IN FLAMES new album being released on 1st March, 2019

eochaid said:
Talking about cliches, omce Jesper said something like "Linkin Park is better than U2 because at least they're metal". That's quite stupid to say. And Linkin Park do not even considere themselves as a metal act, and to this I agree.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with him, though I hate U2. Vertigo is a nice song I guess.

And Linkin Park had to be stupid not to consider them metal with their first two records, it WAS metal. What they didn't like is the label nu metal. It has always irked them.

You know, the more I think about it, the more I agree with Jesper, though LP and U2 are night and day. But the moment you hear that guitar on Hybrid Theory you are intrigued. You want to know what it is. It's cool, it's heavy, it's crazy. You may be turned off for a plethorra of reasons, but at least you give them a chance, because it is clearly some sort of metal.

U2 on the other hand is your typical rock shit. U2 is like one of the masters of doing just enough. ANd that is not necessarily a problem ,there has to be songs which slow the fuck down and shine for different reasons but you shouldn't build records, let alone an entire career around this mindset.

I guess this is why I love industrial music. It's like "hey kiddo, you liked that? well fuck you, here's some noise. Oh, you looked this too? Well fuck you, here's some acoustics. Oh you think it's nice? Here's some multilayered death screams with 12 different samples underneath it. Oh you still like it? Well here's some electronic fuckfest for you." And the list goes on. It's fun.
 
The problem is not about quality but about why you like something or not. If you say LP are better than U2 because this and that, then I can understand your reasons. If you say that they're better because they're metal and the others are not, then it's stupid.

Chester previously told the "Metal Hammer" radio show that he wasn't affected by criticism from some of the metal fans who said that LINKIN PARK could not possibly be considered a "metal" band, Chester explained: "It doesn't hurt, because I don't think we're a metal band either. That was actually something that we kind of intentionally wanted to make clear from the very beginning when we were kind of tagged as a 'nu metal' band. Not that we have anything against metal. It's like a facial expression, or like an emotion. It's like someone saying, 'He's an angry person.' And you're, like, 'I can be nice. I can be loving and I can be sensitive.' That's kind of how we feel about ourselves with our music. We aren't just one thing. So there are elements of the band that are metal, there are elements of the band that are pop, there are elements that are electronic, and hip-hop as well. And we've kind of always felt like we weren't bound to just one genre. So after we made 'Hybrid Theory' and 'Meteora', we really wanted to take risks beyond what we had already done on those first two records, creatively, and show the world that we can do a lot more than just make nu-metal songs."
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ilias7
Yes, LP is not a metal band, but you could not classify them any other way after their first two records. It was only with M2M when they switched into alternative rock.

And there is a million reason to why I think LP is better than U2, but I am trying to keep the focus on the guitars now, so that's what I'm talking about. SOAPF and SC are good, but not fun. The fun ended when they switched tone.

The most similar to that shitty sound is Clayman. Go figure which non-LS IF record I am listening to the least. That's right, fucking Clayman. They are good songs man, but that sound makes me bored. At least I can rate Clayman musically. OFTW, Squared Nothing and Swim are fucking amazing, and I really like Suburban Me too. Also, Bullet Ride is like an all around - musically - superior version of every non-slow track on SOAPF. I listen to SOAPF more because it's more commercial, that's about it. Ropes, FITW, Deliver Us are very good songs to sing along to, and it's easily digested. Clayman is... well, it's like trying to eat clay. Weird.

If I was growing up with IF, then Clayman would have been my first disappointment with IF. Then ASOP, but not because I think it was bad, but because I think it needed just a little to be amazing, but it fell short, and now it's treated somewhat unfairly, though the band is mostly to blame for it. SOAPF and everything onwards is just a sad reminded how the metal sound of IF died with Jesper.
 
I like how Anders again mentioned they didn't collaberatively write this one, unlike what they did with Battles. Also he said they wanted guitars to be more at the front of the mix, so that to me shows they might not be entirely happy with the finished product of battles 2 years on (at the time of recording ITM) from a production, and content perspective
 
Jester Slave said:
If I was growing up with IF, then Clayman would have been my first disappointment with IF.
Click to expand...
Yes it was my least favorite but now I go back to it more often because it is great for casual listening.

