# What does Post-[music genre] mean?



## TMM (Mar 9, 2010)

Just something I've wondered for a while... what do the post-genres mean? Like 'post-punk', 'post-hardcore', or 'post-metal'? I know the prefix typically means 'after', but in this case, it seems to be synonymous with 'worse-version-of-', or the suffix '-core'. For example, 'post-hardcore' seems to mean 'worse-version-of-hardcore', in the same way that 'metal-core' obviously means 'worse-version-of-metal'.

Any thoughts?


----------



## willyman101 (Mar 9, 2010)

No idea really. Post rock is used cos technically it's the same instruments as one would use in rock typically, and post metal is basically an amalgamation of post rock and metal - metal with quiet passages, ambience etc.


----------



## Hollowman (Mar 9, 2010)

Dude, I old school. I've been trying to figure out what all these things mean myself.like all these "post" and "core" bands. IT's All Metal or Punk or Hardcore. Right?


----------



## vampiregenocide (Mar 9, 2010)

Any music influenced by a particular genre and sharing traits, but with a more recent approach and not of the time.

Seether for instance are post grunge. They aren't grunge because grunge ended in the mid nineties, and their music is a lot more mainstream, well produced and refined. hence it becomes a new genre but the influences are still obvious.


----------



## TMM (Mar 9, 2010)

Hollowman666 said:


> It's all Metal or Punk or Hardcore. Right?



Yep, as far as I'm concerned. From my perspecive, any metal-core band I can think of that I've heard was just a less interesting to listen to metal band. "Death-core" typically strikes me as being 'dumbed-down' death metal.

Maybe you can just translate 'post-' and '-core' to mean, "don't-waste-your-time-listening-to-this-version-of-".



vampiregenocide said:


> Seether for instance are post grunge. They aren't grunge because grunge ended in the mid nineties, and their music is a lot more mainstream, well produced and refined. hence it becomes a new genre but the influences are still obvious.



I don't know, I just see them as being Grunge, a decade later. A genre can't "end"... hell, classical has been around much longer than any of these "post-" genres, and people are still writing classical music.

I get the impression that bands identifying as "post-" and "-core" are really just bands in the attached genre, trying to make themselves sound more interesting, current, or sophisticated by using a trendy term. Who knows, I could be wrong, though.


----------



## HeartCollector (Mar 9, 2010)

vampiregenocide said:


> Any music influenced by a particular genre and sharing traits, but with a more recent approach and not of the time.
> 
> Seether for instance are post grunge. They aren't grunge because grunge ended in the mid nineties, and their music is a lot more mainstream, well produced and refined. hence it becomes a new genre but the influences are still obvious.



Thanks for explaining that bro


----------



## Demiurge (Mar 9, 2010)

"post-[genre]" to me usually means "hipster-approved version of the genre that's either a benign piss take on it, a toothless, declawed version of the it, or- most rarely- an exploration of the genre's tropes that actually progresses it in a positive manner."

Also, lots of beards and short sleeve shirts over long sleeve shirts.


----------



## TMM (Mar 9, 2010)

Demiurge said:


> "post-[genre]" to me usually means "hipster-approved version of the genre that's either a benign piss take on it, a toothless, declawed version of the it, or- most rarely- an exploration of the genre's tropes that actually progresses it in a positive manner."
> 
> Also, lots of beards and short sleeve shirts over long sleeve shirts.



Hahahahaha  fucking beautiful. Rep. Exactly my thoughts.

Out of curiosity, I just looked Attack Attack! up on wikipedia... I think I've found proof of your theory:



Wikipedia said:


> Genres:
> *- Metalcore
> - Post-hardcore*
> - Electronica



They're pissing on not one, but two respectable music genres!


----------



## vampiregenocide (Mar 9, 2010)

TMM said:


> I don't know, I just see them as being Grunge, a decade later. A genre can't "end"... hell, classical has been around much longer than any of these "post-" genres, and people are still writing classical music.
> 
> I get the impression that bands identifying as "post-" and "-core" are really just bands in the attached genre, trying to make themselves sound more interesting, current, or sophisticated by using a trendy term. Who knows, I could be wrong, though.


