Talk:Glam metal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Glam metal article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
This article is related to WikiProject Music genres, a user driven attempt to cleanup and standardise music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the project guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good and 1.0 standards.
B Glam metal has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Wikiproject_Metal This article is part of WikiProject Metal, an attempt to improve articles related to heavy metal music. Please participate by visiting the project page for more details on the projects.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Contents

[edit] Date/timeline

Hello everyone I just want every one to stop fighting on the birth and death dates of Glam metal. What should be done is glame started around 1975 in clubs, then it became popular in 1978 with bands like Quiet Riot and Van Halen ect, and by 1980 it became a popular Genre and dominated from 1980 to 1992 and went of the air in 1994. Then started to rise up again in 1997 and on. protos99

[edit] pleas stop fighting

Every one listen Glam metal is the same as Hair Metal. Hair metal is glam metal what happend was many people in the 1990's named glam metal this and it has stuck ever since. Also every one stop fighting over the names and subgenres ok heres how it goses Glam metal subgenres Shock Rock,Sleaze Glam aka sleaze rock,and pop metal. Genres related classice metal, Arena rock. Also some genres got mixed in like Motley Crue mixed Pop and punk with Glam also Vinne Vincent mixed in speed metal with Glam. Another thing people stop fighting on the dates Glam metal started for instance in a Quiet Riot Greatest Hits album which stated" One of the greatest bands of glam metal formed in 1975". Also the dates of popularity should be 1978 to 1992. Here's another fact Grunge never killed Glam metal corperation's back stabed Glam metal by firing it's worker and hiring younger workers who were more into Grunge all because people thought they missed out on some big thing because Nirvana's Never mind album sales were huge. Finaly glam was just as popular in 1992 as any other year just because it wasn't on prime time tv[ it main source to get it's musice to the public] It was played late nights and early mourning when most of it's fans were sleeping, working, and/or at shcool, it was still on the air in 1994 then when grunge died it's been slowly came back. Protos99

[edit] aggressive?

The article states that

"Generally, Glam metal is of an aggressive style"

which I think can objectively be said to be false. If you look at other forms of rock that existed at the same time, such as hardcore punk and thrash metal, it is clear that glam metal has a comparatively polite and polished style, both in the performances and in the production. Isn't this one of the big factors behind the 90s shift against glam metal and in favor of grunge and alternative rock? The appeal of bands like Nirvana and Alice in Chains had to do with the notion that they were much more aggressive than glam metal and arena rock, with much more shock value. No friendly or glamorous anthems to be found there. Let me know if anyone disagrees with this notion, cuz if not I will probably edit something along these lines.


I can see where this argument comes from but grunge used glam metals faults to launch itself. The whole arena & atmosphere thing is part of Heavy Metal. It is aggressive, big, large & sleazy. This is what fans like about Glam Metal. Alot of fans & artists pose with the trends so they move on but the core fans like it. Guns N Roses songs are better than any grunge song period & more heavier. While grunge songs seem more rougher version of rock & not necessarily aggressive. Hardcore Punk/ Thrash Metal is aggressive but then it lacks some features which Heavy Metal fans love.

Glam Metal also is the perfect mix of aggression & talent. Theres no point being aggressive throughout a song as the song loses its purpose, which punk fans need to take notice of. Blues is the base of rock & as sad as the early artists were, there music was still good.

There were hair metal bands that used Glam Metals fame & cashed in on it, so much so that it shitted the genre. Then grunge came along & used the same formula as Metal but was a total opposite. Instead of using tight leather Macho image, it used a dirty & more sad look. But the formula was the same as Metal.

But Glam Metal is aggressive just look at the early artists. Plus grunge was a stripped down weaker version of rock, that used Heavy Metals failings & took its place. It should have tried to create its own place rather than use Glam Metal. Also the talent of Heavy Metal bands is far more than that of grunge artists.


but dude everything you just said is POV

Opinion, I backed it up & if you hate glam metal why come on its page? Hair Metal destroyed it but hair metal is not it. Plus grungers need to just make music & leave sleaze glam metal alone.

[edit] Can this Article Seperate Glam Metal in three catagories

Glam Metal= Crue,WASP.

Sleaze Glam-Hard Rock/Metal= Guns N Roses, LA Guns, Faster Pussycat, Tesla, Thunder, Skid Row & Vain.

