Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 559
- 113
There's a difference between chicks I want to bang and chicks I want to hear sing in a metal band (aka pretty much none). Either way, she isn't even that hot.
Controversial opinions on metal
- Thread starter The Ozzman
- Start date
Let's start a Beatles' haters club or something.
lucy in the sky with diamonds...
Picture yourself in a boat on a river
With tangerine trees and marmalade skies
Somebody calls you, you answer quite slowly
A girl with kaleidoscope eyes
Cellophane flowers of yellow and green
Towering over your head
Look for the girl with the sun in her eyes
And she's gone
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
mutantllama
Active Member
The Beatles are pretty awesome.
Also, I've found Helstar to be one of the weaker well respected US power metal band.
Also, I've found Helstar to be one of the weaker well respected US power metal band.
VelociBrad
Spawn of Possession
Don't really like The Beatles, but I don't hate them or anything. There's much worse shit out there, like power metal and metalcore.
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
One last thing I want to say in this thread(which definitely won't be the last), but why not add pointless dramatics to the prelude?
I posted all of that to get a rise of some lurking elitists from the DLA crowd; I was itching to butt heads with Falconsbane, but the cunt remains dormant.
Anyway, I've got to say that I expected more versatile retaliation from some of you, but all I got was the utterly predictable, meager and frankly insubstantial: "look at him, he likes Dimmu, lol lol lol. Or the equally vague "it's boring, cheesy generic".Without even attempting to clarify these comparative terms. Disappointing, to say the least. I've given you essays, and this is what I get?
I know what some of you may be thinking: "look at him, that gallant peacock, so full of himself, enthused by the sound of his own voice, or more acutely, the sound of his rapidly clicking keyboard. Who is he trying to impress?" Nobody, I guess, but it's all the more unsatisfying when you don't get interesting feedback from your peers.
Oh, well. I actually wanted to go and ruffle the feathers of those nihilist cunts, but they'll probably lock the thread, or write something so convoluted, opaque and wrapped in such immense condescension that you'd wish you'd never posted.
I posted all of that to get a rise of some lurking elitists from the DLA crowd; I was itching to butt heads with Falconsbane, but the cunt remains dormant.
Anyway, I've got to say that I expected more versatile retaliation from some of you, but all I got was the utterly predictable, meager and frankly insubstantial: "look at him, he likes Dimmu, lol lol lol. Or the equally vague "it's boring, cheesy generic".Without even attempting to clarify these comparative terms. Disappointing, to say the least. I've given you essays, and this is what I get?
I know what some of you may be thinking: "look at him, that gallant peacock, so full of himself, enthused by the sound of his own voice, or more acutely, the sound of his rapidly clicking keyboard. Who is he trying to impress?" Nobody, I guess, but it's all the more unsatisfying when you don't get interesting feedback from your peers.
Oh, well. I actually wanted to go and ruffle the feathers of those nihilist cunts, but they'll probably lock the thread, or write something so convoluted, opaque and wrapped in such immense condescension that you'd wish you'd never posted.
Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 559
- 113
Why do we have to explain to you why we don't like certain bands? You really make yourself sound stupider with each post.
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
Because, in my opinion, some bands have gotten a bad rep for no reason other than the fact that they appeal to millions, yet their aesthetics overlap with the underground bands. I know it's all in the eye of the beholder, so to speak, but what isn't? Ah, this is hopelessly circular. Just forget it.
Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 559
- 113
Have you listened to any black metal outside of Dimmu Borgir? They are atrociously over-operatic and use the whole idea as a gimmick so there is little to no black metal left in their music. I would say they are an image-heavy superficial bastardization of the aesthetics of black metal and they've pretty much always been that way. The image and gimmicky musical aspect just got progressively worse with each album. There really is no mystery why seasoned black metal fans dislike them.
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
I've listened to many. Most of the ones that have been recommended on this board. I don't find a lot of them very interesting, but whatever. Summoning are also melodramatic, or at least strike me as such, and so is Emperor and Necromantia.
And while not black metal, but what about Candlemass- they're not melodramatic? Ha, gimme a break!
And while not black metal, but what about Candlemass- they're not melodramatic? Ha, gimme a break!
Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 559
- 113
I'd rather have a band be melodramatic than listen to *chugchugchug* *keys* *chugchugchug*...sorry.
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
Cythraul
Active Member
- Dec 10, 2003
- 6,755
- 134
- 63
Hey dude, I apologize. I think I was in an irritable mood when I wrote that post.
Anyway, I have little interest in arguing about the quality of bands anymore. It's almost always such a fruitless discussion. Nowadays I just listen to what I like, avoid what I think sucks, and try to ignore most of what people have to say about it.
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
Understood. No hard feelings.
I was just bored at work today, hence the result. Verbal diarrhea sometmies gets a hold of me.
I was just bored at work today, hence the result. Verbal diarrhea sometmies gets a hold of me.
Einherjar86
Active Member
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
damnromulans
Klingons do not faint
What's wrong with Nightwish? They make cheesy operatic pop power metal for people who like Renaissance fairs. And the new lineup are great live in terms of band chemistry/onstage interaction.]
