Talk:Avant-garde metal

message: I added Greek band Dol Ammad to the list of example bands.  The fourteen-piece choir alone probably qualifies them for avant-garde as opposed to conventional prog metal.  Irene Ringworm 01:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Added [[Dol Ammad]]

message: This article was nominated for deletion.  There was, however, no consensus to delete.  A full review of the discussion can be found here. Tomertalk 07:37, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  In light of the article being kept, those who nominated it to be kept, now have the onus on them to overhaul it. Due to the article contradicting seven others, and being a pet name. The article needs to make itself far more clear, far more definative, and stop being someones pet name for their favourite bands. Lest this will be nominated for deletion again in another month or so. Leyasu 08:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afd Notice 

message: I just wanted to add a few thoughts about Avant garde metal. I wasn't here when Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avant garde metal this article was up for deletion so I will respond now (in an effort to improve it so that it doesn't get nominated for deletion again!).
Just like avant-rock or alternative rock there has to be a different kind of genre for many of these bands. They simply can't fit into something like black metal (although some of them have black metal background and influence). Most of these bands are described in their articles why are they considered avant-garde and not under some of the more known metal genres.
Although there has to be a proof that this genre exists (WP:No original research), avant garde metal is quite obvious. It is derived from the term Avant-garde (read this article, it is verified for a change) itself and heavy metal music. The combination of those two (Avant for experimentation, unusual characteristics and improvisation, and metal music (you should all know about this!!!)) naturally forms avant-garde metal.
Maybe the problem with this article is because not many people are familiar with this subject, but that doesn't mean that the article is for deletion. It seems to me nobody has problems with symphonic metal and I never heard of anything like that before, and it's not verified also. It's easy to keep something that is obvius and delete other things. But why avant-garde metal isn't that obvius to some as symphonic?
I would also like to ask those who voted to delete the article have they listened to any avant-garde metal band? Their works are quite unique and experimental and explain themselves. There is no need for a critic or a verifiable source for that (the music is the source itself!).
Also if you put them into another genre (or a couple of them) you would have the same problem as with Children of Bodom. Of course this does not mean that Chilren of Bodom is avant-garde metal, it is just a comparison.
I think this is it for now, thank you for your patience (if you read this you certainly have it!). Please leave a comment or two on this. Death2 22:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Avantgarde is a adjective meaning 'Experimental'. Last time i checked every band experiments. Its not a genre, just a cross reference. These bands do nothing that links them together except incorperate minor features into another style of music to give themselfs 'an edge', which all bands do regardless. And i put it up for deletion, as i know most of all the bands, and their sound is not definitive of genre. If i choose to use a woodwind instrument rather than a string instrument in my Mozart cover, have i really just changed the genre of the whole thing? No, i havent, i have simply adapted something to have 'an edge'. Avantgarde is fine, as long as it states what it is, and isnt simply a made up genre. Ley Shade 22:22, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Avant garde metal

message: I think Winds should be taken off. They lack the complete experimental structure that most of the other bands, epitometically Age of Silence, have. They're pretty obviously neo-classical.
:I agree, the only mention I can find "Avant Garde" is here on their page at The End Records and that's on about being signed to AvantGarde Music (which is mostly a Black Metal label).  All the links on the bands wiki page list them as Prog/Neo-Classical Metal and both their albums certainly match that. Unless there's some massive difference in stlye on their EP and someone has support I'll remove them. Dace59 14:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winds 

message: Is there a user template for Metal Arts?  I would like to proclaim that I make metal into art, but I can't find one.
--Trentjohnson 14:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  User template 

message: __NOTOC__
The List of avant-garde metal musical groups has been deleted... (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_avant-garde_metal_musical_groups)
So we might start a list of key artists. The following list contains artists that were on the list (might not be very recent because I retrieved it from the google cache)--Emmaneul (Talk) 08:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of avant-garde metal bands 

message: *  Ulver (ca. 1998)
    *  uneXpect
    *  Unholy
    *  Ved Buens Ende
    *  Vintersorg (ca. 2002)
    *  Virus
This list is definitely better than the current one. But still, imho most sub-genres of heavy metal are already inherently avant-garde. So it's pretty much pointless to have an article like this. And personally I think, avant-garde metal has exclusively been attributed to mostly experimental BM bands, more so than any other stuff. 94.55.235.57 (talk) 23:07, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: U-Z

