It seems lately that in conversations regarding Black Metal bands, many people have been trying to lump artists like Megiddo into the world of hardcore. Black Metal has nothing, if ANYTHING, to do with punk music or it's roots. I've decided to put a little history on the matter up, to make sure people stop making this confusion, as it really only makes them look ignorant in the end. Both are musically, ideologically and historically different in so many ways I am amazed anyone could bother to confuse them.

METAL TO BLACK METAL:

In the late 1960's, Hendrix was charging blues based guitar rock into new levels of attacking distortion and feedback. Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath joined the fray mixing acoustic instrumental packs, blues shorn guitar and screaming vocals, to a weightier rhythm. Metal also adopted melodic ideas from the double guitar harmonies of Judas Priest (and followers) Iron Maiden. Metal has always been about the weighty, pronounced blues/classical riff and the pounding-warlike rhythm of the drums. It is ironic that the future Black Metal movement would actually go back to the more bluesy, lo-fi roots of metal rather than adopt the thrash-waltz (the closest to hardcore metal got) or the snaking guitars of Maiden. (Though some adopted both at times, it was not always a norm.)

Black Metal is an extension of the thrash and 70's metal movements came into play at the same time as hardcore, ironically. (The one similarity both retain is a sense of closed off culture and a large DIY ethic, which often gets the two scenes confused socially.) A band like Darkthrone uses blues and classical changes and only even come close to a "hardcore" beat, due to the somewhat shoddy sound quality that also pervaded early hardcore records. With Megiddo, the chord structures have to do more with Iron Maiden slow chord rides featured on Killers more than anything. Mixing cues with 70's doom rock and sometimes 80's thrash beats, the music is psychedelic, minimally produced and the vocals sound like James Hetfield possessed by Satan.

Unlike the childish enthusiasm and bounce that pervaded hardcore - this has no sonic connection at all other than "fast songs and lo-fi recordings." The hardcore bounce is never present and the vocals/guitars are work with too many nuances to be compared fairly to either side.

PUNK TO HARDCORE:

Punk rock was born of 1950's styled boogie and rock and roll. Add distorted guitars, colored hair and rockabilly styled hooks and you have punk rock. Unlike the blues oriented works of Black Sabbath or the lead guitar sludge-thrash of Venom, these bands used leads and hooks that Chuck Berry himself might have been pleased with. Good examples of this would be the records of The Misfits and The Ramones. Both are filled aggressive takes on the doo-wop and 50's rock scenes. The Ramones have even gone on to directly cop 50's songs and the Misfits are doing a tribute to the 1950's, that doesn't sound so much different at all. Other bands like The Exploited, Broken Bones and the Sex Pistols, bare this "ugly rock and roll" thing in perfect form.

Hardcore of course, is the rebellion against even this. Stripping the 50's chord structure down, speeding it up and creating a fast and distorted "bounce" sound. The vocals are the least metal aspect, with it being more of a shout than a bellow and more of a howl than a Rob Halford scream. The beat is still typically punk, just notched up a bit. These original blokes loathed metal and pretty much didn't listen too much else besides hardcore in the original scene. Maybe punk was acceptable as the forefather, but it was HIGHLY contained and distrustful of metal. Connecting the two is difficult, as they often had fistfights and intellectual confrontations over the two ideas.

Musically - hardcore wasn't a display of musically skillful storytelling, like a Dio record (though the Bad Brains could outplay 90% of any metal bands today) or an expression of horny teenage macho fantasies, like a glam record. It didn't even sound like Black Sabbath's minimal early days. This also proves that fast does not mean thrash and lo-fi does not make music punk.

It was a simple and violent brawl both sonically and mentally, to be in a hardcore band. A metal band was more about being thoughtful and planning songs out instead of charging up some bounce-styled music to spread your views over.

CONCLUSION

The closest the two ever got to crossing over were a few bands who injected fast versions of AC/DC licks into songs or adopted some of Venom's early thrash ideas. Those who wish to call something hardcore just because it doesn't ring similar with your favorite crap metal band, need to realize that hardcore is a whole new animal. Bands like Agnostic Front, Discharge, and Society System Decontrol, Black Flag and the Cro-Mags all threw some metal into the mix but it changes the original hardcore sound entirely. No longer did they represent the original hardcore idea and were often mocked for "turning bad to metal".

For a comparison take a Judas Priest record, take a closer listen to Black Flag. No connection!

Chuck Berry and Jimi Hendrix couldn't have been any different.

Darkthrone, Megiddo and Mayhem cannot be connected to the Dead Kennedy's, Minor Threat or the Bad Brains either.

Get some history folks!

(This is not biased for or against metal or hardcore, as I like records in both styles.)

Picks:
Black Flag - Damaged
Katatonia - Viva Emptiness
Bad Brains - Live at the Maritime
Song of Melkor/Rampage/Cross Sodomy - New World Blasphemy
Type O Negative - Life is Killing Me

Now Reading:
American Hardcore
Wrath of God - Robert Gleason
The Death of Satan - Andrew DeBlanco
Beowulf - Seamus Heaney