Brutal/Slam Death Metal

[V.V.V.V.V.]

You're using the subjective word bad to mean the objective word "unfitting". Gorepoflesh's production perfectly fits the sound they're trying to achieve. They're not silly, they're not goofy, they're brutal and sound inhuman and perverted. I don't expect most people to like it and then again I don't expect most people to find in art what I find in it (the beauty of decay and perversion, in this case). However, brutal death metal is getting too glossy and needs to be slapped in the face and reminded what it's all about: underground, actually brutal, uncaring, hideous, antisocial music made by people who crave just these things from what they create. Gorepoflesh perfectly encapsulates this.

BTW, you generally have good taste in music according to your Youtube, though I'm not really a fan of Ingested, Dekapitator or Jungle Rot (lol).

I understand why people would dislike things that are bad, because, well, they're bad. The only thing, however, that defines what is "good" and what is "bad" in art is judging by technique, which isn't the only (or even close to the best) way to judge and appreciate art. Surely you must understand that in order to judge what someone is doing, you first need to understand what they were setting out to accomplish. If someone is trying to crash a car, and they crashed their car, you wouldn't approach the situation and judge them for their lack of driving capability, for instance. An extreme and unrelated example, but context is important and the artist's will is even more important when judging aesthetics. Gorepoflesh are trying to make fucked up, perverted, insanely putrid sounding slam, and you really have no grounds to say you could make them sound "better" when your entire argument is founded on a bastardization of their sound.

edit: Tyler, thanks. I'm glad a few people at least see it my way. I'd like to see a resurgence of fucking putrid barbaric slam that doesn't even sound like humans created it. Wormed approach this, too, btw.

 

[ShellBlast]

I'm just very picky when it comes to music. I'm starting a business most likely a bit after Christmas. I'm going to start off helping grindcore and death metal bands by mixing/mastering their material for free. I love the scene so much and I'm going to do my best to get their shit sounding what I think should be standard.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

You should probably focus on getting shit to sound how the artist wants it to sound. But, whatever. It's nice and precious of you to offer your services for free, but to bastardize what an artist may or may not want because you think you know better than they do is some ridicule-worthy stuff. And I'm arrogant I get that you want to help them sound "good" insomuch as how you make them sound will be more marketable. If a band wants to sound marketable and nice, that's good for them, they're probably faggots but not really my place to judge. If you're having a band compromise their artistic integrity so that you can turn their music into a product that can be easily marketed and get your name on shit by helping artists make their music as clinical as possible without regard to what they are trying to achieve aesthetically, you're deserving of any hate directed your way by me or anyone else.

 

[nick-metalhead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjUC1sERHoo

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

BTW, "Dead Genitals Fermentation"...first riff is probably the evilest riff in brutal death metal.

 

[ShellBlast]

You should probably focus on getting shit to sound how the artist wants it to sound. But, whatever. It's nice and precious of you to offer your services for free, but to bastardize what an artist may or may not want because you think you know better than they do is some ridicule-worthy stuff. And I'm arrogant I get that you want to help them sound "good" insomuch as how you make them sound will be more marketable. If a band wants to sound marketable and nice, that's good for them, they're probably faggots but not really my place to judge. If you're having a band compromise their artistic integrity so that you can turn their music into a product that can be easily marketed and get your name on shit by helping artists make their music as clinical as possible without regard to what they are trying to achieve aesthetically, you're deserving of any hate directed your way by me or anyone else.

When is making money off of your work ever a bad thing? Would you rather have an album that will get you nowhere or an album that opens a path for opportunity. I think you're too caught up in the whole "underground" thing. Everything doesn't have to sound like a 1970s demo tape. Believe it or not but some bands would actually like to be heard instead of ignored.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I agree with you, but you are not the artist, you do not get to make aesthetic decisions. You are not doing the creating. You are more of a consultant as a mix/mastering engineer. Assuming that what an artist does is not what they wanted to do (especially in the case of a self-released album such as the one in question) is a poisonous mindset that has necessarily dangerous implications in the real world. I'm not caught up in underground anything. I love Soilwork, dude. 'nuff said. I'm just saying that what you are blabbing about ("I'd remaster this for free and use my super awesome audio engineering knowledge to make a perfect, pristine sounding album that will essentially kill the intended purpose of the music...BUT AT LEAST IT WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH RIGOROUS AUDIO STANDARDS!") is fucking blasphemous and retarded.

