What's in a (sub)genre?
In our “What is Heavy Metal” episode of Reality Alternative, we defined and tossed around a number of “subgenres” of heavy metal. Arguments surrounding subgenres proliferate the modern metal community, with discussions typically centered on how to classify a band or album, or whether one subgenre is better than another, or perhaps most interestingly, what defines any given subgenre. As the Reality Alternative banner expands beyond the podcast, I’ve set out to do a series of articles that dive deep into different subgenres metal, exploring what defines that genre, its history, paragon examples of the style, and my own personal take. But before we venture off into what the hell nautical-themed funeral death metal is, we really need to take a step back and do our favorite thing: semantically define what a subgenre is.
Wikipedia tells us that a music genre is “a conventional category that identifies some piece of music as belonging to a shared tradition or a set of conventions.” Tomes worth of scholarly pages have been written about the topic, particularly in the context of “art music” vs “pop music,” or whether genre is even a useful way to categorize music at all. I’m no expert in all of that; I just want to hear dudes scream unintelligibly into microphones over distorted guitars. However, what I do know is that in the metal community, despite attempts from literally every band to avoid them, the breakdown of Heavy Metal into smaller subgenres is a tradition that’s here to stay and is worth exploring.
So what is a subgenre? I’d rather ask a more important question: why are subgenres useful? Us humans’ most successful invention is language—our ability to communicate complex ideas efficiently and precisely. Our use of classifications and categories is a major part of that, and metal subgenres are no exception. To use a stupid analogy: when you point out a dog, you have a few options available to you: you can call it an animal, a quadruped, a canine, a pet, a dog, the breed type, or most commonly, a real good boi. Each of these labels are useful in different contexts, some specific and some more broadly. However, there is a particularly effective range of “specific enough” for most given situations.
To double down on the dog analogy, it’s infrequently helpful for someone to refer to their dog as “animal”: it’s too broad and leaves a vague picture in your mind. At the other end of the spectrum, it’s not always expedient for them to explain every detail about their brindled, country-raised, purebred Schnitzacockadoodledo: now only dog enthusiasts will understand what they’re referencing and, frankly, you might just come across as a pretentious weirdo.
To bring this back to metal, subgenres are not just useful, but absolutely necessary. Metal is already technically a subgenre of Rock, but to call anything Rock isn't far off from calling something “music” in any popular context. It’s also probably unnecessary for me to describe a band to any non-metalhead as anything but “metal.” Yet for me to talk with a fellow metal fan and describe a band as “metal” would leave them asking for more clarification. While subgenres shouldn’t be restrictive or prescriptive, having a common nomenclature of categories and descriptions makes discussions and analysis of heavy metal more streamlined and fruitful.
So back to defining a metal subgenre. I argue that metal subgenres are: Groups of metal bands categorized primarily on common sonic components. I’ve always felt strongly that actual differences in how a band sounds should determine subgenre classification. Many will argue and categorize based on time, place, themes, or lyrical content. All of these are important factors in defining a band (and some common subgenres based more on those factors are here to stay), but the base subgenres should remain sonically linked and the other factors can be viewed as modifiers.
A good example is the bands Alestorm and Swashbuckle. Both bands dress like pirates. Both bands sing about pirates. Hell, both bands even emerged and rose to respective popularity around the same time. Hence, many people refer to these two bands as Pirate Metal and often compare them. Yet, let’s examine:
Alestorm
Let’s focus on what defines Alestorm’s sound. Clean-ish vocals, pretty standard heavy metal instrumentation, but with the addition of the keytar providing accordion-esque lines driving much of the song, as well as differentiating the band. More recent Alestorm adds even more elements, such as increased orchestration and harsh vocals, with the addition of Elliot Vernon on keyboards (because every band needs two keyboard players). Even with these additions, It’s safe to say that Alestorm’s sound puts them squarely in the Folk Metal genre, or possibly the Power Metal genre, as their sonic elements align more closely with other bands in that genre such as Turisas or Korpiklaani.
