Talk:Hardcore punk/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

References

I have added some reference links to the article.--Libertyguy 14:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Emo and it's related subgenres

i already know for one that emo and screamo have pages on wiki that have been repeatedly vandalized by kids who claim it to a point where they developed some fucked up sense of exclusivity that just makes it even more misunderstood. i think emo, screamo, post-hardcore and it's influence should be listed under the hardcore section too. also, i think there should be more mention of significant zines and record labels that contributed to certain eras and the creation of certain subgenres of hardcore.

UK Hardcore

This artical is ONLY about American hardcore... it seems only from a USA point of view... back in the day many English punks called bands like Discharge, Varukers, GBH, (who all started in the 70s!!) HARDCORE... really I think the title should be called US Hardcore or something to distinguish it from the rest... also some fairly childish sniping "crassholes" ?? Does an encyclopedia need to include name calling ??? Maybe one problem is the UK and USA histories happened in parallel and not many people know both and the timelines... but to show the whole picture some big changes I think are needed.

According to this article it was comprised of Discharge who were crap, Crass who were popstars, poseurs and their fans were (cr)assholes and Napalm Death and the like who weren't hardcore. You Yanks are so up your own holes! Stutley 14:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Crass? Pop-stars? You can't even find a fricking album for the band ANYWHERE because they remained in such obscurity when they were around and are nothing but a cult hit band with an extremely devoted but small following. Posers? Don't think so. They are the only punk band I've seen come anywhere remotely close to actually becoming a problem for politicians. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.191.85.75 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 15 November 2006 (UTC).

I know, it's madness isn't it. I suspect that this page like most of Wikipedia has been overun by "celt" Americans looking to have a dig at anything and everything that came out of the UK. I think it's about time England had it's own wiki like France does, I'm sick of reading the bigoted garbage spewed by bitter yanks. Stutley 12:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

There is no separate Wikipedia for France; there is a French language Wikipedia, which is used by French-speakers from many different countries. The great thing about Wikipedia is that if you see problems with articles, you can fix them yourself (providing legitimate sources). There's no conspiracy to suppress information about the UK. The reason that there isn't enough information about the UK in this article is that not enough people from the UK are contributing to it. The solution to the problem of USA-centric content on Wikipedia is for editors like you to add information about other countries.Spylab 13:51, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

That may be the intention but the actuality is that it is the French version of things. Have a look on their music pages, the list of genres by country is classic, every country in the world bar England gets a mention... Stutley 14:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

aw, (...) what you said is wrong anyway, Discharge own, Crass are/were not popstars they're the only punk band that ever got discussed in Parliament as a serious threat. Don't you understand how relevant that is?! And Napalm Death were hardcore and they evolved into a faster more raw style. XdiabolicalX 18:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It would be pointless to create a seperate wiki site for the UK. The cultures of UK and US are virtually indistinct, expecially in the areas of music. I'm not a huge Crass fan, but I recognize that they are among the punkest of the punk and one of the only punk bands to be a serious threat. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.191.83.91 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

Not pointless at all, the average American (...), why would us English want to read their gibberish? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stutley (talk • contribs) 9:58, 117 December 2006 (UTC).

when you say Americans does that include Canadians as well? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.176.115.118 (talk • contribs) 22:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC).

first of all Discharge and Crass were definatley good bands....second of all, if you english (...) dont like reading our "gibberish" then why are you? third of all, wow...so much bitterness from the UK. So the UK has no love for us "yanks". Who Cares?? (...) Why not actually see what hardcore is about. Come down here and see our bands. Agnostic Front....Madball...(...) peace -SHARPtank(FLA USA)72.187.214.199 17:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Way to base your whole opinion on the country on one idiot's rant. Diabolical 22:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Totally biased article that I most definitely dispute most strongly. Hardcore punk starts with all the UK bands you guys have mentioned above. It was those bands combined with the US punk style that created bands like Dead Kennedys and Black Flag. Discharge et al also influenced thrash metal, bands such as scene stalwarts Exodus still cite their influences as NWOBHM - particularly Maiden and Diamond Head, bands like Discharge, and of course Motorhead. Anyway, I shall come up with references to support this and try to make some realistic additions to the page. This won't shortchange the quality NY/US hardcore such as Agnostic Front that followed shortly afterwards. apprentice_punk 22:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I have to say though that it does kind of seem pointless to mention UK hardcore since it's a virtually non-existent scene. Hardcore was mostly an american thing and Crass is arguably hardcore anyway since their songs weren't really all that fast.

Gravity Records

The only part of this article I feel worth changing is on the subject of Gravity Records. In the early 90's aside from Ebullition, which had a different thing going, Gravity Records in my opinion was the most important label to have immerged in early 90's "hardcore". Gravity Records did not put out any Locust records - I always found it strange that Matt Anderson or his intern never put out the Swing Kids, possibly because they were too gimmiky. Gravity Records also never became associated with grind or thrash - whoever wrote that must be confused with either GSL (who also never became purely associated with grind or thrash) or 31G of which is also not just associated with grind or thrash. Gravity Records put out a diverse set of music: drone, art-punk, san diego hardcore style, lo-fi indie rock and noise among others. These facts are important.

Hardcore / Metal Violence

"Unfortunately, the hardcore scene became associated with violence." Isn't this POV? Or does wikipedia promote humanism? ;)

"Veterans remembered that only a couple of years earlier, they were being attacked on the streets by hostile metalheads." Can someone expand on this in the article? The Anthrax guys said that at the time, metalheads couldn't even go to punk shows because they would get beaten up. Maybe this is wrong, but it would be good if someone could explain more about the friction between hardcore punks and the thrash metal people. Maybe something about the origins of the conflict between the communities?

Anthrax was a thrash metal band always looking for a gimmick. Among the living album they decided they would use NYHC images such as shaved head images, mosh, and the NYHC logo to exploit for thier own record selling greed. Well it was not too appreiciated. The story was the lead singer showed up at a NYHC show and was beat up. Mullets were just plain goofy as well as the metalheads were the first scene to exploit and commercialize certain elements of the hardcore punk scene. For example "moshing". nonetheless Anthraxs next gimmick was thrash metal rap..

basically the animosity was because in the first half of the 80's metalheads were one of the close minded people hardcore punks had to fight. In the late 80's ironically because of hardcore punk bands going crossover (ie. suicidal, DRI, COC)metalheads started to copy and take credit for many things started in the hardcore punk scene.

In response to the below, when "hardcore kids" dance ("hardcore dancing" is probably explained somewhere on wiki), metal kids tend to want to start push moshing or something of that sort, so confusion starts and the metal kids think that the hardcore kids are being agressive towards them, therefore fights happen often (atleast this has been the case in my experience in FL)

That still happens today. I was at a show in Ft. Lauderdale where it was a mix of hardcore bands and death metal bands. Generally when on band was on the kids for that band were the ones in the pit while the opposite genre just stood back and watched. There was still the occasional friction though. Funny thing is, while the kids for one band would act like they hated the music from the other bands, they failed to hear that the metal bands had distinct hardcore breakdowns or that the hardcore bands had distinct metal parts. So, these days I have to imagine that the close-mindedness is a little more equal if it wasn't back then.--Skeev 12:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

what?

"Radical environmentalism and veganism found their first popular expressions in the hardcore scene." -ever heard of a hippy? sorry, as much as I'd like to give hardcore that kind of credit, thats just plain wrong. The only thing that hippies ever did was sit round and get high.

Hippies sat around getting high and told people that things were uncool, that is true. There were some radical extremists that were a part of the hippy scene though they just generally don't get catagorized as such.--Skeev 12:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

-Hardcore kids were not that different from hippies. All of them claiming to be anarchists, yet they didn't really every do anything meaningful. They were just a bunch of self-righteous kids. They were the same as hippies, but (sometimes) without the drugs, but with guitars instead.

Yeah, the invention of the guitar in 1980 really revolutionized music. -mark

"The main difference between the two genres was Hardcore's front-runners such as Black Flag, Bad Brains and others would go on to embrace heavy metal influences into their music via Black Sabbath, etc; while the original British punk rock bands were rebelling against the heavy metal movement, which had been widely popular prior to punk's original inception."

this is complete horsecrap. punk/hardcore bands went on to many different styles of music. this was usually later on after they had been playing hardcore/punk for a while. Metal was not the difference between punk and hardcore punk. The main difference was the speed, DIY, and the less punk fashion. Damn metalheads have to revise history take credit for everything.

how do you add to the regional scenes in the table?

I have started a music genre stub for Australian hardcore (with further work required) but can't work out how to add it, or would s/o pls do it for me. Thanks. Paul foord 00:12, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

added Umeå hardcore

So i added Umeå hardcore in the "regional scenes" part of the box. Umeå hardcore is basically about, well umeå hardcore. I've been wanting to write about for a long time so other ppl of other nationalities can learn about it. i was also wondering why you call it hardcore punk, we call it just hardcore. hardcore punk is a mix of hardcorea nd punk, like som bands are. well thats it. maybe i will add some more about the current hardcore scene which is now growing again. ( totalt jävla märker and so on) thx!

Added Sweden and USA at time Australia added for consistency --Paul foord 12:02, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Totalt jävla mörker, not märker ^^

Please Note (re: Talk Page Comments Below)

I'm adding this at the top. I've tried to address most of the earlier comments in rewriting the page (on bias, sources, different regional scenes, etc -- the page is about 85% new material). However, it needs some fleshing out inre: late '80s and '90s hXc: Revelation Records; the placement of pop-oriented bands like All, Bad Religion, etc.; connections with the early grunge scene, and whatever else is relevant.

Also, the table is sort of not doing it, in my opinion -- the article seems to need a good photo. Auto movil 17:43, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

xXx

I made a bunch of edits, some of which may require justification:

Removed reference to Social Distortion. They weren't even a second-string band, and outside LA they didn't have many fans. Replaced them with Neg Approach and the Necros from Detroit (yes, I know, Maumee, OH, but their scene was Detroit), two hugely influential bands. Removed Zeroption form Toronto--while they were certainly better known than Social Distortion they were not a huge influence on the same level as the other bands mentioned.