 
Their early stuff migth be grunge, but Disclaimer and onwards is far too polished and mainstream to be grunge. Still has the heavy distorted to quiet clean parts, and angst ridden vocals, but far too polished. Hence it carries on the style into a more fresher form. Thats why I think the 'post' prefix is deserved.


----------



## BigPhi84 (Mar 9, 2010)

LOL. I always thought, "What happened to nu-metal when it grew old (or is it oeld? )


----------



## vampiregenocide (Mar 9, 2010)

BigPhi84 said:


> LOL. I always thought, "What happened to nu-metal when it grew old (or is it oeld? )


 
Lol this is what I mean  Some music has its time, and while there are a lot of bands today that could've easily been part of that movement, I don't consider them of that era. Its like Punk was its own period. Classical was its own period. You can have Punk or Classical influenced musicians, but they weren't of the time as it were. Thats just my opinion anyway.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Mar 9, 2010)

My understanding of the word Post is it basically means the genre is made more moody and atmospheric, slower with more clean passages and rawer production until it basically sounds nothing like the genre it has in it's name.

Battle of Mice, This Will Destroy You and Mogwai are good 'Post' bands to check out.


----------



## Necky379 (Mar 9, 2010)

BigPhi84 said:


> LOL. I always thought, "What happened to nu-metal when it grew old (or is it oeld? )



ye olde nughmettle


----------



## WoodenAshtray (Mar 9, 2010)

Just 'cause a band has "post-" slapped on to the genre doesn't necessarily mean it's bad. I mean, Cult of Luna, Explosions in the Sky, God Is an Astronaut..


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Mar 9, 2010)

first off, theres some post metal and post rock that fucking own. isis, nuerosis, red sparrowes, calisto ect... so i dont get where this core=post which = suck. 


and 2nd, i dont think that post * means that someone is doing it after that style isnt in fad anymore, if thats the case, how could you have post metal and post rock when metal and rock are at their height?

I


----------



## vampiregenocide (Mar 9, 2010)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> and 2nd, i dont think that post * means that someone is doing it after that style isnt in fad anymore, if thats the case, how could you have post metal and post rock when metal and rock are at their height?
> 
> I


 
Yeah I don't get those two genre titles for that very reason.


----------



## Triple-J (Mar 9, 2010)

I view the term "Post" as meaning a more experimental and progressive variation on a genre which often comes after the initial rise (and fall?) of it yet still adheres to it's basic principles (think of it as a kind of musical mutation) for me the only relevant use of the term is when describing Post Punk/Post Metal and possibly Post Hardcore.

For example Post Punk is often a term used to describe bands which stick to the basic formula of punk rock but tended to be more forward thinking than their peers by incorporating electronics or elements of psychedelia etc into their music, but in hindsight "Post Punk" is the wrong term to use and "Progressive Punk" would be much more closer to the truth but it's journalists that create these terms and let's face it most of them are fucking morons anyway.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Mar 9, 2010)

Yeah progressive is probably more accurate, but then people would get that confused with the pre-existing progressive bands which are progressive in a different way.

Musical journalists are generally fucking morons though yes


----------



## SamSam (Mar 9, 2010)

From what I've read here and heard from anyone it appears to be a meaningless term that Hipsters throw about, I include many of my friends in this bracket. 

"Moody and atmospheric" nothing new. Black Sabbath were moody and atmospheric, loads of other classic bands were too. I still don't get it, but I don't get Hipsters either.


----------



## HammerAndSickle (Mar 9, 2010)

You're just being narrow-minded if you think post- and -core equal bad. That's the straight of it. There's great post rock and metal, and great metalcore and deathcore, as well as there being tons of shit in the "pure" realms of all genres.

I take "post" to mean "using the instrumentation and basic ethos of a genre of music and using it unexpectedly to push it forward." It's very similar to the "progressive" tag. A lot of people take prog as "odd meters and keyboards" but what it really aims to do is push the genre forward. I think Dream Theater or Opeth are pushing metal forward in the same ways that, Explosions in the Sky or Mogwai are pushing the "mainstream" of rock forward. Two sides to the coin.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Mar 9, 2010)

SamSam said:


> "Moody and atmospheric" nothing new. Black Sabbath were moody and atmospheric, loads of other classic bands were too. I still don't get it, but I don't get Hipsters either.