Hair Metal= Poison, Warrant, Bang Tango, Ratt, Britny Fox, Steeler, White Snake, Bang Tango (Bango Tango sounds more funky), Van Halen, Fire House, Kix, Bonjovi (In 80s Bon Jovi was very much Hair Metal) & Autograph.

Not all the bands are hair metal & this should be distuinguished. Glam Metal & Hair Metal are not the same thing. Also labels pushed for a hair metal image/sub section. Labels told bands to wear colorful spandex, over emphasise hair spray & make songs more like dance rock. Tesla have said this themselves & are proud of the fact that they didnt join hair metal. But this happens in all music genres as modern hip hop is more like Bling Hip Hop compared to old school hip hop. Post Grunge & Nu Metal replaced Alternative Metal & Rock also. So basically music channels / labels turn a genre into pop. Which shows Hair Metal is not Glam Metal rather a sub section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.10.93.147 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 20 December 2006.

[edit] EVERYONE READ

Fuck off with saying so-so isn't glam metal just because you're a fan and think it is an insult. Not all glam metal bands sound the same but that doesn't mean they're not glam metal. Judas Priest wasn't originally glam metal but they did become glam metal for a period of time. Same with most of the other bands people are complaining about. Just because so and so isn't like Poision doesn't mean they're not glam metal. Live with it. The guy who said Iron Maiden isn't would be right though. This has nothing to do with me not wanting them to be called glam , though. I like Iron Maiden and glam metal but if we're going to put Iron Maiden on this list we mayswell put bands like metallica and king diamond on it!

[edit] Lacks 70's background, Merge with Glam Rock

Glam metal started in the 70's with artists like david bowie and the ny dolls. The 70's are not covered very well in this article. also, led zeppelin was never a glam band, but were cock rock. androgeny is the core value that glam bands share, and im pretty sure zep always came across as hetero. Probably should be merged with glam rock as they both share the androgeny value.

Burlyguy 03:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] redirection

'Hair Metal' should be redirected to Glam Metal.. not the other way round. 'Hair Metal' is just a derogatory term aimed at bands such as Warrant & Poison in the same way "Emo Fags" is used to describe pop bands such as MCR & The Used.

The term "Hair Band" however doesn't cover bands such as Guns N' Roses, Motley Crue, W.A.S.P., Judas Priest, etc... only a small minority of the "Glam Metal" bands.

The genres name is simply; Glam Metal.

NeonDevil 05:37, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


Exactly. How can the article say: "Fans of the genre usually refer to it as glam metal, referencing the earlier British glam rock movement, and consider hair metal to be a borderline insult." And then go on to call it Hair Metal?

Who decides the name of a music genre if not the people that listen to it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.77.135.94 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

A few alternations were made.. 1. glam metal rightfully in the place of the derogatory term "hair metal" until redirecting is sorted out. 2. Hanoi Rocks removed from list because they are not a glam metal band. Deathrocker 03:14, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I personally highly disagree that "Hair Metal" is derogatory, seeing as I am a said "fan of the genre" and i have never called it "glam metal" in my life. Hair Metal is a subset of the larger genre of glam. Jigsaw Jimmy 19:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] domination

"dominated popular music"? -- Zoe

Yup. From '86-'91 it was the dominant music genre in the US. That's an irrefutable fact.

[edit] getting rid

I think we should perhaps get rid of this paragraph...

"In recent years, certain bands associated (perhaps loosely) with punk rock have scored hits with tracks that seem to evoke the anthemic hair-metal sound, such as the Offspring's Gone Away (1997) and AFI's Girl's Not Grey (2003). It is hard to say whether these tracks are intended as sincere homage or as an ironic reference."

Wizzer

Any particular reason? -- IHCOYC

I added a mention of the current "hair metal" revivalists, The Darkness, currently quite popular in the UK.

[edit] hair and cock

Hair metal != cock rock. It is a form of cock rock.

Hair metal needs to be merged with cock rock. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.109.55.234 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral?

I don't know if this article is exactly neutral. I read it and suddenly hated hair metal. Until I realized some of my favorite bands fell into this genre. I don't feel like re-writing it myself, so how does one get the little banner on the top that says "The neutrality of this article has been challenged"?

