Burden Ending - Out of Tune Guitar
- Thread starter Metamyr
- Start date
Exocaster
Nozzle
- Aug 29, 2005
- 709
- 0
- 16
I enjoy it, and I think it's clever. But I like wacky dissonant stuff and am bored by most metal, so take that for whatever it's worth.
And I'll be yet another person reiterating that it's obviously someone manipulating the tuners on the guitar- you can hear them shuffling around in the background, the creak of the wood as tension is released on the neck... and that it would be far more time-consuming than it's worth to do that on a computer, seeing as you'd have to edit every note individually, otherwise you'd just get a linear decrease in pitch and all the notes would still be in tune relative to each other.
And I'll be yet another person reiterating that it's obviously someone manipulating the tuners on the guitar- you can hear them shuffling around in the background, the creak of the wood as tension is released on the neck... and that it would be far more time-consuming than it's worth to do that on a computer, seeing as you'd have to edit every note individually, otherwise you'd just get a linear decrease in pitch and all the notes would still be in tune relative to each other.
The Don
Member
There is a BIG difference between the stylistic choice of the Burden ending and ANYTHING Kalmah deals with. I'm pretty sure about 95% of this board are Kalmah fans, and the beginning of songs like Hollow Heart just have some intro samples. I don't really think WTF either, since all of their albums have something to do with swamps, and Hollow Heart is really one of the only songs to begin with samples.
Back to Burden's ending. I took a college music course (just went through musical evolution from gregorian chants to modern day) and when we got to Schoenberg (twelve tone system, everything sounds like shit but "works"...) we spent a lot of time discussing intent vs. actual artistic value. If Mikael wrote the part to sound ugly or boring, and it is ugly and boring, that doesn't make it artistic or good by any means. I don't know where I'm going with this actually. Still don't like ending.
The Seeker
Member
You've made some decent points and are definitely entitled to your own opinion, but to state that the ending is not "artistic" is absolutely ridiculous.
Art is subjective. Someone could carve a beautiful image from a watermelon, or someone could carve an ugly image from a turd (or vice versa). We both might debate about which one we like/don't like, and either of us might have the audacity to claim "by God Dear Chap, That's not art!" when in fact, they are both pieces of art, period. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not art.
All that said, I LOVE the ending. One of the elements I think is so great is that before the detuning occurs, it just so happens to be one of the most "jolly" Robin Hood style, acoustic guitar, folk melodies that I've ever heard from Mikael, which he then turns into a detuned hilarity. I can picture the look of confusion/disappointment on many faces when they hear this for the first time, and that makes me laugh! It makes me laugh every time I hear it. One of my friends can't stand the ending (he's extremely averse to out-of-tune git-fiddles, so he skips it). It's both surprising to me, and not surprising, that some people have to skip it.
Cerberus III
New Metal Member
- May 14, 2008
- 425
- 0
- 0
Mikael's only human. Maybe he thought it sounded cool, and found out everyone hated it.. so he's like, "I DID IT FOR THE LUZ!"
The difference is, that he did it for the laughs apparently. Something you do for the laughs, or just simply to shock the hell out of your listener, doesn't really qualify as art in my opinion. I think art requires a certain coherence (ideawise) that that part simply lacks. With your open-minded definition of art, basically anything can qualify as art, even "FUCK YOU" smudges on dirty windscreens.
The Seeker
Member
Yep, it "could" be perceived as art. Just because you don't think it is, doesn't mean it isn't appreciated as valid art by someone else.
Art is human expression via a medium, whether it be words (spoken or written), painting, sculpting, music, dance, etc. And the intent can be anything or nothing. Whether I decide to make you laugh, cry, frighten you, or whether it's a random creation, and if the objective viewer/listener feels something from the art, even if it's apathy or distaste, it's still art.
"Something you do for the laughs, or just simply to shock the hell out of your listener, doesn't really qualify as art in my opinion."
Regardless of the intent, it's still music (although disharmonic), and therefore it's art. It's okay that it's art you don't like, but it's still art.
I think it was a great idea, but if the whole detuning part was much shorter in length, it would be much easier on the ears.
As far as exactly how they did it, hopefully we'll find that out when we see the "Making Of" DVD.
As far as exactly how they did it, hopefully we'll find that out when we see the "Making Of" DVD.
Scourge of Malice
Member
i love it. very dark and uncomfortable feeling. i think theres many parts on the album with that kinda vibe. even if you dont like it, just change the song. its not like its in the middle of it.
hibernal_dream
A Mind Forever Voyaging
It's not that we don't like the sound of it, we just don't like the idea of it. I actually think it's aesthetically quite pleasant to listen to and has a nice effect. BUT if it's done for novelty or laughs or whatever, and not because it belongs there and follows a certain logic or is important to end the song, then it's stupid and is not needed.
Det Som Engang Var
Viking Bastard
Fred is de-tuning the tuning pegs as Mike plays it. It's not smug. Just an idea. Structurally, it's an interesting idea and one which fits the overall mood and flow of the album.
People are fine not to like it. People are fine to like it. Personally, I think it's a brilliant way to spoil a beautiful song.