An audio engineer's job is limited (or should be limited, in an ideal world where artistic integrity is the alpha and omega of, well, art) to suggestions and attempts to make the sound palatable to the artist or band first and foremost. You are a consultant in this position; a paid consultant who uses his skills to do things the band likely has no knowledge or want of the knowledge to pull off, and thus, leave it up to you to assist them in making decisions about the overall sound which will, in addition to the songwriting by the artist, give birth to the music on a finalized level. You do not make said decisions of your own volition but rather should be showing bands what you can do with their sound and working with them until it sounds how they want. Even if this means you make less money. Suck it up.

 

[ShellBlast]

Never did I say perfect or pristine. I said standard, which isn't that much considering its 2009. I'm not going to do anything 100% my way unless told. Even if they would like me to do such and such a certain way, it can still be a solid mix regardless. Music was never intended to be recorded but in this day of age, we want our art to be seen and heard. A solid mix will never hurt your chances but a poor mix will.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Fitting art into standards is an effective way to murder art. So...bad idea. Generally, putting things meant to be creative and free into little definitive boxes is a good way to murder said things. I suppose we disagree fundamentally, but before I concede to disagree on this, I want to point out that the way you're approaching this is inherently flawed because you want to standardize the sound of music. Imagine what music would be like if all recordings were standardized. Ever heard of form and content? Form is the essential way to derive aesthetic value of a piece of art from its physical entity, or, in music, its mix and overall sound, whereas content is the subliminal working of the art. In music the content is essentially the songwriting. By standardizing form in the way you apparently want to, you deprive a major part (well, 50%) of the way we value and appreciate art. Sound like a good idea? Didn't think so.

In any case, everyone here is probably hearing this album now that it's getting so much attention, so a "good mix" (lol) isn't necessarily the definitive way to get people to listen to your music; after all, they have to be willing to even give a shit enough to listen to your music before they can hear it. I take it a lot of people just haven't given it a genuine chance. I'm on my third listen today, to be honest. I have yet to find a note out of place or anything I'd change in the production. If I wanted to hear "standard" and clinical brutal death metal I'd listen to the new Vomit the Soul or something, which, while technically impressive and "standard"/clean sounding, I struggle to remember a fucking second of because it is so invariably impersonal and cold. In short, fuck you and all you stand for. I agree to disagree, but only in so much as I hold your entire way of looking at things in spite because you're contributing to an art-killing cancer known as standardization.

 

[ShellBlast]

"art-killing cancer known as standardization" would be changing "their" music, which I am not. I'm only correcting the technical aspect of audio. I'm not standardizing music, but applying the standards of a quality mix to "their" music. You are too selective and full of hate.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Hateful and fucking raw, man. Take it or leave it!

Standardization leads to objectivity, which leads to a perversion of the intent of art, which is always to exist in its own space shielded from technical judgments which would render anything objective onto it.

You claimed that you could do a better job than a band at making their music sound how they want it to, which is just retardedly wrong for obvious reasons. Get over it. I just want you to realize that what you said is incredibly stupid, and I want you to promise me that you'll never make such a ridiculous statement again.

 

[ShellBlast]

Hateful and fucking raw, man. Take it or leave it!

Standardization leads to objectivity, which leads to a perversion of the intent of art, which is always to exist in its own space shielded from technical judgments which would render anything objective onto it.

You claimed that you could do a better job than a band at making their music sound how they want it to, which is just retardedly wrong for obvious reasons. Get over it. I just want you to realize that what you said is incredibly stupid, and I want you to promise me that you'll never make such a ridiculous statement again.

Who are you to speak for them? It sounds that way most likely because of limited resources and knowledge of audio. If they could have no db clipping and better equalization on the bass drum, I bet they would.
You're being stupid, re-red my post because you have no idea what standardization actually is.

 

[Krow]

And enough gaying up this thread with arguing. Shit.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Who are you to speak for them? It sounds that way most likely because of limited resources and knowledge of audio. If they could have no db clipping and better equalization on the bass drum, I bet they would.

Who are you to speak for them?

