I fucken resent this...

[jimbobhickville]

Therion. Theli, Vovin, Deggial, and Secret of the Runes are all better than their early crap. Deggial is probably the weakest in the group, but Runes rules all. There is an example of positive progression. Death is another example, ITP and Symbolic both destroy their earlier efforts. Of course, this in my opinion and you may not share it.

But yeah, most bands progress nicely for a few albums, then regress (i.e. Metallica, Megadeth, etc).

 

[Useful Idiot]

Originally posted by Mikael is God
ok trapped = ???wtf

im sorrry... i agree with most of this thread... but predator's portrait is awesome... what are you talking about with an "over use of clean vocals" What the fuck are you talking about?? you cant over use clean vocals.... thats the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard. and they use fucking verse / chorus / verse / blah blah song structure on their other 2 cds anyway.... dude... its one thing if you just dont like something, but dont say things that make absolutely no sense.

please i invite you to prove your point logically about how soilwork fits in this group of bands that change for the worse... apparently they are doing so bad that devin townsend is producing their fucking new cd

I've got to agree with you...can't see how Soilwork got any worse with Predator's Portrait. Their newer stuff has much more variety in the vocals while maintaining the incredible guitarwork from the other albums, in my opinion.

With the band evolution thing, I understand that some of you don't want your favorite bands to evolve. But think about it from the band's point of view. Would you want to pump out the same album year after year? Musicians should do what they feel like doing when it comes to making music. They should not have any restrictive limitations set upon them. Just think of all of the revolutionary albums that would not have existed had a band not made that evolutionary leap. Some people here say that the first albums of a band are the ones that come from the heart and are most genuine...that may be true in some cases, but if a musician follows their heart, the band is guaranteed to progress and evolve in their future.

 

[Lina]

Originally posted by godisanathiest
I have no respect for any band that releases the same thing over and over again for more than a few albums. Its shows IMO they are unoriginal, and (in my mind) not real musicians as they are not able to expand or mature

what do you think about opeth? yes, you can hear progression in their cds, but overall they've remained the same (thank god). to me, they have the perfect balance of evolving and yet not changing its foundations.

i don't think many of us here have a problem with a band changing -- what pisses me off is that they RARELY change for the better. (better = more engaging to listen to = stronger musicianship and songwriting) so we've come to equate changing with selling out.

I just don't understand why a band capable of writing technical and emotional music would switch to mindless chord progressions, basic song structures, etc. My friends' band has recently done this. They now sound exactly like Katatonia, and I KNOW they are better musicians than that. Don't they get BORED playing unchallenging music? It's like they just want a break from the intensity of creating passionate music -- I don't think they should make their fans suffer through their writing block, they should just rest for a bit.

 

[S4R]

Another case in point, Theatre of Tragedy's "Musique" what the fuck were they thinking? That album was a drastic change for the worse.

 

[Morningrise]

Some of you say that In Flames made a bad change, and I disagree. Sure it is more easily acessable musically, and simpler, and more "popular" (How many people know who In Flames are outside of metal circles?) sounding. But the music is still good, in my opinion. They really havn't made a drastic change, definately one not as good, but not bad.

 

[D Mullholand]

Originally posted by Wolff
I hate it when younger fans who don't have the patience to fully appreciate the early shit, purely dismiss it as crap... The essence of the band is the early shit: comes always from the heart and it's genuine...

I hate even more when these fans become a majority and take over the fanbase... then I love having fucken 15 year olds tell me how sophisticated or open-minded a certain piece of music is...

I fucken resent it when the band then yields to these fans, and writes crap to sell CD's. I have seen it too many fucken times happen.

Some call it evolution, I call it shitolution.

You're making a mistake here, by throwing the evolving bands and commercialized bands into one pot. As for the "younger fans" vs "older fans" - that's metalheadish elitist bullshit, reeking of the "troo" argument. The essence of the band evolves, and if the evolution does not get fucked up by commercialization - not to confuse with accessibility - the band only finds new and exciting ways to express their essence. The early "raw" shit is not always the best - it's not an axiom.

D Mullholand
------------------------
NP: John McLaughlin - Where Fortune Smles

 

[Misanthrope]

You're making a mistake here, by throwing the evolving bands and commercialized bands into one pot.

Could not possibly agree more. I mean there are bands that change their music out of fame desire, people who want to bust their egos by having thousand worshiping fans around the globe...I really do not understand how could a metal band today could possibly achive that...maybe that is why they cross the road of genres.

But there is always musicians, people that do not actively look fame or other superficial equivalents to a lack of something else in their lives, but merely seek to express themselves and you cannot express yourself if you are always within the confines of a genre or a particular style. How can you express lets say watching a dear one die in a brutal death metal band without being agressive about it but, rather being fragil and sensitive? There is no such thing in brutality. How do you express irony in your music, or how do you do something that resembles a playfull humor in the middle of a very tradicional black metal sound, without making it sound silly?.

