structures of the genres, different vocal styles, etc. someone here as asked about including the info on the various vocal styles. is this appropriate here? i would like an opinion.
i agree with most of this entry. i found the clarification of the early roots useful. also i believe something should be said about this: although death metal in definition must have grunted vocals and blast beats this is not always tru as some Entombed albums like clandestine do not have blast beats but they are death metal no less. (of course the newer death 'n' roll cds by them are NOT death metal.) there may even be examples of death metal without grunted vocals i do not know of. so this criteria should not be rigid but a generalized basis. more should be elaborated on the attitude and philosophy and maybe a classification of the lyrical styles would shed more light  for example the 4 main types of lyrics: satanic/religious (some pro-christian bands r DM), gory/medical (carcass), philosophical (death) and socio/political (napalm death.) i didnt want to change too much as i am nu here. but i felt that mention of florida was important. also i feel scot burns should be mentioned as the premier producer and those 2 famous studios (one in sweden, one in florida.) also the links to the various labels would be good and i could do it if you guys agree. and there is no mention of noise core as some bands do incoporate influences from death metal. i do know it is not death metal and even more distant than grind core.
also i believe lamb of god is NOT DM. it is thrash. i feel the latest testament album sounds more like death metal than LoG. it does have the growls sometimes but otherwise it is thrash. slayer stylistically is closer to death metal. even old sepultura can be said to be death metal. but not LoG. but i dont think LoG is metalcore like killswitch engage.
ADDITION:
is cannibal corpse considered new york death metal? they r not from new york, nor are they similar to the new york sound. only thing is they have that chugging rythm but other than that i would say they r florida DM.
RE: TECHNICAL DEATH METAL:
The list of technical death metal bands should include Martyr from Canada who are as technical as Theory in Practice and are also directly influenced by Cynic, Athiest and later Death.  Martyr's insanely technical musical output should be noted (their guitarist even played on a Gorguts album and they are much less technical, yet mentioned with the others).
: ok by me (not willing to discuss which band is more technical) Spearhead 5 July 2005 11:52 (UTC)
Definitely merge the Florida and Brutal Death metal entries with this one. One is a region and the other is a qualitative descriptor. Even though so many bands from Florida sound the same, they should not be considered apart from death metal as a whole. Better still, there should be sections in here about Swedish death metal (Entombed, Unleashed, Dismember, Grave, et al) because they have a distinctive sound. A Quebec death metal section would be nice too though so many bands from there have gone from copying the Florida sound to a more European sound and then back again over the years that it's hard to pin down any trends except for a lack of originality. (Cryptopsy is the only exception to the foregoing.)
NOTES: Carcass and Napalm Death are considered grindcore, and the addition of "death metal" on their pages can be considered somewhat inaccurate but understandable, owing to the frequent stylistic similarities between grindcore and death metal. 
Death 'n' roll does not sound like a legitimate genre to me, and its page is almost utterly worthless as it lists no so-called death 'n' roll bands. Entombed, according to the page, later became hardcore punk. Dismember is Swedish death metal, not death 'n' roll by any stretch of the imagination. Six Feet Under is death metal. Period. The death 'n' roll page itself contributes nothing, and thus should be deleted. --GreatCthulhu 13:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub Genres and the possible addtion of technical musical details 

message: Am I the only one who thinks it's a mediocre idea to merge Melodic death metal into this article? --Sn0wflake 15:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? I'm pretty neutral myself in this case. But in general there are too many nonsense metal subsubgenre articles on WP - so it's a good idea that people propose to clean that up. Spearhead 16:52, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a quite firm distiction between the 1990s Gothenburg (melodeath) scene and the rest of death metal. In essence, the styles are very different, especially if you use early In Flames for comparision. --Sn0wflake 17:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  many of bands on the list that I know, I would consider rather straight death metal bands:   Arch Enemy,    * At The Gates,    * Callenish Circle,   * Carcass,    * Dark Tranquillity,    * Edge of Sanity,    * Entombed,    * Hypocrisy,    * In Flames,    * Unanimated. Many of these bands are only a small step away from like Carnage, Dismember, Grave, Merciless. And sentenced isn't even mentioned, as North From Here is probably the first gothenburg style dm. The same train of thought actually goes for Brutal death metal as well. And many more metal pseudo genres: Celtic Metal, Pagan Metal, Punk Metal, Tech Metal, NSBM, ... Then again I'd give melodeath the benefit of the doubt. Spearhead 18:16, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not claiming the article is any good, but it does seem to deserve its own entry. I have to disagree with some of the examples you cite, especially Arch Enemy and At the Gates, but we don't have to agree with everything. As for brutal, I do have my doubts, but a few bands of that subgenre do set themselves apart from classic death metal. --Sn0wflake 20:41, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I concur, although I think the article title should be changed from "Scandinavian Death Metal" to either "Gothenburg" or "Melodic Death Metal". "Scandinavian Death Metal" makes it sound like it should be merged; it's a misrepresentation of the distinction.
Then again, I'm also one of those people who'd like to sort articles effectively and efficiently. We could just put it as a subsection in death metal, as a distinction (although given the trend in Wikipedia to as many different article pages as possible...)--24.126.30.46 06:28, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

text: "Melodeath" isn't really death metal, save for maybe At the Gates, Sentenced, Necrophobia (among a few others).  But Arch Enemy and such aren't death metal.--Korey Kaczynski 07:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with melodeath? 

