Originally posted by Poison Godmachine
I hate it when people say the oldest stuff is the best just so they can complain about change and act like an "old school fan".
As opposed to those of us who actually ARE old school fans, not just acting??
Originally posted by Poison Godmachine
It is completly obivious that all the albums after the first 2 are completely superior.
Well, shouldn't it be obvious that that is your opinion??
>>Worse singing,
In regards to the clean vocals, probably, but then do you judge how good an album is by what a band releases AFTER it?? Who cares if Michael sings better now, that has no baring on how good the old albums are, merely that the performance on the new ones is better (good performance <> good album)
>>poor(no) song structure,
Disagree, it's no different from any of the other millions of metal albums made up of a hundred riffs thrown together, and many of them do relate. Guess it's just personal taste as to weather you like that or not
>>poor recording,
Disagree, it's good enough to get the point across, apart from the vocals being a little too high in the mix, everything sounds cool to me. And to me, recording quality doesn't mean alot, so long as it's audible
>>far less interesting riffs,
sorry, I have to laugh at that. You don't find 2 guitars doing different things yet still intertwining to be interesting? Man, the riffs make those albums. That probably explains why you don't like them as much.
>>I like the first 2 albums but you must atmitt there inferiority.
Not at all. Infact, I find the structure of the songs on BWP to be boring, I find the riffs boring (more chord based as opposed to melodic, which is what I like about the old stuff).
>>Even Mikael has commented several times about the poor song structure on the first two albums.
Yeah, but even that is just another opinion, and that's all this is, people's opinions. There really is no point in arguing about it, you like what you like.