Changed "first phase" to end in 1982 because the end of 1982 was the first crucial turning point in hardcore (the birth of MRR)--at the end of 1981 there were perhaps a dozen noteworthy hardcore bands and five or six noteworthy fanzines. At the end of 1982 there were at least a hundred bands worth noting and dozens of worthwhile fanzines. The bands from '80 to '82 were the vanguard, and built the infrastrcuture that was used by the hardcore explosion in '83 and beyond. 1984 (aside from Orwellian symbolism) is a pretty meaningless year in hardcore history.

The page is totally screwed up and in more ways than Paige mentioned. Citing American Hardcore as a worthwhile reference is just WRONG. The book is full of mistakes, half-truths and outright lies, and has a huge bias to boot. Mr Blush crucifies political bands and individuals (particularly left-wing ones), while praising self-avowed racists like White Power (the band, name taken from the movement). His sources are chosen to support his bias and he's inclined to blow off bands he doesn't like, no matter how significant they may be. I don't really feel like going in too much depth, but if you're going to edit this page based on material from American Hardcore, please reconsider.

Ugh! I'm trying to think of ways to tweak this article, but a lot of it is just wrong. The history is totally California-centric, somehow glossing over first wave punk bands in N.Y.C. and D.C. who helped to define the sound(s). It's unclear in the separation of this sub-genre from mainstream punk as the second wave began. It overemphasizes the significance of British bands. It mixes up bands in subtly wrong categories. It makes no mention of the two periods of subsequent crossover with mainstream punk. It gives no info on the influence of metal or oi. Most importantly, though, it leaves out a ton of history and important bands!

Is anyone absolutely in love with this page, to the point where they can't bear to see major revisions? Otherwise, I'd like to take a crack at really expanding it and adding a lot of detail. Any objections? -- Paige 13:35, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Update: I'm never going to get around to doing a major rewrite of this article. Paige 01:11, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I can't believe you that you would consider that bands who released records with 1000 copies in small scenes such as 1981 Detroit should bump regional heavyweights such as Zeroption and Social Distortion out of 'history'. I think that you don't really understand the nature of the hc world in the early '80's. The infrastructure that you talk about did not exist except for active local scenes. It was not an infrastructure, even in the loosest sense. Just because there were bands who fit the narrow subcategory of what hc is considered to be today, the reality is that those bands were past their prime when the interregional scenes really began to explode in late 1983 - early 1984. As usual, disinformation from popular fiction such as Blush's work seems to become the official line due to the lack of academic rigor that the Wikipedia promotes. Get you facts straight!

— speaking of getting your facts straight the Necros and Negative Approach both had Lps that sold 20,000-40,000 copies. Social Distortions were certainly big BUT it can be argued they didn't play hardcore. Zeroption were pretty unknown (out side thier region) in their day and totally forgotten now (they don't even merit mention on Kill from the Heart, a shrine to obscure regional hardcore bands). I asked 2 guys who live in Ontario who were going to shows from 81 onward and one had heard of them but said the history of the band was "embellished". I can definitely see dropping them as anything but a passing sidenote of a regionally popular band.

American hardcore history?

Isn't the first album from Suicidal Tendencies (1983) worth named as US hardcore?

How exactly did Minor Threat fuse hardcore punk with experimental stuff like Wire? Ive got Complete Discography and all I can hear is straightforward Hardcore.Motown Junkie 20:19, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

seconded. -mark

I agree.I think that the song "Think Again" was as experimental as Minor Threat got. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.143.100.113 (talk) 18:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

I have changed the article a bit because of the genral consensus that its misleading/biased/badly wriiten or whatever. I have only added the section "Influence of American Hardcore" and disposed of the "Diversification" and "British Hardcore". If anybody thinks that this has done further damage just revert it back to the old one. Thanks.Motown Junkie 20:19, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hardcore today

This article leaves the reader with the impression that hardcore is a dead movement from the early 80s when it is in fact still thriving. It would be nice to see a section added to reflect this. Maybe I'll take a first crack at it if nobody else does. - cobra libre 11:35, 01 Apr 2004 (UTC)

How is Grindcore related to hardcore? There is a British band called Extreme Noise Terror that I would describe as hardcore where do they fit in? The first Suicidal Tendencies was definitly a hardcore album. How about Brazils Ratos de Porão do they qualify, Italys negazione and raw power?

IMO ENT is definitely grindcore (with a heavy hardcore punk influnce). Ratos de Porão, Negazione and Raw Power are all increadible hardcore punk bands, but will be ingnored as long as the music industry pushes the idea that they're darlings like Bad Religion, the Dwarves, NOFX, the Distillers are "hardcore punk" (I just noticed that all those bands were at some time or another on Epitaph records -- and Epitaph is part of RIAA, need I say more). millerc 05:21, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The whole thing seems to be cribbed from a press release from the publishers of the book mentioned in the references... Seems very biased and heavy on POV. Would be nice to avoid the political crap and just explain what hardcore is, without having to argue about whether a band is or is not hardcore or grindcore or emocore or whatever. Xinit 02:39, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Who's the geezer that wrote this hardcore punk page? Hardcore was stronger than ever in the 90's and definitely wasn't an afterthought of the 80's. Ebullition and HeartattaCk #1 anyone? Inside Out? Chokehold? Man even the Gorilla Biscuits is late 80's and it spawned what was to come, a global scene that was never bigger.

Bad Religion and NOFX generally accepted as hardcore punk? Ok, could someone please explain to me how Bad Religion and NOFX are hardcore punk and not pop-punk? I'm not putting them down, I am a fan of the older Bad Religion. They're the only pop-punk band I think I can stand, but that doesn't mean that they're hardcore punk, and it doesn't mean they're not sellouts. In fact, I seem to remember seeing the cover of a Crust punk album entitled How could we possibly make any more money than this... which had the same picture on the cover as Bad Relgion's How could hell be any worse... The connection is obvious.

May be because of Dag Nasty and such... and melodic (mainstream) hardcore in general is pretty similar to the sound of Bad Religion.

In the mid '90s, bands like NOFX and Bad Religion achieved varying levels of mainstream success, though both NOFX and Bad Religion had been around since the '80s. They added catchy melodies and anthemic choruses to the Hardcore template whilst removing much of the aggression and anger that had been the genre's trademark. Though NOFX and Bad Religion are generally accepted as authentic by fans of Hardcore punk, other bands that towed a poppier line, such as Green Day and Blink 182, are widely regarded as sellout. Bands that retained the aggression of '80s Hardcore into the '90s include The Distillers and The Dwarves.

Also, I wouldn't claim that the Distillers or the Dwarves are very agressive at all, at least not compared to some other current hardcore punk bands like Ratos de Porão, Code 13, etc. millerc 05:21, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

While Bad Religion and NOFX might have made couple of numbers that can be construed as hardcore punk, I certainly agree with User:Millerc - They are, and were, indie/pop/ska-punk. Sure, they have a lot of clout in the hardcore audience as well(after all, who didn't start out with Bad Religion?), but that does NOT make them HC. Tias 09:19, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The reason I put that NOFX/Distillers stuff in is because there are only really 2 ways to end this article. You can either say that hardcore died a death in the late '80s, which is something I don't think anyone really thinks, or you can say that it survived by going in different directions. I dont think that it's possible for hardcore punkrock to happen EXACTLY like it did in the '80s, it happened like that once but it wont EVER happen like that ever again. The chances of everything coming together at the same time are just very unlikely and because of bitching the so-called "scene" fragmented near the end. Most of the people who were involved in it originally like Ian MacKaye seem to have very little interest in it anyway, so people dont tend to get nostalgic about it, and so the only way to carry on with this thing called hardcore punkrock is to find something that resembles it, wether musically or just in spirit.

Punk Rock. Punk what?Motown Junkie 16:31, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

" Wikipedia is better served in all cases by deconstructive criticism." DoubleD

- Where's the mentioning of Revelation records, Victory records, and bands like Gorilla Biscuits, Strife, Earth Crisis, Warzone, Sick of it All? Most of this article is on hardcore-punk, but there is the other hardcore genre (the whole NYC, lower east side scene in the late 80'S) which was made up by labels and bands that I mentioned. Milk 04:28, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I suppose I see your point about BR and NOFX. One other nitpick, though: Why isn't it mentioned that lots and lots of local bands(at least here in Denmark, and I'm sure that it happens everywhere else too) play hardcore punk in exactly the same styles as in the inception? Original HC punk is not dead at all, but the article doesn't seem to mention this. And Milk, I think the very PC sXe metal stuff has been let out because this is about HC punk, not the PC subculture it would eventually spawn - And SOA is way too stylized and tight to be considered original HC as such. <-- Just my opinion. Tias Tias 08:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

the "sub genres" part needs something about the general trashy intensive hardcore that is still around. Does anyone know a proper name for it? :)

I think that's Moshcore. The genre which all these metalheads MEAN to say when they say Hardcore. Hardcore is NOT metal and has NOTHING to do with metal.

Why did someone deleted the "hardcore today" part of the article?

Bad Religion was defintily part of the hardcore punk scene in the 80's(1980-85 CD). Although in the late 80's they started to develop that poppunk sound that they are known for.( ie. no control)

NOFX and Epitaph was 90's when hardcore punk was dead and punk turned poppy and goofy.

"This article leaves the reader with the impression that hardcore is a dead movement from the early 80s when it is in fact still thriving."

Well, people who participated in hardcore in the 80s, a quarter of a century ago, generally consider it pretty much played out. Most bands playing in this style now are derivitive, and pretty much just working up nostalgia for an era they missed. It's not really creative to ape something that's been and gone. But imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and all that. This article should treat the subject as history. Doggo 21:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

- with all due respect, fuck you. what you wrote is the most ignorant thing i've ever read. just because older dudes in the scene are jaded and bitter doesn't mean the scene is fucking dead. hardcore is hardly history. Lionelxhutz 05:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Naming of the page

Nobody I know calls Hardcore "hardcore punk". Somebody should change the title.

You dont know the roots then. In the 80's the type of punk was hardcore. It gave root to what your calling "hardcore" today. Hardcore was a punk thing in the 80's. Now its more of a metal thing. I think your looking for the metalcore page, maybe that needs to be expanded.