message: Why aren't arch enmy on this list of death metal bands? Cos they are. and mastodon, I though they sounded like death metal. And venom aren't black metal? they started the whole black metal genre you tool.
venom was classified death at the time. as for arch enemy, it is more melodic death metal and they haven't had a greater affect on death metal as the others. lastly mastodon, they are not death metal, they are more like sludge metal though it is hard to put them in a category since they have grind, death, jazz and hardcore in them with melodic instrumentals. panasonicyouth99
:: As panasonic said, Arch Enemy is melodeath. Mastodon is ranked somewhere around sludge metal or noisecore, but they're -definitely- not death. Oh, and about Venom. Without Venom, black metal wouldn't have sprung up... Then again, without Slayer or Metallica, death metal probably wouldn't exist either. That doesn't mean either band is death. 
::Logic is fun, tool.
::: Venom were Death Metal (to some extent - I mean, they are much more like Death or Possessed than Immortal - that's how I see it) - although their album/song "Black Metal" sparked off a whole new "subgenre" of Death Metal which ended up becoming the perverse monstrosity known today as "Black Metal".  I would NEVER think of calling Arch Enemy proper Death Metal - even though the heavy riffs and Cookie Monster Vocals are there, they are hardly as brain-splittingly blast-beatingly good as bands like Decapitated, Cannibal Corpse, etc. thedragon5000
::::Oh no no no, my friend, you did NOT just call Mastodon noisecore.  Listen to 2 Minuta Dreka and talk to me then.  They're simply a vaguely technical sludge band.
::: Venom is neither Death Metal nor Black Metal. They're a Thrash Metal band, although they would also have some influence on Death Metal musically. For Black Metal though, they aren't extremely notable. The only Black Metal band that was heavily influenced by them was Mayhem, and they didn't even start truly playing Black Metal until the '90s. I'd say that bands like Bathory and Sodom on the In The Sign Of Evil EP (the latter of who were influenced by Venom, so I guess you could argue their influence in that regard) would be much more influential to Black Metal than Venom. X-pert74 08:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arch enemy  

message: ===What should not be linked to===
# Links that are added to promote a site, by the site operator or its affiliates.  See 
External link spamming.
(Opes 03:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  external links 

message: # Links that are added to promote a site, by the site operator or its affiliates.  See 
External link spamming.
(Opes 03:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What should not be linked to

message: Hi.  Please do not edit war.  Further, both parties, User:Deathrocker and User:156.34.234.101 should refrain from calling each others' edits "vandalism" or "trolling".  This is clearly a content dispute.  It should also be an easy one to solve.  User:Deathrocker, the unreferenced assertion " due to the nature of the vocals detractors of the movement often label this style “Cookie monster metal”. " should be removed until it is properly referenced, as it is a disputed fact.  When you find a reference for it, it should be in the article as "Prominent music critic John Doe describes the style as "Cookie monster metal"[reference]".  "Detractors of the movement" is a broad generalization that we should avoid (see WP:AWT for more about this).  Going forward, please keep in mind WP:CIVIL and use article discussion pages when there is a dispute.  Thanks.  Jkelly 17:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Deathrocker, I appreciate that you are right, insofar as not having any criticism of the genre would violate our Neutral Point Of View policy.  However, saying "Google for it" when someone asks for a reference from a reliable source isn't ideal.  When we contribute to Wikipedia, we are expected to cite all of sources, and the burden is not upon other editors to track down the references.  The correct thing to do, oultined at Wikipedia:Citing sources is to cut the disputed material to the Talk page until it is verified, which is what I am going to do.  Jkelly 02:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

text: And this link is to a Google search on "Death metal" and "Cookie monster".  I would like one of our experts here to review some of those links and identify those that are the most reliable sources in the field.  Thanks.  Jkelly 02:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I have edited the sentence to avoid generalizing and added a footnote for proper referencing.  I trust that User:156.34.234.101 will be satisfied that this characterization is now well-sourced and belongs in the article.  Jkelly 03:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Cookie monster" edit war

