Controversial opinions on metal

[Manic Ferocity]

Read Falconsbane's reviews of their albums on Metal-Archives.

I've never read them and I like The Chasm.

 

[Expletive]

Hey guys im new to this site..if anyone is interested in checking out some louisian deathmetal then let me know what you think..we like everyones opinion..good or bad..

http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/expletive/id355869520

 

[DarkBliss]

I've never read them and I like The Chasm.

Good man. Who cares what he says?

 

[waif]

I see three short positive reviews. I can't see how the fuck that could possibly bring a band out of obscurity.

 

[Krow]

Can we get an "Arguing with DarkBliss" thread so it'll end here?

 

[Manic Ferocity]

Good man. Who cares what he says?

Right, so wouldn't it be safe to assume that that's not the reason people listen to The Chasm?

 

[Mort Divine]

he's a jew

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Slayer's The Antichrist has one of the dorkiest riffs in metal existence, and overall is worthy of little more than polka moshing.

EDIT: Same goes for the similar sounding riff in Tormentor.

 

[Slayed Necros]

^ homosexual

 

[skeptik]

Why are you getting upset? I don't have any problem, man. I just wish for once that people would admit to upholding double standards. Just for once. Saying X is not as theatrical as Y doesn't really mean much. It's still just favoritism at its purest.

I'm not 'getting upset', I'm responding to you continually spouting off complete and utter nonsense. I don't think you know what a double standard is, either. Also, saying that "Dimmu Borgir is not theatrical in the same way that Candlemass is theatrical" is not by any means to be construed as saying "Dimmu Borgir is better/worse than Candlemass because they're more/less theatrical." It's to be construed as saying THE WAY IN WHICH THE BANDS ARE THEATRICAL IS DIFFERENT FROM ONE ANOTHER. Qualitatively, not quantitatively. And not qualitatively as in better or worse, but rather in terms of attributes. Candlemass and Dimmu Borgir display different kinds characteristics that can both be considered theatrical, so trying to say that if you like one theatrical band then you should like some other specific theatrical band is just a really stupid thing to say. Do you understand this point? Please let me know, because I'm actually interested if you do understand.

Vilden, liking one album over the other is no problem, but claiming that one possesses some mythical depth just because it was released in 1995 and not 2001 is proof of double-standards

Nobody does this here. Why the hell are you saying it, then? Name somebody who does this and provide evidence of them doing this or shut up.

Might be due to the fact that some guy with an English major wrote a long piece, praising the mythical properties of the band's music, and everyone followed in his footsteps.

Nobody does this here. Why the hell are you saying it, then? Name somebody who does this and provide evidence of them doing this or shut up.

The Chasm would have been condemned to obscurity had Falco not written his essay-long reviews about them.

That has nothing to do with the quality of their music. The only thing that affects is how many people know the band. If Falco helped to bring The Chasm to people's attention, then good. But nobody likes The Chasm because his reviews told them to like them.

You keep making wildly inaccurate and erroneous assumptions about why people like the bands that they do without ever providing any evidence to back up your claims. The only person here, including Dimmu Borgir fans, who doesn't think that you sound really stupid and that your arguments are irrational and baseless is yourself. Saying that people like The Chasm because some ANUS troll reviewed them, that they listen to years rather than musical notes, and all of the other stupid things you've said; be honest, are you trolling? Are you saying things that you know full well are stupid in order to get a response out of people, or are the things you're saying delivered with sincerity? Do you seriously think I or anyone else here judge the quality of a band based merely on what year an album was released or on who else listens to them? I'm genuinely interested in your answer.

 

[Manic Ferocity]

I'm pretty sure he's more interested in getting a rise out of people than actually finding justification for his claims.

 

[DarkBliss]

Matt, I'm not saying that you're all judging bands according to what year their material was released, but it's just that certain bands are favored simply because their music was released in the early to mid 90s disregarding the actual musical attributes of said band. Like that Wicked Innocence example I've provided. Had the album been released yesterday, it would've not been as praised for being some sort of unique entity; for all it's worth, it's just a weird tech death album with poor flow and incoherent sound.I actually think the same of early At the Gates and Demilich-I've listened to them countless times and they're as confusing as ever,. But whatever, let's not turn this into another "you just don't get it, man" debate. Maybe my ears are at fault here.
However, certain bands are forever sidelined and dubbed inferior even if they use adept melodic phrasing that certain other cult acts use.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

I'm pretty sure he's more interested in getting a rise out of people than actually finding justification for his claims.

 

[skeptik]

I'm only going to go through this one more time.

it's just that certain bands are favored simply because their music was released in the early to mid 90s disregarding the actual musical attributes of said band.