There is a good deal of things people seeks to express that cannot be found in a particular genre. Relasing the same old stuff with a new scale or a different structure over and over again will make what it should be a wonderful experience, a repetive nightmare that only a person who does not depends and dedicates 100% to music could enjoy. But there are people who dedicates, there are Musicians....

 

[D Mullholand]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
...how do you do something that resembles a playfull humor in the middle of a very tradicional black metal sound, without making it sound silly?

I always thought of traditional black metal as comedy music. What can be funnier than absoultely pompous and humorless music aiming to be "dark" ?

D Mullholand

 

[Misanthrope]

hehehe well yea you got a point there

But well i meant it like, you have Mr. Satyr running in a forest with the biggest axe he could find and then you start hearing something like a fast jazz part in the music with a sax solo. Would it be funny still? yes but your Typical Mr. Satyr would be seriously offended by such an insult yo his frightening work of terror he thinks he plays.

 

[brightoffski]

I think it would be pretty boring if musicians didn't progress, I mean at least it means more chance of expanding into new unexplored areas. Sure, sometimes you are going to dislike the evolution, but I think in metal more often than not, the band is not selling out, just trying create something new. I actually think metal suffers a little bit from unoriginality. How often have I read those little advertisement descriptions that say:

"Epic dark melodic metal with beautiful clean vocals..." ...etc

BTW has anyone heard of the band:

"April Ethereal" with the album name "Advent"?

 

[SentencedToBurn]

hey in flames "colony" is a good album. clayman has some good stuff on it too but its not as good as their others. iced earth horror show is good.. im tired of people saying its bad and its soooooooooo bad and worthless. metallica and megadeth. now they are bands that just TOTALLY changed. not iced earth though. in flames a little bit (touring with slipknot, UGH!!!)

 

[Soul Forlorn]

I'm not saying anything new here but I most certainly think it's completely natural for bands to evolve. As a musician myself I can understand how it happens. We start to listen to new and different music, therefore our influences change. We grow tired of playing in the exact same style for long periods of time. We also try to make a conscious point to not repeat ourselves. Some bands evolve more than others. I have yet to hear a band that hasn't changed at least a little over the years. Even Iron Maiden- sure their style is relatively close to the same as it was back in the 80's yet I still hear some differences that correspond to natural evolution. Some bands do a complete turnaround in terms of style. Maybe they do it because they're completely tired of the old style, they want something fresh, or maybe they're tired of their old image. Though I don't always find the change is a good one, if it is done from the heart I find it admirable. Some bands sell out for a larger fanbase. This kind of change is what I like to refer to as "unnatural evolution" and I usually can't agree with this sort of change. In short, I generally see nothing wrong with the evolving of a certain band (unfortunately, the evolution is for the worse, though). One thing that really gets on my nerves is when people talk shit about bands, such as Maiden, who haven't really changed much. I mean, fuck, we love the music, we don't desire any radical changes, and hell, maybe they're playing from the heart and really love playing in that style. What the fuck is wrong with that?

 

[Tribal]

Best Death metal ever= old Death, early Gorguts, Pestilence, Cynic, Atrocity, Grave, early Entombed, Sodom, Carcass, Malevolent Creation(Retribution), and the mighty Infernal Majesty!

Best metal today= Opeth, Estatic Fear, Shape of Despair, Emperor, Throes of Dawn, Blood Bath, Arch Enemy, Abominant.

 

[SentencedToBurn]

tribal has our buddy jesus as his avatar

 

[Tribal]

AAAARRRRGGGGGG! How could I forget early Amorphis, Morgoth, and Sacrifice. Please forgive me I have sinned!

 

[Tribal]

Originally posted by SentencedToBurn
tribal has our buddy jesus as his avatar

Dogma was a funny movie! I haven't got to see Jay and Silent Bob Strikes back yet. The movie Clerks was pretty damn funny as well.

 

[HoserHellspawn]

As far as I can see, the crux of the biscuit is artist intent. Does an artist want to evolve? If the answer is yes and they don't for some reason, then fans tend to notice the stagnation and be unhappy, because the band is probably unhappy. If the band is always doing what they want to be doing for their own artistic satisfaction then that's what matters... THAT'S what makes music "true", not forcing yourself into a strict category, i.e. the "true black metal all is darkness we're so evil let's go storming up and down the fjord and scaring people with our goofy halloween-gone-haywire outfits" angle. That was only true if that's what the artist really wanted to do. If they were trying to fit an archetype, then they're really no better than commercial sellouts.

Similarly, if a band is truly interested in making albums with shorter, simpler songs, then that's their call as well. What makes them sellouts is the motivation... did they do it because they found it interesting to do artistically or because they wanted a larger fanbase, to be more famous, and to make more money? Unfortunately, It's often a forgone conclusion.

Ultimately, if they do what they want to do, then I'll always respect it as art. My tastes may dictate that I no longer listen to them, but I won't knock them. I've read people whining about Ulver and Garm going by "Trickster G." ...one listen to "Themes..." or "Perdition City" and it should become painfully obvious that Ulver are moved by artistic intent, not stereotype-filling or money. If you don't like it that's totally cool, but respect it.