message: I wrote much of the original history text here quite a while ago, and partially it has been improved upon since then, but mostly it got worse, so let me comment upon the new changes/repristinations I made.
1.Influences
Deleted calling Venom an "early" heavy metal band, as far as that genre is concerned they were pretty late, and it already said "metal" in the previous part of the sentence.
Deleted "It has been said that Slayer's early music, most notably Reign In Blood and Hell Awaits are hugely influential."
Any particular band that said this? Why these particular albums, and why list them in anti-chronological order? I rewrote it, but I do agree that it fair to mention one early thrash metal band in the history part, and Slayer seems like one of the most aggressive representatives. 
2. Venom/growling
"... as genres are not usually identified solely by aesthetic form."
I was making a point that growling cannot be the only identifying factor of death metal. What does esthetic form have to do with this? Since I couldn't exclude that there was some thought behind this, I didn't delete it in case someone wants to defend it.
3. Special preferences/bias
a) I don't think the band Master ranks in influence with bands such as Possessed or Death, but I left it there for now to see if someone wants to argue.
b) I don't think Suffocation was nearly as big a deal in the merging/creation that went on in 1991 as any of the other bands I listed, in particular Suffocation *debuted* in 1991 and the other bands were older bands that were moving into new territory. Unfortunately I don't have that album here so I can't remind myself of how it relates to the other ones right now. But noone can try to motivate that they would be the "most plagiarized band" in the field. Also that person had put "Effigy" as their debut album, which seems incorrect to me.
4. Early vs. modern
As I had anticipated, some from the "early death metal" group of fans/historians started putting Chuck Schuldiner right in the middle of the discussion, making a reference to the Human album, even though the "early" part of the discussion was clearly marked as pertaining to 1983-1987.  "Human" should appear exactly where it appeared chronologically, *after* the discussion around Harmony Corruption in 1990. If you want to change the statements about Death in the early period 1983-1987, feel free, but you cannot use the as yet untranspired events around Human in doing so. I have tried to make the discussion fair to what I have the impression are the two main views of when death metal was created: very roughly speaking, the "1985" view and the "1990" view. I think the only way to get peope to agree on this is to clearly state who recorded what and when, and only put in one or two comments to the effect of "this is when someting new was created" without claiming authority on when death metal was *really* created.
::Effigy of the Forgotten is Suffocation's debut album. They released an EP prior to this.
:::1.  Slayer, while not death metal, had a major influence upon the genre.  I still don't know why Venom is being mentioned in relation to death metal.
2.  There's more to aesthetic form than simply the vocal styles used.  I'm not a big fan of the phrasing of that anyway; it and other ANUS inspired comments are a bit too sketchy for my taste.
3.a.  I haven't heard Master myself, but a lot of historians claim them to be a critical factor in the history of death metal.  I'm always a little edgy, though, when demo-only bands are held up so highly...
b.  Suffocation is critical to the idea of death metal because they represent the rise of brutal death metal.  Human Waste was the debut EP, but all but one of the songs were re-recorded on Effigy Of The Forgotten anyway.
4.  This is my view.  Death metal begins with Possessed's Seven Churches album.  This represents the beginning form of death metal, as a kind of extreme thrash.  I personally believe that the shift towards the modern death metal sound comes from the release of Obituary's Slowly We Rot.  You'll notice there the shift from rasped vocals, thrash drums and guitars, and satanic or occult atmosphere to guttural vocals, double-bass priority and brutal riffs, and horiffic atmosphere.  I think it's an important distinction to make.
::I agree with the Slowly We Rot view.  It seems to be the first album to include all of the characteristics of modern death metal.  I think it should get more mention in this article Thedividingline 06:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overhaul of history section 

message: Who the fuck keeps deleting metal articles? I can understand cleaning up bullshit genres such as "battle metal" and "troll metal", but why do people with no understanding of metal have to start meddling in useful and informative articles? Aside from the deletion of the pages of two important bands, I noticed that a lot of the links on the page, such as the one to "Slam death metal", simply redirect back to the death metal page, presumably because the original article was deleted.
:Nobody knows!!! In German WP it is an own article!de:Slam Death Metal--DanielMrakic 12:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Slam death metal sounds like a euphemism for sodomy. Kiss me, sailor? www.anus.com 03:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  slam death metal is not notable enough and not different enough to warrant a separate article. Hence it is includede here. WP had/has a huge number of metal genre articles many of which are genres limited or created by just a few bands.  Spearhead 14:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Please see WP:MUSIC for inclusion criteria and also Wikipedia:Civility if you would like to contribute to the discussion.  Jkelly 05:32, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retarded deletion 

message: There used to be some images of album covers on this article. Why were they removed? I think images should be added to the page, both of album covers, bands and live performances.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.222.96 (talk • contribs) 
:Probably because of Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Fair use.  If you have photographs that you have taken of bands at performances, please do release them under a free license so that they can be used to illustrate articles.  Jkelly 22:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: The 3rd and 4th paragraphs  of this section mentions "other death metal historians" and "The alternative standpoint", without naming any source. In fact, the entire article was written without any references whatsoever (except the rather arbitrary reference to "Cookie monster Vocals"). Mzyxptlk 15:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early history (up to 1991) 

message: This article should have a musicology section. Themindset 21:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  musicology 

message: "Venom never labelled what they did"
Who ever thought this? Just looking at my booklet of Black Metal for example, I see a quote from 'Hellsapoppin!', which reads "Our music is Power Metal, Venom Metal, Black Metal, not Heavy Metal cos [sic] that's for the chicks". That's just one example. This is kind of a minor point for the article, but that line should be changed somehow, since they obviously did label their music. X-pert74 06:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I found that comment a bit odd. Pasajero 17:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Venom and their labeling of their music 

message: Surely this qualifies as early death metal (1985). It's sure more death than anything Possessed ever released.
:Pasajero 17:11, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, I'd have to go and spin Bestial Devastation again. It probably qualifies, but all it really helped lead to is waves of crappy Brazlian Death/Black bands, rather than a big impact on things like the US scene. EDIT: After giving it a spin again, I wouldn't call it more death that Possessed work, but yeah it has that sort of sound and style, so it fits. Trouble is, the article then goes on to compare Scream Bloody Gore to Thrash bands of the time in 1987 like Sepulture and Vemon. Would take a little work to fit it in and not condradict itself a few lines later, but yeah. Dace59 18:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bestial Devastation (Sepultura)

message: "Death metal is a sub-genre of heavy metal that evolved out of thrash metal during the early 1980s. Today it has been reduced to what many call loud disgusting noise. Most of these artists have little to no skill on the guitar, followed by a dual-base drummer, and the perpetual screaming, moaning lead singer. If one wishes to recreate these sounds, one must simply grunt and smash a loud object."
THat needs to be changed. MC John 23:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. It was vandalism. Prolog 23:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What the hell?

