Talk:Thrashcore

I think I'm going to remove some bands from this.

Totalitar are a great band, but I really can't say they're a thrash band, more or less straight up scandi hardcore.

Totalitar are d-beat, aren't they? I always thought of Thrash as a form of punk, and Thrash Metal as a form of Cross-over. Though then again Hardcore itself started as Punk with Metal influence, so Thrashcore might as well be considered a fusion of two different forms of cross-over. Nagelfar

-Where are people getting this genres, whats up with all these new terms noisecore swedecore thrashcore? we only need heavy and power labels to complete the exact same "metal" labels (heavy metal, thrash metal) Ifdaysend

Possible merge?...

I rarely, if ever, hear anyone refer to the term "thrashcore," as opposed to "thrash metal," "crossover," "crust," etc. It also appears that only a small amount of bands comprise the genre, as opposed to the countless number of bands that play related styles. It seems like it should either be merged with the hardcore punk page, or the thrash page. Seems excessive for it to stand on its own. 65.67.100.161 07:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

It certainly isn't metal. It is a style of hardcore (punk). If thrashcore should be merged with the hardcore page then so should Crust Punk, Discore / D Beat, Metalcore & Grindcore etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalosaurus (talk • contribs) 20:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

What?

Some asshole said that thrashcore has mid level mainstream popularity, that is hugely wrong. Thrashcore is deeply underground and few have ever even heard of the genre, but I do believe it should still have its own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.58.199.208 (talk) 00:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow! Great job guys! This article really got better since I helped writing some of the early stuff. (Not an english native speaker so I couldn't have done it this good anyways) But an you be sure about lacking mainstream popularity? When I got into hardcore, there was a phase when it all sounded like this. Plus some of the crossover thrash brings you easily into early DRI and ST, etc

23:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)23:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)23:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)~

Clearing up some confusions, perhaps?

I think there should be something that somehow either seperates or relates similar genres such as Power Violence, Crossover Thrash, Thrashcore, Crust Punk, etc. Example: I see Dropdead in Thrashcore and Power Violence, but It seems to me like Power Violence is part grindcore. I don't really hear any grindcore influence in Dropdead. And a question: is there a definite line between punk rock and metal, or are there cases (Power Violence?) where the two terms are interchangeable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.32.18.243 (talk) 18:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

This page at present is horrible. The OR needs to be removed or replaced with decent citations, particularly when discussing the relationships between thrash metal, thrashcore, crossover, power violence etc. as I'm left none the wiser, despite listening to many of these bands. Have any decent histories of the scene been written? Commercially-published in print copy for preference? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

In fact, the more I've read this page, the more awful I've realised it is. I started by removing all redlinks... if a band or record label is not notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, I seriously doubt it is notable enough to be mentioned. I also did some minor corrections to grammar and wording. Although there is already a 'sources needed' tag at the top, I added further tags to the statements that at present represent OR... this includes all of the delineation between the various subgenres. If a source isn't produced extremely soon it will have to be deleted as OR, and the best option for this sorry mess of a page would be a merge somewhere. As there is so much crossover amongst the bands (pun not intended) this may not be a bad idea. Thoughts? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

I'm gonna try and look for sources. If I can't with in a few days, move the article to a sub page on my user page. I'm asking this as I'm fairly busy and will barely have time to work on it with in the five days. Inhumer (talk) 00:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I realize it being unsourced is the main problem, but I think 123,000 hit on google shows some notability.Inhumer (talk) 07:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but the problem with the google search is determining how many are referring to the genre, or if they are refering to something different. I would say a google search is not a good argument for notablity. Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 18:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Steven Blush's book American Hardcore includes information on early thrash groups (D.R.I., C.O.C., some others). I've added the reference to the article. By the way, in reference to the above -- what else could the word "thrashcore" possibly refer to other than the genre we're discussing here? Even a cursory look at the articles brought up by Google should confirm that it's being used to refer to a subgenre of hardcore punk. Aryder779 (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Also, I'd like to note that Googling "fastcore" (a synonym of thrashcore) also brings up thousands of hits (though many of those don't actually refer to the genre). Aryder779 (talk) 22:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Google books also brings up 2 pages of references to the genre.Inhumer (talk) 00:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

All I'm saying is that google searchs should be taken with a grain of salt, and are not nessacerily indictator's of notability. User:Aryder779 has proposed that we merge this with powerviolence, therby transfer some of the pages. Also He/She has added a referance from a book on hardcore punk. While this is an inprovement, There are still some problems. For one, the book does not mean the genre is notable. We must take in to account when it was written and for how long does it discuss the genre. As many people may know during forming yaers of certain genres get tossed around before the genre solidifies (Ex. Black, power and death metal). Also, We should adress the fact that the main bands of the genre are often put into other genres. For example, DRI are almost always refered as crossover. The sheer amout of bands that are group into crossover(COC) and grincore(S.O.B) do not reflect well on the legitimacy of the genre. This futher leads to the question, what is the typical thrashcore sound? What shared qualities do these band share(other than being fast) makes this a genre? The article does not make a clear argument for the existance of this genre, and I don't think anyone can beacause this genre does not exist, but is merely a group of bands randomly throw togetherJohan Rachmaninov (talk) 02:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