Swashbuckle
On the other hand, Swashbuckle’s sound is much more aggressive. The production style is heavier, they’re much faster, and their vocals are harsh. Despite the fact that their album has a number of nice acoustic interludes, their model is short, fast, aggressive songs about pirates. Swashbuckle can easily be placed in the Thrash Metal bucket, and a particularly heavy variant of Thrash at that.
So, while many will call these bands Pirate Metal and argue one is better than the other, it’s truly an unfair and unreasonable comparison: they sound completely different, and unless you’re taking their pirate theme way too seriously, there’s nothing else that should dictate these bands’ connections. Both can be given the modifier pirate-themed, if relevant. Alestorm = Pirate-themed Folk Metal; Swashbuckle = Pirate-themed Thrash Metal.
Let’s go through another case study, one with a bit more nuance. We’ll focus on three bands of interest, although this example can be applied across a number of other groups: Amon Amarth, Tyr, and Bathory.
Bathory
Bathory is a legendary act in metal history, and arguably the creator of a genre many people call “Viking Metal.” Their early sound was rooted in black metal, yet by their album Hammerheart it had transformed into something different. Their sound can be described as slow and raw, yet with a lot of room to breath; acoustic guitars, nature sounds, etc. Although their sound continued to soften as their career progressed, the shift from Black Metal to Viking Metal helped to spawn an entirely new sound.
Amon Amarth
Amon Amarth is a beast of a band that has held its footing as the viking-themed metal band. Yet they sound dramatically different from Bathory: much more aggressive, faster, and a cleaner production style. They are perhaps the definition of what many call Melodic Death Metal, sounding similar to bands like Arch Enemy or Dark Tranquility out of the Gothenburg scene in Sweden (we’ll get there).
Týr
Last but not least, Týr is a band hailing from the little-known Faroe Islands equidistant between Iceland, Norway, and the British Isles. They also sing about Vikings, yet their sound is a bit harder to describe: straight forward and melodic, very guitar focused, but with a distinctive folk influence derived from traditional melodies and progressions rather than folk instrumentation itself, and a unique harmonized vocal element. Not every band fits perfectly in a bucket, and Týr is one of those bands, but I think most people would safely categorize them as Folk Metal.
So three bands, all that live, eat, sleep, drink (from a horn) vikings, yet with three entirely different sounds. This example is made more complicated by the fact that, for better or worse (read, worse), Viking Metal has become a subgenre in itself with a specific sound. So if Tyr is viking-themed Folk Metal, and Amon Amarth is viking-themed Melodic Death Metal, does that make Bathory viking-themed Viking Metal? Here’s where my pedantic definitions start to fray...could you have a non-viking themed Viking Metal band that maybe sings about robots or existentialism or gore? That probably exists but it does seem like a strange proposal.
So where does that leave us? These examples show the necessity of subgenre classification based on sonic elements over lyrical content or imagery. If I meet a fellow metal weirdo on a train and decided to make both of us distinctly uncomfortable, I might strike up a conversation and say “I lean more towards Viking Metal.” It would be an awkward conversation (well, more awkward) if he immediately jumps into bands that sound like Amon Amarth. So as we move forward and take a look at bands or metal subgenres, I’m going to follow a few general rules:
Start with a base subgenre
I.e., Death Metal, Thrash Metal, etc.
Move on to sonic modifiers
I.e., progressive, symphonic, blackened, etc. These modifiers reference specific sounds, styles, or even other subgenres to provide an additional layer of description to the sound
End with thematic modifiers, when relevant
I.e., modifiers having to do with lyrics, imagery, or themes
Or, modifiers having to do with time, place, or other historical considerations
With these in mind, we can rely on a common language for discussing metal and its insane family tree. Subgenres are not to be ridiculed or decried as pedantic; rather, their necessity of existence demonstrates the diversity within metal and brings a level of credibility (albeit very nerdy credibility) to the genre as a whole. And before the naysayers emerge, let me be clear: subgenres should always remain a force for Good and Justice™. They should not be used to restrict creativity or force artists into a box. The mixing and experimentation of sounds and styles is part of what makes the metal scene so diverse and interesting.