Some sort of disambiguation is necessary, so the title can't be perfect. It can't be at just hardcore or hardcore music because there are other genres of music also called hardcore, mostly a bunch of heavy/pounding techno stuff related to gabber. Although everyone who listens to that just calls it hardcore, we have its article at hardcore techno, because we need to disambiguate. Same thing here. --Delirium 07:39, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

What about "Hardcore (Punk)"? To me, hardcore punk and hardcore are different things, and I dont think I'm the only one who this goes for. Though the exact line is fuzzy, and there are lots of variations in definitions, an example might be Youth of Today or any "metalcore" like Shai Hulud band being Hardcore without being Hardcore Punk and maybe say the Germs being Hardcore Punk without being Hardcore, with the Dead Kennedys being both Hardcore and Hardcore Punk. I really do hate that it's called Hardcore Punk, because that's just out and out wrong. Jacib 12:28, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

hardcore punk scene is defintly dead. It was an 80's thing. However "Hardcore" as known today is different and I agree larger then ever. The roots of modern HARDCORE is definitly the NYC hardcore punk bands of the 80's. Youth of today and dead kennedys in the 80's were hardcore punk bands, different styles yes. the germs was more 70's punk influential to some early hardcore punk types.

'Hardcore punk' is what the music was historically called. These later distinctions get extremely fine and subjective. Auto movil 14:27, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

One reason that I've run into is that the term "hardcore" has also been applied to a number of other genres that are radically different; "hardcore rap" for example. Depending on who you're speaking to, saying that you listen to "hardcore" could mean a couple totally different things. It's the same sort of distinction that you'd get from "pop punk" versus "bubblegum pop". --Xinit 20:10, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A few points, like Discharge, etc

- The Discharge show where they got trash thrown on them happened in 1986, not 1984, after they put out the album 'Grave New World'. The reason for the crowd's reaction was not due to them being from the UK, but due to the fact that Discharge had in 1 record, went from a great hardcore band, to a horrible crappy metal band. Only those that had heard the new album were aware of this. An since the album came out only 2 weeks before they played The Ritz in NYC, allmost no one knew of the change. So, picture a huge club full of rabid punk rock fans, ready for a hardcore show, an the band they came to see comes out with long hair, playing crappy metal instead of punk rock. Add to that, they played none of their former punk rock songs, which upset the people even more.

-I have no idea where someone got the idea that american puk fans were not into bands from other countries, or the flipside, people overseas not into american punk bands. I was going to shows from 1983 to 2000, and the only times well known non-US punk bands had bad turn out was normally due to the shows being on weekday nights, when many had to work. These bands an their bookers seemed not to realize how important it was to have weekend shows. As for american bands overseas, all my friends who were in bands told me they got great response from people outside of the US, and often did better outside the USA then they did at home.

-Hardcore in the 90's and on is pretty much dead. Back in the 80's, in towns as small as Charlotte NC, or even Columbia SC, there were clubs doing hardcore shows not only on the weekends, but during the summer, more than a few during weekdays. It was not uncommon for shows to also sell out. In the 90's, you were lucky if there was 1 show per weekend.

I think this needs a lot of work

Generally i think the US in the 80s is covered well, but the 90s needs some work ,and I don't think Pennywise, The Dwarves or Zeke really need to be mentioned. Also Zeke never played thrash metal, I have all their albums I should know. I do thik bands like Born Against as well as others should be mentioned. I also think the rift between the DIY scene and Victory records/In Effect/ect. should be brought up for sure, but also making it as neuteral as possible.

I also made reference to some other modern bands like Career Suicide who play a very old school California styled hardcore. I feel that they along with various other bands on labels like 625 and Six Weeks should be brought up as well.

Street Punk?

I've never heard Minor Threat or Black Flag referred to as "street punk," and to call them such is definitely wrong.

--64.222.43.245 13:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC) agreed street punk in the old, old days was basically slower thuggy sounding punk or Oi-ish type stuff and was sometimes called "Skunk" (skin/punk). Flag are much too artsy and Minor Threat too fast to be street punk inthe least.

street punk is another word for Oi! punk which is a very different ball game to hardcore. Oi is similar to pub rock and it's origins lie here in the east end of london. :)

Post-hardcore

Post-hardcore should have some reference in the article, I also thought of adding it to the ~~sub-genres~~ derivative forms on the ~~two~~ larger templates & adding derivative forms on footer template. Comments please Paul foord 13:47, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Done Paul foord 22:58, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

"Contemporary Hardcore"

This article should talk about Pg. 99, the blood brothers, orchid, circle takes the sqaure, since by man (the older stuff) the locust and botch etc. as hardcore. Yes, I understand that some of these could be called metal or sass or screamo or whatever label people have put on to them, but the fact of the matter is that bands like minor threat and band brains are "classic hardcore", and that classic hardcore is dead, and to most who do not know the entire history of the Punk Movement, classic hardcore sounds like and is classified as regular old punk.

In the post-hardcore aftermath of the early 90s, there came emo, then screamo, then hardcore; with all of these genres borrowing things from each other and having sex with other genres not listed and giving birth to other genres and marryign other genres and adopting step-children genres and all of the incestuous things that various genres who share a single root tend to do. Even a lot of grindcore has shed its metal roots and adopted a much more contemporary hardcore flavor (Jenny Piccolo, With Child-Like Eyes, and even the Locust/some girls/holy molar are noteable examples).

metalcore is not talked about enough either, in the late 90's and through 2002ish metalcore and hardcore were virtually interchangeable, although definitely a bit different. metalcore now has virtually overtaken conetmporary hardcore, along with poppier versions of the genre.

You cannot simply dismiss the bands I suggest should be classified as contempoarary hardcore as screamo. Screamo is dead and was more or less a transitional period between emo and hardcore.

I fully understand hardcore punk (classic hardcore, as i call it) existed into the 90's, but it soon blended in with just plain old punk or developed into different genres like indie or emo.

Another thing that should be emphasized is the fact that with out classic hardcore, independent music as we know it would not exist, and DIY culture would have virtually died. Essentially, every indie/emo/screamo/crew/crust/punk/hardcore/metalcore/grind band owes a very serious something to bands such as black flag and dead kennedys.

The current state of the hardcore scene is an interesting one, with a lot of people forgetting that hardcore is an off-shoot of punk, its depressing, but it should definitely be addressed as well. Taking photos of oneself and putting it on an lj and fashioncore dont need to be talked about in this discussion, but it might be a nice little portion of the article.

I would like to note that I'm just a punk kid like the rest of us, and as such I fully realize that my opinions are totally open to criticism and correction -- I'm just trying to add my two cents to hopefully create a better article, which is what we all know wikipedia is about.

Citing Sources: I have used American Hardcore: A tribal history by Stephen Blush to aquire much of the knowledge needed to make the claims I've made in this discussion. I have used wikipedia articles here and there, and knowledge I picked up from people due to the fact that I'm an acitive participant in what remains of the milwaukee hardcore scene (and associated genres -- its a small city with all types of bands playing together) and Ive been involved for a few years now.

-vince.

"Who wrote this?"

Why is this written so poorly? And why is Bridge 9 always listed as such an important and nearly god-like record label? I must say that there is a lot more to hard-core and that this page makes it look like something to not be taken seriously. It's the same problems as on hard-core or punk message boards. You try to use it to find out when a show is or, as in wikipedia's case, some important information on the history and then all you get is people jabbering back and forth over who is hard-core and who is not. - anon.

I dont want to be an idiot, but if you dont like the article, fix it ^_^ -- and to answer your question, tons of people wrote it. It MIGHT be considered representative of the writing / research skills of people in the hardcore fandom that this article isn't that great... but dont whine about it. If you're not fixing it, you're part of the problem... *goes back to fixing disambig links* TastemyHouse 17:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I have to second the anon person. This article seriously needs to be rewritten. And it's not just in one place; the whole thing is inconsistent and jumbled. -- LGagnon 02:33, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

and as i know hardcore punk and hardcore are not actually totally same things,like when i say hc punk i refer to bands like bad brains,agnostic front,gbh,discharge,thsoe were actually punk bands and when i say hardcore id refer to bands like hatebreed or something

_____________________________

I DONT THINK ITS POORLY WRITTEN I JUST THINK FOR 1990'S AND AFTER NEEDS A SEPERATE LINK TO A "HARDCORE" ONLY PAGE. A PAGE DEDICATED TO HARDCORE AS ITS OWN ENTITY AND NO LONGER AA STYLE OF PUNK.

2/1/06 11:30am - I edited and rewrote much of the first half of this article. It was reaaaaallly badly written and was very difficult to read, and almost sounded like a bad MRR article. I added sections and made the early history more timeline based. - xBrendanx

The only problem with calling the page "hardcore" is that it's also a name given in the UK to a type of dance music from the early nineties (think people in the US called it Rave). I don't think any one of the genre's can take priority Paul Tew 17:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC) –Come on,It is widely accepted that Hard core is the name of a particular brand of punk.Tell the English techno folks to cease and desist using the term, as homosexual porn purveyors use it to describe a certain element of the product they publish. 24.10.178.110 03:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)helmut

Death grunt query

The death grunt article is not clear about the relationship to hardcore vocalisation. Would editors here please have a look? Paul foord 10:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Straight edge

I removed: In those years, hardcore was the same as punk except hardcore was straight edge. For information read further into the article. Of the bands referenced, only Minor Threat was Straight edge.--SVTCobra 03:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

That's debatable anyway. Ian MacKaye has actually said he didn't believe in "straight edge", and the Minor Threat song of that name is a response to the death of a friend (who died from a Heroin overdose) Paul Tew 16:55, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Dead Kennedys ...

Dead Kennedys are only "OTHER" influences ? They are one of the big...one of the greatest... --PET 05:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Sadcore?

"such as Sadcore, and Slowcore. The term "Emocore", however, does have links to Hardcore"

has anyone ever heard the terms "sadcore" or "slowcore"? because I haven't

This certainly isn't widley used and should be taken off the page. While "emocore" is rarley used, "Emo" is the most commonly used term for this, but it doesn't necessairly stand for "emotional hardcore" in today's hardcore, so that should be moved to the 80s-90s section. People today concider Emo to be a seperate genre.