message: Why is correct info being removed from this article.  Boston's Post Mortem (who started in 82) are one the first death metal bands in the U.S.. The Post Mortem 1986 (and it was delayed!) Coroner's Office LP pre-dates Death's "Scream Bloody Gore" and any Master LP.
Also check out:
http://www.myspace.com/ernestborgninebos 
From 1986...read the scaned review in the pict section...
: Some research shows that this band is thrash (e.g. metal-archives) - so it's debatable at best and a listen to the sample on myspace confirms that, imo. Google shows very little relevant links - so their actual influence is probably marginal. Also master recorded an album 1985 which was released in many years later by Displeased. Anyway provide references when making such bold statements. Spearhead 09:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Let's Get this Right

message: Despite the relative popularity of the genre worldwide, there are little to no objective sources which describe and define the genre according to musicological or even sociological (ie. 'scientific') principles. As with other musical genres, death metal has its' own magazines and other periodicals (both in print and online), but no serious and formal case study on the subject exists.
This means that the definition of the (expanded) genre is subject to intense, subjective debate among fans. One only has to look at this talk page.
Often heated discussion about the roots of death metal is also commonplace because death metal started as an underground movement which was recognized, but not mainstream enough to be defined by a common consensus. 
After more than twenty years of existence, those people who are involved within the death meal scene   for, say, an equal period of time can be considered a knowledge base all by themselves. Call them 'authorities' if you must. Damn, I myself listen to this kind of music for almost twenty years, know a lot about it but I, too, am not a 'reference'. And since no scholar has, until now, written a thesis on death metal, references remain what they were: subjective matter. Call it anus.com or lordsofmetal.nl what you like, it still isn't objective. And because of that, this article will remain on the list of articles without enough references. Harachte 21:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note on the definition of the genre 

message: Having been a death metal fan for just over 7 years now, I've often wondered, like many fans, where the term came from.  It should be noted that a German compilation called "Death Metal" (which featured a number of bands that wouldn't be labeled death metal by today's standards) was releaed in 1984, and Possessed's demo, from the same year, featured the "Death Metal" track.  I've also read--though this hasn't been confirmed--that members of Hellhammer/Celtic Frost ran a zine called Death Metal; this is presumably around 83 or 84 when Hellhammer was around.  Secondly, I think that, as the most popular genre in extreme metal, that there should be a "Pop Culture" section which identifies referenes to death metal in contemporary culture.
: don't forget the Onslaught track either - released on their 85 album and Death's demo/song Death by Metal. Spearhead 08:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. There should be some form of 'reference in modern pop culture', for example the short Cannibal Corpse scene in Ace Ventura. Harachte 12:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Possessed's 1984 demo is the most likely origin.  Possessed (and Death, early Morbid Angel, etc) might have been more speed metal by today's terms, but death metal really evolved slowly out of speed metal, and didn't manifest overnight. Honestly, though -- with the subject matter being approached by the speed metal bands of the early 1980's, "Death Metal" was inevitable regardless of whether the bands Death, Possessed, and etc. existed or not. (Black metal, on the other hand, would not have existed if Bathory, Celtic Frost, and maybe Sodom had not existed.)--Korey Kaczynski 07:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Term origin and other things 

message: I changed some of the subgenre descriptions to (hopefully) better describe some of the subgenres. The most notable change was to Melodic Death.
I also removed the Origin of the Genre section at the bottom, since the issue of the name was brought up fairly early in the article, and having another section at the bottom seemed redundant. Scourge441 21:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Subgenre List, Origin of the name

message: I would gladly go through the article and find citations for certain things, however, I do not know which facts in the article require citation. If someone could go through the article and add the "citation needed" note on the things that require them, then I can search for sources and help fix this article. Scourge441 23:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations Required

message: There's a lot of confusion about grindcore in some metal circles and despite the fact that grind and death metal have influenced each other in one way or another, it should be clear that grindcore is a subgenre of hardcore punk music, hinted by hc bands like Cyanamid and Lärm and perfected by the likes of Fear of God and Napalm Death (who after two albums, stopped making grindcore and started making death metal instead). There's a lot of wrong information on grindcore on the internet, so please, let's do it right. Grindcore isn't "related" to death metal, besides some bands jumping ships between the two styles and isn't a metal subgenre at all. It's a form of hardcore punk. Now, I know there are bands with a strong (death) metal influence (Discordance Axis, Birdflesh, Bathtub Shitter), but that doesn't justify the mistake. So yes, let's get rid of the "grindcore" section from the article. There's a reason why lots of grindcore bands live by "0% metal" and labels like 625 and Slap-A-Ham release grindcore records. And no, Pig Destroyer and Cephalic Carnage and all that stuff isn't grindcore.
Seeofseaof 19:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Grindcore

