Best Cannibal Corpse album?

[CiG]

Miasma did sheer brutality in a very different way, with a crazy focus on a ruthless and crushing production and a maniacal perfection of incorporating mid-tempo to downright doomy passages that accentuate the faster parts very nicely.

Anyway, other than the sheer stupidity of saying the album isn't groundbreaking work, saying Tomb of the Mutilated gets boring after the first 3 songs is some weak shit that says way more about the listener than the album itself IMO. The best songs on the album are on the latter half, the sheer savagery of "Necropedophile" for example, the razor-sharp "Post Mortal Ejaculation" or my personal favourite "The Cryptic Stench" which changes up the tempo nicely and just obliterates everything in its path.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Tomb of the Mutilated ..... "groundbreaking" Lmfao

 

[morguelord]

Care to explain how it isn't, or just drop S I C K one liners?

Also please explain what album(s) you find to be groundbreaking in 1992.

 

[CiG]

It wasn't groundbreaking because he doesn't like it.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

... no son, its no groundbreaking because you like it and its not groundbreaking just because they're morguelords favoritistest band ever

There is nothing they did on that album that other bands didnt do better. They were always more style than substance and always tried to be contrve3rsial witht heir album covers and names. Its nothing more than a middle of the road ho-hum death metal album which helped catapult them to the #1 selling death metal band at the time. Basically, average death metal that was rather suited more for the dumb kidos

 

[CiG]

I was half expecting an actually well thought-out argument for why that album wasn't groundbreaking in 1992. Bands at that time did it better than them? The lyrics are edgy? The album covers were edgy? The song titles and album titles were edgy? It was for dumb kids?

No examples of bands doing what Corpse did but better at the time? Oh well.

 

[EspaDa]

Also please explain what album(s) you find to be groundbreaking in 1992.

Onward to Golgotha, The IVth Crusade, Slumber of Sullen Eyes, Last One on Earth, The Red in the Sky is Ours, Cross the Styx...the list goes on and on forever

 

[CiG]

One of the most commonly spewed tropes surrounding Cannibal Corpse by the in-crowd (and now Tech I guess) is that the band was redundant, standard fare, generic etc yet they always fail to provide examples to prove this. All the Cannibal Corpse clones came after Corpse (duh) and I don't know of any other bands doing what they were doing, in a similar fashion, around the same time.

Nobody in 1992 thought Tomb of the Mutilated was "ho hum" and only a retarded cunt would think that now. That's purely a hindsight opinion of the band which has no place in a discussion about whether they were groundbreaking at the time.

The IVth Crusade, Last One on Earth, Cross the Styx...the list goes on and on forever

The list goes on and on forever and includes the 4th Bolt Thrower album but not Tomb of the fucking Mutilated? wut

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

But musically, Legion is sheer sonic violence and relentless

not even a big fan of Deicide but this is on point. TOtM is tame as fuck in comparison, and to say otherwise would just imply either a) your ears are broken or b)you're a fanboy

 

[CiG]

I notice how you're providing zero actual points lmao.

Also, on RYM, you gave Tomb... and Legion a 3/5 rating. It's "tame as fuck in comparison" though. What other qualities besides sheer brutality exist on Tomb... for you to give it the same rating as Legion?

 

[EspaDa]

The list goes on and on forever and includes the 4th Bolt Thrower album but not Tomb of the fucking Mutilated? wut

To me The IVth Crusade is a very enjoyable album, as opposed to Tomb of the Mutilated. The latter severely lacks in variety.

 

[CiG]

To me The IVth Crusade is a very enjoyable album, as opposed to Tomb of the Mutilated. The latter severely lacks in variety.

Enjoyable =/= groundbreaking

I worship Bolt Thrower, but the 4th Crusade is the album where they finally cemented a formulaic sound. It's literally the least groundbreaking of their first four albums. Also, the latter severely lacks variety? What, and Bolt Thrower played jazzy technical death metal? This is getting to be really stupid.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Also, on RYM, you gave Tomb... and Legion a 3/5 rating. It's "tame as fuck in comparison" though.

yes. My turn, are you an idiot? You think i rate an album on "sheer brutality"? Are you implying that Tomb of the Mutilated is a more savage album than Legion?

