Song writing approach

[AmirH]

After reading the Opeth thread in general discussion, it got me to thinking about Mikaels songwriting approach. Very few people deny that Opeth have talent, but a consistent complaint is that the songs sound pieced together. No surprise then, that they are. But then I wondered if Opeth would really be Opeth without the sloppy arrangements. Their riffs are wonderfully written to be sure, but would they be as good if Mike started writing songs as a whole? Here's your chance to discuss the biggest controversy in Opeth's music. Does the riff piecing approach make Opeth stand out as a unique and unpredictable band, or does it simply mean they're bad song writers? You decide!

 

[Esoterik]

Their song writing technique makes the music very unpredictable and interesting to listen to in a world of oversaturated verse chorus verse chorus bridge chorus ending bands. Even though each song is pieced together, all of their songs have a great flow to them and a certain mood. Their songwriting techique is definetly a strength, not a weakness.

 

[The Black Canvas]

I think they have really good songwriting. Some of the riffs might repeat a little much but it still sounds really good, and Opeth do have a lot of talent!

 

[Ermz]

I hate to break the mood here, but almost all metal bands piece their music together. Almost every band uses Pro Tools and record riff-by-riff, until they have their arrangements set out. There is nothing unique about Opeth in the respect that they riff-patch. Speaking of which, it was only noticeable to a great degree on the first two albums. After MAYH their songs boasted more standardized structures, so I don't see where the complaint is coming from in the first place.

Songs as a whole? How exactly do you write a song as a whole? I know the human mind is only capable of working on one thing at a time. Ever after the first two albums, there HAS been more focus on the songs as a whole, especially going with the concept albums, which quite obviously neccessitate that the songs be conceputalized along with composed as a whole. The fact that their music may at times be unpredictable, does not in any way suggest that there was no vision of the song as a whole.

Actually going with song structure tightness, you see what happens when Opeth try to go overly standard. You get Deliverance. You get an album that makes sense structurally, yet can bore the living shit out of someone because it's so repetitive and bland. The more standardized Opeth get, the worse their music will get... it's as simple as that. All a band has going for them is their uniqueness, and the more they conform to what people want, the more stagnant they will get and thus the people who criticised Opeth for their riff-piecing will in turn criticise them for being boring. It's a vicious circle, but it needs to be said that a majority of fans are fucking morons and don't know what they want from music.

 

[MightyA]

I think Metallica was inspired to make St. Anger after listening to Opeth's first two albums.

 

[AmirH]

I hate to break the mood here, but almost all metal bands piece their music together. Almost every band uses Pro Tools and record riff-by-riff, until they have their arrangements set out. There is nothing unique about Opeth in the respect that they riff-patch. Speaking of which, it was only noticeable to a great degree on the first two albums. After MAYH their songs boasted more standardized structures, so I don't see where the complaint is coming from in the first place.

Songs as a whole? How exactly do you write a song as a whole? I know the human mind is only capable of working on one thing at a time. Ever after the first two albums, there HAS been more focus on the songs as a whole, especially going with the concept albums, which quite obviously neccessitate that the songs be conceputalized along with composed as a whole. The fact that their music may at times be unpredictable, does not in any way suggest that there was no vision of the song as a whole.

Actually going with song structure tightness, you see what happens when Opeth try to go overly standard. You get Deliverance. You get an album that makes sense structurally, yet can bore the living shit out of someone because it's so repetitive and bland. The more standardized Opeth get, the worse their music will get... it's as simple as that. All a band has going for them is their uniqueness, and the more they conform to what people want, the more stagnant they will get and thus the people who criticised Opeth for their riff-piecing will in turn criticise them for being boring. It's a vicious circle, but it needs to be said that a majority of fans are fucking morons and don't know what they want from music.

Here good sir is where I read the complaints.

http://ultimatemetal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=147789&page=1

The metal-archives link given in that thread as well.
And thank you for not giving another fan-boy response by the way. "I think they're awesome!" Yeah, that tells us a lot...

 

[Ermz]

Thanks alot, I might go and involve myself a bit.

 

[Demilich]

I think that people who would dismiss Opeth as bad song members should consider this: songwriting is an art form, artists are free to express themselves as they want. Opeth's form of expression, especially in the beginning, the more wandering, "unstructured" form of song, is expressive of what they want their music to be: a journey in music from one place to another, not like most songs. This is how their songwriting makes sense to me, even on Orchid and Morningrise. I have never had a problem with the flow on these albums, the stops/starts in the songs seem logically placed to me. Call me crazy...

 

[MightyA]

^Just like Metallica on St. Anger.

 

[Evil Ernie]

You talk about "sloppy arrangements". I don't think the word sloppy is appropriated. Opeth has always been about being unpredictable, and I don't think that's making their arrangements sloppy at all. That said, the first two albums contained more abrupt transitions and I think the presence of Steven Wilson (please don't turn this tread in a SW flaming thread you fuckheads) aded a lot of fluidity to their work. Sometimes they get so fluid that you just don't notice how unconvetional it is.

 

[jaykeegan]

I think Metallica was inspired to make St. Anger after listening to Opeth's first two albums.

Such a dick.

 

[Demilich]

Hmm... maybe some of the Opeth-obsessed people around here would benefit from the kick in the face provided by that General Discussion thread and the Metal Archives thread linked to from that. We may not have to agree with them, but it'd be good for some of the people around here to realize that they aren't the be-all-end-all best band in the world, they may be to you, but not everyone shares this opinion. Their music isn't for everyone, this isn't necessarily because it's better or worse, but because it's different.