 

[Wolff]

Originally posted by HoserHellspawn
As far as I can see, the crux of the biscuit is artist intent. Does an artist want to evolve? If the answer is yes and they don't for some reason, then fans tend to notice the stagnation and be unhappy, because the band is probably unhappy. If the band is always doing what they want to be doing for their own artistic satisfaction then that's what matters... THAT'S what makes music "true", not forcing yourself into a strict category, i.e. the "true black metal all is darkness we're so evil let's go storming up and down the fjord and scaring people with our goofy halloween-gone-haywire outfits" angle. That was only true if that's what the artist really wanted to do. If they were trying to fit an archetype, then they're really no better than commercial sellouts.

Similarly, if a band is truly interested in making albums with shorter, simpler songs, then that's their call as well. What makes them sellouts is the motivation... did they do it because they found it interesting to do artistically or because they wanted a larger fanbase, to be more famous, and to make more money? Unfortunately, It's often a forgone conclusion.

Ultimately, if they do what they want to do, then I'll always respect it as art. My tastes may dictate that I no longer listen to them, but I won't knock them. I've read people whining about Ulver and Garm going by "Trickster G." ...one listen to "Themes..." or "Perdition City" and it should become painfully obvious that Ulver are moved by artistic intent, not stereotype-filling or money. If you don't like it that's totally cool, but respect it.

Sure there's evolution... need to explore different areas, and I accept that. Sometimes it's better, sometimes it's worse. I consider Opeth [and Metallica's Load for that matter] to be the former and MDB's 34.788% to be the latest: Aaron did his exploration and it was crap. Credit to MDB, they moved back to their roots... Fair enough.

But what about bands like the gathering or theatre of tragedy or moonspell or the three I mentioned above? To write such passionate and intense stuff coming straight from the soul, and to throw it all away makes me sick. It's not music from/for the soul, it music intended to fatten the "musicians" wallet.

I understand the "running out things to write" argument. If that's the case with a band, they should quit. Pure and simple. Keep some fucking integrity. At the Gates anyone?

I also hear a lot "things becoming boring if you constraint yourself to one genre". Did Iron Maiden ever get boring during their first 10 albums? Megadeth before Youthanasia? Did Metallica ever get boring during the first 5 albums? Don't think so. I, for one, enjoyed Load too. It was fresh, and it had some music from the heart. But some bands not only changed the music, they also changed the image, [and I'm not talking about haircuts here] and their targeted audience. This is something I resent.

 

[Wolff]

Originally posted by JesusChristPose
About Anathema...

I saw a used cd by them at CD Warehouse, I can't recall the title, but it was made in 1997. What do they sound like and does anyone recommend them?

Here's the discography of Anathema, excluding countless promos:

• The Crestfallen (1992 Peaceville Records TCD VILE36)
• Serenades (1993 Peaceville Records CD VILE34)
• Pentecost III (1995 Peaceville Records CD VILE51)
• The Silent Enigma (1995 Peaceville Records CD VILE52)
• Eternity (1996 Peaceville Records CD (X)VILE64)
• Alternative 4 (1998 Peaceville Records CD VILE73)
• Judgement (1999 Music For Nations CDMFN250)
• A Fine Day To Exit (2001 Music For Nations/Koch Records CDMFN260)

I draw the line at Eternity. I thought A4 was bad, and I was not impressed at all with Judgement. I haven't bothered with A Fine Day to Exit.

My fave is Serenades. Yes it is heavy, and yes it will take some time to understand it, but it's worth it. It's very emotional, deep and heavy... in the sense of the themes it carries: loss, death, sorrow. Drums pound rather than beat, Darren's gut-wrenching growl gives voice to all sorrow, and the guitars intertwine and wind around each other to create an atmosphere of intense, surreal suffering... This is the ideal album to hear in a lonely night, embraced by darkness, when you have lost a loved one. Songs like LOVELORN RHAPSODY will show you how powerful sadness can be in composing good songs. (Akerfeldt claims that 96 was a shitty year on personal terms, but listen to Morningrise...) Best if you buy the Serenades/Crestfallen double CD.

Pentecost had 5 songs, 2 of which are brilliant, 1 is good, and two are average. Silent Enigma has 3-4 great songs. Eternity has some dog-shit and some absolutely great stuff: Eternity (I, II, III), Far Away, Suicide Veil and a nice rendition of Pink Floyd's Hope

 

[Russell]

Originally posted by Lina
what do you think about opeth? yes, you can hear progression in their cds, but overall they've remained the same (thank god). to me, they have the perfect balance of evolving and yet not changing its foundations.

I never said the prgression had to be obvious. They have progressed, and still are, they are still being original and doing new stuff... I respect them

Oh and Alt.4 Judgment, and AFDTE are all very different from Anathema's early work, but are all very good..