In Flames New Album being released in Q2 of 2014 thread

I agree with how you judge the individual songs, but I disagree with how you rate the album. I don't think it's lazy, I think it's accurate. Let's simplify this for a second. If an album has 10 songs and you rate half at 6/10 and half at 7/10, the average overall is 6.5/10. It doesn't make sense to give all 6 and 7 ratings but the album is a 4. Or conversely, rate the songs 3 and 4 but the whole album an 8. To me, how you do it doesn't make sense.
Exactly, an album full of 10/10 songs is 10/10, even if they have the same structure. Same structure != same song.

Unless we have super-hyper-mega expectations and when we talk about an album we mean a concept album with 20 interludes, a book written around it and whatnot.

SC matches all the not too high standards of a phenomenon called an album.
1. Have songs on it. This is pretty important if you want to call something an album. Preferrably at least 7/7+, otherwise it's more like an EP.
2. Don't make the track order obscure. You can throw all your new material in any order to the disk as long as it doesn't feel dissonant. Like if you have 5 faster paced songs and 5 slower ones, you don't want to separate them 5-5 (unless it is a concept album and that's the whole point of your vision) because it feels shit. Obviously there are songs which are vastly different on their own, so no matter where you put it, it will feel somewhat out of place (like Alias on ASOP). This also means you should not have let's say 7 death metal songs and 3 dubstep on the same disc. You either merge them into a new genre or you release it on different albums.
3. Congratulations, you just made an album! It's really not the hard part.

Anyway, SC gets some extra credits:
+1. It has a vibe. It doesn't mean it is good, but you don't feel lost every 3rd or 2nd song, you can pretty much "feel" that these songs are from SC, which just strengthens the integrity of the album.
+2. The songs are defiently not over the place, you don't have to be a wizard to see the raw concept. You see the world is about to end, it's already happening and you can't do shit. Now the TO is interesting and linked with SC. In TO the protagonist begs for a savior "Save me from my fears/And darkest thought of her/Carry me through times/Through oblivion" and in SC the Siren offers him what he wanted (OR he has found the Siren and he is talking to others to follow him, because he knows the way to Her) "I'll set you free if you follow me/Reach out touch the hand of God". Now what the fuck is going on exactly could be up to debate, but then the world explodes and the rest of the album (bonus tracks not included, we don't know where exactly they would fit into the narrative) takes place in the post-apocalyptic world, aka Earth after everyone nuked the shit out of each other. Filtered Truth is interesting. It's like he's talking to someone from a time before shit got loose. Anyway, it has the oddest vibe on SC, so it's either as I think, between Whoracle and SC, or it's a song where the protagonist is dying (if we take BTS as a canon last song, he eventually dies there) and calls out the cowards who caused this/did not help him prevent it.

tl;dr: the prophecy from the Whoracle has finally arrived and it's too late to do anything and implies that they did nothing, despite the Whoracle's warning. + something about that Siren.

I also dig the contrast between a Whoracle (you despise her) and Siren (you fall in love with her).

So yeah, if someone thinks the songs are 6 or 6+ then I have no idea what else does he expect from an album if he gives it 4, lol. You might say they were lazy with the songs, same structure blahblah, but the work on the album itself can hardly be taken away from them, especially how they linked it with Whoracle, which is a really cool thing.

Edit: sorry, you gave it 5.5. It still doesn't make sense but not as outrageous as a 4. 4 is pretty much "Two songs are OK-ish, the rest are fucking terrible".
 
Exactly, an album full of 10/10 songs is 10/10, even if they have the same structure. Same structure != same song.

There are no albums with 10 10/10 songs. But there are 10/10 albums.

You must give some +/- points for overall impression, originality, flow, or lazy songwriting, repetitiveness, too many fillers...
 
There are plenty of albums full of 10/10 songs. Plenty.

Jester Slave your logic is so faulty you squeak. SC gets extra credit because it has a bad vibe? Are you really that much of a fanboy that you'd grant credit for something that by your own admission isn't good? "I'm gonna give this album some extra props. It has a vibe to it, albeit not a good one, but a vibe nonetheless, so yea, extra points for the band." I mean that is just insane. Just admit the album is awful.

I wish the band would rerecord R2R. Horrible production. Muddy, all thud and no crunch like Clayman. Poor mixing with guitars too far back. If R2R had Clayman's production it would be much better. Still total sellout, but decent at least.
 
I didn't say that.

But you can't be implying that In Flames demonstrate any technical prowess on SC...surely not. Again, an objective fact and not an opinion. There is no musicianship on this record. None. You're dissecting the album trying to look for something that isn't there.

This is was I've been saying until now. And I'm dissecting the album to explain why I don't like it.
 
I agree with how you judge the individual songs, but I disagree with how you rate the album. I don't think it's lazy, I think it's accurate.