There are two steps: 1) Document some specific not-neutral parts of the article here on the talk page; 2) Add {{NPOV}} to the top of the article. Tuf-Kat 22:51, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Judas Priest?

Judas Priest was not a hair metal band. If anything, they could be included with the new wave of British Heavy metal--but not hair metal, like Warrant, Poison, and Vixen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.14.32.36 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 1 April 2005 (UTC)
  • they definitely did not start out as a hair metal band. around the time of turbo was the closest they ever got to hair metal, and even that is stretching it. Gringo300 11:43, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
  • they started before the time of NWOBHM. Gringo300 22:12, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but Judas Priest is Heavy metal. Shady_Joe

[edit] Hairspray rock or Spandex rock

Glam rock is also many times called Hairspray rock or Spandex rock. There could be some mention of that. As for the upper poster - many of my favourite bands also fall into this category, but so what? Glam was always both funny and dead serious for me. Even today I sometimes darg out my old pollished spikes, ripped jeans, leather jacket and sunglasses and go out in such outfit and don't give a flying fu** what other people think. ..Yeah, those were the days, LA, 1984, high flying shred solos, smoke machines and babes were back then still slim and sexy, Soviet Union still existed, night life was active,.. yeah, those were the days, mmmm.. Now go and walk the streets of LA today. What will you see? A bunch of overweight chicks, patriot act, terror color codes and rap beats on every corner.. Makes me wanna cry! 80's FOREVER !!!!

[edit] List of bands

Do groups like Mr. Big and Night Ranger really qualify as "hair bands"? JetsLuvver 05:11, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  • well, mr. big once had former poison guitarist richie kotzen...

Gringo300 16:07, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Johnny crash!

[edit] GN'R

I don't get it. In this article Guns N' Roses is included as a hair metal band, put in the Guns N' Roses article, they seem to make GN'R anti-hair metal. Can anyone clear this up for me? -Big Brother is Watching

I would not consider GN'R to be hair metal. Prairie Dog

Why not? They had the hair, they had the metal, and they are certianly amoung the other examples mentioned here alfrin 19:20, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
  • there are different versions of hair metal, both musically and image wise. Gringo300 11:47, 7 October 2005 (UTC)


having long hair or playing metal does not make you a hair metal band. playing to a female audience makes you a hair metal band, and i shudder at even using "metal" in its name Lue3378 05:41, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Johnny crash!

GNR are definitely in the Glam-Metal neighborhood. Sleaze-Glam (used properly in this text) or Gutter-Glam are more apt. definitions of their AFD CD.

[edit] Is the list even necessary?

There is a category for hair metal bands in use. Can't that provide a list? I can see listing out some of the more popular/well-known bands, but these lists always generate controversy and add little value.

All band lists in genre articles should be moved to something like list of hair metal bands. In order to make them useful in a way that categories are not, they should have brief captions describing each band. Tuf-Kat 20:46, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Despite the periodic fussing over these lists, I find them extremely useful both in understanding what a genre is actually supposed to mean, as well as in getting ideas of bands to look for. I'm far from alone in that, and long before I was an editor I used the wikipedia band lists that way. They are extremely nice, despite the aggravation they cause for purists and those who strive to thwart them ;). Sam Spade 21:10, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess that's true, but it should probably be as TUF-Kat describes, in its own entry (the list is now longer than the article) Davetron5000 15:14, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

The thing about the list is that most of the bands are borderline and controversially hair metal. Ozzy? Hair? GNR? Hair? Van Halen? Hair? etc. Since its all controversial i believe it should be removed

[edit] Glam rock/glam metal/hair metal

Why the article reffers to "hair metal" as a subgenre? Isn't it supposed to be glam metal as a subgenre? Hair metal is a category of musicians in the 80's and not necessarily a sub-genre of heavy metal music... Waiting for an answer--Lironos / 2LIRONOS7 16:56, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

"The British band The Darkness has attempted to revive the hair-metal style, albeit in a more tongue-in-cheek style, somewhat reminiscent of early Van Halen, and Queen." A friend of mine knows the band quite well, and claims that they never intended to be tongue-in-cheek, that's just the way they came across to the public.

[edit] Pejorative terms

Add here the subject's pejorative terms here, if you like:

  • that would be GLAR, not GLAM. i think it was "gay LA metal". Gringo300 11:51, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] johnny crash

at least one person keeps removing johnny crash from the list. this is ridiculous. it looks like intentional vandalism to me. bands such as judas priest and van halen on the other hand, both of which can far less logically be called hair metal, are NOT removed.

