Album Rating: 4.0

well dm is more accessible

Album Rating: 5.0

I also like death metal more, but still

Album Rating: 4.0

Really depends on the band.

Album Rating: 4.0

bm overall is more interesting for me rn because i havent conquered the limits of the genre yet like i did with dm

Album Rating: 5.0

Yeah, I feel that. I've been into death metal forever, Black Metal is much more recent.

Album Rating: 4.5

i kinda feel like bm is more accessible--it was for me anyway

Album Rating: 4.5

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Album Rating: 5.0

Nah, black metal is usually recorded with a potato and has screechy vocals and whatnot. Definitely not more accessible than death metal.

Album Rating: 4.5

that's your basis for accessibility-recording quality? "screechy vocals"? lol. i mean, it is obviously going to vary from person to person but, when i first got into metal i found Bm to be a bit easier for me to process i think because a lot of it was more melodic and less cluttered and murky sounding.

Agreed with Hal. A big reason BM was more accessible for me at first was that you have plenty of options these days that make use of many genre motifs without the lo fi production.

It's a lot easier to enjoy the wall of sound that pretty much all metal creates when the riffs are a lot simpler like in WitTR, Drudkh, etc. For me, there was just so much going on in any given DM song, particularly the more technical stuff, that it took me multiple listens before I started to hear how sweet something was.

In the end it's your opinion but the lo fi production argument doesn't really hold much water.

Album Rating: 5.0

Screechy vocals + muddy production = not as accessible to most, at least I would assume. Clearer sound that sounds a tad more "mainstream" and more riffs you can rock out to with vocals that are basically just harsher thrash metal vocals (obviously not shit like Demilich and Cryptopsy)...yeah I think DM is way more accessible.



But to each his own.

Album Rating: 5.0

bm is more accessible imo, there's so many sub subgenres that are melodic or hypnotic, the posty or cascadian shit and so on.

Album Rating: 4.5

ya i getcha. i guess it's just contingent on what elements in the music you find less immediately appealing and harder to grasp. i prob listened to Nespithe 20+ times before it really sunk in and became enjoyable for me

Album Rating: 5.0

Whenever I mention black metal to someone who knows nothing about metal they think I mean Sevendust or something.

"i prob listened to Nespithe 20+ times before it really sunk in and became enjoyable for me"

Yeah this. The density of quality DM is what makes it more challenging. Maybe accessible isn't the word, but BM is definitely more immediate.

Album Rating: 4.0

Black Metal is simplistic in nature which makes it more immediately acceptable. Most metal fans I've met that don't like BM are either turned off by the vocals or the image.

Album Rating: 5.0

I'd say harsh bm would be harder to get into then whatever the equivalent dm example would be, most technical? Dense? Idk. But I think if you intorduce someone to say Nattens Madrigal and Nespithe since the example was given, I'd wager a majority would prefer Nespithe. That said as a whole you'd be splitting hairs becuase theres stuff like Six Feet Under (highest selling death metal band?) that offers absolutley no challenge, but then there's some BM with production so slick and full of synths etc. that you'd be hard pressed to find someone it doesn't appeal to. If you count things like Mesarthim as BM well there you go those guys play incredibly saccharine bm. But of course you also have melodeath, folk metal and other fun stuff that can ease someone in.

Album Rating: 4.5

true but i bet most people would prefer bergtatt or any other ulver release to nespithe, bm is way more accessible than dm imo mostly on account of how meditative a lot of it can be

Album Rating: 5.0

Yeah that's a good point I didn't even think of Bergtatt haha

Album Rating: 4.0

kvlt