message: Why does experimental metal redirect here? Avant-Garde certainly IS experimental, but that doesn't mean that they are the same thing. Kidburla2002 14:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: YES, they are, Avant-garde metal and experimental metal ARE the same thing. Frédérick Duhautpas 19:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We should just call it indie metal. Death2 02:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

text: There's no such a genre Indie metal  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.23.199 (talk) 20:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Experimental metal 

message: I intend to delete Opeth from the list of notable avant-garde metal bands. I don't consider Opeth as an avant-garde metal band. It is rather a progressive death/extreme metal band. And most of the sources I can see so far confirm my feeling. Frédérick Duhautpas 19:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, Opeth are not Avantgarde at all Karpsmöm 19:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Opeth Definitely isn't avantgarde. It seems that some people just overstate their use of different chord progressions, in unconventional way.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Talvimiekka (talk • contribs) 16:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Opeth

message: Hey, could Therion be included as Avant-garde metal. At least they are inspired by Celtic Frost, the one of the best
knowable foundations. For example their most experimentalious record Symphony Masses Ho Darkon Ho Megas, has avant garde
qualities, due to strange guitar work, sympho tones or in generally sound of Into the Pandemonium. Thoughts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.156.250 (talk) 15:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're correct, Therion occasionally displays experimental structures. That's a fact. But here, the list of this article is not meant to be a comprehensive one of every metal band including some (occasional) experimentations, No, this is a list of CRUCIAL avant-garde metal bands. Now despite the experimentations of Symphony Masses Ho Darkon Ho Megas Therion is far from being a crucial band in avant-garde metal. On the other hand there is no question they are a crucial band in symphonic metal. Frédérick Duhautpas 17:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Therion 

message: "At the same time despite a large amount of eccentricities, unorthodox and unconventional traits, avant-garde still saves a certain number of specific traits of Heavy metal (most particularly its specific groove) unlike alternative." 
Seems to me that some black/death metal fan was trying to weasel in an opinion about alternative metal not being metal at all. Prepare to be Mezmerized! 02:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely not. I have absolutely have nothing against alternative nor do I favor Black metal. Before making that kind of wrong supositions may I ask you to read that discussion above, where I extensively argued why. discussion aboutthe difference with alternativeFrédérick Duhautpas 04:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed

message: As experimental metal is regarded to be the same as avant-garde metal here on wikipedia I think Meshuggah needs to be added to the list of key artist. Their last few recordings (f.e. I (EP) and Catch Thirty-Three) are very experimental and Meshuggah is referred to as experimental metal by numerous websites.
*blabbermouth.net "Swedish experimental metal band Meshuggah"
*blabbermouth.net "Swedish experimental extreme metallers MESHUGGAH"
*www.mtv.com "Swedish experimental-metal legends Meshuggah re-upped with Nuclear Blast this week"
*www.nuclearblastusa.com "It is impossible to talk about experimental or avant-garde metal without mentioning this truly groundbreaking act: MESHUGGAH"
*www.metal-observer.com "Welcome to the second part of their experimental phase and also the last according to the band"
*www.bbc.co.uk "and yet more Swedes, in the form of experimental metal masters Meshuggah"
*www.nashvillescene.com "which draws on the brutal, experimental-metal legacies of acts like Meshuggah"
I have added them to the list. Kameejl (Talk) 15:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meshuggah 

message: The list of "important" avant-garde bands is slightly misleading. This can confuse people into thinking that only the bands on that list are worth anything. I"m going to change it to "noteworthy" instead. Dark Executioner (talk) 16:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's ok for me Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 16:37, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important? 