^
Just like Metallica on St. Anger!

 

[Episteme]

Well. I'm not too sure what writing a song as awhole means...but I kinda gather that you mean writing down the whole structure and arrangement of the song and writing riffs that work with the structure. So in a way, the skeleton is planned and the organs just need to be added in...that's what I see it as...

Either way, even if Opeth cut and paste their music...I really don't care because the music sounds fine to me and I like it. The thing with Opeth haters, there are just as many of them as the number of Opeth fanboys, no matter how good your arguement is they will always hate it and resort to lame comeback like "sleep metal" etc type of crap. There's no point arguing really.

I don't see any fault in Opeth myself, except the number of fans who worship the band as if they're gods.

 

[Nico]

All in the name of atmosphere. The choppy structure of the first two albums essentialy emphasises each section and riff. Down the line, that emphasis disapears due to the nature of the production and the smoothness of the songs/albums. Not so much in MAYH or Still Life, but definitly in the later works. Still Life still reigns as the strongest album, as it retains a semi-chaotic structure, as well as superbly composed riffs and definitly the complete feel.

 

[JoeVice]

You talk about "sloppy arrangements". I don't think the word sloppy is appropriated. Opeth has always been about being unpredictable, and I don't think that's making their arrangements sloppy at all. That said, the first two albums contained more abrupt transitions and I think the presence of Steven Wilson (please don't turn this tread in a SW flaming thread you fuckheads) aded a lot of fluidity to their work. Sometimes they get so fluid that you just don't notice how unconvetional it is.

Agreed on the transition deal...i don't know if SW was all responsible for that, but i'm sure he was a bit...

The smooth transitions in their latest albums tend to turn a ten minute song into what seems like a 5 minute song.

 

[NonBoxed]

is it so wrong to move towards a more structured song type? could it be just good songwriting... it would be good songwriting if they didnt do the SW appraoch of same riff but different overdub for 5 minutes.

as a songwriter myself, i know its really easy to piece together a riff collage that dont really go together. the hard part is piecing together a riff collage (becasuse honestly, thats what progressive metal of this type really is) that flows nicely and really conveys the emotions, rather than just having an acoustic break just for the hell of it, because it is an acoustic break.

on the acoustic break clicheness arguments.. the whole blackwater park album comes to mind where they do it just for the hell of it, when they dont really need to... especailly the song blackwater park.. then one moment on deliverance where they actually needed it... in wreath, after the fast solo but before the sort of call and response "closure to bleak matters" section... that part is like the eye of a storm... you just got done being destroyed by a brutal solo, the eye passes over and that riff is so calm.. then the overdubbed growls come in for extra brutallity and it really is amazing.

on blackwater park it seems like they just went... hmm, lets do.... an acoustic break! like on songs like bleak, and even the one on leper.. the only songs where the acoustic breaks really belong are dirge and drapery falls. in those songs they are the great set up part in dirge, and play the main emotion-conveying verses in drapery.. the songwriting in drapery is probably their best on bwp, it definitely has its structure, but maintains variety fairly well (except during the russian riff... blah)

but yeah, moonlapse has definitely picked up on something with the acoustic breaks are cliche.

 

[Ermz]

Yeah definately it seems as if at times they would say 'yeah, we'll put an acoustic break here because yknow... we're Opeth, and that's what we do'. I mean with the acoustic/electric patching from the early albums they seem to have set themselves a linear formula which they need to adhere to just because they are Opeth.

 

[Demilich]

I think I posted this same kind of idea in another thread just a couple of days ago, saying that this is what separates the first 4 albums from BWP and Deliverance for me. The last two are the ones where it feels to me like SOME OF the soft parts are thrown in because it's Opeth and not because they're needed for the dynamic of the song. I still like those last two albums, but it just feels like some of the inspiration and creativity dropped off. Hopefully it was just them getting lazy and #8 will be a stunning return to form... or lack of form, if you will.

Edit:
Actually, I'm listening to Leper Affinity right now for the first time in a while, and loving it... just compare it as an opener to a song like The Moor... the difference in emotion and dynamics is incredible.

 

[hibernal_dream]

It is not the 18th century anymore, where music that was not based on a structural form was deemed inferior. Opeth doesn't write songs, they write parts of songs. Each riff is like a song in itself, but for publicity's sake they feel the need to bunch them into inappropriate 10+ minute segments. But who says music needs to flow to have any worth? We have been through thousands of years of developing and exploring music. After all this suddenly music has to have structure and flow? Opeth has always been a band built on ideas, creativity and emotion and not musicianship. So yes, the random chaotic element is what makes this band distinctive - this does not lessen the music's value.

 

[AmirH]

It is not the 18th century anymore, where music that was not based on a structural form was deemed inferior. Opeth doesn't write songs, they write parts of songs. Each riff is like a song in itself, but for publicity's sake they feel the need to bunch them into inappropriate 10+ minute segments. But who says music needs to flow to have any worth? We have been through thousands of years of developing and exploring music. After all this suddenly music has to have structure and flow? Opeth has always been a band built on ideas, creativity and emotion and not musicianship. So yes, the random chaotic element is what makes this band distinctive - this does not lessen the music's value.

Haha, I like that. You're right Y'know. Too many theory-heads in these forums.