KurtFF8 04:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

The terms are widely used although they do have nothing to do with hardcore so a hardcore fan wouldn't necessarily be familiar with them. They refer to indie bands such as Low (band), Codeine (band) & Red House Painters. --Diabolical 02:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Crap

This page needs a complete revamp. When people start claiming that Metallica were influenced by hardcore, its gone too far. I'm working on it... Punk isn't, and hasn't ever been, metal. Other comments on here are correct; punks and metalheads don't like each other. Also, which should be obvious, hardcore has always been east-coast, while metal was west-coast. Get a clue. By the way, people, learn how to fucking sign your comments; jesus.Static3d 08:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Not really.. have you not heard of Black Flag or the Dead Kennedys, The Germs, etc. Hardcore certainly isn't exclusive to the east-coast, while it may be more common on the east coast, it wasn't and isn't exclusive by any means. KurtFF8 05:51, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Hardcore was by no means exclusive to the East Coast. You had the Dicks in Texas, the Crucifucks in Michigan, Jodie Foster's Army in Arizona. It was everywhere. As for the term "hardcore" it was heavily in use by 1983. It is correct that many non-thrash bands were generally lumped in with hardcore such as Flipper or Sonic Youth. In the Heavy Metal scene there was a parallel movement that spawned bands that had much in common with hardcore. Bands like Motorhead and Venom play a fast paced form of music called death metal. Punks and headbangers often acknowledged such rival genres and collected their albumns. In the late 80s some hardcore bands turned to metal simply for profit. There was little money to be made playing Hardcore. Someone who lived during that era should revamp the entire page.

--64.222.43.245 13:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC) Here is a great list of 70s and 80s Hardcore band worldwide with selected articles: http://homepages.nyu.edu/~cch223/mainpage.html Also Venom played Black metal not Death metal , and Motorhead are a fast rock n roll band.

HEAVY HARDCORE

I ATTEMPTED TO EDIT THE HEAVY HARDCORE SECTION TO ADD SOME NYC HISTORY AND IT GOT REVERTED. IS THAT BECAUSE I DIDN'T SAVE IT CORRECTLY OR DID A MODERATOR DISAGREE WITH THE INCLUSION OF THESE NYC BANDS THAT KEPT NHYC ON THE MAP WHEN ALL THE GOOD BANDS IN THE 80'S WERE BREAKING UP OR GOING MAINSTREEAM?

I DOUBT ANYONE FROM NYC IN THE EARLY 90'S WOULD BE LOOKING TO DISPUTE ANYTHING WRTTEN HERE ABOUT MERAUDER, CONFUSION, DARKSIDE, DMIZE, ETC.

Today, the most popular, and best-known representative band of the genre is most likely Hatebreed. Hatebreed was formed in the middle of Connecticut's strong hardcore scene in 1995 and quickly made a name for themselves. After releasing a split EP, a 7 Inch, and a 7 song EP called Under The Knife, they signed to Victory Records and released 1997's Satisfaction Is The Death Of Desire. The album placed the group squarely in the spotlight of the hardcore scene, and can be found on many diehard fans' top ten lists. From there Hatebreed managed to cross over into the heavy metal scene through tours with Slayer and Slipknot, and later signed to Universal Records. It would be impossible to have a discussion on "heavy hardcore" without mentioning some of the the aggressive bands that came out of the early 90's, particularly the Northeast, who helped pioneered the mixture of old school hardcore with death metal. Brooklyn, NY's Merauder and Confusion along with Jackson Heights, NY's Dmize are perhaps the finest examples, crossing bands like Kreator and Obituary with New York Hardcore. Darkside NYC, formed by Alan Blake of Sheer Terror fame around the same time, was often compared to Celtic Frost meets Sheer Terror musically and Negative Approach meets Crumbsuckers vocally, a devastiatingly brutal combination. (Alan Blake is credited as the man who brought Celtic Frost to New York Hardcore!!) They were also known for incorporating blast parts as a direct death metal/grindcore influence. Dmize, Confusion and Darkside NYC managed to achieve cult status in the U.S., Europe and Japan while only playing shows in the Northeast during thier short existences. Merauder went on to sign to Century Media and tour the world, and still performs today, albeit with various lineup changes. In upstate NY, All Out War, formed with ex-Merauder members gained an extremewly violent repuation as members of their audience would pummel the hell out of each other - many shows often ended in a full scale riot! As a result, many clubs were loathe to have these kinds of bands perform. When All Out War played, hundreds of people would show up. They went on to release 3 incredibly heavy albums on Victory Records and has also toured the world. Most of the bands playing "heavy hardcore" today inevitably cite these bands as an influence.

In Baltimore, MD, Next Step Up put the City That Bleeds on the map with their heavy gutteral rendition of hardcore and brutal mosh breakdowns. Thier ex-members have all remained in music and have gone on to start perhaps a dozen newer bands, namely Wake Up Cold, The Unyoung Heroes, Hell To Pay. Early in the 1990s, Earth Crisis fused hardcore's ethic and simplistic aggression with brutal metallic syncopation to create an unforgivingly heavy sound. This, combined with the band's near-militant stance on veganism, animal rights, and the straight edge movement (inspired heavily by the band Vegan Reich) ensured them popularity, if not notoriety in the scene for years.

216.217.24.178 22:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)BITE-IT-YOU-SCUM

I reverted my reversion so the article is now back to the way you saved it. —RJN 01:55, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed Cold As Life as one of the originators of Heavy Hardcore. It really overestimates their contributions and influence. 9917

What the hell have Hatebreed got to do with anything? :/

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.143.100.113 (talk) 17:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

Hardcore Punk Sub Genres

if "heavy hardcore" is listed in the subsection -Crust, Emocore, Fastcore, Melodic hardcore, Power violence ,Skate punk ,Straight edge/Youth crew, & Thrashcore should all have there own small parts on how they stemmed from hardcore punk too. not detailed as the descriptions on their own pages but something like the Heavy Hardcore Section. somebody get felix von havoc in here lol. -petemxw

There was none of these classifications in the 80's. Most bands that we called punk in the 80's was the same as being called "hardcore" in the 80's There was also crossover bands. Thrash metal was the only term for metal and it was a seperate scene.There were regional differences in the 80's between the different bands. ie New york sound was more powerful and had metal influences but it was still punk/hardcore.

All these terms now did not exist then. pop punk and straight hardcore only bands arose around the beginnings of the 90's. Metalcore and or heavycore is the crossover of the 90's and today. No one is saying Hardcore only existed in the 80's. But that 80's style and scene certainly only did and the 80's is when it began and ended. The people are different now as well as the dancing. The people involved are more "normal" today and hardcore dancing looks extremely retarded. there are so many branches as well as acceptance by society. It is defintly not cutting edge or interesting anymore. Im sorry if you younger people disagree but thats how it is. water is purest to its source.

First Suicidal album straight hardcore punk 80's style. Join the army crossover. after that pretty much a metal band.

This isn't specifically punk, it's Hardcore, a much louder, fast-tempoed genre then classic Punk. In my thinking "Hardcore" and "Hardcore Punk" should have two different pages. Because in my thinking, they are very different, and people who started in the punk era should be "Hardcore Punk" because they basically created the genre. Bands who started in the "Hardcore" era should be called "Hardcore", and bands that started outside that era (later) should be called "Post-Hardcore". My point is, that we should have TWO DIFFERENT pages. I've heard Hardcore, and I've heard Hardcore Punk, and they are much different.

External Links

So, I'm noticing the external links with the latest addition of the "first krasnodar hardcore" page, and I'm noticing that these are pretty arbitrary sites that don't seem to relate directly to the subject material on this page. Limp Bizkit and Linkin Park aren't exactly hardcore... If you want a listing of random sites that may or may not be about Hardcore punk, then hit Google and search for that term... the sites listed there should be of use to people interested in more information; Punknews is an excellent resource, but outside of that one, I'm up for deleting most of the other links at the top of that section, and shuffling a couple of them to the proper sub categories. Suggestions? Xinit 20:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Posi

Does anyone have a problem with me writing an article on it? 782 Naumova 10:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be relevant to today's hardcore, go for it KurtFF8 09:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

EDITS 5/31/06

Metalcore is not the apropriate title for the section of the heavy/new school hardcore. Metalcore is a later sub genre of such hardcore. Someone should make a metalcore sub-section of the "toughguy" section. ALSO, I deleted the whole SYG crew bullshit. Keep your crew beefs out of this article.

It is the correct title. Bands have been called metalcore since the '80s, so this isn't new by any means. And the "new school hardcore" and "heavy hardcore" titles have been applied to bands like Madball since only the '90s, mostly because the bands wanted to distance themselves from metal.
- I know of absolutely NOBODY who has ever used or currently uses the word "metalcore" for anything other than the current batch of metallic hardcore/emo bands like As I Lay Dying or Caliban. Metalcore is a mid 90's - 2000's thing. In the 80's, mixing metal and hardcore was called "crossover" and "thrash", and that's a completely different scene and article. My original title for this section was "heavy hardcore", and I don't know why that was changed, because that describes it much better than "metalcore".
  - I know several people that call it metalcore, with most being into hardcore punk and/or in their 30s or late 20s. So-called "heavy hardcore" bands borrow a great deal from metal, which can be heard in the beatdowns/breakdowns--something death metal bands were doing in the late '80s--or many of the riffs, which are a mix of mid-paced thrash metal and mid/late-'80s hardcore. Metalcore isn't new. Also, thrash was not the same as crossover, there's little hardcore about As I Lay Dying or Caliban, and neither AILD nor Caliban has a thing to do with emo.
    - Hey, at least we agree that AILD and Caliban aren't real hardcore, hahaha

This Line is misleading

The last line of the first section:

However, today, and for the purpose of this article, it refers more or less exclusively to what was known as 'thrash.'

This line should be rewritten in my opinion. Is the author saying that what is called "hardcore" today is basically what used to be called "thrash"? It kind of seems to read as if "for the purposes of this article" we are calling hardcore "thrash" which I think would lead someone completely new to these musical genres to think hardcore and thrash are exactly the same thing, but they are not.

At least when I was getting into this scene in the late 80's, "Thrash" was always more of a skate-punk thing and more related to metal, and seemed to originate from the west coast. (D.R.I. comes to mind) While 'hardcore" seemed to be a direct descendent of Minor Threat. Though very much part of the hardcore "scene", it does not seem correct to say they are the same thing. To my understanding, thrash would be a subgenre of hardcore, am i wrong? Or a pre-genre? Or an early relative to hardcore? But the two are not interchangeable terms.