message: Does anybody else even bother to check things? There was a source cited fairly extensively in this article. Click on the link. The first thing that should give it away is the website. Metalstorm.ee relies on submissions by users. Just like the more well-known metal-archives. The second thing that should attract one's attention is the "Guest article disclaimer" placed right at the very top of the article in bright yellow. So what is a guest article on metalstorm.ee? No prizes for figuring it out: guest articles are contributions by users. This particular contributor is not anonymous. He provides a name: Ethan "Insineratehymn" Mittel. Click on his user page. He even provides some photos and information about himself. Oh look, he was born on 19 September 1990. The article was published on metalstorm.ee on 21 November 2006. He was a 16 years old kid when he wrote that article. And this is being used as a source on wikipedia? Not to sound all ageist but that is just absurd. I realize that the article he wrote is pretty impressive for a 16 years old kid. Lots of interesting points he made. Doesn't change the fact that it's a 16 years old fan of the genre contributing an article to a website based on submissions by users. Doesn't change the fact that this is anything but a reliable source. If nothing else though, the very first line of the article should have tipped anyone off: he quotes the definition of avant-garde metal from wikipedia. A definition that was not supported by any reliable source here but instead falls under original research. This is actually a case of unverified information on an article being cited by an unreliable source and being cited back on the article page.
I have removed that unreliable source and every other piece of original research that was on this article and replaced it with a few paragraphs of info that I got from the avant-garde metal website. I am not very familiar with the genre in question, only knowing a few bands on the list. Yet I can whip out a few paragraphs worth of information that's fully referenced by sources that are actually reliable. I have little interest or desire to expand this article any further though. So feel free to add more to this article. I will be popping back in every now and then though to make sure that any contribution to this article fits in the wikipedia policies of verifiability, no original research and reliable source. If you want to specify the cultural or stylistic origins as something other than varied, I would expect to see something to back up any entry. An account of the genre's history should suffice. --Bardin (talk) 00:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, nothing to add...Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 00:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Given that you were the one who originally added that article by the 16 years old kid, I can only be grateful that you think it's a good point. --Bardin (talk) 01:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to be sarcastic. I humbly recognize and assume my mistake. I was unaware of the system of metalstorm. My fault. I'm also grateful that you corrected it and I will take lesson of this mistake. Be sure you'll not see me again making such a mistake in the future. Nevertheless note that when I added this quote, I'm absolutely certain that this disclamer wasn't there. It was added later.I think this fact can be verified by asking to the site and by comparing the dates if needed.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 09:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Please Navnlos, before restauring what Bardin has removed, read what he wrote here. Moreover concerning what you were saying while some OR is sometimes tolerated by consensus in some article, if some user decides to remove them there's noway to do anything about it. He's just applying the wiki rules. Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 22:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are ways to fix that poop instead of deleting it. But I'll do that in my own time, I guess. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 22:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verifiability 

message: Started the above page.  It's an older version of this article and I believe information can still be gleaned from it (hell, I just added a few things back into the article a while back that's stragiht from the older citation and was sourced).  So let's take what we want from it and source it and then we don't have to use the rest.  Purely for verification purposes.  Hope this helps. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 20:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Avant-garde metal/Workspace]] 

message: I tried to add my band's myspace page to the avant-garde metal wikipedia page and it was quickly deleted.  I was told I needed a reliable source to claim that it is an avant-garde metal band.  This is b.s.  The entire avant-garde metal page is b.s.  And the worst part is the discussion page.  None of you understand the concept of metal, the notion of avant-garde, and aesthetics of music.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.91.251.62 (talk) 06:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm very sorry that you don't understand the mechanics of Wikipedia. I guess you're talking about this edit. First, your band has no article on Wikipedia and therefore alone is not legit to be featured in this list. Second, see WP:COI. Third, your entry was technically wrong. If your band is notable enough one day to get an own article here, your fans may include you to the list.--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 15:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some unknown band 

message: they're classed as A-G metal in their wiki article and certainly fit the description. added. RPTechnic (talk) 04:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Behold The Arctopus

message: What would System of a Down be considered? Are they Progressive Metal or Avant-Garde Metal?Xx1994xx (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 18:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll will warn the above IP editor that they should be civil and not engage in personal attacks. I'm not even going to get into the whole neutral point of view and verifiability arguments. And as the list now has its own article now, concerns should be addressed there.--¿3family6 contribs 01:26, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

text: For all you keeping track at home, 'not metal' is an insult used by metalheads to express disdain for a band or genre. It has nothing to do with the band or genre's actual status as metal or not metal. Very rarely, metalheads will attempt to claim non-metal bands they like as metal or metal-influenced, once again regardless of their actual genre and influences. 175.38.204.40 (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: [[System of a Down]]?