Gringo300 13:16, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] user 200.86.69.8

at least one person keeps removing johnny crash from the list. i've identified one user doing this as 200.86.69.8. i recommend blocking this person. Gringo300 06:33, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I suspect the reason that this person is doing this is because Johnny Crash at first glance looks highly similar to Johnny Cash and they are probably mistaking the two. Avador 19:33, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

That had occured to me. i can see someone making that mistake maybe several times. however, as many times as it's been it seems odd- i would have thought that a person would after several times notice the difference. Gringo300 21:59, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
I added a note- "not to be confused with johnny cash". IF the person is making an honest mistake, this SHOULD nip the problem in the bud. Gringo300 22:09, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
i just heard that wikipedia has blocked people without wikipedia accounts form editting. unless this person has an account, this really has been nipped in the bud now. Gringo300 04:19, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed merge with Classic Metal

The discussion can be found on the classic metal metal page.

This needs to be merged with Cock Rock.

[edit] Glam/Hair/Sleaze

Maybe a paragraph or two explaining the different between the Glam bands (Crue, Ratt, Quiet Riot, etc.) from the Hair bands (Poison, Cinderella, etc.), and then even from the Sleaze of the mid-late 80's (Jetboy, L.A. Guns, Faster Pussycat, etc.). There's an obvious difference between the three, and obvious similarites that link the bands within the title, but I didn't want to just go in and add it. Thoughts?

Yeah-----Hair, sleaze, AOR, are all different sub-genres of Glam Metal. They were foremed at different periods in different parts of the world. I think you should never merge Glam Rock with Classic Rock because they are NOT THE SAME THING! Totally two different lifestyles, and different sounding music. It would be like merging Rap with Soul (I hate both rap and soul, so don't get any ideas.)

I don't think there should be a merge either, but I agree with separating the genres in this article itself (Glam, Hair & Sleaze). Jewofunk 08:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glam Metal started in the United States in the late 1970s?

What about artists such as Slade, Gary Glitter and Wizzard to name just a few who started in the United Kingdom in the late 1960s??

Those bands are Glam Metal, they're Glam Rock. Similar, but not quite. Jewofunk 08:33, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lists

How can one compare Van Halen to Poison, that they both share the same category? While it was true that Van Halen was over-the-top in its performances, it cannot be put under the label of hair metal or any glam metal that incorporates bands such as Poison. Anyone else share my views on this issue? Feel free to comment. Lue3378 06:06, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Just because a band doesn't sound exactly like the others doesn't make them any more or less part of the genre Ratt is different to Motley Crue, Poison is different to Twisted Sister... just the way it is. Van Halen helped to kickstart the genre in the first place. - Deathrocker 15:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] READ THIS ONE<---------------------------------------(COME ON)

Alright lets just call everyone glam metal because apparently bands that have nothing to do with it are being labeled glam in this article (such as Iron Maiden) and I have lost patience with ignorant pricks. Besides this, bands that are glam metal are being mixed with bands belonging to hair metal (such as Van Halen and Poison), 2 totally different genres. Will someone please understand that hair metal and glam metal are different and write an article for each?!?! I am losing my mind thinking that there are people who actually think that they sound the same. Anyone who agrees/disagrees with me feel free to comment. And those who disagree can suck it Lue3378 05:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Glam metal is the euphemism that hair metal fans came up with when they realized they never gave it a name when it was popular and they didn't like the name MTV chose. Glam metal is different from hair metal in the same way Project David was different from Crossover Office. 72.40.101.236 00:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glam Metal Blog Sites

Blogging is becoming hot and happening. We can list some Glam Metal Blog sites here so that Glam Metal fans and Wikipedians can get some important information which can be used to expand the Glam Metal article. Here's the link (keep on adding)

[edit] Ted Nugent glam?

Twice I've removed Ted Nugent from the List of glam metal bands page. Twice he's been returned. Isn't calling Nugent "glam" like calling Hitler a humanitarian?Flogg 05:01, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Im not sure you understand. Since you know so effing much about nugent, why dont you have aproblem w/Damn Yankees??????