--64.222.43.245 13:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC) Thrash was a term used for more than metallic hardcore stuff for sure, a lot of Finnish HC bands of the time were termed thrash for the speed they were playing at with no metal influence creeping in. I'm talking 81-83 here. Later on (in the late 80s as you mention) the label became less used due to "thrash metal" being a much larger genre and people who hated metallers not wanting there to be confusion about what they were into.

Just suggesting that there could be a possible, better last sentence for this section that is more clear about what hardcore really is without noting thrash at all. Thrash is an important part of the picture but should be listed below like other subgenres or related genres and not based in this first general overview of the term "hardcore".

Or if you want to say something about today's hardcore kids, or what hardcore sounds like today that should be a clearer statement. Are you trying to remark on the commercialization of hardcore and elements that show up in mainstream hard music now, or the underground scene?

Another suggestion maybe for another section or if you want to talk about what's going on now : mention the recent resurgence and visibility of hardcore with the likes of Hydrahead records, etc. Isis, Pelican, Big Business. Hardcore was still happening from the late 90's til 2000's, being kept up by younger kids entering the scene, but as of the last year or so I've actually seen articles on "the resurgence of hardcore" in fairly mainstream music magazines.

Just another side note: There is a huge history of hardcore in the Boston and Worcester (MA) area circa late 80's early 90's. No one has mentioned that many of these were ALL AGES SHOWS in K of C halls, grange halls, warehouses in little towns, people's basements, school cafeterias, organized by kids in the scene and outside of the system of clubs and bars because everyone was under 21 and couldn't drink. (legally) Also many shows were benefits for various non-profit groups like food not bombs, amnesty international, etc. This was part of the experience of suburban hardcore.

American Hardcore (Film)

http://www.sonyclassics.com/americanhardcore/

This should be included in the article I think.

Article is totaly DC/west coast centric

The artice TOTALY leaves out the whole New York hardcore scene, Although I agree that it could be considered a totaly seperate style. No(or very little) mention to bands like warzone,DRI,agnostic front,carnivore,or murphys law(and a million others Ive never heard of ,we'd need a NYC resident to really do this subject justice) Theres not really any mentoion of boston groups other tham mentioning a comp album.Allmost sounds like dischord wrote the hardcore WIKI entry ! zaphodbblx@gmail.com

I think that Agnostic Front has changed hardcore alot (or at least contributed to it) in the sense of the transformation of the hardcore of the early 80s to what people concider to be hardcore today.KurtFF8 01:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

-- EUROPEAN HC TOTALLY MISSING OUT-- The above is absolutely correct. The article is totally Dischord centric. To hardly mention the seminal role of Dead Kennedys, MDC, Agnostic Front etc. makes this page a total joke.

Even more so, the article is totally US-centric. At the same time as the US bands, and often even preceding the US developments, Crass and Conflict were laying the foundations of the UK HC scene, Amsterdam squatters The Ex were creating Dutch HC, and a whole string of bands were shaping Scandinavian and Finnish HC.

At least as much, if not more, attention as is paid to the US bands could be addressed to: - Crass, Conflict, Subhumans, Chumbawamba, Political Asylum, Instigators, Napalm Death, Extreme Noise Terror (UK) - The Ex, Gore, Larm, Vacuum, Lul, Pandemonium, Bambix, Vernon Walters, Grabbits, BGK, Morzelpronk (Netherlands) - Heibel, Hate Crew, X-Creta, ZyclomeA, Ear Damage, Baudoins Morts (Belgium) - Anti-Cimex (Sweden), Heimatlos (France) - Barn Av Regnbuen, Kafka Prosess, Stengte Dorer (Norway) - Rattus, Kaaos, Riisteyet, Terveet Kadet (Finland) - Spermbirds, Jingo de Lunch (Germany) - Negazione (Italy)

As long as this isn't resolved I suggest to rename the article to "Washington DC & West Coast Hardcore".

List of straight edge groups is being considered for deletion

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of straight edge groups (second nomination) Paul foord 12:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Double Kick?

someone needs to change the double kick drum pedal thing, that's never used in punk.

This isn't specifically punk, it's Hardcore, a much louder, fast-tempoed genre then classic Punk. In my thinking "Hardcore" and "Hardcore Punk" should have two different pages. Because in my thinking, they are very different, and people who started in the punk era should be "Hardcore Punk" because they basically created the genre. Bands who started in the "Hardcore" era should be called "Hardcore", and bands that started outside that era (later) should be called "Post-Hardcore". My point is, that we should have TWO DIFFERENT pages. I've heard Hardcore, and I've heard Hardcore Punk, and they are much different.

Uhhh. Double bass is used in D-Beat.--71.236.239.19 03:50, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

It's also used alot in Post-Hardcore. Hardcore and Hardcore Punk are the same thing. They always will be. No matter what a bunch of Metalheads say when they decide to bring Hatebreed and Slayer into the equation.

re: Bob Sallese and that guy from Zeroption

These people have been adding false vanity references into this article for almost two years.

Sallese is a tale-teller who has been trying to claim that he invented the term, "hardcore." The story keeps changing, but the new version is that a writer at a college newspaper "picked up" on his use of the term.

Even if it were true (and nobody I know who was around in NY during '80-'82 thinks it's true), Sallese adds entire paragraphs attempting to establish this claim. I've left the outline and removed unnecessary embellishment.

Sallese was also recently quoted in a book telling a story about the band ISM and the radio station, WLIR. I've kept the basics, but must stress that the story comes from Sallese, is printed in the book, and is now being used by Sallese as a reference in this article. He's referencing himself.

re: The guy from Zeroption, the band had a single song on a compilation in 1984. They are not a seminal early hardcore band.

Sallese posted his vanity references again, so I deleted them.Spylab 03:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Just for the record, the long explanation above my previous post was not by me. However, seeing the repeat vandalism by Sallese (or a very determined Sallese groupie), I have a good hunch that the above comments are valid.Spylab 12:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

I typed "bob sallese" into google, and most of the hits were just repeats of content from Wikipedia that has been posted on other sites. Other hits that came up were related to movies that Sallese has been an extra in. They are listed almost as if he was a real actor. It really seems like someone is trying to re-write history and make this person seem more important than he really is.Spylab 13:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Spylab Get a life. Sallese produced "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" which was not only the first NYC hardcore piece of vinyl at the time but one of the few ever. It recieved national airplay and critical acclaim. Commercially it was in regular rotation on WLIR and in rotation on important east coast college radio like WFMU with Pat Duncan, WFDU & WNYU. The album included key bands of the scene like The Mob ( who Sallese sometimes promoted) and Ism ( who Sallese managed and produced). It also included Butch Lust and the Hypocrites ( who Sallese promoted also) with original members of Pure Hell. I can remember a time when listening to the hardcore interviews in the 80s and Sallese was mentioned by bands on a regular basis. Hurchella's book is right on the money. Jism of Ism and Sallese bridged the gap between the old punk regime in NYC which was almost dead and the new hardcore scene forming. As time went on, the later hardcore bands went in an entirely different direction. However, there may have never been a movement at all in NYC had it not been for Sallese. He got hardcore into rotation regularly on commercial radio at a time when commercial radio was beginning to shy away from even classic punk bands like The Ramones and The Sex Pistols. For the most part, your writing is vanity writing. You continue to delete key parts of hardcore history that tell a chronilogical story while you offer no explanation other that your ignorance on the subject. Take if from someone older and wiser and who was actually part of the scen at the time. You sound like a misguided fan or a jealous wannabe. Get a life. WORLDEXPERT

This is absolutely not true from top to bottom. The Big Apple Rotten to the Core compilation came out in 1982, long after EPs and singles by other New York bands. It was briefly in mild rotation at WLIR in Long Island, but included mostly unnotable Long Island bands who were never heard from before, were not popular, and never did anything afterward (The Mob is an exception).

Bob Sallese was a minor Long Island promoter who does not deserve to dominate this article.

Also, he is using sock puppets (see directly below).

Bravo, WORLDEXPERT, Bravo! I'm starting to get sick of this whole blog while the editors let people like Spylab destroy what others have worked to so to accurately report. I was on the scene at the time too and agree with both you and Hurchella!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wonder how much longer Wikipedia will let this cowboy Spylab run wild and destroy the site. PUNKNYC

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Spylab 16:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Second, you have not backed up your story with cited facts, and you expect everyone to take you at your word. Also, you might want to actually sign up for a Wikipedia account and read the following link: Wikipedia:Sock puppetry Spylab 16:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

JUST THE FACTS JACK ref NYC evloution of punk to hardcore

Fact: "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" was in regular rotation on WLIR, WFMU, WNYU & WFDU. Fact: "John Hinckley Jr." produced by Jism & Sallese was nominated two weeks in a row for "screamer of the week" on WLIR and was in heavy rotation.

Fact: "John Hinckley Jr." was the first hardcore song to recieve commercial airplay in the NY metropolitan area.

Fact: "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" was the first NYCHC comp.

Fact: The 1983 release of Ism's "A Diet For The Worms" (produce by Jism & Sallese and album concept by Sallese/ see sleeve) included "I Think I Love You" which once again was nominated for "screamer of the week". Once again, it was one of the few "hardcore songs" getting any commercial airplay in the metropolitan NY area...(even in 1983)

Fact: "A Diet For The Worms" topped CMJ college radio charts.

Fact: Jism & Sallese promoted The Mob in Queens. Eisner did PR work for S.I.N. Records. (see The Big Apple Rotten To The Core sleeve). Eisner later used Sallese's "hardcore" jargon in a review of The Mob. Spylab continues to butcher the blog making the story very confusing.

Fact: The term "hardcore" was used in the movie "Decline of Western Civilization" before DOA or Sallese or Eisner used the term. The point of the article was that the term seemed to catch on sometime in '81. No one person or group "invented it".

Fact: Most of the members of bands on the "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" were from Queens (birthplace of punk) or Brooklyn & Manhatten. There was one band from Nassau County ("The Headlickers") who were a kick ass band playing A7 in those days. As any native New Yorker knows, when you make reference to "Long Island" it is usually understood as Nassau County or Suffolk County despite the actual geography. Nobody refers to The Ramones as a Long Island Band since Queens is in NYC.

Ism (Queens NYC), The Mob (Queens, NYC) Butch Lust & The Hypocrites ( Brooklyn & Manhatten, NYC), Squirm (Brookyln, NYC), Killer Instinct (Queens & Manhatten, NYC), The Headlickers (Nassau County)

Fact: George Hurchella never did an interview with Jism or Sallese in his book yet Spylab continues to rewrite the article without knowing the facts or bothering to check into them. Hurchella did his homework which the contributors of this artcle should do before butchering the site.