message: OK, before I start gutting the list on the basis that almost nothing on there passes WP:RS, I'm just going to give other editors a day or so to explain how avantgarde-metal.com might pass? It appears to be a webzine (hence no chance of passing); the website includes a section titled "print mags" but there's no indication that they were published by a third party... if they weren't they fail under WP:SPS. Either way the list needs hugely trimming in line with other metal list articles. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, you write for the site... read WP:COI, and also WP:SPAM with regard to the comment, "If you are a fan, please encourage our website". Blackmetalbaz (talk) 17:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The Massive List

message: Any inclusion on the list needs either the explict use of "avan-garde metal" or "experimental metal" in a reliable source. Many on the list do not an will be removed. If, say, MusicMight lists the genre assay, "Avant-garde, Death Metal", that is not enough, and any attempt to claim otherwise is pure WP:SYNTH. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Heavy trimming of list

message: Is Animals as Leaders too new to be considered a notable experimental metal band? Although they are new, they showcase many qualities of the genre and I believe they are a quintessential example of it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.168.254.2 (talk) 16:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Then you need a reliable source saying that. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 10:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animals as Leaders? 

message: This refers to Sleepytime Gorilla Museum as "avant-metal". Now, normally I would go with a specific citation - either "avant-garde metal" or "experimental metal" - but in this case, I think it could qualify as a citation. What else would "avant-metal" refer to other than "avant-garde metal"? --LordNecronus (talk) 13:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sleepytime Gorilla Museum 

message: Why is someone systematically removing any reference to Avantgarde-Metal.com, as well as the reference to Oliver Side's article, "What is Avant-Garde Metal?". AudioDreamer (talk) 04:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not space for promoting your webzine; they get removed per WP:EL, the relevant guideline. Constant addition is simply spam. You want to establish notability, find some third-party reliable sources talking about the site in detail and we'll talk further. Until then, you persistent spamming  is becoming disruptive. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Oh, with regard to Side's credentials, if you wish to cite him on the topic, his words need to be in a professional music publication or a peer-reviewed paper or book... not his own website (see WP:SPS). Out of curiosity, do you have any personal connection to the site or Side? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 17:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

text: The policy you are not grasping is WP:RS. The avantgardemetal.com material has never been printed by a third-party source, unlike, say, MusicMight or Allmusic; that is why it is inappropriate. I'm unclear as to the reference you make to PhD students and the like... you appear to be comparing apples and oranges. If Side's thoughts are published somewhere by somebody else in a professional, i.e. commercial format, then we can talk. Wikipedia is not concerned with "truth" only verifiability by reliable sources. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:13, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avantgarde-metal.com 

message: I removed Tiamat. From my judgement, there is nothing Avant-Garde about them at all; all their songs just sound like regular gothic metal. Their wikipedia article does not list them as Avante-Garde Metal, and the citation listed was a link to a bio about Opeth. If someone can find a better source there is no problem with putting it back on the list, but it doesn't seem to be obvious that Tiamat belongs on the list, and the citation given was completely unrelated. The only place I can find the words "Tiamat" and "avant-garde" in the same place are avant-garde-metal.com and A Deeper Kind of Slumber, which is really more post-metal than avant-garde metal. 24.2.51.248 (talk) 00:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get what the issue with the citation is. It's a reliable source that refers to Tiamat as "experimental metal", which according to this page also counts as a citation for "avant-garde metal" (The line in question: "The album created a huge buzz among progressive metal fans, who had begun to lump the band in with other experimental metal bands like Tiamat."); it shouldn't matter whether the article is actually on Tiamat. It doesn't matter whether other Wikipedia articles refer to the band as part of this genre, either. (As a sidenote, not all of Tiamat's songs sound like regular gothic metal at all; their early stuff is death metal, Wildhoney is part progressive rock, and much of their later stuff is gothic rock with hardly any metal influence.) --LordNecronus (talk) 10:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Tiamat 

