Pretty much. They are far touchier on the subject of "metalcore" (or anything with the -core suffix), eg. no Converge, or "alternative/nu metal", eg. fine to have Faith No More, but no way we are having Deftones.

That's why I call them Encyclops! In the land of the blind theyre still king!

Looks like he's releasing a new album with the illegals

Funnily enough, I just discovered Def Leppard are on Metal Archives

They couldn't leave Def Leppard out because of their early albums.

Not saying I personally have a problem with it, but I do find it strange that Def Leppard snuck in, yet Slipknot is deemed 'not metal enough' and have far too many 'alternative moments', yet they are more than happy to claim Soundgarden, Alice In Chains and Faith No More.

Yeh there is a clear bias at work, but that isn't surprising.

The fact that people care about the content of metal achieves amazes me, it's like caring about the contents of kerrang.

I wouldn't say it is a care (I'm not going to lose sleep over it), more I just find it interesting what the larger collective are willing to accept and their general attitudes to certain polarising bands.

It's still the biggest and most influential metal encyclopedia out there though. Metal Music Archives where I do reviews is nowhere near the same size, but tries to cover a wider range of things.

Yes but metal archives is pretty much a laughing stock no? The admins are complete clowns.

Yes, but it doesn't stop it being big and influential.

Influential to whom?

No disrespect to yourself Vim, I'm genuinely curious.

Don't know if it is now, but I used to come across a few young guys who worshipped that site, and considered the message boards there to be the be all and end all of metal knowledge. Haven't posted there in many, many years, but I remember it being full of rednecks and elitist wannabes. At least if someone is being a cunt HERE you know that they actually know their metal and don't think Pantera/Suffocation/Les Legions Noire/Ulysses Siren are the pinnacle of metal achievement.

They're not?

Sub-question: Do we have to hate Suffocation because a million less interesting copy clone bands sprouted up a good decade after Suffo made their mark?

Agree.

I get the argument that they were a bad influence, but they have released enough good material over the years to be at least partially exonerated. Effigy and Pierced are essential death metal albums.

Their latest album was bloody disappointing though.

The previous one was decent, though.

It was their best since 1995 imo. Their only really good album since their reunion. That's why I found the last one so disappointing.

Terrible drum sound too.

No, I hate 'em because they're boring as fuck.

I haven't really followed them since their comeback. 'Human Waste', 'Effigy...', 'Pierced...' and 'Despise The Sun' are all I really need from them. I recall hearing 'Souls to Deny' when it first dropped and thinking it was pretty solid, but I never felt inclined to purchase for one reason or another. These days they has a Terrence Hobbs & Friends feel to it (Mullen doesn't seem to be as involved as he once was).