Controversial opinions on metal

Jeez, you still remember when and where I posted this? Sorry I scarred you so much with an original thought. I know that can be traumatizing for sheep, so I'll make sure and put a "trigger warning" label next time I critique a highly overrated canon band.
Oh, blow it out your ass. Sorry I've offended you by not having the memory of a concussed dementia patient. No one was traumatized you degenerate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Butt
There is a search function on the site. I'm not sure why people act like it's hard to find posts. I think that most forums have this feature.
 
lol. The problem with them specifically is that they fill all available space with their riffs on the first album, and use them basically just following the same progression of the keys. Metal that doesn't emphasize rhythm guitar is a waste.

Yeah, that's also untrue.


This has clear riffs that don't follow the same progression of the keys. The only time that's even somewhat applicable is the riff starting at 0:35, for which it could more accurately be said that the keys follow the riff. There's the outro riff at 5:04 that might appear to be doing so, but it's already introduced at 4:17 without any keyboard backing, so it's likewise a case of the keys following the riff.


The opening riff, the one appearing shortly thereafter at 0:11, and the one at 4:16 are all memorable riffs that function as standalone melodies.

But that fact that you said "metal that doesn't emphasize rhythm guitar is a waste" tells me all I need to know about your mindset. A band could have plenty of epic riffs, but if it also has a lot of parts that aren't centered around "dat rhythm guitar", you won't be able to sustain an erection throughout the entire song, so clearly it's weaksauce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: H.P. Lovecraft
Later Emperor isn't as bad, it's the first album I have the most issue with. The riffs are still boring, no chop, just noise density and rigid drumming.
 
It was a weird comparison, I agree. As pretentious as Crimsonflloyd comes across, I don't think you can argue that SMRC is more ambitious and has more depth than Venom. Obviously it's up to the listener to decide if they achieved that ambition or not.

Could you explain what you like about Fas...I listened to it a few times when it first came out and couldn't get into at all. It put me off checking out Paracletus.

Their songwriting improved for one. SMRC is a bit longwinded, but I feel like they condensed things in Fas to be much more manageable to digest, yet still effectively building. Their complexity in atmosphere is due to their exemplary use of dissonance in a way that they were just starting to experiment on SMRC. Also, this album is haunting as fuck. It can even be uncomfortable to listen to at times (think Immolation, Averse Sephira), but that added dimension adds depth to the songs. Give it more attention, Fas can be a grower due to having to digest that barrage of sound; it really demands your focus.

That said, I wouldnt put off listening to Paracletus. They lose a bit of the insanity that was present on Fas, making it a slightly distilled version of Fas, but on the other hand they are even more focused and mature. Nevertheless it is still as chilling and unsettling as ever. Id rate their albums in the order of Fas >= Paracletus > SMRC >= Inquisitors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phylactery
People should just avoid debating HBB on stuff like this. Anybody that thinks Trivium is better than Manilla Road and Virgin Steele is not to be taken seriously at all.

Lol at people deluding themselves into thinking ICP isn't the worst band on the planet

They're at least funny and entertaining.
 
Trivium has matured since their metalcore days. this song here has a pretty massive sound