Because I've never listened to Damn Yankees. No band with former Styx and Night Ranger members can possibly have any interest for me. Also, whether or not Damn Yankees is glam or not is irrelevant to the topic at hand. Pat Boone made an album of metal covers, shall we label him a metal artist? Flogg 15:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

News flash Ted F#$%ing Nugent was IN Damn Yankees!!!!!--Anthraxrulz 09:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Stop calling Europe a glam metal band for God's sake !. How many times do I have to tell you this ?. They are a melodic hard rock bandAishah Bowron14:32 28 February 2006

Melodic hard rock = glam

Speaking of Europe, the fact that they were somewhat "pretty" got them put into that category.Actually, Kee Marcello was in one of those pretty-boy bands that got called "Metal" by the press because they weren't punk. The band was called "Easy Action," and they were one of the heavily produced mascara mayhem bands that existed in the early 1980s. Their sound and image was more like Kevin Reid era Rox or Ray Zell's Marionette than it was the later strains of Europe, which was more "tasteful" and not so image oriented. You know,outrageous clothes, makeup and heels. They had a lot of teen girl fans back then. Easy Action was in the early part of the 1980s, Europe was later. JBDay 00:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Point of View

Yeah, even though the artical never specifically bashes Glam Metal... you still get this very powerful looming feeling that Glam Metal sucks. I think this is because of a total absense of any sort of praise of it. Besides "It was popular during the 80's" everything else seems to be about the negatives of it. Expand, but try to say something good about it. -- Underwater 01:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place to criticise or praise. If the article does either then it needs to do both. Feel free to reword things to be simply fact, but dont add POV or praise, as this will be removed. Ley Shade 02:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Agreed

I agree with Underwater. The whole article appears to have been written by someone with a grudge, and the fact is I know lots of people who were huge fans, including me, of what is being called Glam Metal or "hair and spandex" 80s rock. The article should inform, and leave the slams for Encyclopedia Dramatica. Andacar 21:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Sleaze Glam and other additions

I've tried to sort out the article a bit, adding the Sleaze glam section for the bands that came during 87, starting with Guns N' Roses, hopefully this clears up a bit of the confussion that seems to have been a roblem for a while.

Also pruned down the Decline section to the prominent reasons - Deathrocker 04:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Metal???

This topic has hardly anything to do with metal, the topic title is a misnomer. None of the bands actually make music that is metal-like at all. Apparentely, the glam rock community doesn't like this genre at all either. Perhaps a merge to cock rock as suggested above is a good idea. Spearhead 17:26, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Glam Metal has always and will always be a subgenre of Metal, just as much as any other subgenre; Thrash, Death Metal or Black.

Judas Priest, Dio and Ozzy Obourne have even made albums in this style aswel as Def Leppard who were considered to be part of the NWOBHM.

Early bands of this subgenre included W.A.S.P., Motley Crue, Dokken, Twisted Sister, Quiet Riot... stop trying to re-write history to suit your "tastes"... its POV pushing to the extreme. The genre even has a count down of 50 best albums on Metal-Rules.com[1] Metal-Sludge.com also covers alot of Glam metal bands too.- Deathrocker 17:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] There needs to be a Criticism Section

Hair Metal recieved A LOT of ciriticism from professional reviewers and rock purists..........so why should we ignore it when that is a fact Chubdub 17:03, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Relationship to Butt Rock?

Hi. There's a page on Buttrock that I don't know what to do with. It's up for deletion, and one proposed solution is to merge it with Hair metal, which ends up here. If somebody with good knowledge of the relationships between the terms could weigh in on the AFD, I'd be much obliged. Thanks, --William Pietri 00:21, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

God there are some stupid people out there! Just because of your opinion, this genre is not COCK ROCK, or "BUTTROCK..." So all the people who KEEP repeating this, fuck off

[edit] Distinction between glam rock and hair metal.

As explained by professional music information Web site www.AllMusic.com:

Glam rock (http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=77:388): "Often confused with '80s hair metal (at least by American listeners), glam rock was an almost entirely British phenomenon that became wildly popular during the first half of the '70s."

"Top artists: David Bowie, Gary Glitter, Mott the Hoople, New York Dolls, Roxy Music, Sweet, T. Rex, Cockney Rebel, Brian Eno, Bryan Ferry, Jobriath, Mud, Queen, Lou Reed, Slade, Roy Wood, Marc Bolan, Alex Harvey, Richard O'Brien, Showaddywaddy."