I didn't say it was something new, I said it's what is generally applied to the music which distinguishes it from the genre it was born from.


----------



## pink freud (Mar 9, 2010)

Post-Rock

It's ambient, doesn't follow the conventional verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-chorus-verse-chorus etc, has very little vocals and focuses on textures.

Post-Metal takes that, adds distortion, some heavier drumming and more vocals.

Post-Anythingcore is a contradiction, in my opinion.


----------



## Zamm Bell (Mar 9, 2010)

You could relate it to a "post modernistic" view point or take of a style of music. Such as Talking Heads with a punk version of funk music with malformed into a variation of world beat or somthing. I dont know


----------



## Necky379 (Mar 9, 2010)

^ that mogwai video was too cool. i never heard them before this. i got to say, i like it.


----------



## Variant (Mar 9, 2010)

'Post-' is a prefix meaning: 

*"Music journalist that needs to coin a new take on an old sound but utterly lacks any sort of creativity because of being a music journalist."*


----------



## techcoreriffman (Mar 9, 2010)

I've never understood "post". But just because something has "core" thrown on it, doesn't make it bad. I'm sick of that. There are just as many terrible "pure" death metal bands as there are terrible "bree-bree core" bands. But when you take the great ones, like Necrophagist for death metal, or Veil of Maya for deathcore, you get great music. It's as simple as that. You can't say music sucks because of the genre.


----------



## Variant (Mar 9, 2010)

> You can't say music sucks because of the genre



I don't agree, I defy you to find a "good" crunkcore act.


----------



## techcoreriffman (Mar 9, 2010)

There are exceptions to every rule variant. 

[crunkcore is not a genre, it is a disease]


----------



## Xaios (Mar 9, 2010)

Seems to me like post-rock is what happens when you mix indie, avant-garde rock and shoegaze.


----------



## Variant (Mar 9, 2010)

^
That's because it is. "Post-metal" is largely atmospheric and progressive rock/metal ethic. I stand by the lazy/ignorant journalist statement.


----------



## Splees (Mar 9, 2010)

ignant thread is ignorant.


----------



## Xaios (Mar 9, 2010)

Splees said:


> ignant thread is ignorant.



Good to know it's both ignant AND ignorant.


----------



## Splees (Mar 9, 2010)

word.


----------



## HeartCollector (Mar 9, 2010)

Splees said:


> word.



Holy shit you live in alaska. Thats fucking dope


----------



## pink freud (Mar 9, 2010)

HeartCollector said:


> Holy shit you live in alaska. Thats fucking dope



Really? Everybody I've ever talked to who lived there said it sucks


----------



## signalgrey (Mar 9, 2010)

Demiurge said:


> "post-[genre]" to me usually means "hipster-approved version of the genre that's either a benign piss take on it, a toothless, declawed version of the it, or- most rarely- an exploration of the genre's tropes that actually progresses it in a positive manner."
> 
> Also, lots of beards and short sleeve shirts over long sleeve shirts.




Tell Fugazi that being a Post-Hardcore band makes them "hipster approved etc...."

if we are getting into this topic we need address the "wave theory"

theres a first wave "the initiatiors" 

the second wave "the influenced"

the third wave "the copies"

the forth wave " the commerical copy who dont acknowledge the primogenitors but who claim to be original"

the fifth wave and beyone "mass produced shit that doesnt resemble the 'original' but claim to be in the same vein"

Think of any of the big name primogenitors, they are all apart of some wave in their hey day, yet to us they are perhaps first or second wave. For example, Fugazi/Minor Threat, Joy Division, My Bloody Valentine, the Pixies, The Cure etc.... 

take it how you will.

the Post thing merely refers to the music that comes after the initial genre' popularity dwindled. so sooner or later we will have "Post Nu Metal" or "Neo New Metal". People love to have nice neat containers to put things in so if there is an option to place yourself in a nice neat container with someone else that you like...you will do so regardless if you should go in there. Its like saying hot sauce wants to be mustard because they are both spicy...but they are not the same thing. "This band" wants to be associated with "That band" because it will bring credibility, so the closest they can get is sharing a genre container.

well thats the theory i generally work with. doesnt always fit but...yknow..no ones perfect.

biggest pet peeve is "Neo- New- Wave".....what?
thanks for fucking THAT up MTV.

its early. i need some coffee.