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

but the 4th Crusade is the album where they finally cemented a formulaic sound.

what in the fuck. That's one of my favorite BT albums ... but are you delusional?

 

[CiG]

yes. My turn, are you an idiot? You think i rate an album on "sheer brutality"? Are you implying that Tomb of the Mutilated is a more savage album than Legion?

Savagery is in the eye of the beholder, but you seem to have a very low opinion of Tomb... that you're contrasting it against Legion as if a chasm of quality exists between them, yet you gave them identical ratings.

what in the fuck. That's one of my favorite BT albums ... but are you delusional?

Are you unable to formulate actual rebuttals faggot?

 

[EspaDa]

But it doesn't change the fact that The IVth Crusade holds much more value in my book than Tomb of the Mutilated. I'm listening to Necropedophile at the moment. It's not bad, it's just bland. I'd rather be listening to something different. I like drumming on this album tho.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Nobody in 1992 thought Tomb of the Mutilated was "ho hum"

this goes once again to show that you're just a clueless boonga on the other side of the planet.

 

[CiG]

But it doesn't change the fact that The IVth Crusade holds much more value in my book than Tomb of the Mutilated.

Yes but you said "groundbreaking" and that's what this has all become about. The 4th Crusade is basically the album where Bolt Thrower mastered the Bolt Thrower sound whereas the previous albums (less so War Master...) they were still refining the formula. You seem to be confusing "groundbreaking" with a statement of quality. Majority of my favourite albums aren't groundbreaking, my favourite Cannibal Corpse albums aren't even the groundbreaking ones.

this goes once again to show that you're just a clueless boonga on the other side of the planet.

Great rebuttal. Keep ass-kissing Phy you closet in-crowd homo.

 

[Phylactery]

I don’t think that’s true at all. He’s already spoken multiple times about him being pretty much indifferent to Deicide and outright said numerous times he prefers Cannibal Corpse overall. But we are talking about one aspect of the music - brutality, savagery, violence, etc. And Morgue implied Tomb was the pinnacle of all of these things in 1992. And I don’t think that’s true at all. Legion still sounds savage and violent even now, it hasn’t really aged in that regard to these ears. Whereas Tomb of the Mutilated has. To me at least. And I never said that it wasn’t brutal or whatever, as it clearly is. It’s just not “the most brutal thing recorded in 1992” and I don’t even think it’s close to it if I’m honest. Nothing about It isn’t standard fare for death metal in 1992. Not its gory lyrics, not its rhythms, not anything.

And, you won’t like this response, but they have always just sounded by the numbers death metal to me. And maybe that’s not fair, but it’s an opinion I have had and maintained since when I first got into death metal. I don’t hate them and I don’t even dislike them to any huge degree.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

I don’t think that’s true at all. He’s already spoken multiple times about him being pretty much indifferent to Deicide and outright said numerous times he prefers Cannibal Corpse overall. But we are talking about one aspect of the music - brutality, savagery, violence, etc. And Morgue implied Tomb was the pinnacle of all of these things in 1992. And I don’t think that’s true at all. Legion still sounds savage and violent even now, it hasn’t really aged in that regard to these ears. Whereas Tomb of the Mutilated does. To me at least. And I never said that it wasn’t brutal or whatever, as it clearly is. It’s just not “the most brutal thing recorded in 1992” and I don’t even think it’s close to it if I’m honest. Nothing about It isn’t standard fare for death metal in 1992. Not its gory lyrics, not its rythms, not anything.

Legion obliterates Tomb if you put them side by side and compare 'em on sheer aggression, savagery and yes even the subgenre they went to influence with their imagery and track titles, BRUTALITY. To say otherwise is just incorrect.