message: While I agree that grind is not a subgenre of death metal the influence they have had with each other is undeinable.  It would be inaccurate to discuess death metal without talking about grindcore.  The two styles compliment each other very well and many bands have elements of both.  If anything I would say grindcore exists somewhere between Death Metal and Hardcore Punk.  So calling it a Hardcore punk genre wouldn't do Grindcore any justice at all.  It seems the more punk a grind band is it becomes power violence and the more heavy it gets it sounds similar to death metal.  Grindcore is truly a stand alone style but can be used in conjunction with other styles and deserves mention in any death metal discussion.
Lampreyofdoom 18:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More thoughts on Grindcore

message: I think this part either needs to be completely rewritten or just removed. The way it is now, I think it is totally unnecessary, and could be safely removed until someone with more experience can write it again. Thoughts? Scourge441 14:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Fusion Genres section

message: i think we can all agree that this genre is under-represented by the current Death Metal page. until we address this glaring deficiency, the Death Metal page is laughably incomplete. who is up to the challenge?
_____________________________________________________
I agree.  Wigger slam metal is the gateway for so many kids getting into death metal, and death metal kids getting into rap metal.  Never mind under-represented, wigger slam doesn't even get a passing mention.
: Dying fetus? --Korey Kaczynski 07:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wigger Slam Metal