People are fine not to like it. People are fine to like it. Personally, I think it's a brilliant way to spoil a beautiful song.
Yet being narrow-minded and using hearsay to back up your assertions don't exactly make you sound like you know what you're talking about.
Maybe Bosch was laughing hysterically or manically while painting The Garden of Earthly Delights. Does that make it any less impressive?
Defluo
Member
In my view this represents how Mikael's approach to his work has changed.
There didn't seem to be any parts in the older albums like this. Opeth as a whole was more closed, more sombre and dark - it had that mysterious edge. Even Mike's stage presence was different back then. I even remember hearing about him being voted the most boring metal band frontman in some stupid fucking magazine actually.
Things like this take away that appeal, that pure and refined/cultured dynamic (think of the approach most classical composers have/had), and replaces it with a more "rockstar" human edge, rich in character.
I think Mikael has "mellowed out" so to speak. It's not that he doesn't take his work seriously, not at all, but his approach to his work isn't always serious these days. I loved the older approach because it seemed to leave listeners free to interpret things however they wanted, they could make it something completely personal - to the extent of almost feeling like they "owned" the music, be it right or wrong.
In my opinion there is now a lot of Mikael's character incorporated into his work and for me that makes harder to see the music as a separate entity from the artist. When listening to Burden (not just the end) I picture Mike and the others laughing and enjoying themselves. It sounds like they're celebrating music.
While I miss the old Opeth I do really enjoy the new Opeth, and I'm glad to see the guys free to be themselves...those bloody rockstars!
There didn't seem to be any parts in the older albums like this. Opeth as a whole was more closed, more sombre and dark - it had that mysterious edge. Even Mike's stage presence was different back then. I even remember hearing about him being voted the most boring metal band frontman in some stupid fucking magazine actually.
Things like this take away that appeal, that pure and refined/cultured dynamic (think of the approach most classical composers have/had), and replaces it with a more "rockstar" human edge, rich in character.
I think Mikael has "mellowed out" so to speak. It's not that he doesn't take his work seriously, not at all, but his approach to his work isn't always serious these days. I loved the older approach because it seemed to leave listeners free to interpret things however they wanted, they could make it something completely personal - to the extent of almost feeling like they "owned" the music, be it right or wrong.
In my opinion there is now a lot of Mikael's character incorporated into his work and for me that makes harder to see the music as a separate entity from the artist. When listening to Burden (not just the end) I picture Mike and the others laughing and enjoying themselves. It sounds like they're celebrating music.
While I miss the old Opeth I do really enjoy the new Opeth, and I'm glad to see the guys free to be themselves...those bloody rockstars!
Reelo
5°170
Funny thing is: a few years ago, I was at a friend's who also plays the guitar (like me) and he was playing some stuff that demanded his full attention. Some chord-picking stuff. And just for the fun of it, I secretly detuned some of his strings slightly, and he would go WTF??? He didn't even notice what I was doingnthought he had fucked up until I told him what I did.
I really forgot that little episode until the discussion here popped up.
Think I should sue Opeth for stealing my idea, but then again, I have no proof of that incident.
When I'll listen to the song with my friend, I gotta remember to remind him of that joke. I bet he still remembers...
I really forgot that little episode until the discussion here popped up.
Think I should sue Opeth for stealing my idea, but then again, I have no proof of that incident.
When I'll listen to the song with my friend, I gotta remember to remind him of that joke. I bet he still remembers...
Someone posted a link which they said backed up the argument that it was put there for kicks. I didn't look at it, so I cannot be sure honestly. That is why I said "apparently", to reflect my uncertainty there.
Again, this is a subjective argument which leads to nowhere. But suffice it to be said that I'm fed up with many in the art business today. Forget about Opeth, whom I've loved for ages for now (and only have a few gripes with here and there), but since you've mentioned paintings, let's talk about paintings. So, look at the following exhibition:
Do you call that art? Yes, it's a set of three blank canvases. 'Art' being sold for money. What is artistic about it? Oh sure, you could say "it brings up the notion of emptiness, of nothingness". I would tell you, "Lol". There is this modern tendency to pass off lazy works or shockingly different works as art. That is, in my opinion, utter bullshit. Now, I don't value technical proficiency above artistic value, but since the latter is subjective, and the former is not, I find it hard to believe that these so-called 'artists' spend any more than a few minutes contemplating these works of 'expression', which usually amount to little more than splotches of paint. No, I definitely won't be 'open minded' and pay 600$ dollars for a blank piece of canvas.
Defluo
Member
Fundamentally art is anything one can aesthetically examine and/or appreciate ie: anything.
We're all free to have opinions on what is and what isn't worthy of aesthetic examination, but with this absolute subjectivity in mind there are no ultimatums other than this: if it's part of the universe, it's art.
...now print this post off, put it in a bright orange frame, entitle it "a view of a view of the universe" and sell it for $9000.
We're all free to have opinions on what is and what isn't worthy of aesthetic examination, but with this absolute subjectivity in mind there are no ultimatums other than this: if it's part of the universe, it's art.
...now print this post off, put it in a bright orange frame, entitle it "a view of a view of the universe" and sell it for $9000.
