Calling all Opeth homos

King Richard

Hello there
Mar 23, 2006
12,666
293
83
39
Wouldn't you like to know
Some dude on the Opeth forum posted a bootleg video of Opeth's new song Heir Apparent, and apparently (according to my ears after filtering out the recording which is balls btw), it's pretty fucking good. *drooooooooool* June can't come fast enough I tell ya.

[ame="http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=52640108091399531&hl=nl"]Play me or eat a bag of dicks![/ame]
 
I just listened to this song and it reminded me all over again of why I can't stand this band. Absolutely terrible songwriting.
 
There were a couple songs on My Arms, Your Hearse that actually showed some interesting narrative song structure (I'm referring to "April Ethereal" and "Karma"). The majority of their other songs are just "cut-n-paste" though--- an acoustic section here, then the heavy part, then a bit with piano, then another acoustic section, etc....
 
There were a couple songs on My Arms, Your Hearse that actually showed some interesting narrative song structure (I'm referring to "April Ethereal" and "Karma"). The majority of their other songs are just "cut-n-paste" though--- an acoustic section here, then the heavy part, then a bit with piano, then another acoustic section, etc....

I never understood the whole "they are so predictable" argument. I'm pretty sure every band in existence has used a guitar, or drums, or vocals, or keys, or something in their songs to you know, create a song. It's a reall weak, and moot point to claim that a band is "predictable" because all bands are predictable. The only way your argument would make sense is if every heavy part, every piano/key part, every acoustic section sounded identical; which they don't.
 
Care to elaborate on how it's bad? Serious question btw.

Basically, this:

omnipotence said:
The majority of their other songs are just "cut-n-paste"

I'm not hearing the underlying logic that's supposed to unify all the elements within their songs together. It just sounds like musical masturbation to me. The method seems to be "let's put this dark sounding riff here because it sounds cool, now let's put this other part after it because I think this part sounds cool too, now let's throw in a clean riff for good measure, now a totally badass solo because people need to know that I'm learning how to shred these days, now let's repeat that one riff we played earlier so we can have some justification for calling this a song, etc., etc."
 
Someone who actually has a good knowledge of their discography (meaning listened to their music more than once and said fuck this shit!) type me an argument as to why Opeth is so bad. The cut and paste and predictable arguments are bullshit and are not allowed to be used either.
 
I never understood the whole "they are so predictable" argument. I'm pretty sure every band in existence has used a guitar, or drums, or vocals, or keys, or something in their songs to you know, create a song. It's a reall weak, and moot point to claim that a band is "predictable" because all bands are predictable. The only way your argument would make sense is if every heavy part, every piano/key part, every acoustic section sounded identical; which they don't.

Agreed. The only bands who aren't ceaselessly predictable are bands who randomly change their entire genre. And even that only happens once. Bands who do it frequently end up being predictable just the same.
 
The "they're too predictable" bullshit must have been formulated by people who have never actually listened to the band