ORCHID ABLAZE (melbourne metal)

Status
Not open for further replies.

storv

New Metal Member
Mar 20, 2007
2
0
1
Hi guys, call it spam if you will, but if you can look past that and are keen on new music please check out the latest offering from melbourne,australian 5 piece metal/metalcore band "orchid ablaze".This is OA's 3rd recording and are looking to finally break through with the new and long awaited EP ' the aftermath ', in-stores from march 23.

To hear the promo track 'dead to me' please go to www.myspace.com/orchidablaze - Cheers!
 
Alot of people don't like metalcore around here. Too many kvlt peeps around here.

Let me give it a listen I like metalcore.

Oh wow thats pretty good.

Dead To Me is a very good song :)

Edit: Didn't really care for the other song >.>
 
its got nothing to do with being "kvlt". its got to do with the fact that metalcore sucks due to its overly rhythmic focus, generic nature, typically whinny vocals, intentional appeal to simpletons with angst etc. ("imo")

I'm talking about "metal"-core. Not talking about bands like fucking atreyu and shit like that.

Neaera with whinny vocals? Simpletons with angst? Honestly, dude not all metalcore bands are shitty. And yes it does have to do with being "kvlt" and "tr00". You notice all the -core bashing on this forum is by the BM types, who haven't even listened to good metalcore and thus base their opinions of the whole genre based on a few shit bands.

That can be said for all genre's.


Go listen to HELL WITHIN, and tell me the term "metal"-core still turns you away.

http://www.myspace.com/hellwithin

Listen to Godspeed to your Deathbed..Thats good "metal"core, though their new CD is sounding pretty shitty(ok thats understatement, their new shit blows nuts) >.> <.< they are getting away from what made them good.

Anyways, Hell Within - Asylum of the Human Predator is one of the best "metal"-core albums, give it a listen.
 
No. I'm not a "black metal" type, I seldom listen to the genre. I'm not going to bother trying the metalcore you are suggesting, because everyone into metalcore comes up with the same bullshit: ie "you just haven't heard good metalcore". I'm not wasting anymore time trying bands from a genre that is seemingly filled with endless queues of unintersting music.
 
It's enjoyable in a primal sense, but try to understand where Byrne's going. Hammering out a series of I-IV-V-I cadences one after the other IS kinda generic no matter how many melodic tremoloed notes are sprinkled over the top.

Everything doesn't have to be classical-ish composed to be "good". Simplicity isn't always bad.

Honestly if what you looked for was something that had amazing song structure, symphonic/orchestral black metal would be way more popular than what it is.
 
disarmonia mundi said:
Everything doesn't have to be classical-ish composed to be "good". Simplicity isn't always bad.

Honestly if what you looked for was something that had amazing song structure, symphonic/orchestral black metal would be way more popular than what it is.

Right on, but it's not enough to be "good". Musicians have been using the type of theory Soulgate's Dawn uses for hundreds of years, and they were not only "good" but they also did it first. Anyone reasonably talented at painting is capable of whipping up something along the lines of Rembrandt's Nightwatch, but it would just be irrelevant despite perhaps being considered good. If there are no compelling reasons to listen to Soulgate's Dawn ahead of the hundreds of composers who did what they did earlier and better, other than their use of metal instrumentation and screaming, then why should we bother? In a nutshell, it's the subtle but pivotal difference between good craftsmanship and good art.
 
Right on, but it's not enough to be "good". Musicians have been using the type of theory Soulgate's Dawn uses for hundreds of years, and they were not only "good" but they also did it first. Anyone reasonably talented at painting is capable of whipping up something along the lines of Rembrandt's Nightwatch, but it would just be irrelevant despite perhaps being considered good. If there are no compelling reasons to listen to Soulgate's Dawn ahead of the hundreds of composers who did what they did earlier and better, other than their use of metal instrumentation and screaming, then why should we bother? In a nutshell, it's the subtle but pivotal difference between good craftsmanship and good art.