The book was written in 2001. I feel this is a contemporary source. If you'd like, I'll go borrow my friends copy and let you know the page numbers. As to the groups being discussed as part of other genres: One difficulty is that these groups were initially referred to as "thrash" (not thrashcore). Unfortunately, the term "thrash" is now usually short for thrash metal, and while there's a relationship between the two, there's a pretty big difference between D.R.I.'s first album, or Lärm, and Metallica. Crossover thrash and thrashcore are also distinct, because the early thrash groups don't have the heaviness associated with metal. That's why D.R.I. called their (mid-period) album "Crossover" (which is where we get the term): They were indicating that they had now begun to incorporate metal elements, which their early albums essentially did not. Now, one could say that their early albums are just "hardcore punk" and that we don't need another term, but this is also (first) vague and confusing, because there's clearly a pretty big difference between, say the "Dirty Rotten LP" and early Bad Brains, and (second), historically inaccurate, because it was widely recognized at the time that D.R.I., early C.O.C., Siege, etc., were doing something different (i.e. much faster), and that this "something different" was not crossover, because it didn't borrow from metal. Further, there remains the difficulty of what to be done with contemporary groups (Limp Wrist, Some Girls, Dropdead, Das Oath, all the others I mention) who are certainly not crossover thrash, nor are they thrash metal, nor are they grindcore. They're thrashcore, and they recognize their predecessors going back to 1983, and some rudimentary research will confirm this. Now some of these groups also overlap with grindcore and they certainly do anticipate in certain ways, but we only get grindcore in '86 out of the British crust punk scene, which is clearly distinct. There's also power violence, as I've said I guess I don't mind integrating all of this with the power violence article, but I'd like to add the caveat that this choice would be misleading in many ways, insofar as power violence is a brief moment of integration between thrashcore, noise rock, and grindcore defined more by what it excludes than by what it includes (namely, metal), which drew on thrash as it's main inspiration and which mainly fed into the renewed thrashcore scene (e.g., everything on 625 Thrashcore). At least if this all gets integrated into the power violence article, it's not as confusing or misleading as an integration with any of the other candidates. As to "qualities in common making this a genre": Thrashcore is defined by very fast tempos, blastbeasts, and brevity of song composition. It shares these traits with grindcore; however, grindcore also incorporates growling vocals and greater use of dissonance, and is often more closely related to death metal. It shares many traits with crossover thrash, but crossover thrash is generally slightly slower, includes guitar solos, and typically longer compositions. Thrash metal, which is distantly related, borrows a similar emphasis on speed and intensity, but places these moments in the context of much longer compositions, and has a vocal style much closer to heavy metal. Thrash metal groups also have a distinct cultural and conceptual heritage, owing to a background in metal rather than in punk (so the antimilitarism and snotty anti-authoritarianism of thrashcore are muted or discarded). Thrashcore is also closely related to power violence, though power violence, is typically more experimental in its rhythms (odd time signatures) and more dissonant and closer to noise rock. I realize that I've largely resorted to a negative definition (defining thrashcore by what it is not rather than only by what it is), but that's necessary because so much terrain is shared in common by various extreme forms of rock music. While many of these groups might seem to be reclassified as crossover or grindcore, I'd like to insist that some of them cannot be (the more recent groups, in particular -- there's no way to classify Das Oath except as thrashcore). More importantly, even if D.R.I. did *become* a crossover group, it is incorrect to say that they always were (as I said, the "Crossover" album indicated a departure, and they lost many fans because of it). And even if Siege could be said to be a proto-grindcore group, this only draws to attention to aspects of thrash that anticipated grind without directly creating it (grind comes from sped-up crust, not from thrash). These groups are not randomly thrown together at all. They share a fan base, they tour together, they recognize their lineage, and they would be irritated to be assimilated to grind or crossover or whatever. Buy a contemporary issue of Maximum Rock'n'Roll. Go to a DIY hardcore show and strike up a conversation with a punk rocker. You'll see what I mean. Aryder779 (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I have to give credit for your dedication. Now, from what I can tell, you are saying that thrashcore is an extremly fast verision of hardcore, correct. Now, I am open to intergrating this article into PV, but it would be more convienent if we could improve the article. It would be great if you could get a hold of said book and even better if you could incorperate this into the article. You also mentioned that some bands refer to themselves as thrashcore. Find referances that state a major bands opinion that is such, and it could add some real ligitmancy to this page. This would be preferable to the alterative merging(which would be troublesome at best). That being said, I can understand the difficultly of trying to navigate the genres of extreme music. Godd luck at finding some sources Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 23:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I've added a ref. to an interview with Max Ward of Spazz and 625 Thrashcore in which he refers to the Bay Area thrashcore scene. Any further investigation of that website will reveal other references to "thrash", which clearly refer to "thrashcore", rather than to thrash metal. Aryder779 (talk) 00:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedcore

Both this article and the Speedcore article explicitly explain that Speedcore is not related to Speedmetal, but rather of sub-genre of Electronica from the 1990's, going as far as to say "Not to be confused with Thrashcore or Speed metal", as though that is a false assumption. However, in the 80's we referred to crossover between Speedmetal and Hardcore punk as Speedcore. To back this up, MRR's Feb 1985 issue is apparently dedicated to Speedcore, crediting the name to Pushead (at least according to the book "This Ain't the Summer of Love: Conflict and Crossover in Heavy Metal and Punk" by Steve Waksman.)Can we change the notation on the current Speedcore page to instead read: "For the combination of SpeedMetal and Hardcore, see Thrashcore" and then add Speedcore as a synonym on the Thrashcore page, especially as there isn't a single citation verifying the Electronica reference at all?Sheriffjt (talk) 03:25, 12 June 2013 (UTC)