Hair metal (http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=77:2693): "Hair Metal is a derisive term applied to the slick, pretty, and pop-oriented heavy metal and hard-rock bands of the late '80s."

"Top artists: Bon Jovi, L.A. Guns, Poison, Warrant, Cinderella, Def Leppard, Faster Pussycat, Firehouse, Great White, Mr. Big, Skid Row, Slaughter, Tesla, Vixen, White Lion, Whitesnake, Winger, Babylon A.D., Bad English."

I suggest that this article be renamed "Hair metal" and the appropriate revisions made, and a separate article be created for glam rock. - KB 09:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

A) There's already an article for glam rock.
B) Whether it's "glam metal" or "hair metal" depends on who you talk to, and "glam metal" was viewed as being less POV. (And hair metal links here anyway.) -- ChrisB 17:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, simply calling one genre glam rock, and the other glam metal, does not sufficiently distinguish between them for the casual fan who is likely to use the terms "rock" and "metal" interchangeably. As the AllMusic article noted, the confusion of referring to the almost exclusively American genre of hair metal as "glam" is usually an American convention, and this could also cause problems for international readers.

I think the music of David Bowie and Bon Jovi are different enough that the title of their respective genre articles should be differentiated by more than just "rock" and "metal," words which, especially in this time, are often used with no real distinction.

As for the POV issue, it is my opinion as a fan of hair metal that it is another case of an originally derogatory term which has been adopted as the standard usage by its fans or those it describes, such as "nigga" or "queer," to name two controversial but well-known examples. - KB 20:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


I think, the article's name should remain as it is. We can very well distinguish between rock and metal. Hait metal is a derogatory and biased reference given by grunge and thrash fans, that too in the early 90s, when traditional metal faced a backlash. The term is just like cock rock. And by the way, hair metal as a term was never mentioned in the 80s. Nor was glam metal. This kind of music was called just HEAVY METAL ! And the underground bands were called thrash. All of the glam metal bands (as they are called today), alongwith more traditional bands like Iron Maiden, Scorpions and Dio were called Heavy Metal. The term Pop Metal was used sometimes in the late 80s/early 90s, but only for bands like Bonjovi and Poison. This term was never used for Motley Crue, Ratt or Whitesnake. So, I guess, the proper title should be Heavy Metal, but it is now used to describe the parent genre. Hair Metal is derogatory, so is cock rock. Pop Metal is exclusive and it cant describe early 80s bands or even some late 80s bands. So what remains ? GLAM METAL ! And it is the best way to describe this genre.

--NRS(talk to me,mail me or award me a barnstar) 07:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Although I don't agree with several of your points, let me just address the issue of "rock" vs. "metal." Currently, those two words are all that is separating the two categories called "glam." According to Dictionary.com:

"Rock and roll": "n : A genre of popular music originating in the 1950s; a blend of Black rhythm-and-blues with White country-and-western; "rock is a generic term for the range of styles that evolved out of rock'n'roll." [syn: rock 'n' roll, rock'n'roll, rock-and-roll, rock, rock music]"

"Heavy metal": "Loud and harsh sounding rock music with a strong beat; lyrics usually involve violent or fantastic imagery."

The point being, metal is a kind of rock, and the casual fan of 1980s rock who is thinking of bands like Bon Jovi and Poison will probably not even be aware that the closely related words "rock" and "metal" will completely change the results of what article he finds, if he searches for "glam ( )."

Aside from the accessibility issue for those unfamiliar with many rock genres, I think the article is made very POV by calling the 1980s American (plus Def Leppard) style "glam," since in most countries that word refers exclusively to the 1970s British genre, such as David Bowie and Mott the Hoople.

As for "hair metal" being a negative term, I think I have already explained how many hair metal fans don't take offense to it, and in fact have adopted the term as their own. I gave a couple other examples of this linguistic phenomenon which I believe show this point.

As an example of how this terminology can cause problems, the other day I was editing the Stryper article. They were a 1980s hair metal band, with Christian lyrics. In the article, the authors had termed them both "glam rock" and "glam metal." Obviously, the first term, which was linked, led to the completely wrong article, on 1970s glam rock.

Thanks for considering my criticisms. - KB 21:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Including the term Hair Farmer.