Name me something "original" that has came out in the past few years? Basically everything has been done outside of bringing in new instruments ala folk metal, which is an awesome genre. The basic band structure made popular in the 70s of

Guitar
Guitar
Bass
Drum
Vocal

Theres only so much one can do. Using your definition I can name a ton of I mean a fucking shitload (90&#37;) of bands in each genre that no one should bother to listen to because they aren't doing something "new". Basically what you just said is that the only thing we should listen to is Avante-Garde and Progressive mixed with some folk.

Edit: Your painting analogy is absolutely horrible, because there is a billion things a paintest can do to seperate himself from others, whereas in music its limited by the instruments you have and the style you do. (Quite limited). That's why I love it when bands incorporate (new) things like Dark Lunacy using a string quartet or Turisas (oh god alot of people hate them, I love em :) )using trumpets and other instruments, or Mael Mordha using flutes and Gaelic influences. ***Basically my point being, you don't have to make something new to be considered "good" or something enjoyable to listen to, and your if its not new why do it bit is really absurd***

http://www.myspace.com/warofages Listen to Battle On

You don't think thats "good" music? (Don't bother critiquing the lyrics I could care less what lyrics there are in metal music)
 
It's not even necessarily about producing something entirely original. Of course being very derivative decreases enjoyment but originality is only part of what I find interesting or appealing. Focussing on metalcore's most basic aesthetics (as I noted above) I still find entirely unrewarding, even without considering whether it is "original" or not. And no, it has nothing to do with what other people think. I could't give a shit about what is on the agenda of what people think is "cool" or whatever childish school yard style behaviour others may be assuming.
 
Edit: Your painting analogy is absolutely horrible, because there is a billion things a paintest can do to seperate himself from others, whereas in music its limited by the instruments you have and the style you do.

Why? Isn't a painter limited by his style? Modern painting has rejected 'style' altogether, it's probably about time music did the same.
 
Why? Isn't a painter limited by his style? Modern painting has rejected 'style' altogether, it's probably about time music did the same.

A Paint can paint a million things so many different ways. Paint landscapes/animals/flowers/houses/people/cars...black and white/color/etc. etc.

The options available to a painter is a million times more than to a musician. Theres only so many styles...

Alternative Picking
Tremelo
etc. etc.

Only so many note progressions/chords.



What I want to see more in metal these days is incorporating more natural elements to bring out the music more, like a backdrop of lightning/thunder/rain/ocean waves with a crushing double guitar riff over it or something. (1 guitar playing higher notes on the neck, one on the lower end)
 
Orchid Ablaze sound pretty good to me, not too cheesy, as all of Disharmonias metalcore recommendations seem to be.

The resulting argument in this thread has been quite retarded from all angles.

Byrne, fair enough you hate metalcore, I couldn't care less. But your reasons for hating it are bizarre. "overly rhythmic focus, generic nature, typically whinny vocals, intentional appeal to simpletons with angst etc"? What the hell are you on about.

All music has rhythm. How does metalcore have more rhythmic focus than thrash for instance? Also metalcore tends to have more growly/screamy vocals than "whinny", and your "intentional appeal to simpletons with angst" comment could be directed at any style of metal, or punk, or hardcore. Same with the "generic nature" comment.



And Disharmonia, your recommendations suck and your arguments are stupid. By your logic, a painter doesn't really have many options either because all he has to use is

a brush
some paint

"Theres only so much one can do." :rolleyes:

And as for this:

What I want to see more in metal these days is incorporating more natural elements to bring out the music more, like a backdrop of lightning/thunder/rain/ocean waves with a crushing double guitar riff over it or something. (1 guitar playing higher notes on the neck, one on the lower end)

Fucking lol x 100.
 
I actually believe there's more realizable content in music than painting.

True - music doesn't have to be original. All i'm saying is that music that isn't original is likely to be derivative/generic as a result of too much influence from other bands, rather than being non-original simply because it happens to sound like something else coincidentally.

Why? Because most bands sound like they came up with a few riffs jamming, then shaped it into a song. I prefer a more top-down (holistic) approach - come up with a universal concept, then arrange the parts in detail. This happens in about 0.00001&#37; of bands.
 
Disarmonia_Mundi:

Stop trying so hard to understand why people don't like your fav genre. You'll get it when you get it, imo. To each his own. We can't all enjoy the same shit or there'd be no variety out there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.