message: This site has a great explanation of Death Metal right down to the Culture. plus you all need to also take a look at "Choosing Death: The Improbable History of Death Metal and Grindcore" and you will have a strong basis on these genres from the mouth of its innovators. Here is a copy and paste of Deathmetal.org:
Death Metal: Introduction
Death metal is a form of music which arose from the heavy metal movement as it went underground. Using rejected sounds and noises that resemble industrial objects, death metal bands make sonic art from twisted distortion and guttural howls of distorted vocals. While it is not radio-friendly, death metal has won itself a worldwide audience from people who admire the independent spirit and pride in self over society that death metal embraces. Metalheads across the world have started underground death and black metal bands, zines, fansites, and radio shows, promoting the metal movement to new heights below the radar of mainstream perception. 
Death Metal Music
Death metal is structuralist heavy metal that borrows heavily from classical and industrial music. Its heritage is equal parts neoclassical heavy metal from the 1970s and hardcore punk from the early 1980s; if you throw Discharge, Judas Priest and King Crimson into a blender and set it on "high," you might get something like death metal. It took from roughly 1983-1988 for death metal to fully evolve, and at that point, it experienced six golden years of fruitful growth before lapsing as black metal eclipsed it in popularity. 
The original underground musical genre, death metal was completely unknown to most people until 1997 when it became fodder for mainstream commentary after several school shootings. During the 1980s and early 1990s, it was impossible to find death metal in normal record stores and chains; most people ordered it from small mailorder companies, or "distros," that stocked underground metal exclusively. The underground in fact replicated every aspect of the normal music industry, including journalists and radio stations, to avoid being tainted by "commercial" or "mainstream" music. 
We say death metal is "structuralist" because, in contrast to rock music, its goal is not a recursive rhythm riff that encourages constant intensity through verse-chorus structure; death metal, like black metal after it and prog rock and classical before it, uses "narrative" song structure, or a string of phrases connected in such a way that they effect musical and artistic change throughout the song. While rock music aims to find a sweet riff and ride it, and much of older heavy metal does the same, death metal is like opera: its goal is to use riffs to introduce more riffs, and through those, to create a treelike structure of motifs which resolve themselves to a final dominant theme. In this, death metal (like the progressive rock and synthpop bands that influenced it) is closer to classical music than rock music. 
The history of rock music has been written by commercial promoters who have tried to establish its "authenticity" and uniqueness, and therefore, almost all mainstream publications are hostile to death metal. Death metal reminds us that rock music, blues and jazz did not arise autonomously in America, but were based on centuries of European popular music (the I-IV-V chord structure of the blues is derived from European folk music, and its "blues scale" is a modification of Asian and Celtic scales). Rock music is a scam, and its marketing makes it seem to be something greater than what it is, which is the same old music dressed up as a product. Death metal more than any genre before it broke from the rock tradition, and therefore is a threat to the rock establishment and its profits. 
Like most musical genres in the modern time, death metal is constantly under assault not only from external interests, but from within, as self-interested people try to make rock music and dress it up as death metal. These attempts to simplify the genre would benefit those who attempt them, as they would both be able to make a saleable product (being similar to established musical tastes, it sells easily and broadly) and be able to claim the "authenticity" of belonging to an outsider form of art such as death metal. These false death metal bands have polluted the genre with the same mainstream dogma and musicality that death metal sought to escape. Like all human social breakdown, this breakdown occurs through the selfishness of individuals who are unwilling to admit that the health of the genre is more important than their personal profit. 
Death metal flourished from the mid-1980s to mid-1990s, and then was for most purposes replaced by black metal. Where death metal was structuralist with heavy emphasis on chromatic phrasing and hence rhythmic, black metal used narrative construction based on melody (an innovation of later and progressive death metal bands as well, such as At the Gates, Atheist, Gorguts and Demilich). As such, it is often hard to tell where death metal ended and black metal began, although in their mature form they are distinct genres. In this, and in the aesthetic components of death metal borrowed by mainstream bands as varied as Slipknot and Nirvana, death metal lives on. 
For the most complete history of heavy metal and underground history possible, consult The History of Metal by Vijay Prozak. 
Death Metal History
Death metal arose from the end of hardcore punk colliding with a desire to renew the spirit of metal; launched in 1969, proto-metal like Black Sabbath had become lost among hard rock (Led Zeppelin) and progressive rock (King Crimson) and needed redefining. The aggressive, oversimplified, and disconnected from contemporary music sound of hardcore punk was apt and therefore infused into heavy metal. In the process, because hardcore punk relied on streams of power chords or phrasal instead of rhythmic competition, metal became an entirely new animal. 
This change can be heard first in speed metal bands like Metallica, Slayer, DBC, Rigor Mortis and Nuclear Assault. Phrases got longer, songs got more intricate, and the type of riffing that repeated a rhythm using a single chord got rarer; a new form of music was in the forging. However, these bands were still too entrenched in many of the rock-influenced tendencies of metal; death metal made a clean break from these. (It is interesting to note that the ultimate point of breakaway was thrash, or hardcore punk crossover bands who wrote punkish songs with metal riffs; these reduced music so much to its essence that it had to reconstruct itself, and having grand ambitions, reached toward narrative composition instead of the hackneyed rock styles.) 
During the years 1983-1985, a style emerged that was between death metal, black metal and thrash, and from this all of the succeeding genres were to derive their musical inspiration. Bathory, Sodom, Hellhammer/Celtic Frost formed the basis of this style, augmented in the Americas by Possessed, Slayer and Sepultura. From these founding acts styles diversified into death and black metal. While many give credit to Venom for the term black metal, musically speaking they were rooted firmly in the heavy metal tradition. 
The golden years of death metal were from 1988 to 1994, during which time the classics of the genre and all of its variations formed. Percussive death metal thundered from the industrial east coast of America; Texas produced a harsh and grating otherworldly sound; Florida created the rhythmic and alienated Tampa style of death metal. Progressive bands from the USA and melodic bands from Sweden rounded out the style, as did innumerate hybrids, including doom metal and speed metal crossovers. 
However, by 1994, the genre reached a decision point: where to go so as to keep up with black metal, which had expanded into melody as quickly as death metal had expanded into rhythmic structure, and now threatened to become more popular? The death metal genre had become calcified between diehards who insisted on a narrow definition of style, and "innovators" who wanted to make it into rock music, but both groups in their efforts to control external factors forgot internal factors, and the ideology and artistic spirit of death metal as lost. As such, it appeared senile and was forgotten for some years. 
At the time of this writing, death metal is practiced by a few holdovers from the late 1980s who continue to put out quality music, but their numbers decline each year. The general health of the metal community is poor because it focuses on uniqueness of external appearance and not composition and artistic integrity. While we hold out hope for a death metal revival, it is more likely that it will simply take its place in history and we will be left with recordings. 
For the most complete history of heavy metal and underground history possible, consult The History of Metal by Vijay Prozak. 
Death Metal Tshirts
In the underground death metal subculture, the shirt you wear -- bearing the logo of a favorite band or organization or concept -- defines which strata of social accomplishment to which you belong within the death metal community. Your taste identifies your level within an intellectual hierarchy based on what its members are able to comprehend, or withstand, perhaps, musically. 
For example, a guy in a Cannibal Corpse tshirt might be neglected by someone wearing a Beherit tshirt because Beherit has a more esoteric and theoretically-adventurous audience than the low-brow blockhead churning of Cannibal Corpse; tshirts determine what bands your brain can accept and thus often, a type of caste identification within the hierarchy of fans. Those who try to forge this identity often find themselves answering difficult questions under unpleasant circumstances. 
In the inverse situation, someone in an Atheist tshirt might laugh off someone wearing a Sarcofago tshirt as a philistine. This allows multiple communities to exist in a hierarchy within the death metal community and identify each other by sight, as well as differentiate metalheads from the hordes of drone normals who do nothing but buy Creed CDs and singing plastic fish. 
The Language of Death Metal
Death metal bands tend to use complex, Latinate language to describe the world in terms of its function and technologies, leaving the emotional terminology for rock music and blues. Its goal is not to affirm the emotions of the individual, but to point out the effects of structural change in the surrounding world. Not surprisingly, as a musical movement, death metal is also structuralist. 
Unlike rock genres, there is a near total absence of gender words and love songs. Death metal is not about emotional escapism. Death metal is about reality. 
Death Metal as Art
Symbols serve as an important anchor between the way a music sounds and what it represents aesthetically, including the ideas of the musicians as inspirational to their work. In death metal, there are several main categories of symbolism: the "occult," the morbid, and the technological. 
Death metal art -- as seen on tshirts, album covers, flyers, patches, pins and stickers -- includes all of these. The occult represents an opposition to morality; as a "nihilistic" genre, death metal musicians tend to be realists and recognize that no matter how much we classify something as morally bad or good, reality is unaffected, and whatever object is in question will serve reality at the level of function and not morality. The morbid represents another nihilistic outlook, which is that not only is death more real than our moralizations against it, but it will inevitably happen to us and we must be reminded by that. Where the occult uses pentagrams, ancient script, sigils and demonic imagery, the morbid uses disease, horror, submission and bodily corruption (including the mind/body turned against itself, as in zombie films) as its palette. 
Technology makes an odd bedfellow with death metal art, as it is commonly used to modify one of the other two categories. Much as at the end of the Black Sabbath song "War Pigs," Satan is shown as laughing and spreading his wings at the slaughter of young men for profit, technology is portrayed as amoral and therefore something that can turn on humanity at any minute. Combined with morbid imagery, we have art revealing human beings as both dependent on and captive of technology; combined with the occult, we have either technology in the power of the occult, or the occult as naturalistic and opposing technological humanity. 
Occultism in Death Metal
Many ask "Are death metal bands satanic or occultist?" The answer is both yes and no. 
Death metal bands are occultist in that each of the founding bands and most to follow had an occult focus or research interest evident in their lyrics. However, few practise mysticism and most seem to use it solely as metaphorology for their works. This is convenient because our moral society, even when secular, bases its morality on Judeo-Christian mythology. 
Any academic study of occultism in death metal must also take into account the range of occults employed. Judeo-christian, Babylonian, Far East, Nordic and indigenous American symbolism and ideologies appear in the lyrics and conceptual positioning of death metal bands. 
For more detail on occult metaphor in heavy metal and death metal, see Satanism as Metaphor in Metal Music by Vijay Prozak. 
Death Metal Ideology
When heavy metal evolved in response to the hippie culture around it, it took darker themes to a new intensity and warned of apocalypse. Fifteen years later, speed metal bands were wailing about armageddon. But as Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" is different from George Orwell's "1984," death metal had accepted that the apocalypse would be a whimper, and not a bang, and that its progress was inevitable. 
This paranoid and soul-wrenching logic created an immediate need to overcome the superstition and self-pity of a complacent age. in consequence, as if approaching Nietzsche's "abyss" and going under instead of over, these bands have embraced a philosophy of nihilism and a delight in the intellectual, sensual and spiritual extremes of a dying age. 
From this, much can be learned about a human future: nihilism frees us from much of our fear by confronting it head-on. Death metal bands have created an epic change in american subculture from one of morality to one of existential self-assertion, but further, the "gore" lyrics of many bands have targeted social denial of collective fear of death. 
Ideology serves an important place in the generation of lyrics and concept to each band. for most, the personal is political in choice of music, intellectual aspirations within it, and values as expressed in themes of darkness, death, the occult, war, genocide and suffering. Death metal reflects a lineage to hardcore music, yet its heavy metal side shows in the use of the personal rather than collective as a means of communication. 
That death metal has not collapsed on its own inertia, or become morality-driven and thus socially conformist like emocore or "life metal" bands, is a small miracle in a time of overwhelming commercial motivation to human efforts. Its underground remains strong and defiantly independent. As more people in society feel the need to withdraw from decaying mainstream values and behaviors, death metal's ideology offers a glimpse of a nihilistic but impressively un-neurotic future. 
For more information, see The Philosophical Tradition of Heavy Metal by Vijay Prozak. 
Copyright © 2000-2006 Dark Legions Archive 
THERE YOU HAVE IT!
71.125.114.160 15:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: www.deathmetal.org