Spylab continues to post innuendos and personal attacks and offers nothing to back up these attacks. Before you start changing the pages and print stories as fact which are fiction, you should check your facts. Talk to distributors, DJs and not to bands that entered the scene years later. The Hardcore page should give a chronological history of what evolved in all cities and where the roots are. Unless you were there, you can not fully understand the impact of the "Rotten To The Core" album on the scene and what was to follow for years to come. It was a turning point for Hardcore in NYC and it opened to door for new bands for years to come even though they may have not appeared on the album. To date "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" & "A Diet Fore the Worms" LP remains a staple in NYC hardore history.

It sounds like you have a personal vendetta against Sallese, Ism and Hurchella. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and don't let your prejudices get in the way of the truth. Stop the personal attacks.

PUNKNYC

Those are only "facts" because you say so, Bob Sallese. You are not the be all and end all of hardcore punk history. Wikipedia is not obligated to post content just because you say it's true, without any outside references. I have not posted any personal attacks against you. I'm not the only one who disagrees with your edits to the hardore punk article (and the associated talk page). I'm also not the only one reversing those edits. Please stop posting lies and personal attacks on Wikipedia. Spylab 17:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

I haven't talked to Sallese or Jism since the early 90s. But I think you should identify yourself and your background. You offer no factual arguments worth reading. Which fact do you have a problem with? What documentation do you need? Can your offer facts that dispute the ones listed? You obviously have a bone to pick where I am interested in helping create a article which is factual for those trying to learn about the evoloution of "hardcore. My expertise is mostly in the NY metropolitan area and this is what your dispute. Tell us where you got your expertise on the New York City music scene? Once again you changed the article using words like "reportedly", "invented", "the most important" and "suggested". This is supposed to be an encylopedia and not a record of hear say. When will you admit that you continue to post about an interview in Hurchella's book that doesn't even exist. This alone proves that you post so-called history here on a whim without ever bothering to check your facts.

PUNKNYC

Again you are talking about edits made by someone else, not me. Please direct those comments to that editor instead of focussing on me. Yes, this is supposed to be an encylopedia of documented facts, nor the Bob Sallese fan club website. You have failed to provide documented references such as articles, books or reputable websites. You are the only one defending the claims that you have posted. You are the one engaging in hearsay and original research. That is not what Wikipedia is for. Please stick to the guidelines and see Wikipedia:No original research. Spylab 18:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Finally some mention of WBCN, Tim Sommer & Kraut while I myself entered Pat Duncan, WFMU & WFDU info. Maybe all the bickering got you people off your asses. Instead of deleting or distorting key information, you should be looking for what has been left out and plenty has been left in this fairytale article.

PUNKNYC

Last Line, Genre Name Section

"Contrary to the popular belief the Hardcore punk had evolved in genres like the Crust, Thrash, Grindcore, Death, Sludge, Black and also the nu-metal (since should take off the word metal of these genres but since they descend directly of the Punk)."

This makes no sense, so I am taking it out.

I think there should be a section on the naming of the genre. In my opinion, Hardcore Punk and Hardcore are the same thing; the first term was used before "Hardcore" became the common genre name.

AfD on Minor Threat songs

A group of articles on songs by Minor Threat are up for deletion. You may be interested in adding to the discussion. --Switch 14:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Sources, sources, sources

Although most of the info in the article is true, some of it is potentially not. Every statement about a living person needs to be properly cited and sourced with a direct reference. This will not only bring the article up to Wikipedia standards, it will help to quell the edit-warring between editors who share differing opinions about who did what, and how important they were. wikipediatrix 21:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

That's what I keep asking for, but a certain editor has consistently failed to do so and expects everyone to take him at his word, as if he is the almighty god of hardcore.Spylab 01:17, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

It isn't always appropriate, Wikipediatrix, to take stock of a dispute assuming that both sides merely have 'differing opinions.' That allows crazy people to set the middle ground way over in crazy-land, while the other side has to work just to make it stop and limit the damage.

A cognate would be if I tried to add laudatory references to myself into the main article on Chemistry. It wouldn't merely be 'an opinion' or 'one side of the issue' that those references didn't belong there, and an equal compromise would not be appropriate. Auto movil 20:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy clearly states: "Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth". It's not about "two sides" or "right and wrong", it's about whether the statements made in this article can be backed up with valid verifiable sources as per WP:V and WP:RS. That needs to be addressed first and then people can argue about whether some sources are being given undue weight. wikipediatrix 21:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

HARDCORE ARTICLE IS A ONE-SIDED FAIRYTALE PR PAGE FOR A SELECT GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS & BANDS

Your editors continue to make the article a joke. If you take out all brief explanations of key players and leave no links then what would be the point to have more detailed seperate bios and articles. As it stands, all references to Pat Duncan, Tim Sommer, Bob Sallese, Ben Manilla, Jack Rabid have been omitted. Yet Rodney Bigenheimer & Tim Yohannon info stays. This is a very one-sided article. These names were equally important in NYC as were Bigenheimer & Yohannon were on the West Coast. The beginning of the article is a joke too..."Hardcore originated in North America, primarily in and around California, Texas, and Washington, DC, although Chicago, Detroit, New York City, Vancouver, and Boston were also important." What the fuck!@#$@#$%^&&&????????? This is a total OPINION!!!!...and in my opinion....California, NYC, DC, & Boston were the most important places. To write this article suggesting Texas & Vancouver were more important than NYC or Boston is a joke!

Tsk, tsk. Watch your language. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis 13:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, what about the other key players without even a link...The Stimulators, The Mob, Bad Brains, Ism, Kraut, Butch Lust and the Hypocrites with punk veteran Lenny Steel of Pure Hell on guitar, The False Prophets,The Undead....all extremely important in NYC in the early days which made the way for the movement to carry on. Oh that's right, this article for some reason wants to discount the importance of NYC even though Hardcore was a direct evolution from punk which was basicly born in Queens NY with the Ramones grew up in Manhatten at CBGBs & Max's Kansas City. Nah, NYC and the key players to this genre mean nothing...The article as it stands is now a joke. In the early days, hardcore was dying in NYC because...nobody wanted to book the bands...nobody wanted to play it on the radio...Nobody could afford to put out a record or distribute it right...A7 was EXTREMELY important, Pat Duncan & Tim Sommer were extremely important, Dave Rat Cage Records & Bob Sallese were extremely important. "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" was extremely important. Nobody could get a good comp out and get it played commercially as well. It was a turning point and not to list briefly the importance with links to the players is a joke!!! The success of Ism's "John Hinckley Jr." & "I Think I Love You" on WLIR leading to the first commercial broadcast in the NY metro area of Black Flag and the first commercial hardcore show with Ben Manilla were extremely important. Ben Manilla went out on a limb with the station. He also almost got fired over an incident at Nassau Colliseum when he & Jism of Ism sang the Star Spangled Banner hardcore style before an indoor Soccer game. They pulled the plug and the station was never even warned about they were going to do it.

The early support section is a joke. The Stimulators, The Mob, Bad Brains, Ism, Kraut, Butch Lust and the Hypocrites, Lenny Steel, A7, Bob Sallese, Jack Rabid, Tim Sommer, Dave Rat Cage Records, The Beastie Boys, Pat Duncan, "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" & "John Hinckley Jr.", Ben Manilla, WLIR, should all have links & breif explanations SOMEWHERE in this article. If not, it is one-sided fairytale meant to pump vanity writings for a select group of individuals and bands. When someone like myself comes along with an extensive knowledge of the era, they get squelched. I wonder how many others with valuable input have been turned away from the site after reading the farce. You are doing the young readers an injustice and anyone else who want to learn about the subject. This is not an encyclopedia but a PR page for a select group of individuals and bands. Granted, some may not liked how history unfolded but what happened is what happened and they can change it in this fairytale but they are only fooling themselves. I will add this message to the discussion page and see if anyone with one iota of common sense wants to fix the article.

User:PUNKNYC

To repeat what someone else wrote in cased you missed it: Wikipedia policy clearly states: "Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. It's not about "two sides" or "right and wrong", it's about whether the statements made in this article can be backed up with valid verifiable sources as per WP:V and WP:RS. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies and feel free to find outside sources to back up your claims. Spylab 16:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

The majority of the article does not live up to the policy. How is the rather lenghty blurbs on Tim Yohannon & Rodney Bigenheimer any different that including brief blurbs on Tim Sommer, Pat Duncan, Jack Rabid, Bob Sallese, Rat Cage Records, Ism's commercial airplay, A7 and Ben Manilla? They are all key in the early support of hardcore. Futhermore, your citations for DOA are not real citiations but links to more of the same vanity type pages. These are not "sources" However, I have no problem with them since it is obvious DOA put out the Hardcore 81 album. Hardcore was a term that evolved similtaneously in 81. It's not a big deal. DOA used it to name an album, Eisner used it in an article, Decline of Wester Civilation used it in a movie that was released in '81. It's all good. I do not delete it. You have went overboard and deleting all references to all key players in the artcle and especially in "early support" Why even have an article? If you would like to e-mail me, you can at goldmartnyc@yahoo.com so we can discuss this civilly. If you want an accurate article, you need to add a few necessary but breif names, info and links or you have nothing.