Eternal Suffering sucks, btw. Fuck Massachusetts brutal death metal. *facepalm at this state's scene*

Anyway, in regards to your comment about my (admittedly lacking) knowledge of audio; at least I don't have a lacking knowledge of the important aspects of art in general. In fact, I'm going for a BFA right now, so that's where I'm coming from

 

[ShellBlast]

Who are you to speak for them?

Eternal Suffering sucks, btw. Fuck Massachusetts brutal death metal. *facepalm at this state's scene*

Anyway, in regards to your comment about my (admittedly lacking) knowledge of audio; at least I don't have a lacking knowledge of the important aspects of art in general. In fact, I'm going for a BFA right now, so that's where I'm coming from

Yea well I have my brain, and it serves me well. I said Gorepoflesh likely lacks knowledge of audio, not you. You can say all you want about me but you actually know nothing. I'm happy for you about the BFA, but you're still an ignorant asshole.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Ah. Well, yeah they probably do, but it is a mistake to assume that artists release their work without being 100% sure of it. You have no right to assume that. Just sayin'. I only mention the degree I'm getting because it probably allows you to understand that I'm speaking from a vantage point that deals heavily in taking what artists do on a de facto level and assuming that a publicly released work of art is, as far as those who can judge it know, 100% perfectly realized and that everything about a work which is released to the public is intentional to the best of their current ability (which is where you would possibly come in, by the way). Am I discounting the possibility that, in the future, they go to you or someone else for their mastering? Not at all. I probably would like their music less, but that's not even the point I'm trying to get across. What I'm trying to get across is that it is erroneous to assume that the work they have released is not how they want it to sound. It is even more insidious to assume that their work should adhere to an engineered audio standard. Do you think Darkthrone's Transylvanian Hunger in all of its intentionally underproduced, uncaring-about-audio-standards, fucked up glory was done that way because they just didn't know enough about audio? Quite the slippery slope to argue, dude.

 

[Krow]

Complaining about your "scene"...
Fuck. I live in west virignia. There's not a goddamn metal scene in my entire state. MA lists 59 bands from the state in total... not a single one have I ever even heard of, living in the state...

 

[ShellBlast]

Ah. Well, yeah they probably do, but it is a mistake to assume that artists release their work without being 100% sure of it. You have no right to assume that. Just sayin'.

Well its beyond me why anyone would want audio distortion defecting their music. Drums give and keep rhythm, without the bass drum being audible, it sure takes away.

 

[Judzfell]

This argument was the most amazing thing ever, Both got good points across.

I think V5 is right for getting his point across because the arugment that the band wouldn't release it until it was the way they intentioned for it to be.
...But I do agree with the other side, its 2009, and it wouldn't hurt to have better quality.

It all boils down to whos actually listening to the album, if you like it, you like it, dont like it, fuck off.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Well its beyond me why anyone would want audio distortion defecting their music. Drums give and keep rhythm, without the bass drum being audible, it sure takes away.

(One of) The beauty(/ies) of art is that you don't have to understand why artists make the decisions they do, you just need to understand that the decisions they make are their own decisions, made out of necessity of doing justice to the work they've released. What you claim to be a defect could just as easily be seen as a positive aspect. I create noise music, for instance. I know exactly what I'm doing when I record and master my material. You bet I fucking clip like there's no tomorrow. Do I care? No. It's my decision-making process. By your own admission, and taking your argument to its logical conclusion, when I record and master my work, the program shouldn't let me save or export my music because it violates audio standards. Pretty ridiculous notion, don't you think? Not to be so personal here, but I feel it's necessary for you to get a crash course on aesthetic decision-making. I'm aware of any point you can make, it's all pretty much flawed from the get-go because you misunderstand the intents of art and admit to the aim of excising half of what makes art art in the first place (by claiming that standards must be followed in order to release a work that can be seen as quality). Or did you not get what I was saying with the form and content section of that previous post?

I don't find anything really deplorable or "wrong" (well, aside from the fact that the entire album sounds like fucking hell in the best possible way) about the way the drums are mixed. I gave it two spins on headphones and could properly understand the logical changes in song structure and riffing patterns, right down to where breakdowns would begin and end, so I think I am qualified to some extent to talk about the drums being good. Snare is often the key rhythm-keeping drum in slam, btw.