message: Perhaps Opeth should be added? As a prog-death/melodeath band of no small stature, I think they need to be added to the list, especially for their pioneering use of acoustic instruments. Or am I missing out on an early death band using acoustic passages? I'll leave it up to you 'experts' (I say that in good humor, everyone's a self-titled expert, but you guys have a good record) to decide. If nobody takes note of this comment I'll add them in a few weeks.
Well, since the list got removed, I guess I won't add them. NightfyreX 23:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're not death metal. --Korey Kaczynski 07:02, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Death bands... 

message: Someone keeps adding the following sentence in te Characteristcs part:
"Originally created and defined as "Deth Metal" and often misspelled and marketed from then on as "Death Metal""
My concerns:
The sentence is
*not sourced;
*misplaced (is it a DM characteristic?); 
*inconsistent with the rest of the article ("There are three common theories... ...band never pursued a death metal approach"
*not suited as intro of the body content.
I couldn't find any sources... 
Any opinions? Emmaneul (Talk) 07:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Trust me, whoever is adding it is either a troll or a moron.  "Deth Metal" has never existed, and proof is with Possessed's 1984 "Death Metal" demo.  (And maybe, also, the band Death --Korey Kaczynski 07:08, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deth metal? 

message: "Cradle of Filth incorperate the same song style into black metal, with rythmic choruses and many guitar solos remenescient of bands from earliest times, to create what might be known as melodic black metal". Vandalizing?
: COF isn't black metal and has nothing to do with Death Metal.--Korey Kaczynski 19:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cradle of Filth 

message: Terms such as this, and "slam death metal," are somewhat vague terms that I think are used more by the fans than the musicians.  There is a generally agreed upon definition on what "death metal" or "grindcore" or "black metal" is, but when it comes to sub-genres, there can be some confusion, as the differences between them can be subtle or ambiguous.  It makes me wonder if a clear definition can be made as to what qualifies as such. 209.30.153.219 17:53, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brutal Death Metal Definition 