----------



## Xaios (Mar 9, 2010)

I'm over in Whitehorse in the Yukon. Practically within spitting distance of mr. Splees.


----------



## Fred (Mar 9, 2010)

I wrote for a website specialising in reviews of instrumental music for two years - I hate the ridiculous tendency of lazy reviewers to invent genres just as much of the rest of you, but I really, really do not get this kind of statement:



TMM said:


> I get the impression that bands identifying as "post-" and "-core" are really just bands in the attached genre, trying to make themselves sound more interesting, current, or sophisticated by using a trendy term. Who knows, I could be wrong, though.



I appreciate you say you could be wrong, so this is by no means meant as a personal attack. All I want to say is that there are certain genres which have had the post- prefix attached to them which have been around for so long now that it's not worth trying to be a dick and ignore the easiest/most straightforward way to classify them by referring to the peers that they sound vaguely similar to. It's human nature to categorise things so as to be able to refer to them as a group more easily, which you have only confirmed by suggesting that you'd rather refer to them by a broader title whereby post-metal acts are just a variation on metal and post-rock is just a variation on rock. It is just a means of dividing the incredibly broad terms of "rock" and "metal" down further. I don't think you'd deny that hardcore is essentially a mixture of punk and metal/rock, so why deny that post-rock is essentially a mixture of ambient/shoegaze and rock or neo-classical, ambient and rock...

Black metal, death metal and thrash metal are all well-known terms used to denote different kinds of metal music which I'm sure you would accept differ widely in terms of their sound and aesthetic. Why not add post-metal or metalcore to the list? Metalcore is a mixture of metal and post-hardcore. Post-hardcore is a mixture of hardcore and various other influences from all manner of rock/metal. Post-metal is a mixture of post-hardcore and metal or post-rock and metal.

If you don't like the genre name, don't use it. Just don't get all high and mighty when other people like to find more specific ways to categorise the kind of music that they are talking about.


----------



## Splees (Mar 9, 2010)

I've been there once. I enjoyed it.


----------



## iondestroyer1527 (Mar 10, 2010)

"For example, 'post-hardcore' seems to mean 'worse-version-of-hardcore', in the same way that 'metal-core' obviously means 'worse-version-of-metal'."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!


----------



## signalgrey (Mar 10, 2010)

i still use my minor threat and fugazi reference.

use the wave theory!


----------



## Splees (Mar 10, 2010)

I for one love brocore. I can't get enough of it. I'm getting an isp decimator tomorrow so I can really clamp down.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Mar 10, 2010)

I have a soft spot for metalcore, and a bit of deathcore. Some days I even stick on some grindcore.


----------



## avenger (Mar 10, 2010)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> first off, theres some post metal and post rock that *fucking own. isis, nuerosis, red sparrowes, calisto ect...* so i dont get where this core=post which = suck.


 
post > core = suck

Thats what I am getting from this thread. 

I always found post stuff to be more atmospheric and texture based rather then straight out riffing. Its just a title to describe a certain sound. First there was metal, then came this atmospheric metal... hmmm lets call it post metal because came after the initial explosion of metal as a genre. 

Also most core sucks harder then its parent genre... except grindcore. There is some damn groovy grind out there.


----------



## jymellis (Mar 10, 2010)

im no nirvana fan by any means but i love how people tagged his music grunge when the person who wrote the music called it punk.


----------



## budda (Mar 10, 2010)

SUBGENRES I tend to ignore them 

I wondered a about postxcore as well


----------



## Fred (Mar 10, 2010)

jymellis said:


> im no nirvana fan by any means but i love how people tagged his music grunge when the person who wrote the music called it punk.



