Tupa-Tupa
Google translated but pretty accurate, I must say (I don't speak italian but I can understand it pretty well, thanks to my mother language.)Tupa-Tupa
Well, if we are going off from a google translated, (most likely) casual italian music review sites' words, Battles will be OK. Can't say I got too excited, only looking forward for Before I Fall based on this review because of the comparison with MSS.
It was funny they did a typo with Jesper's name (into Jester), my heart skipped a beat thinking I'm getting trolled or something.
Just looking at the titles of the songs lowered my expectations.Korn and The Chosen Pessimist being name dropped instantly makes me fear the worst for this album.
The review also lacks critical view. This is almost the opposite of the no name, hardcore review sites the people used to link me when SC was released to further prove their point, because what a shitty ass, underground metal review site says is law.The review is fairly positive. Maybe IF will surprise fans with one.
They're not. No one is impartial or objective when making a review. And, remember this, if you make an awful review, next time you're not given the cd to make the review.The review also lacks critical view. This is almost the opposite of the no name, hardcore review sites the people used to link me when SC was released to further prove their point, because what a shitty ass, underground metal review site says is law.
I'll be looking forward for the major reviews. Yes, they can be exceptionally awful too, but at least they are (mostly) impartial when it comes to music like this.
Yes, but major/popular general music review sites won't be impartial to In Flames. Hardcore metal reviewers will still give it a shitty 0-5/10 review at best, because it's cool to shit on new flames among those people. But if you go to Rolling Stones or Allmusic or Pitchfork, etc., no one gives a shit about In Flames, whether you rate their record a 3 or an 8.They're not. No one is impartial or objective when making a review. And, remember this, if you make an awful review, next time you're not given the cd to make the review.
Are you answering a question you just proposed to yourself? Liberation is better though, but WEWO is almost like Come Clarity. They are both good songs (hell, CC has that plus in it, can't quite put my finger on it) but they both go on for way too long. Or rather, they are too repetitive, and all these songs need is the classic breakdown before the final chorus, like they did it in Reflect The Storm.Liberation vs. With Eyes Wide Open
Liberation wins for me as there's more variance in the singing, as well as that part where the verse leaves the structure to bridge into "close your eyes walk with me I'll set you free and everything you ask for..." While With Eyes Wide open stays simple and lackluster the entire song
By the way, in Liberation there's an actual guitar solo
With Eyes Wide open is definitely missing a nice solo in place of that lazy refrain that goes right back into the chorus. Big miss of an opportunity
To me it sounded more like SC+STYE.Cant really tell from an Italian google translate but sounds to me that Battles is going to be a mix of SOAPF and SC skewed more towards the latter.
I love the (drunk) Wacken version, it's really great.The biggest negative of Come Clarity as a song, for me, is the vocals. They really grate on me, which is a shame as the song is otherwise a really solid ballad.
Liberation is awesome. A great track to finish a great album.
Though to me SC and SOAPF are awfully similar because they both sound very, very "rockish".