message: →Iwrestledabearonce has avant-garde metal in their page, why are they not listed as one of the bands here in this page? Jw, they'rea notable worthy band, so why can't they be in the list as well?←--IAmSuchALoser (talk) 15:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iwrestledabearonce 

message: I added Benea Reach, only to have the addition reverted. Is it a question of whether they should be classified as avant-garde metal, or whether they are notable? The latter I can understand, but the former I cannot. The review says that "You'll hear everything from doom to metalcore to avant garde to math metal." If this does not qualify it as avant-garde metal, then as far as I can see the given sources for Ulver and Maudlin do not qualify, as the sources do not explicitly call them avant-garde or experimental metal, Triptykon should not be included because it says that the album is beneficial to fans of avant-garde metal, not that it is avant-garde metal. Again, if Benea Reach is an issue of notability, I will concede, but if otherwise, some other bands should be removed as well.--3family6 (talk) 22:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just ignore this, I have moved way past this.--¿3family6 contribs 03:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Benea Reach 

message: It's been a while since I last checked this article, and I personally feel that the list of avant-garde metal bands has taken a turn for the worst. However, I'll try and ignore most of it, in keeping with Wikipedia's policies regarding citations, and concentrate on one artist that I think I can argue for the removal of: Pentagram.
When I first saw Pentagram listed, I laughed, assuming it was the American doom metal band that has fuck-all to do with anything experimental or avant-garde. Then I remembered that there's more than one metal band called Pentagram, and that I wasn't sure which band was listed -- was it the aforementioned American band, was it the Turkish band that I've never listened to, or was there some other Pentagram that actually plays avant-garde metal that I've never heard of? I clicked on the source and found that the page is unavailable for viewing, meaning there's nothing that reliably backs up Pentagram's inclusion.
So, what I'm asking is: until a reliable source has been found that actually calls them avant-garde metal or experimental metal (that I can also actually read), could Pentagram be removed from the list? --LordNecronus (talk) 23:13, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm... that's odd. I was able to access the source when I found it about a week ago or whenever it was when I made the edit. I can assure you that the quotation is accurate, and though I thought it a rather odd statement, a reliable source is a reliable source. I'm leaving for a vacation tomorrow, so it might be a few days before I can try and find out if someone actually has the book or some form of access to it to confirm the accuracy of the source. Why Google Books no longer shows it I haven't the faintest clue.--¿3family6 contribs 02:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Source is working now, it definitely refers to Pentagram as "avant-garde metal". However, I still feel the need to argue this. The article actually features a definition for avant-garde metal ("Avant-garde metal, also known as experimental metal, is a subgenre of heavy metal music characterised by the use of innovative, avant-garde elements, large-scale experimentation, and the use of non-standard sounds, instruments, and song structures." - and it's sourced) that we're completely ignoring (and contradicting) just to add any old band that's referred to as part of the genre, regardless of whether they actually display any traits of the genre. Adding Pentagram to this article is like adding Nightwish to the list of black metal bands just because Allmusic refers to them (incorrectly) as "symphonic black metal"; it's very obviously incorrect because the bands themselves don't display, in their music, the traits necessary to be defined as part of those genres (ie. Nightwish isn't musically extreme, Pentagram isn't experimental). --LordNecronus (talk) 18:58, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: First, the allmusic reference for Nightwish is a genre tag, and those have been deemed unreliable by consensus, mostly because they are unattributable to an author. But for the main point, 1) the article does go on to say that "there is no convention or criteria to exactly define the genre" and 2) claiming that Pentagram is not avant-garde metal even though a source says it is, is an example of original synthesis, unless there is a source that says that Pentagram is not avant-garde metal.--¿3family6 contribs 19:31, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of continuing to argue with you on this, I'm going to ask about something else: which Pentagram is being talked about? There's more than one Pentagram, and there's a chance the Pentagram being talked about in the source isn't the doom band (that objectively isn't avant-garde, regardless of whatever rules you try and counter me with). Unfortunately, the source just says that Pentagram (a Pentagram) is avant-garde metal without going into further detail; I assumed it was the doom band because they're the most popular Pentagram and therefore the most likely to be mentioned, but it's unclear which Pentagram is being talked about. Perhaps we should confirm which Pentagram the author is talking about before we put them on the list as a "notable" avant-garde metal band? --LordNecronus (talk) 21:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good point, I'll need to do digging.--¿3family6 contribs 01:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Going by that info, it does seem that the author is referring to the American band, but it's just baffling to me; why would he call such a straight-forward band "avant-garde"? I'm tempted to find some way to contact the author so that he can hopefully clear this up and explain why he mentioned Pentagram, but that's probably not going to make much of a difference with the article. --LordNecronus (talk) 23:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pentagram? 