Haha, that's very true. And it's often the case that people who originate or play an integral role in the early years of a genre will come to hate being associated with that particular term. I know that Mogwai for one absolutely despise the post-rock moniker, but if I wanted to describe the kind of music they play to someone who hadn't heard them before, the truth of the matter is that it's a hell of a lot easier to say "they're post-rock" than "they're a predominantly instrumental rock band with a tendency towards ambient, space-y passages which build gradually towards explosive climaxes, often over the course of a longer than average song duration". Sure, it's non-specific, and there are extremely obvious traits of Mogwai which make them different to another prototypical post-rock band, but of course that's going to be the case... Give two groups of people exactly the same song to play and they'll still make it sound different. That's not the point of the genre name - it's to allow for easier classification. End of.

Some of the genre names are, I'll admit, phenomenally wanky. Anything with a "post-" in front of it tends to give off an air of superiority - "we liked what they were doing before us, but we're going to do it differently and much better". That's not the fault of the bands, unless they are the ones who come up with the genre name. It's the fault of the critics who decided that a "post-" prefix is the easiest way to convey what kind of sound the band go for. And although it has its pitfalls, I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with the "post-" prefix... Post-punk came after a period of a huge rise in popularity for punk, and although it maintained elements of the same sound, the first few bands of its ilk were very audibly different to what most would understand to be the standard punk band. So why not call it post-punk? Post-rock, post-hardcore and post-metal just followed in those footsteps, and although I wouldn't say it was the case that post-rock or post-metal chronologically followed a surge in the popularity of rock or metal (both of which have been pretty phenomenally popular for a long while now), like with post-punk they both take elements of their respective "mother" genres and play around with them in ways which makes them sound very unlike the standard perception of "rock" or "metal" bands.


----------



## jymellis (Mar 10, 2010)

i usually answer the "what do they sound like" question with"go listen to them". or i usually have somesort of musical device on me so i can say "here maing, check this shit out, and kick your own teeth out to this shit"!


----------



## TMM (Mar 10, 2010)

jymellis said:


> im no nirvana fan by any means but i love how people tagged his music grunge when the person who wrote the music called it punk.



Exactly. Even he didn't think a new genre name was necessary, and I'd bet that, similarly, most bands / artists that are credited with the birth of a new subgenre didn't consider themselves to be anything but their own take on the original parent genre.

I don't think things need to be classified at such a granular level. We all know that no genre title is ever going to adequately describe all of the bands that will subsequently be labelled as such, so why bother? Even if you're talking post-rock, when someone asks you about one band in particular, you're likely to describe them as, "they're post-rock, with electronic and world influences."

Spawn of Possession and Dying Fetus both consider themselves to be just "death metal", but they're far from being similar styles of death metal. As noted above, Mogwai don't like being referred to as post-rock. My point was, in my experience, a majority (for those of you who didn't catch this, terms like typically and majority ^= all, and I'm aware there are exceptions to every rule) of artists who identify _themselves_ as a post- or -core genre typically sounds like a watered-down version of the parent.


----------



## Fred (Mar 10, 2010)

TMM said:


> I don't think things need to be classified at such a granular level. We all know that no genre title is ever going to adequately describe all of the bands that will subsequently be labelled as such, so why bother? Even if you're talking post-rock, when someone asks you about one band in particular, you're likely to describe them as, "they're post-rock, with electronic and world influences."



A fair point, but I can't help feeling you just end up with some kind of sorites paradox if you take that kind of approach - where do you draw the line? If you can't have post-rock but can have rock, can you still have metal? Metal is about as based in rock music as post-rock is based in rock music. Would you rather you just end up with some sort of incredibly strict freedb-style break-up of genres, whereby you have to choose between blues, classical, country, folk, jazz, newage, reggae, rock, soundtrack or misc? All that happens if you get rid of the lesser subgenres like the "post-" and "-core" genres is that you end up having to spend even longer trying to describe what a band sounds like. Instead of me saying "they're post-rock, with electronic and world influences", I'd have to say "they're rock, with ambient, newage, electronic and world influences" or something along those lines. Or do we just say "it's music", and ignore our natural (and, more often than not, helpful) inclination towards comparison as a means of description?

Such subdivisions as "post-rock" and "metalcore" are clearly distinguishable - I could very happily describe the prototypical sounds of both of them to you - so it seems arbitrary, if not bloody-minded, to suggest that they are needless terms.



