Encylopedia Metallum (The Metal Archives) 2.0

http://209.59.186.200/~metalarc

There is now a second version of the site. It can be viewed at the above link.

Great site run by morons.

For instance, why the hell isn't Soulfly on there? Oh, right. Because they're a "mallcore" band. Pffft!

The new layout made my bandpage look a lot better, but as a whole I haven't decided if I prefer it to the old site

It's ugly. The font colors are poopy.

Not to bad.

Wargod52

i havent exhaustively explored yet, but i dont really appreciate the change. ill become acclimated.

Eyesore wrote:

Great site run by morons.

For instance, why the hell isn't Soulfly on there? Oh, right. Because they're a "mallcore" band. Pffft!

There's a lot of bands missing from that site. Deep Purple, Thin Lizzy, Scorpions, Rainbow are ok, but UFO, Michael Schenker Group, Blue Öyster Cult, Gary Moore, Whitesnake are a no go.

Dokken, Stryper and Quiet Riot are ok, but no Ratt, Lynch Mob, Cinderella or Rough Cutt.

Die Happy are ok, but no Badlands or Red Sea? Not only did these bands share some members, but their sounds were pretty similar.

ultmetal wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Great site run by morons.

For instance, why the hell isn't Soulfly on there? Oh, right. Because they're a "mallcore" band. Pffft!

There's a lot of bands missing from that site. Deep Purple, Thin Lizzy, Scorpions, Rainbow are ok, but UFO, Michael Schenker Group, Blue Öyster Cult, Gary Moore, Whitesnake are a no go.

Dokken, Stryper and Quiet Riot are ok, but no Ratt, Lynch Mob, Cinderella or Rough Cutt.

Die Happy are ok, but no Badlands or Red Sea? Not only did these bands share some members, but their sounds were pretty similar.

Agreed Scott. Always thought it was funny that Deep Purple is on their site, but Led Zeppelin isn't along with the other bands you mentioned. Whitesnake, Ratt, Badlands, etc. all belong there. Also hate they they have rejected all the reviews I've ever sent them. You've read them yourself and know what I'm talking about. And Soulfly should definitely be there as well.

GrandNational wrote:

ultmetal wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Great site run by morons.

For instance, why the hell isn't Soulfly on there? Oh, right. Because they're a "mallcore" band. Pffft!

There's a lot of bands missing from that site. Deep Purple, Thin Lizzy, Scorpions, Rainbow are ok, but UFO, Michael Schenker Group, Blue Öyster Cult, Gary Moore, Whitesnake are a no go.

Dokken, Stryper and Quiet Riot are ok, but no Ratt, Lynch Mob, Cinderella or Rough Cutt.

Die Happy are ok, but no Badlands or Red Sea? Not only did these bands share some members, but their sounds were pretty similar.

Agreed Scott. Always thought it was funny that Deep Purple is on their site, but Led Zeppelin isn't along with the other bands you mentioned. Whitesnake, Ratt, Badlands, etc. all belong there. Also hate they they have rejected all the reviews I've ever sent them. You've read them yourself and know what I'm talking about. And Soulfly should definitely be there as well.

I wrote a couple reviews there and none got posted, so I don't even bother any more. I know several people reviewed Ultimatum's Into the Pit and Lex Metalis CDs, yet both only have one review each there.

I, too, have noticed they'll often reject a band for not being "metal", but accept a band that sounds almost exactly like them.

Yeah, they're a bit picky with reviews. I also wrote one for Into the Pit and they wouldn't post it. Strangely they did approve my Yngwie and Exciter reviews and all my reviews follow prettty much the same format

adrian wrote:

Yeah, they're a bit picky with reviews. I also wrote one for Into the Pit and they wouldn't post it. Strangely they did approve my Yngwie and Exciter reviews and all my reviews follow prettty much the same format

How can they be picky with reviews when 99% of the reviews there are horrible?

Are kiss and ac/dc still missing from the website?

I haven't visited it in such a long time.

I understand why some bands like AC/DC aren't on there. They're rock bands. Sure, if you were a teen in the 70s you probably think they're metal, but clearly this site is run by younger people, thus rock bands don't belong.

Of course, then why is Def Leppard there? And if they're all about metal, why is the whole discography for Pyogenesis there, for instance? That band went from being a doom-death band to pop punk. Why not keep it real and block certain albums?

Right, because the site is run by morons.

Eyesore wrote:

adrian wrote:

Yeah, they're a bit picky with reviews. I also wrote one for Into the Pit and they wouldn't post it. Strangely they did approve my Yngwie and Exciter reviews and all my reviews follow prettty much the same format

How can they be picky with reviews when 99% of the reviews there are horrible?

That's what confuses me. It seems like they are picky with what bands actually get reviews approved for.

I used the site to find new bands. Mostly thrash it has been helpful to me in that way.

I never tryed to submit a review there, I didnt know they were so picky.

Great site for information. Don't appreciate the change in design personally. Also hate the way that the admins randomly decide which bands can be in the archive. I think a lot of it comes down to personal preferences, i.e. maybe they just like Deep Purple and also to do with this whole 'metal' image the site likes to have. The reviews are also a load of crap, many just try to sound clever and fit as many big words in as they can, use stupid metaphors and overall aren't helpful at all, mainly because you can't understand a word they say. I also find the forum rather offensive, it's full of silly immature idiots who can't appreciate anyone else's opinions or tastes. Basically, it's a great site that is poorly run by idiots who give the genre a bad name with their stupid elitist views.

Some of the reviews are intersting, but alot of them just try WAAAYYYYYYY TOO hard to be clever sounding and instead come across as irritating and immature, I also remember the admins saying that they generally won't accept track-by-track reviews, which I think is total BS since track-by-track reviews are arguably more informative and helpful then general ones IMO.

adrian wrote:

Yeah, they're a bit picky with reviews. I also wrote one for Into the Pit and they wouldn't post it. Strangely they did approve my Yngwie and Exciter reviews and all my reviews follow prettty much the same format

Try submitting it again.

I find it odd that they reject so many Into the Pit reviews.

Eyesore wrote:

Great site run by morons.

For instance, why the hell isn't Soulfly on there? Oh, right. Because they're a "mallcore" band. Pffft!

I will admit that I have not heard newer Soulfly, but from what I've heard from others, they are groove/post-thrash albums.

I actually assume the reason they aren't on the site is because Fred Durst makes a guest appearance on their first album.

EDIT: Having heard Soulfly's newer stuff since I initially posted, their longtime exclusion was a joke. They should have been let on years before they were accepted.

To quote Eyesore, a site run by morons

I think soulfly used to be the site, but they got removed, I also recall that Rob Halford's Two was on there at one point but it's gone now, probably because it's more industrial then metal.

I use the site all the time, and find it to be a valuable resource. However, I have the same beef with it that you guys. I've even have had bands rejected because they questioned the existence of the band, even though I provided a discography, website, AND sound samples on MySpace!!!! And don't get me started on the review thing.

The new site takes getting used too, but it features some cool new features!

I use Metal Archives to look up info when I do a discography thread here, aaaaand...that's about it.