message: What the f*** is going on with the list of bands? We could remove 90% of listed bands...Vater-96 (talk) 22:01, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be much less painful to rewrite the whole article. This is sad... very sad. — NikFreak (leave message) 22:04, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with NikFreak. P.S. Sorry for the "inappropriate" vocabulary for Wikipedia.Vater-96 (talk) 22:07, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

text: If you thought that merging "experimental metal" and avant-garde metal was wise, than explain terrible ratings under the article. P.S. "Experimental metal" is not real genre! It is imaginary genre same as Dark metal etc. Vater-96 (talk) 13:36, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't merge the the styles, they were merged a long way back, before I'd ever even heard of either style, and it doesn't matter anyway, as the merge is sourced. If anything, my recent edits actually separate the two styles somewhat, as the article now points out that experimental metal can also refer to post-metal (I also think it refers to mathcore, but I don't have a source to confirm that.) I personally agree with your P.S. statement, and many would extend that to include avant-garde metal as well. It should be noted that the article does say that the term "avant-garde metal" is fairly nebulous.--¿3family6 contribs 14:02, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  List?! 

message: Need sources to state black metal's origin for this genre. I don't disagree, but we need a source. I've tagged it, but removed extreme metal as it's not mentioned in the prose. Remember, not everyone coming to this article will know what this genre is, and we don't want to make it more confusing. Thoughts? Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Black metal is certainly indirectly mentioned as an origin throughout Jeff Wagner's book. The difficulty is that I don't have a personal copy, and some of the pages that I referred to when I wrote much of the prose are now unavailable in Google or Amazon previews. Death metal is mentioned directly in the article. I could probably expand some of the info about band's like Celtic Frost, which blurred extreme genre categories, which would help explain why the broader term is used, not just death metal. The regional scenes are mentioned directly in the prose, so there shouldn't be a problem there (I removed Sweden though - I don't know when or why that one was added.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: My issue with extreme metal is, since it's just covering these specific genres, it's not a good term to use. Extreme metal is not it's own single genre. For example, Doom metal is considered part of that style, but the article doesn't state that Doom metal is derivative of Doom. Since it's not sourced, I don't think it should be included. Thoughts? Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:15, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Extreme metal is an umbrella term, I agree, but it often is treated as a genre by sources. Part of the issue here is that bands like Celtic Frost and Voivod, who pioneered extreme styles of metal, are difficult to categorize (which makes since considering that they were avant-garde), but I think "heavy metal" is too broad a term. They definitely were extreme, but whether they were speed, thrash, death, or black metal (especially with regard to Celtic Frost) is hard to specify.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:32, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources needed

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Avant-garde metal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120331041210/https://www.areditions.com/journals/notes/66.4Tear/Sound/09_SndRecRevs_pp840-850.pdf to https://www.areditions.com/journals/notes/66.4Tear/Sound/09_SndRecRevs_pp840-850.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120404151554/http://www.montrealmirror.com:80/wp/2012/03/01/music-reviews-71/ to http://www.montrealmirror.com/wp/2012/03/01/music-reviews-71/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:59, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Meshuggah has very little to do with avant-garde metal. They're not experimental nor atmospheric and nearly all songs have a similar structure. The only experimentation in their music was the beginning of the extensive use of polymeters in the early 90s which has since defined their sound. Vrezerino (talk) 01:21, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meshuggah?