User:PUNKNYC

Decline's use was in early 79 or early 80 at the latest. Also check this: http://www.detour-records.co.uk/dischargealabel.gif This is not the "Realities of War" Discharge, but another English group with the same name using the term "Hardcore" as related to punk in 1980. 70.20.3.215 01:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Again, you are accusing me of making edits I didn't do (other than the DOA mention). The editor who made the recent deletions is User:Wikipediatrix. Please address your comments to that person, not me. As for the reliability of the DOA references I provided, that's for the individual reader to decide. However, you have provided no references at all for your claims. They may be true, but there is no way of knowing that without any outside documentation. Also, an outside source would do well to establish whether an event, radio show or record was actually important to the development of the genre, or just minor trivia.Spylab 18:58, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

What "claims"??????? Why is the blurb left in about Kraut on MTV (and it should be) but nothing about Ism on WLIR? Why is Rodney & Yohonnan links still in but all the NY Key players and bands left out? There are few outside sources listed for almost everyone and everything in this article. For instance, "Midnight Riot" was the first and only commercial hardcore radio show in the New York area. It's not disputable by anyone from the scene just as Bigenheimer is not either. You know I can start deleting everything and everyone without a source attached to it and they'll be nothing left on the page. This article as I have pointed out is a fairytale. User:PUNKNYC

No sources, no info. Period. Take it to arbitration if you feel differently. wikipediatrix 19:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipediatrix, you have no problem selectively removing things while letting others remain with no sources. My question to you is do you consider Spylabs sources to be good enough? Also, DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ME REMOVING EVERYTHING WITH NO SOURCES? User:PUNKNYC

Sounds like you're threatening to vandalize the article by trying to make a WP:POINT. Not every sentence in an article has to be sourced, but the ones that make key proclamations do. In other words, the intro paragraph's statement that Hardcore Punk songs are "short, loud and passionate" doesn't need a source because it's the common sense definition of the subject itself, in the same way we don't need to prove that water is wet. We DO, however, need sources on statements that make claims about the importance of someone or something within the subject. If that means that, for a time, the article does not reflect the true and complete history of hardcore punk, or that certain people are slighted by their omission, that is unfortunate - but anyone who wants to fix that can do so by getting some proper sources for that info. wikipediatrix 19:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Not at all. So I still then do not understand why you can selectively omit info about Tim Sommer Jack Rabid, Bob Sallese, Pat Duncan, Ben Manilla yet leave in info about Rodney, Yohannon, Kraut? This is a joke! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Punknyc (talk • contribs) .

Suit yourself. I tried to communicate with you about how to improve the article, but I'm done talking now. You've already said "this is a joke" so many times now that it would make a great drinking game, so if you can't discuss the article constructively, your disruptive comments are of no value here. I repeat, take it to arbitration if you feel I am in error. wikipediatrix 19:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

For goodness sakes, there is even a link to Anthrax in the article but none for the False Prophets, Heart Attack, Ism, The Undead, Butch Lust & The Hypocrites, The Stimulators, The Beastie Boys, The Bad Brains This is becoming this biggest joke of an article! In fact, when sources were added before, you removed them from the page. Yet you say "but anyone who wants to fix that can do so by getting some proper sources for that info." It's pretty obvious that you have predjudices and biases to certain people and bands. I have no bias to any band or person whether I liked their work or not. The mission is to tell the story of hardcore punk. The whole story and not only the parts of the story that Mr. Wikipeiatrix of Spylab feel are important. You are becoming very transparent and very quickly. You try to set the rules but do not apply them to yourself. The readers of this discussion are not fools but you seem to think they are. Alright, I will reference "claims" and will remove those which are not sourced. Do you have a problem with that? User:PUNKNYC

Still needs to be more DC info. Minor Threat weren't formed in a bubble, DC was important to the scene. "DC hardcore punk" (without quotes) turns up quite a lot on Google:

http://www.silver-dragon-records.com/hardcore_punk.htm http://www.mp3.com/genre/427/subgenre.html http://www.fourfa.com/history.htm http://experts.about.com/e/h/ha/Hardcore_punk.htm http://www.bannedindc.com/ I know not all of these will be judged reliable sources but they're all off the first two pages. DC was extremely important for hardcore. I think the article must reflect this. Nach0king 20:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Know your rock history

KIDS TODAY!!!! HARDCORE ORIGiNATED IN NORTH AMERICA?????!!! have you ever heard of the sex pistols, clash, crass,buzzcocks?????... HELLO!!! punk came out of england in the late 70's. if music is so important to you, open you ears and learn your rock history... --Liftychk 10:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Those bands are punk rock, not hardcore punk, which is what this article is about.Spylab 14:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Hardcore evolved from punk. Bands like the Sex Pistols and The Clash were at the first Ramones shows in England before they even formed bands. Ramones formed in 1972. Most historians would agree that the Ramones were the first punk group although influenced by Iggy Pop & the Stooges and the New York Dolls. The movement started in NYC in places like CBGBs and Max's Kansas City. It was a genre that was born out of the boredom of life in general and the stale corporate music industry (which once again we have today). Groups like Richard Hell and the Voidoids, Patti Smith, The Dead Boys & early Blondie were the pioneers. England took the genre and made it a political statement with great bands like you mention. England was extremely important in the progression of the genre. Hardcore, especially in NYC & Ca. was a direct progression from punk and notable bands like Fear, The Dead Kennedys and Black Flag were known as punk rock and later refered to as "hardcore punk" . It was a natural evolution that may have begun in North America however the "Oi" bands of England may have been equally as responsible. That's were the beginning sentence to the "origins" sentence needs citation. The part about hardcore originating more from certain cities more than NYC or Boston is dead wrong.

User:PUNKNYC

PunkNYC is right. Punk started in America, yet England was a very large factor in the notoriety and "explosion" that took off. New Wave then happened, which was a large factor in the development of Hardcore Punk/Hardcore.

User:Mofokuban

As Spylab said, those are punk rock bands, not hardcore ones. They have an entirely different set of influences, characteristics and ideology. The UK equivelent of hardcore (UK 82) has its own article also. - Deathrocker 06:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Just so my recent improvements don't get destroyed...

My last three edits (October 10) were fixing up things like sentence and paragraph structure, writing style, grammar, links, citations, order and similar issues. I did not add or delete any factual content. Many of those improvements had been done before, but got reverted in the edit war. Please do not change any of those things without justification.Spylab 22:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Just for the record, I haven't changed any of you edits, changes or citations lately. I think the article is actually starting to look legit now. Hopefully nobody will come along and ruin it. I still think there's room for mention and links to a few other key players and important events.

User:PUNKNYC

Protection

Please not e that the article page is now protected unitl the RFC is resolved, as the edit warring hasn't stopped. Rich Farmbrough, 20:11 18 October 2006 (GMT).

It looks like the edit war will continue, now that PunkNYC has reinserted the content that was the cause of the edit war in the first place. Spylab 13:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Breakdown article up for AFD, Hardcore dancing was PRODed - both need work

Breakdown (-core) - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breakdown (-core)
Hardcore dancing was edited to reference hardcore emo, not hardcore punk.
Punk dance needs work.

Paul foord 15:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Introduction

I'm not heaps familiar with the history of hardcore punk. I hear hardcore punk bands all the time at local gigs, but I don't own any eary hardcore albums...so I'm asking, in the intro, why it says the hardcore emerged from great britain, and yet later the 'big 3' hardcore bands are listed as DK, Minor Threat and Bad Brains...all from the US. And, from doco's I've seen, Hank the Tank claims hardcore was an american east coast thing that spread to california and shit. Can anyone justify why great britain is mentioned as starting it? I'll go ahead and change the intro myself, unless anyone can explain to me why it should be reverted. (Justinboden86 12:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC))

I just want to let you know how stupid you sound. Hardcore is not punk? AS I LAY DYING? please tell me your joking. listen to PUNK/HARDCORE bands from the 80s like minor threat, dead kennedy's bad brains. thats hardcore. does as i lay dying and Minor threat sound anything alike? no! as i lay dying is not hardcore. its jsut abunch of sissys in chick bands that want to act tough and cool so they stole the name. fuck off.

actually As I Lay Dying dont even consider themselves hardcore. They know they are metal. There are just too many jerks.

HARDCORE IS NOT PUNK

as you know, HARDCORE IS NOT PUNK! there is nothing punk about it. punk, like green day, takes little musical talent while bands like As I Lay Dying and It Dies Today write their songs and lyrics with a passion in mind. Musical ability is derived from passion, passion is derived from emotion, and emotion is derived from events around a person. And the UK article was right KNOW YOUR MUSIC! you should be banned from wikimedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BFMV1020 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

    You idiot!! First, Green Day aint punk, thats just some mainstream rock stuff.. And AILD and IDT are f..in' metal bands you jerkface, they have nothing to do with the hardcore scene..nor with hardcore music. You should be banned.

So what were you hoping to achieve with that statement? Feel free to post some constructive criticism... hellboy 01:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

What exactly is the point of bashing bands you don't like? Hardcore music came as inspiration from punk rock.

You are totally wrong. First, Hardcore started as a punk genre as this article describes. The authors of this article and many punk enthusiasts would cringe at your mention of Green Day. They are agruablely a punk band, but they are about as far from hardcore punk (if they are indeed punk) as it comes. Bands that you have listed, As I Lay Dying and It Dies Today are categorized on Wikipedia as Metalcore. This is not an unfair categorization despite the fact that both of those bands are commonly refered to by fans as Hardcore. The truth, as I understand it, is that modern Metalcore music has derived from the original hardcore punk which is what this article about. Genre is not determined by your opinion of musical talent so that is completely irrelevant. --anon 05:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

'''Tribal hardcore and evolution.''' I've heard bands like spultura described as tribal harcore maybe we could say something about this.

The "new" Hardcore These so called "hardcore bands" are no more musically passionate than punk bands are. Punks bands have energy, and write about life as well. It is unfair to say "hardcore" bands have passion and Punk bands dont, especially when all they do is write their music based AROUND their "breakdowns" just so kids can "throwdown". The ORIGINAL bands that were considered hardcore were bands much like Black Flag, and the new "hardcore" scene wouldnt even have a straight edge way of thinking without a punk band. It was called Minor Threat, and they wrote a song about abstaining from doing any kind of drugs or drinking. The song was called, "straightedge". Chew on that for a bit.

Besides, a lot of things have "hardcore" genres. We're talking about Hardcore PUNK here, anyways.

Hardcore punk came from punk. The punk rock groups got more and more extreme and eventually became hardcore. I have to argue however that much hardcore is more metallic with slow songs and deep screaming. So if that's hardcore punk, what does the metal version of hardcore sound like?

Ok, most of what people call "Hardcore" these days falls into the following categories: Any emo band that employs screaming around 90% of the time. Underoath for example, or Atreyu. Screamo bands. Moshcore bands derived loosely from the New York Hardcore scene such as Hatebreed. Metalcore bands such as Norma Jean and old school A7X. NWOAHM such as Lamb of God and Killswitch Engage. Now the fact remains that none of these bands can fall under the true definition of hardcore. Just because people mistake them for hardcore, does not mean that hardcore exists as a genre. Hardcore punk bands never evolved into just hardcore bands. At the heart of it, the true hardcore scene always remained a punk scene. Some bands chose to play other styles of music and those styles of music have their own names such as Grindcore, Crossover, Moshcore, EmoCore, ect. And while this music is derived from hardcore, they got their own names for a reason, so that people would not confuse them with actual hardcore.