Jester Slave said:
SOAPF and everything onwards is just a sad reminded how the metal sound of IF died with Jesper.
Click to expand...
That has been true up until now. Once ITM hits all that will be different. Hell, even DE4life was saying maybe they stole some of Jesper’s old song ideas for this album.
 
Last edited:
Jester Slave said:
SOAPF is like when a 200 years old guitar player who used to do metal stuff is now tired and on life support, so he plays very slow, very long melodic tunes, and makes it sound extra rich in production, so it creates the illusion of having a big oompf, when in reality it is just an inflated balloon. And this reply goes to (part of) DE4's message as well.

ASOP on the other hand represents two metal guitarists, who are still eager to go crazy. Absolutely love the speed and sometimes crazyness of those guitars. Yes, production guts them a lot, but it's still there.

SOAPF is more mature and more richer album experience for sure, but saying it's more metal than ASOP is borderline trolling. The dudes who wrote ASOP and the stuff before that would've been through two songs already, while the wise, old fella meticulously put together a seemingly hour long riff.

Battles is more metal than SOAPF and Battles is pretty shit in that department as well.


So what are we supposed to write when they L I T E R A L L Y do a carbon copy of I am the Hughway's riff?

You are acting surprised that a small, furry animal, who meows and likes milk is constantly called a cat. IT'S BECAUSE ITS A FUCKING CAT.
Click to expand...

You are fucking retarded and delusional.

In what sense does SOAPF not sound metal? The arrangement and the riff structures should be pretty obvious.

Just because you don't like alternative metal doesn't make it not metal you mongoloidian fucktard.
The communication between rhythm and lead guitars are absolutely flawless on the album, and everything compliments each other, nothing sounds out of place.
There's plenty of metal in it, it's just very pulling for other influences, and experimentation, which makes it Alt Metal in the first place.
Plenty of songs have huge and complex song structures that I haven't seen in In Flames songs since Colony, to be honest. Fear Is The Weakness, Enter Tragedy, A New Dawn, all have new parts in them like every 15 seconds. No recycling, just a build up on every single part. Songs like Deliver Us, All For Me, The Puzzle and Darker Times have heavy crushing riffs.

There's no part in this album that really falls apart, unless you talk about the ballads, which are debatable, maybe liberation being the only questionable thing imo.

Like honestly "I LIKE SLIPKNOT BUT FUCK THIS ALBUM".

nah, fuck you
 
  • Like
Reactions: JesterSlaveSucks
You can have SOAPF on your "good alt. metal shelf", but I will gladly pass, and wait for ITM, where they actually play what they are best known for and what they are best in.
 
DE4life said:
Pretty sure ITM will come under alt. metal as well tbh.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but it's many steps in the right direction, and I am fine with that. SOAPF on its own is fine, just like STYE was, but it's gotten really fucking lame how they refused to let that sound go. It was never good in the first place, it's just came at the right time. Jesper left, expectations and cynicism were high, so they made this mature bullshit sound, where people like Clayman can jerk his dick off, because maaan, they put it together sooo well, maaaan, amazing!!! Great, no one gives a fuck, as no listened to IF for shit like that, but hey, I'm glad they give it a shot, now go back please. Or forward. Whatever, just drop the fucking sound and mentality.

And to be fair, they kinda started it with Battles, but with all the wrong methods. Guitars were mostly still lame, but now you could barely even hear them over Anders. ITM fixes it, while straying away from that sound as well. Which is a win-win.

See, this is why I speak so highly of The Truth. Is it some pop shit? For sure. But at least it's something new, not the snoozefest of SOAPF/SC/Battles. I rather hate a new record for being so different that I just don't like it, instead of hating it because it's the same goddamn shit they refuse to let go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

krofius
In Flames New Album being released in Q2 of 2014 thread
Replies
4K
Views
288K
In Flames
Pallbearer
Pallbearer
G
New Cyhra Album 2018-2019
Replies
816
Views
58K
In Flames
DE4life
DE4life
DE4life
In Memoriam: Inactive Posters
Replies
36
Views
9K
In Flames
drawntoblack
D
Ilias7
IN FLAMES Clayman Re-recorded 2020
Replies
2K
Views
78K
In Flames
eochaid
eochaid
MetalAges
CHILDREN OF BODOM's New Album Will Be Released In March 2019
Replies
0
Views
113
Metal News 2
MetalAges
MetalAges
Top Bottom
Back