Not only judging from the songs structures but also for the riffs and composition, I would say that the only one that did an effort on this album was Anders. As for Bjorn, their compositions are plain and repetitive, I don't mean through the album but for every song. So I agree that it's lazy.
 
I agree with how you judge the individual songs, but I disagree with how you rate the album. I don't think it's lazy, I think it's accurate. Let's simplify this for a second. If an album has 10 songs and you rate half at 6/10 and half at 7/10, the average overall is 6.5/10. It doesn't make sense to give all 6 and 7 ratings but the album is a 4. Or conversely, rate the songs 3 and 4 but the whole album an 8. To me, how you do it doesn't make sense.

Let's simplify it even further.

If In Flames released an album that just had Zombie Inc. playing ten times, I'd give the song 10/10 each time because... well, it's Zombie Inc. I don't reduce the rating just because I've heard it 8 times already, the song has the same quality regardless of where it is on the album.

Now, by your logic I should also rate the album 10/10, because I'm averaging out the scores. This is obviously total nonsense, but that's basically what you're saying.

Judging individual songs, and then judging how those songs work as a collective on an album, is a completely different system of scoring. I can't believe I'm having to explain this :D but if this doesn't make it clear to you I don't know what will.
 
Not only judging from the songs structures but also for the riffs and composition, I would say that the only one that did an effort on this album was Anders. As for Bjorn, their compositions are plain and repetitive, I don't mean through the album but for every song. So I agree that it's lazy.

We weren't talking about the effort of In Flames, we were talking about the rating system DE was using.
 
Let's simplify it even further.

If In Flames released an album that just had Zombie Inc. playing ten times, I'd give the song 10/10 each time because... well, it's Zombie Inc. I don't reduce the rating just because I've heard it 8 times already, the song has the same quality regardless of where it is on the album.

Now, by your logic I should also rate the album 10/10, because I'm averaging out the scores. This is obviously total nonsense, but that's basically what you're saying.

Judging individual songs, and then judging how those songs work as a collective on an album, is a completely different system of scoring. I can't believe I'm having to explain this :D but if this doesn't make it clear to you I don't know what will.

Touché. Nice rebuttal, but I feel you got close to insulting territory which isn't necessary with me. We were just having a surprisingly civil debate on the internet.
 
Not my intention to be insulting, however, I felt like I explained it adequately the first time. It's more frustration than any attempt to insult you... if I'm going to spend time insulting people on here it'll be the likes of Jester Slave or Uneasy Conscience :D you're a good fella.
 
Nah, I didn't get it because I felt the overall was too low for the rest of the songs, but you didn't have an example. Everything is better with an example. Speaking of examples and Uneasy, he still hasn't said where Anders was rapping, has he?
 
He must be runningnthrough what (in Spain) call "la crisis de los 40". Traduction should be middle age crisis.
 
Not my intention to be insulting, however, I felt like I explained it adequately the first time. It's more frustration than any attempt to insult you... if I'm going to spend time insulting people on here it'll be the likes of Jester Slave or Uneasy Conscience :D you're a good fella.

Be strong, bro. I'll support you, seriously. If you are disagreeing with someone, or voicing your opinion, you gotta be stronger. You always disagree then add that stupid smiley face as some sort of play nice card. You gotta tell these guys that they're dead wrong in their opinions. Quit being so nice. Jesus.
 
Be strong, bro. I'll support you, seriously. If you are disagreeing with someone, or voicing your opinion, you gotta be stronger. You always disagree then add that stupid smiley face as some sort of play nice card. You gotta tell these guys that they're dead wrong in their opinions. Quit being so nice. Jesus.

Opinions aren't right or wrong unless put up versus facts.

Now, there are no set specifics for music, so it is untrue to say that there's such a thing as a right or wrong when it comes to opinion when what really only matters, is what you think about it.

I can rate Siren Charms 1.2/5. This does not make me correct, nor wrong.
I base it upon what I think about it, and how well it is executed.

Meanwhile, someone else may be listening to Siren Charms and rate it a 9/10.

I disagree with it, but it doesn't mean that it is wrong because when it comes to reviewing, all it is about, is the opinion.

-

If my opinion is about, for example, the existence of god(s) (Jew, Muslim, Christian). I can say that my opinion is that there is none. I base this upon what scientific fact points to, while taking errors in the "holy" books into consideration, as well as direct contradictions of the deities themselves. - In this way, I can be right, or I can be wrong. Since I demand a LOT of evidence before believing, and everything that science points toward is that the more we learn, the less likely the deity exist. This has now, of course, came to the point to that it is a laughable matter.

It is of my opinion, based upon factual evidence, and the completely extreme lack thereof to think otherwise, that god(s) (Jew, Muslim, Christian) do not exist.

This is not how reviews work.