I think I'm pretty much the same as DarkBliss, except I like Deicide.
I also am ambivalent about The Beatles, but the White Album has huge nostalgic value for me and part of me is a psychedelic hippy.
I think I'm pretty much the same as DarkBliss, except I like Deicide.
I also am ambivalent about The Beatles, but the White Album has huge nostalgic value for me and part of me is a psychedelic hippy.
no country for old wainds
Active Member
- Nov 23, 2002
- 26,680
- 9,655
- 113
alright fine ill give a proper response to db (i'm still sort of irritated and perplexed)
your beach boys comparison verged upon the insane. the beach boys created textured, otherworldly harmonies which never resolve and slip through your fingers when you try to grasp them. they set out with the intention of making seriously worthwhile works of art. the mood was a desperate, ambiguous, haunting kind of melancholy which practically no band has come close to imitating, and nothing was even in the same ballpark prior. their best albums are ridiculously unified and fluid, like being in the midst of a dream. modern pop music and, hell, dimmu borgir, have nothing to do with any of these traits.
i do think 'theatrical' is an adequate term for distinguishing dimmu borgir from, say, the big 4 norsk bands, and i don't think it needs to be qualified here. there is no doubt in my mind that you know exactly what david (malign) means by that comment. i'll bite however. dimmu borgir do not sound 'serious', their music does not give the impression that it is being spouted from a place of pain or shadow or contemplation or a dream or etc. it sounds comparatively happy and light-hearted and uninterested in exploring the unknown, shying away from all possible complexities and ambiguities, and so any 'darkness' that could be attributed to its aesthetic is superficial and a gimmick.
i don't particularly think atheist is more fluid than death in terms of rhythmic momentum, however i feel they are far more successful in maintaining a consistent tone and conjuring vivid imagery. death's stuff feels like far more conventional death metal sprinkled with digressive shows of sparkly technical skill which jar horribly against the core of the thing. atheist meanwhile are more unified in their cartoonish, swirling, jazzy aesthetic, and whilst they come off a bit glib and soulless themselves at times, it doesn't feel like a tacked on gimmick like it does with death.
uh, what else. yeah, when you make maddening comments about the chasm being as excessively technical as later death, then back up those comments with a completely irrelevant criticism of the guitar tone, that's just obnoxious and honestly borderline insane dude. that's the kind of tactic you get from the worst kind of brainwashed religious zealots.
it's mostly annoying because i don't disagree at all with your central point ("often it seems to me as though the aesthetics of many bands that are praised in the undeground overlap with [certain] popular acts, yet it's become trendy to praise the underdog while dismissing the more well-known band for seemingly no reason"), i've used exactly that argument in the past, but the specific examples you provide always seem to be absolutely terrible. :/
your beach boys comparison verged upon the insane. the beach boys created textured, otherworldly harmonies which never resolve and slip through your fingers when you try to grasp them. they set out with the intention of making seriously worthwhile works of art. the mood was a desperate, ambiguous, haunting kind of melancholy which practically no band has come close to imitating, and nothing was even in the same ballpark prior. their best albums are ridiculously unified and fluid, like being in the midst of a dream. modern pop music and, hell, dimmu borgir, have nothing to do with any of these traits.
i do think 'theatrical' is an adequate term for distinguishing dimmu borgir from, say, the big 4 norsk bands, and i don't think it needs to be qualified here. there is no doubt in my mind that you know exactly what david (malign) means by that comment. i'll bite however. dimmu borgir do not sound 'serious', their music does not give the impression that it is being spouted from a place of pain or shadow or contemplation or a dream or etc. it sounds comparatively happy and light-hearted and uninterested in exploring the unknown, shying away from all possible complexities and ambiguities, and so any 'darkness' that could be attributed to its aesthetic is superficial and a gimmick.
i don't particularly think atheist is more fluid than death in terms of rhythmic momentum, however i feel they are far more successful in maintaining a consistent tone and conjuring vivid imagery. death's stuff feels like far more conventional death metal sprinkled with digressive shows of sparkly technical skill which jar horribly against the core of the thing. atheist meanwhile are more unified in their cartoonish, swirling, jazzy aesthetic, and whilst they come off a bit glib and soulless themselves at times, it doesn't feel like a tacked on gimmick like it does with death.
uh, what else. yeah, when you make maddening comments about the chasm being as excessively technical as later death, then back up those comments with a completely irrelevant criticism of the guitar tone, that's just obnoxious and honestly borderline insane dude. that's the kind of tactic you get from the worst kind of brainwashed religious zealots.
it's mostly annoying because i don't disagree at all with your central point ("often it seems to me as though the aesthetics of many bands that are praised in the undeground overlap with [certain] popular acts, yet it's become trendy to praise the underdog while dismissing the more well-known band for seemingly no reason"), i've used exactly that argument in the past, but the specific examples you provide always seem to be absolutely terrible. :/
JGMetalhead
Anti-humorizing DL Whore
Similar threads