TMM said:


> My point was, in my experience, a majority (for those of you who didn't catch this, terms like typically and majority ^= all, and I'm aware there are exceptions to every rule) of artists who identify _themselves_ as a post- or -core genre typically sounds like a watered-down version of the parent.



Ah, now that point, although I don't agree entirely, is far more true. I wouldn't necessarily say a majority, but obviously I haven't done the kind of research that would entitle me to any sort of authoritative view on the matter, but it's definitely the case that a lot of bands who will automatically label themselves as post-rock or metalcore tend to be the most generic bands out there. That's normally precisely because they've gone out to write the kind of music their favourite bands (who have at some point been labelled with whatever genre description was deemed appropriate) have written, without taking into account the fact that those bands they are inspired by never set out to write "post-rock" or "metalcore" in the first place. Again, I guess that's hardly surprising in a way, taking into account the relationship between the words "genre" and "generic".

So yeah - I guess my overarching stance is that the "post-" prefix and the "-core" suffix aren't intrinsically bad or useless, but that approaching music with an intent to writing in a very specific and recognisable style (related to "post-" or "-core" genres) rarely achieves much other than some fairly uninspired and uninspiring music.


----------



## benanne (Mar 10, 2010)

Some of the posts in this thread make me weep. In fact the TS is pretty much a poorly disguised troll. You'd think the people would be a little more open minded in a community like this one. Some people seem to have a lot of trouble grasping the "subgenre" concept.

I appreciate a lot of post-rock, post-hardcore and post-metal bands. I don't think the "post-" reflects a set of similar qualities and properties of the music, in most cases it's just an uninspired name for an offshoot of an older genre, which has very little to do with any of the other post-*'s.


----------



## TMM (Mar 10, 2010)

benanne said:


> Some of the posts in this thread make me weep. In fact the TS is pretty much a poorly disguised troll



Hey, I can still read this  No need for name-calling here. At least 40% of us are adults.



benanne said:


> I don't think the "post-" reflects a set of similar qualities and properties of the music, in most cases it's just an uninspired name for an offshoot of an older genre, which has very little to do with any of the other post-*'s.



So why bother having them? Is it getting you any closer to categorizing the music if, in fact, they're still significantly different from one another?



Fred said:


> Would you rather you just end up with some sort of incredibly strict freedb-style break-up of genres, whereby you have to choose between blues, classical, country, folk, jazz, newage, reggae, rock, soundtrack or misc?



Haha, I have to deal with that on iTunes already! Doesn't bother me, though.


----------



## lucasreis (Mar 10, 2010)

*P*ut
*O*n a 
*S*hitty
*T*itle

And "differentiate" your band from others!


----------



## pink freud (Mar 10, 2010)

benanne said:


> I don't think the "post-" reflects a set of similar qualities and properties of the music, in most cases it's just an uninspired name for an offshoot of an older genre, which has very little to do with any of the other post-*'s.



I disagree. "post-" is essentially interchangeable with "ambient/symphonic-". By symphonic I don't mean violins or rip-offs of Bach and Mozart, but rather the textural intertwining of instruments set in build-ups and movements. All post-rock generally has that. And a lot of reverb. That's important too.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Mar 10, 2010)

benanne said:


> Some of the posts in this thread make me weep.



Same here, mainly yours.


----------



## benanne (Mar 10, 2010)

TMM said:


> Hey, I can still read this  No need for name-calling here. At least 40% of us are adults.


I'm not calling anyone names, I'm just indicating that the topic start is obviously intentionally provoking. I'm an idiot for falling for it, but I happen to like a lot of *-core and post-* bands.



TMM said:


> So why bother having them? Is it getting you any closer to categorizing the music if, in fact, they're still significantly different from one another?


Yes it is. Post-hardcore is different from straight up hardcore, so it is a (sub)genre in its own right. Same goes for post-metal and post-rock. It's just that you can't lump post-rock, post-metal and post-hardcore into one post-* category, because that's meaningless: the post-prefix means something else for each of these three examples, musically speaking.



pink freud said:


> I disagree. "post-" is essentially interchangeable with "ambient/symphonic-". By symphonic I don't mean violins or rip-offs of Bach and Mozart, but rather the textural intertwining of instruments set in build-ups and movements. All post-rock generally has that. And a lot of reverb. That's important too.