message: I don't think this article is ever going to be encyclopedic. Hardly any sources, original research, constant vandalism, bandcruft etc. make this article scream for a rewrite. I've started a prototype article at User:Emmaneul/Death metal based on the black metal article. I'm changing it sentence after sentence, step by step, using sources along the way. I'm planning to reuse the good parts of the actual DM article where I can.
If you would like to comment/help, please do, it can be done here or on User talk:Emmaneul/Death metal. Note that for now, only the intro has been rewritten, I'll change the rest when I have more time. Emmaneul (Talk) 15:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I'm still working on the history part. I've finished the early history. The history around the late 80's is more complex, with a lot more bands getting into DM, different scenes, important studios, and the emergence of influential grindcore bands like Napalm Death and Carcass. It might take some time (and I didn't have much time lately) to finish the article. Emmaneul (Talk) 22:49, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: I disagree with this sentiment, I know it only says that Death metal bands are OFTEN identified by fast riffing/percussion, but to me, my favourite Death Metal bands have always played in a slow to mid-tempo vein, never approaching the speed of Morbid Angel etc.
I think a clear distinction should be mentioned here about the two trains of thought, whether Death metal 'should' be played fast or slow. Obviously not phrased like that, but I believe many bands who begun playing early in the history of the genre have NEVER been known for any of the above 'fast riffing/percussion' styles for the majority of their existence. 
You could go on to argue that incorparating Doom elements were the reason for this change, in which case does that make every Death Metal band which predominantly plays in a slow to mid-tempo range a Doom/Death metal band? Bands like Grave and Bolt Thrower (yes, Bolt Thrower are Death metal, elements of their grindcore days largely disappeared by the 'IVth Crusade' album) for example are well known for their slow to mid-tempo riffs/beats (OCCASIONALY dipping into faster playing). 
Many older Death Metal fans would argue that this 'slower' style of playing is actually one of the earliest incarnations of the genre, with many labelling bands who play in this style as 'old-school' Death Metal. Now I don't want to suggest including a sub-genre called 'old-school Death metal', because that would just be plain wrong. But it seems to me there is a clear divergence among the early Death Metal camp (highlighted clearly between many European Death Metal and US Death Metal acts (with the clear exception of Autopsy and Obituary) about how Death Metal should be played/interpreted. European bands GENERALLY preferring to play Death metal in a more 'primitive' style in contrast with bands like Morbid Angel, Death (later), Monstrosity etc.
I don't want an entire article about it, but maybe just some mention of the difference would be nice, even if you do want to attribute all these bands as 'Doom/death metal', thats upto you, but to say that Death Metal, especially in its infancy was primarily focused on faster riffing and percussion is wrong imo. Bottom line is, you don't need to have blast-beats to be a Death metal band.
ps. there should be some mention of Sadus under the 'influences' section.
:I'm not sure what you consider early death metal, and why it wouldn't be fast. Proto-death metal, proto-black metal, NWOBHM, and thrash metal bands in the early 80ies, the bands that paved the road to death metal (like Venom, Possessed, Bathory, Slayer, Kreator, Sodom, other thrash bands, and earlier bands in the late 70ies/early 80ies like Motörhead, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Diamond Head) where playing fast music, faster then the heavy metal bands around at that time. When death metal matured in the mid to late 80ies it still was fast, played by bands such as Death, Morbid Angel, Deicide, Necrophagia, and Sepultura. Speed was a generally accepted trait. The only pre-90ies exceptions that come to mind are Obituary and Celtic Frost who incorporated slow part but still had (a lot of) fast parts.
:Death metal is a genre where speed is a common trait. Death metal is known for its speed, just like thrash metal and black metal. You're right, not all the bands are fast all the time, but the majority of death metal bands are. 
:By the way, "death metal is fast" is not implying all death metal is like Nile or Spawn of Possession. It's fast compared to other rock/metal genres. In general (mainstream) music has tempi between 90 and 140 (not a good source, I know, but it's an indication). Faster tempi are very common in extreme metal.
:It's totally appropriate to consider death metal fast. Emmaneul (Talk) 13:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  yeah thats fair enough man, but i mean this article gives a little a bit of a one-sided impression about the music is all I'm on about. I'm sorry if I came across in any way to detract death metal bands of that 'style', I love bands like Morbid Angel and Death (one of my fav bands lol), but I dunno, it just seems to me that the article could mention that for example: 'although for many death metal bands speed is an important factor, some incorparate almost doom like dirges and have more of a focus on mid-tempo riffing.' I know thats a bit sketchy, but thats the general idea.
But yeah, Death Metal bands like Autopsy (band) (who had a big influence on the swedish scene), Asphyx, Grave (band) and even early Therion seem to take a different approach and they were (I think) around pre-90s and playing in this slow to mid-tempo style.
Maybe theres not really enough to go on there, but I think it would be worth mentioning the European scene a bit more anyway, I know the Scandinavian scene is covered (although a mention of Darkthrone's first and only foray into Death metal on 'Soulside Journey' could be mentioned here aswell I think), but it might be worthwhile to look at the rest of EU aswell. Metal Gimp 16:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death Metal is not characteristically fast... 

message: I removed Novembers Doom and Swallow The Sun because they have not created the genre. They are more recent. And also removed Sentenced and Amorphis because they were never a death/doom metal band nor did any useful contribution. Viriatus  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.136.128.14 (talk) 16:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death/Doom