What annoys you in OMI?

yasemino said:
my graphic doesn't change! I hate that!




I didnt find any tags in your profile. Maybe thats whay it stays...

Here here Gizmolico

I'd rather it was split as you said with some variants i.e. metalcore coming under metal tag =P.

I feel country should have its own genre as well along with RnB, I don't really care how these metal genres came about and don't give me the stupid metalfaggotry view that they were influenced by "Classical or Jazz" just to try to extent there music to been somewhat intelligent, I certanly don't hear Jazz in Opeth or Akercocke. Fair enough metal sub-genres should be taken into account and add points to the OMI but not to the same extent as main genres such as Jazz, Hip-Hop, Classical, Pop etc. Because a metal fan who just listens to 10 different metal SUB-genres should not have the same OMI of someone who listens to 10 different GENRES of music

You surely must see it this way.

I’m glad we have finally come to an agreement upon this! Yes I can hear Prog rock in Opeth but definitely not jazz lol. And certain bands like Cynic may be influenced by Jazz but I never heard it in their music. (I used to be a massive 1337 metal fan/idiot).

A good point but it still stands that clearly either metal fans are overcomplexifying things, or other music fans are oversimplifying things.

But still, no matter how many times you state the differences between Opeth and Sun O))) or whatever, they are still METAL bands. And while they are obviously different, both Coldplay and Nirvana come under the Rock tag. You cant tell me that two different metal bands deserve different tags when other bands dont?

How about if I listened to Jazz, Hip Hop, Punk, Ambient, Blues and Classical EQUALLY...Would it really be fair if I got the same OMI as someone who listened to Metalcore, Thrash Metal, Death Metal, Black Metal, Prog Metal and Symphonic Metal? Seriously?

The eclectic score is calculated on a basis of Similar Artists, while OMI is based on tags, so feasably you could end up with totally different scores if you listened to artists that shared the same tag but werent in each other's simiar artists section.

I think that would be a great idea, to amalgamate all the metal subgenres into one, all-powerful metal tag. Either that or some distinction be made between genre and sub-genre tags, so the latter are worth less OMI points.

And you do make a very valid point about other genres sub-classifications, because it wouldnt be fair to collect all the metal ones and not do the same with others, but I rarely see such sub genres, with the most prevalent tag for an indie band, for example, being indie, rather than a sub-genre. In metal, however, fans seem to take a positive delight in being VERY specific with their tags.
What I'm getting at is that other genres ARE generally pretty collected into one big tag, even though they are totally different. In indie, you have Arcade Fire alongside Franz Ferdinand, and those two bands are TOTALLY different. In hip hop you have Dr. Dre classified with cLOUDDEAD, who are even more different. In my OMI, the only sub genre is Folk Punk, and the only reason I dont "ignore tags" it is because the artists with that tag dont have another, non-subgenre tag I can put in there. Normally, if I have a subgenre, I get rid of it, because it ruins my chart.

Ha. Pretty good. Yeah it would be nice to see a more complex form of OMI, one that actually does represent a persons open mindedness, but its probably never goint to happen, so....
What we should discuss now is how many points to imaginarily deduct for every sub-genre in someone's OMI. I'm saying 10.

patysmen said:
tankianfan pisze:
@Patysmen, I dont know how much metal u listen to, but the difference between genres and subgenres of metal is ENORMOUS however I agree "brutal" or "technical" or "extreme" suffixes making it an entirely new genre is sorta dumb, however progressive death metal and normal death metal are 2 entirely different things.

That's what I meant actually :) I used all this labels just to enlarge that pointless suffixes meaning the same.

You got an inherent logical error here, because ALL genres more or less use the suffixes, metal fans are just A LOT better at applying them, and that's all. And what's the problem being correct in your tagging? That's the ideal thing really.

If I listen to trance I don't tag every electronica song I find as electronica as trance, I call it trance, goa trance, chill out, psytrance etc as they are properly called. Not my fault some people think that normal or classical trance is the same thing as chill out.

It's really just the same in metal but people are a lot better at tagging each invididual artist right because for us it matters for some reason.

How about no one cares as much about music tagging as metal fans are most of the time elitist.

And Opeth are metal deal with it, they aren't jazz, Akerfeldt may have been influenced by Jazz, but for one I do not hear any Jazz in there songs.

For the last Rhythym and Blues does not fall under Pop. Blues originated the whole genre, this isn’t pop music.

It’s like saying in the eighties with the thrash scene would have been pop music, does that mean Thrash Metal is defined as pop? No. It’s simply what is popular at the time, it’s barely a specific genre.

Just keep thinking you have an extensive music taste because you listen to 10 different metal sub-genres.

Winterstorms said:
How about no one cares as much about music tagging as metal fans are most of the time elitist.

And Opeth are metal deal with it, they aren't jazz, Akerfeldt may have been influenced by Jazz, but for one I do not hear any Jazz in there songs.

For the last Rhythym and Blues does not fall under Pop. Blues originated the whole genre, this isn’t pop music.

It’s like saying in the eighties with the thrash scene would have been pop music, does that mean Thrash Metal is defined as pop? No. It’s simply what is popular at the time, it’s barely a specific genre.

Just keep thinking you have an extensive music taste because you listen to 10 different metal sub-genres.



As I said, that's your problem, start tag your artists correctly and tell others to do so as well and you will see an equal amount of divserity among all genres, as it imo, should be. What's wrong with diversity?

Yes, Åkerfeldt has a strong inspiration of progressive rock in general, it's a flatout lie to say that just because a band isn't real this or that (for the matter, Opeth was never clean death metal to begin with, not even on Orchid, I have a feeling you have never listened to classical death metal, maybe you should listen to Åkerfeldt's sideproject Bloodbath to get a feeling of what real death metal is like) it doesn't mean that the genre shouldn't be properly reflected as such. Or do you consider progressive rock to be just rock too, although there are clear jazz influences there as well?

R'n'B is inherently a pop music genre, a lot of R'n'B artists are POP artists. I for the matter don't hear the blues in modern R'n'B either, but that's just my personal opinion. But I would NEVER argue to drop the "blues" part because the genre IS called like that. Neither did I ever say that Opeth should be called jazz metal, Opeth is a FUSION band, they mix many different ideas and genres and the fact we are sitting just right here, arguing what genre Opeth really is just proves that. See? Sometimes things aren't as easily categorized as you'd like to think, and in this very writing moment Opeth is about to move away from its metalroots, incorporating more and more rock elements. How do you solve that problem by just calling it metal?

And yes, Metallica was/is pop music, so was/is Iron Maiden. It just so happened to be that pop is a more an umbrella term for a very undefined genre (listen to pop 60 years ago and compare to modern pop) while we can easily classify an R'n'B artist or a thrash band. You are contradicting yourself saying "what is populat at the time", but hey, both Metallica and Iron Maiden are very popular bands and are constantly up running in the mainstream media as soon they release a new album etc.

And did you look at my charts? Probably you didn't since you assume I am just a stereotype metalhead because I primarily listen to metal. Yes, PRIMARILY, does it mean I only listen to metal? I have a very extensive musical taste, that's why I got artists like Astral Projection, The Pillows, L'Arc~en~Ciel, Koji Kondo, Motoi Sakuraba and Yuki Kajiura in my top 20. You will have to look wide and far to see any metal connection to any of these artists. Maybe I should just assume you thought that to be metal too, since I only seem to listen to "metal".