Little/no mention of Fear, Lee Ving, or the SNL incident

Fear was a pretty big band in the scene in the early eighties. Why no mention? Also, shouldn't Fear's Saturday Nigh Live appearance be mentioned somehow? As a moment that showed mainstream America what was going on in with this new music (new at the time)?Dpetley 17:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Husker Du

You have Husker Du backwards, they began as a breakneck hardcore outfit then turned into a postpunk band. "Land Speed Record" was the first album and its insane.

Music samples

I took the liberty of replacing one of the music samples. I removed the link to Dead Kennedy's "Holiday in Cambodia" and replaced it with Bad Brains "Pay to Cum", which I think is a much clearer example of hardcore punk music. In fact, I really don't think the pre-In God We Trust DKs are hardcore punk at all, but rather, are a good example of pre-hardcore American punk. (With IGWT, of course, their sound changed noticeably.) Peter G Werner 09:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Suffix: CORE

Feel free to debate this with me, but I can't tell you when I will reply. You guys can adress me as Chuck Phantom

I took a look at some of the peoples posts on here. A lot of people are oblivious to things that I notice fast. Generally, styles of music ending with the suffix Core (Grindcore, Metalcore, Moshcore) regardless of what they sound like are related to Hardcore Punk Rock and therefore belong in the Punk realm. People have things like Hardcore, and Emo incorrect. Emo was orriginally the Washington D.C. Hardcore scenes EmoCore music starting around 1985, with Rites of Spring as the originator, and followed up with bands like Fire Party. Emo bands started going into an Indie Emo sound in the early 90s and eventually went mainstreem into a style close to the sound of PowerPop that people call Emo today. What people call Hardcore nowadays, regardless of how different it sounds than Hardcore Punk, is still related to Hardcore Punk, just like it is analagous to Metalcore and Grindcore, also still coming from punk, just like Grindcore is analagous to Crust-Punk or Stenchcore or whatever you want to call it. The fact is, all these bands that you are all calling Hardcore has another subgenre of it's own called Moshcore, which has a page on answers.com which you should all take a look at. You will find the material that you see on that page quite familiar. People adressed Hardcore Punk as Hardcore in the 80s before these Moshcore bands started coming around. Samething with the Hardcore Scene. When you ask people what they listen to and they respond with Hardcore, you ask them about it and they call it simply "Hardcore". I asked a person what she meant and she said "Hardcore Music". And all these subgenres fit into primary genres of Rock and Roll. There's Hard Rock, Punk Rock, Metal, Agressive Rock, Soft Rock, Folk Rock, and prime Subgenres like that. There's no music simply called Hardcore that's one step down of Rock and Roll music. Moshcore, Metalcore, Grindcore, Goregrind, Thrashcore, Skacore, Queercore, Skatecore, Emocore, Screamo, they all have pretty unique sounds and are still all right out of Hardcore Punk Rock.

You've probably heard a few Death Rock bands. Tell me, what genre is Death Rock a subgenre of? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.87.235.145 (talk) 07:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

Portland Hardcore.

there should be a portland hardcore page. Oregon that is. Poison idea and shit.--71.236.239.19 07:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Genre

Hardcore is its own genre none of this sub genre bs it evolved from metal and punk buts grown to its own style and lifestyle thats associated with it -unsigned

Bad Religion?

Just browsed through the article and noticed one glaring omission...Bad Religion isn't mentioned anywhere. I don't know much Hardcore punk, but I have heard that they were an important hardcore punk band in the 80's, and almost single-handedly saved punk in the 90's. I don't if this is true, but someone should investigate.

I did notice their label is mentioned (Epipith (sp?), which was created by the band. Ledzeppelin19 23:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I've always just considered bad religion to be punk (with the hardcore purposely omitted). They aren't really heavy or fast enough to be considered hardcore. And it has nothing to do with the clean vocals either. Plenty of hardcore bands employ clean vocals (propaghandi, Rise Against, Bouncing Souls) without necessarily excluding themselves from the hardcore scene. Bad Religion just seems to be missing that edge or maybe that fast pace that would make me think of them as hardcore.

they were part of the 80's HCpunk scene, but when became epitaph started that melodic poppy crap that dominated in punk towards the 1990's. now look at them just as bad as all the non punk bands I used to hate back in the 80's.

Two schools of hardcore

Should something be mentioned about East Coast Hardcore (more popularly termed New York Hardcore) and West Coast Hardcore? It seems to me that east coast hardcore is generally heavier and more prone to metal orientations than west coast hardcore. If anyone knows enough about these two scenes to put in their two scents, be my guest.

I don't think that would be a very good idea. I agree there are alot of metal-inflected HC bands from the east coast, but therev are equally alot of east coast HC bands with no metal inflection (Minor Threat, S.O.A., Reagan Youth, Bad Brains etc.)

I dispute this definition of hardcore punk

This definition of hardcore punk is not satisfactory. Hardcore is always hardcore punk. It will always have more in common with punk than metal as it is a subgenre of punk. Any bands that "have more in common with metal" are therefore metal. There are many screamo band who call themselves metalcore (a nonexistent genre made to associate these groups with the hardcore scene simply for street cred which many metal bands do not and cannot have) or hardcore. Metalcore shares no characteristics of hardcore in that it is not punk. It is simply metal with harder, possibly "reminiscent of hardcore" style vocals. I saw DMIZE, Madball, and Merauder referred to as metalcore bands which is something that they would completely deny as they are or were solidly members of the hardcore scene. Using Michael Azerrad as a source on Hardcore is like using a country music reporter to talk about hip hop. Michael Azerrad may be an expert on popular music but he is not qualified to explain a scene that he does not belong to and NEVER belonged to. Even if much of his knowledge is based on studies and watching a documentary it will never compensate for the "Feeling in your heart" when u listen to the music and dance in the pit. The brotherhood we have cannot be bought it must be felt. This scene is underground and underground is where we want it to stay. It needs to remain free from the bullshit definitions given on the space up above. It might seem petty but it ain't petty to me.

Jcnyhc 22:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)JC NYHC, NYHC Family United, www.myspace.com/NYHCFamilyUnitedJcnyhc 22:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

THERE ARE TOO MANY REVISIONIST HISTORY KIDS ON HERE. HARDCORE=PUNK IN THE 80'S I KNOW ITS DIFFERENT NOW BUT IT WASNT BACK THEN. METALCORE DID NOT EXIST, POP PUNK LIKE GREEN DAY DID NOT EXIST YET. NEWYORK HEAVYCORE DID NOT EXIST YET. ALL THESE TOOK OVER AROUND 1990. IN THE 80'S THERE WAS 70'S STYLE PUNK /80'S HARDCOREPUNK AND CROSSOVER/THRASH. THAT WAS IT. QUIT TRYING TO CLASSIFY YESTERDAY UNDER TODAYS TERMS! THERE WERE ALSO MANY COOL BANDS THAT DEFIED CLASSIF LIKE BUTTHOLE SURFERS, FLIPPER, NOMEANSNO ETC..

AND IM SORRY NO MATTER WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO THINK TODAYS HARDCORE OR METALCORE SCENE IS WORLDS APART FROM THE 80'S HCPUNK SCENE

this page is shit

half the bands mentioned are not hardcore bands anyway.

     I agree. And Underoath metalcore?? :S:S Deleted that. They are f..ing screamo fags!!

What tha hell??

The article should be called HARDCORE. Because todays hardcore like Hatebreed, Terror and Throwdown are more metal than punk. Ok, oldskool bands exist but those are called "oldskool". How could we call Hatebreed hardcore PUNK?? No way. Nor are they metalcore. Well, metalcore.. Even AS I LAY DYING dont consider themselves metalcore.. Simply metal. Those who really do think theyre metalcore are like Diecast.. Same sounding bunch of geeks who wanna be cool by playing whats trendy. Someone really should do somethin to this article.. - shadowz, not signed in

Possibly add a record label to the list?

I would like to ask if we could add "In-Effect Records" to the list. Unfortunately, I cannot remember hardly any of the releases, but I think I recall them doing more than a few HC releases. Please correct me if I am wrong and if you have any information on In-Effect's hardcore releases, could you please list them here? I think that Killing Time's "Brightside" was one, also 24/7 Spyz's first record. For some reason, I thought there were a few more good ones. Please post them if there are and if not, please remove this section. Thank you! -Chris from DE, July 3, 2007, 13:08.

Aren't these bands pop-punk?

     ...Some bands have created a sound that has been described as melodic hardcore. Examples of those bands include Rise Against, Strike Anywhere, Set Your Goals, Crime in Stereo, Modern Life Is War and Shook Ones...

I know for a fact that set your goals and crime in stereo are defined as pop-punk. Should melodic hardcore be changed to pop-punk?

gorilla biscuits? guns up? madball?

shouldn't they be mentioned? they were obviously some very important hardcore bands...

Cultural Origins

I have to take Matthew Fennell's side on this: why does the InfoBox say hardcore originated in the "early 1980s" when you have Black Flag, the Bad Brains, the Dead Kennedy's, and the Misfits all forming in 1977-1978, The Germs most influential record release in 1979, etc? Clconway 19:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I changed it to "late 1970s", which is more accurate than "circa 1980".Spylab 22:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

gotta question

Death By Stereo and comeback kid are hardcore punk, black flag is hardcore punk to, but the only song I heard like comeback kid and dead by stereo is the song depressions, can someone, the others song I have by black flag are like the song I love you or fix me, can someone explain me why are to different kinds of hardcore punk are of the same genere?

To answer your question:

Note that DBS and Comeback Kid are relatively young bands. Black Flag started out in the early eighties. That's a long time (about 20 years) for the genre to have evolved, and any band that's formed since then may have some similar influences but sound completely different. This is like how any band today described as pop-rock doesn't mean they sound like the Beatles, etc. Just because two bands are listed in the same genre doesn't mean that they sound exactly alike.

Also, please take note in the future that Talk pages are meant to discuss the creation and/or maintaining of the article and not the article's subject. Thank you. TheLetterM 23:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)