People didn't start criticizing this music by instantly calling it Hair Metal. First people started deriding the guys in the bands as "hair farmers", and then "hair metal" caught on after that. I provided two examples of the usage from articles in the early 1990s, and I remember an interview with Nirvana where they were calling somebody hair farmers. I think we need to note how the term changed early on to what it is now. 11:58, 4 November 2006

I'd like to know why this sentence has been removed repeatedly from the article. It appears to be sourced properly, and I'm going to reinsert it with a slight rewording. | Mr. Darcy talk 16:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The interviews in the sentence are from 94, two years after glam metal fell... its not cronological in the article or a reason why the genre stopped been popular... its a reflective insult on it which came later. Its the equivelent of somebody dying of old age and then revisionists trying to make out the reason they died was because they were later burried in the ground. - Deathrocker 04:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Where does it say usage of the term hair farmer or for that matter hair metal caused anything? Its a reactionary term that caught on, is used as the primary term for the genre, and we have proof of its evolution. This is the etymology of the term hair metal, the primary name of this genre in general usage. These citations are from the early 90s, same as the stated era for the decline of hair metal. If you want to claim the usage of the term didn't occur during the same era as decline, you're splitting hairs. 1992 is an arbitrary year. You can pinpoint an agreed upon time? Then cite it. Either way, we have citations from arguably the two most prominent sources of rock movement documentation of the time, and ignoring that usage while not citing the first use of the term hair metal is revisionist. Xndr 15:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The term "hair farmer" seems to be a hoax. And by the way, by the above logic, the article on heavy metal music must include a few lines on how heavy metal was used for glam metal bands in the 80s, which is nowhere mentioned there. But atleast, that is true and was used in those days. The thing about "hair farmer" is that it wasnt used by anyone in glam metal heydays and was used by two-three non-notable nerds to degrade 80s metal. So, there is no sense in including that term. --NRS | T/M\B 18:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
"Two-three non-notable nerds" means you are POV pushing in the extreme. Ann Magnuson writing for Spin (magazine), Alternative Press (music magazine), and yet another, a quote from a member of charting band L7 (band): [2]. There are hundreds of examples of usage in a simple google search. Its a derogatory comment on the bands, and sorry, criticisms are included in articles. This criticism caught on to become the most readily used term for the genre. It has already been covered here, and it was decided to use the term "hair metal", in the 3rd sentence even. This further expands how a once derogatory term became embraced by fans. You don't have to like it, but that's the origin of the term. Again, if you have evidence of "hair metal" being used (especially in its heyday), cite it.
I'm not sure what you mean about having to edit the heavy metal page. If someone wants to, be my guest. That's not revisionism. It was called heavy metal in those days, as is noted in this article, and then it was called hair metal after the fact. If you have evidence to the contrary of the term's origin, cite it. Xndr 19:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm with Xndr. There is no argument for excluding the term "hair farmer;" it is properly sourced. Making the article revolve around it would be POV, but mentioning it is acceptable, and deleting it is not. | Mr. Darcy talk 02:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Keep it, I've heard people use it elsewhere. Ours18 17:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, on Google.com, the term is proved non-notable. The derogatory phrase "Hair Metal", has 1,030,000 results. "Hair farmer" has less than a thousand and hardly any are about the topic at hand, alot are about actual animal hair farming and other unrelated topics. - Deathrocker 17:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Notability doesn't apply here - I'm not sure why you'd bring it up. The guideline on notability refers to article subjects - people, companies, websites - not to individual terms or subsections within articles. Regardless, even if we were considering the "notability" of the term hair farmer, its use in two articles in mainstream publications would more than suffice. | Mr. Darcy talk 18:38, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

The exact text says "hinting", not "causes". Hinting implies a commmonality, with one preceding the other. Do we have to point out what "hair farmer" and "hair metal" have in common? Do we now have to cite obvious relationships? This nitpicking is amazing. Xndr 17:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Van Halen

Wasn't their eponymous album released in 1978? In the article it is listed as part of a group of albums released in either 1983 or 1984. At least that's how I understood the passage. Can someone confirm this?

[edit] Pop Metal

Pop Metal shouldn't be redirected to Glam Metal. Reason #1: Hair Metal = Glam Metal, and Glam metal has two things that redirect to Glam Metal

Wrathteen

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/l/a/Talk%7EGlam_metal_3f9e.html"