I actually went back a few pages to reread the posts before I posted because I had no idea what the fuck you are crying about. I even did find command for "tone" and found one comment from Rune stating that the older school tone is a notch better. Maybe you're mistaking "sounds like" for "tone"?
And you definitely said "EVERYBODY would figure this out" and "EVERYBODY is waiting for..", but in reality a lot of posts here specifically acknowledge the fact that they're only hearing samples. And it seems like most people are liking the samples.
This thread was pretty shit for me before any album art/samples came out. But now that there's actually something to discuss, I don't even mind Joonas's posts now. Honestly, I very much understand his interpretation style and appreciate it even if most don't. Colors and metaphors can be powerful descriptions, especially with music.
It's like... I just saw this giant wall of text that didn't make sense and felt compelled to respond, but I shouldn't have because I'm propelling the same hypocrisy!
I do know the difference between tone and sound, but quite some people here interchange them quite frequently, which is understandable since not everybody is a musician and/or knows about those things, nor should they need to know to comment, this is after all a free online message board.
Go ahead and tell me how my points don't make any sense. You may want to understand first that not agreeing about something doesn't automatically make it void of sense.
Aye Mr Grammar Nazi, I'll show my way down a cliff, don't worry
Acutally I'm pretty sure that if they had mixed Blooddrunk in Follow the Reaper "style" (lot more reverb, thinner drums, less "punch" overall) most of the people who post here would have gone nuts and it would be the FTR#2 for them. Regardless of the riffs.
They may have, yep, particularly with some songs which are actually not that bad, but you've been here long enough to know the pattern, so you see that now that Blooddrunk is 3 albums ago and not the new shit all of a sudden it's not that terrible anymore, when as it came out it was blasted all over the place (deservedly, since it's their worst album in every regard, I can't get over how bad the final production is, it ruins the good songs for me) and RRF was widely welcomed as also an attempted "return to the roots" sort of.
The problem with Blooddrunk had nothing to do with it's tone (for me at least), it was super crappy production for which I blame Tagtgren as Hypocrisy '05 had the same issue.
I'd say yes and no, since we never actually heard the dry guitar, bass, drums... tracks, so it could be that the recorded tone was actually good, or it may have already been spiked and too distorted/"screeching" for a lack of better term. But anyhow, what I see as the important part for us fans is that the final product's sound was terrible. I mean, even Something Wild sounds better and it was almost recorded with as little as possible.
agreed. CotN is may be better.
how about tie my rope verse?
In a shocking turn of events, I'm going to refer to Joonas' post quoted below:
You've only heard a short sample, why you all talk about them like full songs? If you only heard TMR verse you wouldn't know it has one of the finest melodies (which sounds more epic in demo version).
And on TMR, I have to agree. I was expecting the album version because I wanted a version with stronger guitars (which to me is the only major knack on the Bam Margera version), but then they crapped the bed on BD's production and, weak guitars and all, I think the compilation version is actually better than the album version.