Talk:Mechanical Resonance (album)/Archive 1

Glam metal
Both Eduardo Rivadavia and Martin Popoff in their reviews described the music of this first album as belonging to the hair metal genre. Considine of Rolling Stone described the music as uninspired commercial hard rock. Tesla are cited as a hair metal band on many publications. This album sounds a lot like Def Leppard's Pyromania, which is a "certified" glam metal album. I don't want to start a genre war here, but I think that there are sufficient references to include glam metal in the infobox. Lewismaster (talk) 07:06, 27 May 2018 (UTC)


 * You'll need to wait for discussion before making a change.


 * That a source (Popoff) calls it "hair metal" might be enough to label it hair metal. Are you arguing for that?


 * Next we have a source (Rolling Stone) calling this album "hard rock". Good enough, it's there.


 * Numerous sources call the band "hair metal". We're discussing this album, not the band.


 * Finally, two sources call a different band's album "glam metal" and you feel this album sounds "a lot like" it. Essentially, the only support here for calling this album "glam metal" is that you feel it sounds like another album that sources called glam metal (incidentally, the best source in the other article, Rolling Stone, says it is heavy metal).


 * IMO, Poppoff/Collector's Guide is good enough to call it "hair metal". Rolling Stone is certainly good enough for the broad "hard rock". I don't see much else. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:13, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, AllMusic review says that half the album is "tailored to seduce" "glam metal consumers" "via radio-friendly templates and therefore packed with mostly throwaway, cliché-ridden arena anthems". I guess that this review implies the presence of commercial glam metal in this album. Popoff writes that the album takes from Def Leppard and Y&T, "wallowing all too often in lackadaisical lite metal, ranging from boppy hard rock to funkiness and gruesome ballads, all a bit too chart-focused with cliché predictability". By the way, I really don't like the classification of Pyromania as glam metal. If I remember correctly, another long discussion ended with that result, indicating Pyromania as one of the main inspirators for American lite/hair/glam metal. Lewismaster (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm still puzzled by how Tesla can be cited among the best hair metal bands by four sources without having released an album featuring typical commercial metal in it. Can it be Mechanical Resonance? Lewismaster (talk) 17:56, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * "Half" of the album is "tailored to seduce...glam metal consumers" implies part of the album has something glam metal fans would hopefully like. That is not saying half of the album (much less the whole) is glam metal.
 * The review calling it "lite metal" is fine for saying it is lite metal.
 * That you disagree with calling a different album hair metal, think it sounds like this one and wish to Frankenstein that together to call this album hair metal is...interesting.
 * Could it be that this is the album that has people calling them hair metal? Maybe. Maybe not. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:20, 28 May 2018 (UTC)


 * If we are discussing semantics, "tailored to seduce" means more than what you say. It means made especially for that audience. In Wikipedia the terms lite metal, hair metal and glam metal are synonimous and indicate a quite ample range of bands with some common musical traits, such as commercial appeal, melodies and power ballads, and a pleasant and sometimes over-the-top appearance. Mechanical Resonance is the only album where reviews consider Tesla as playing commercial hard rock and lite metal. Subsequent albums have apparently different flavours and are more oriented towards blues rock. Regarding Pyromania, the decision that it was a glam metal album came, as usual, when other wiki editors evaluated sources and the glam metal term was debated and approved. I know that the comparison with Tesla's album is only my perception and I'm not a professional music critic, so my opinion has no validity. Lewismaster (talk) 20:26, 28 May 2018 (UTC)