Your interpretation applies to post-rock, and to a lesser extent post-metal, but this doesn't work for post-hardcore or post-grunge. Which is basically my point.



Scar Symmetry said:


> Same here, mainly yours.


Bite me


----------



## Mattayus (Mar 10, 2010)

*P*retentious & *O*utrageously-*S*tagnant *T*oss

It's basically something that turgid cretins throw around when they feel the need to label bands in spin-off copycat genres. Now, if you want me I'll be in my time machine fucking off to the 90's when metal was awesome and you fuckin kids hadn't overthrown the internet yet. *puts on spats and a tophat* toodle pip.


----------



## TMM (Mar 10, 2010)

Mattayus said:


> ...I'll be in my time machine fucking off to the 90's when metal was awesome and you fuckin kids hadn't overthrown the internet yet. *puts on spats and a tophat* toodle pip.



Just awesome


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Mar 10, 2010)

benanne said:


> Bite me



Sure thing! 



Mattayus said:


> *P*retentious & *O*utrageously-*S*tagnant *T*oss
> 
> It's basically something that turgid cretins throw around when they feel the need to label bands in spin-off copycat genres. Now, if you want me I'll be in my time machine fucking off to the 90's when metal was awesome and you fuckin kids hadn't overthrown the internet yet. *puts on spats and a tophat* toodle pip.



Cheer up Grandad


----------



## robotsatemygma (Mar 10, 2010)

Post-anything to me means...

"We lost the balls to fully do what we previously did."


----------



## PeteyG (Mar 10, 2010)

In relation to the question in the original post, I'm going to disagree with the lazy journalist thing, in fact I feel that whatever original intensions I can imagine were quite useful.

The use of the "Post" prefix to me is a simple thing, I think the origin of the term will have been used by/for bands who were playing music that was a natural progression of whatever genre they had originally submersed themselves in when beginning a band. In terms of whether or not it should then be called "Progressive" is an interesting point, it depends on the band but I think that the use of "Post" is still apt in many ways. To me, the progressive term comes in when a band is still similar in many ways, but have much more explorative qualities within the confines of the original genre, and the post term comes when the group have made a departure from the genre itself, but still have the very noticeable sounds of that genre.

Along the lines of the whole idea of "Post" being a natural progression from a genre, it's a much more literal relation to the term, but also would include both the great creative stuff, and the much more waff music also like you all have been mentioning. In the past decade it has definitely been used more and more by bands who don't know what the fuck they are on about, and yes by lazy journalists, so the waff definitely outweighs the awesome in many ways.

Besides isn't this just a product of us hoomans? We who wish to pass judgement on a description, and therefore needing as in depth a description as possible?

Me? When people ask me what I listen to, I reply in answers packed with onomatopoeia, try it, it's hilarious.


----------



## signalgrey (Mar 10, 2010)

wow so much lameness happening


----------



## Daemoniac (Mar 10, 2010)

TMM said:


> Exactly. Even he didn't think a new genre name was necessary, and I'd bet that, *similarly, most bands / artists that are credited with the birth of a new subgenre didn't consider themselves to be anything but their own take on the original parent genre.*




This is pretty true... I read that Justin Broadrick, despite being one of the primogenitors of the "Grindcore" sound in Napalm Death, hated the term with a passion 

That said, "post" to me generally denotes a progression of the genre. It's not "progressive" per se, but you can hear the very strong influences of whatever the other genre it is, but it's been expanded and progressed to something different.

Take jesu; Traditional metal influences, there are blaring, detuned, heavy guitars, it's heavy as all hell, so it _is_ metal. But it's not "traditional" metal in any way, it's taken that style and pushed it into a more white noise/dark ambient sort of space with feedback and whatnot, hence the "post". 

Refused; Traditional "hardcore punk" elements to it, definitely, but progressed beyond the standard 3-chord-songs into more aggressive, better crafted pieces of noise-tinted hardcore.

I have nothing against genres or subgenres, as long as people aren't so stupid as to be blinded to good music by them... Which they are... both stupid and blind


----------