No, it's NOT "just" that at all. This is just a rewording of what I claimed that you were saying anyway. The year in which an album was released is relevant only in so far as it reflects the originality and novelty of what the band was doing at the time the album was written/recorded/released. Nobody here likes Burzum more than Craft because Burzum was released in 1991 and Craft came around a decade later (guessing? I could be wrong). It's because those who like Burzum more than Craft think that Burzum is a better band than Craft. On various levels. Yet NOT because one is a decade older.

Like that Wicked Innocence example I've provided. Had the album been released yesterday, it would've not been as praised for being some sort of unique entity

Well DUH, if it was released today it wouldn't be "some sort of unique entity", since other bands have expanded upon their sound already. Horrible example. Actually any example you give will be horrible because it wouldn't make sense. A groundbreaking album in 1981 would not be groundbreaking in 2010. Why do you think people complain about bands rehashing the ideas of older bands? Because it was original THEN when it was recorded the first time, not decades later. A recording is an encapsulation of a moment of time; to treat it otherwise is doing it an injustice.

for all it's worth, it's just a weird tech death album with poor flow and incoherent sound.I actually think the same of early At the Gates and Demilich-I've listened to them countless times and they're as confusing as ever,. But whatever, let's not turn this into another "you just don't get it, man" debate. Maybe my ears are at fault here.

I'm not even very familiar with the band so I don't care what you think about them. However, what you think about them has nothing to do with what other people think of them, nor whether or not what they recorded was unique for its time. Likewise, whether or not your ears are capable of detecting a 'flow', whatever the fuck you mean by that ambiguous term you continue to use to siphon out that which is bad from that which is good, of albums like Nespithe and The Red in the Sky Is Ours are fucking irrelevant to what that album meant when it was released or what it means now.

However, certain bands are forever sidelined and dubbed inferior even if they use adept melodic phrasing that certain other cult acts use.

Like Iron Maiden, right? You know, if I still owned my copy of Deathcult Armageddon I would relisten to it and explain in detail to you not only why I don't like it and don't think it's a quality work of art, but why it's NOT like Necromantia or Candlemass. From what I can recall, however, and referencing the "Progenies of the Great Apocalypse" video on youtube, the production was excessively sterile in a way unsuiting to the music, the vocals of Shagrath were horribly transparent and superficial, the transitions from 'dark' to 'light' moments were seemingly random and without purpose within the structure of the song itself, but were rather more likely an excuse to allow Vortex to sing, and many of the symphonic elements are completely saccharine and overwrought, and seemed like afterthoughts, which I do not believe to be the case, which makes the quality of the symphonic elements even worse.

 

[VelociBrad]

I'm pretty sure he's more interested in getting a rise out of people than actually finding justification for his claims.

Either this or he's just so dense he honestly believes what he's saying.

 

[Manic Ferocity]

but it's just that certain bands are favored simply because their music was released in the early to mid 90s disregarding the actual musical attributes of said band.

You are STILL not providing examples of people who actually do this. When are you going to stop rehashing your points and actually come up with what might at least sound like an attempt at an argument? Or are you just doing this because you are bored?

 

[TheInsane]

Come on people you argue about personal opinions which you know neither of you can win. There is no purpose to keep doing it. Some people like Dimmu Borgir and some dont. Simple as that. I do think certain bands take an unfair amount of shit because of their reputations and standings with the "core fans" of a genre though, Dimmu being one of those bands, but it doesnt matter. Those who dislike music because others dislike it are fools anyway.

For me Dimmu Borgir is very good but only in small doses. It tends to become to much if I try to listen to whole Dimmu albums. I for one love the "Progenies of the Great Apocalypse" discussed above.

 

[DarkBliss]

Either this or he's just so dense he honestly believes what he's saying.

In other words, nanananaana

 

[no country for old wainds]

Slayer's The Antichrist has one of the dorkiest riffs in metal existence, and overall is worthy of little more than polka moshing.

EDIT: Same goes for the similar sounding riff in Tormentor.

i know exactly which two you mean (i think), and they are prob the two worst riffs on the album. those two songs also contain amazing riffs though so let's not complain too much...

 

[Cythraul]

Hey look guys, Darkbliss is being obnoxious!! Who would've thought?

I've never had a problem with you before until you started recently with this bullshit argument about Dimmu Borgir in this thread. Why did you decide to start behaving like an inconsolable toddler all of a sudden?

This isn't all that new. He's made claims/arguments like this before. It's just that now he's decided to sustain the discussion for several pages. Actually, a while back he wondered how I could both like Elend and dislike Summoning, as though I were somehow being inconsistent.