But thats because Soulfly are a very experimental band, all their albums have a big range of styles, especially their last 3 albums. Bleed came out of Soulflys first album, which also had songs that were pure hardcore, and some that were groove thrash, and some that were industrial. Labeling Soulfly a nu metal band just sounds dumb, imo.

Yeah well, like I said, a lot of bands that weren't actually nu-metal were labelled as that, it seemed that pretty much anything that wasn't "old school" or any already established sub-genre was called "nu-metal" at one point... in much the same way as a lot of bands are being labelled "metalcore" now.
The "groove metal" thing is an interesting one though because that's a description I'd not even heard until last year. I remember "power/groove" being used to describe bands like Machine Head and Pissing Razors (which I believe came from Pantera's own description of themselves) and "post-thrash" seemed to be a popular term for bands like them and Face Down at the time... "groove metal" though seems to have sprung up quite recently and has been applied retrospectively to bands. I blame Metal Archives

I use to term Groove Thrash to describe bands like Pantera, Machine Head and most Soulfly songs, i dk if you have, but if youve ever been to a Soulfly gig, youd understand how much of their songs have a very set groove behind a thrash song.
I also agree that alot of bands got labeled nu metal for no reason, it was like any band that wasnt "troo", wasnt suddently labeled "nu".

Oh I've seen Soulfly many times over the past 10 years or so, in fact I was at their first ever UK gig. The "groove metal" thing wasn't a dig btw, sorry if it came across that way... it's just an interesting thing to see this description seeming to suddenly crop up and be used to retrospectively label bands with.
It's the same thing with "Battle Metal" here in the UK at least (I'm not sure about the US or anywhere else) where the term essentially didn't exist until Turisas' debut album but now everyone from Blind Guardian to Amon Amarth gets labelled it.

The term Battle Metal is pretty lame imo, because if it was to be described correctly, bands like Hail of Bullets and Bold Thrower would also be Battle Metal.

I'd rather go to battle listening to Bolt Thrower and Hail of Bullets then Turisas tbh

I love how there is a musical discussion going on, and then Mattie just tells us what music he'd prefer to go to battle to
And then I put my two cents in about it

I listened to some of the bands on your list. Korn, Slipknot, SOAD.. a lot of them wore of extremely quick and I ran onto heavier stuff.

remember when machine head dabbled in nu metal i still cringe to this day.

QUOTE(Christhammer @ Dec 1 2008, 11:07 AM) [snapback]458854[/snapback]I always preferred the bands that came immediately before nu-metal (and undoubtedly had a hand in inspiring a lot of those bands) like Prong, White Zombie and Faith No More etc who I always thought while superficially similar in a lot of ways just had that "something" that nu-metal bands lacked.
I think it was really ingenuity.
Bands like Prong, White Zombie and Faith No More really didn't do just anything so simple as having a guy rapping over a metal riff as nu metal did, it was more complicated than that, I think. While Mike Patton had rap stylings, he never painted himself as a rapper like the nu metal guys did and he never really tried to be street, and he was far more versatile than all of those douchebags.
The sound was infused with some stylings similar to hip-hop, funk and groove, but it was never just a simple borrowed groove or riff. Nu metal just really dumbed down a lot of that infusion and made it easier for the masses to follow so they could act street and tough. Blech.
If you will excuse me, I have to go listen to Angel Dust now....