The Thread Where You Talk About Music You Like

[DarkBliss]

I guess I didn't get the joke in a timely manner
Well, here's a belated HAHA to show I care. And a
:
Two even. I'm too generous.

 

[Manic Ferocity]

I'd have to admit that disliking Dimmu Borgir is kind of trendwhorish, unless you're able to adeptly explain what it is that you dislike about their music. Of course, those individuals who can't, may simply echo the criticism of others, or conveniently adopt the negative view of people whose taste they admire.

Cythraul basically summed it up for me but I don't think every band I dislike is deserving of an explanation.

 

[Einherjar86]

am i allowed to hate them for racial reasons

Fucking humans.

 

[DarkBliss]

@OI: No, course not. It's just nice to hear a reason that doesn't consist of the all too familiar adjectives and adverbs that can be applied to any band.

You know, something new and creative- like unendurably askew in both horizontal and vertical narrative structure. Needlessly elaborate? Meaningless? Perhaps,but it's more entertaining to read than "gay, shit, sucky, fag art of death and cheesy" on every internet corner. Borrrrring!

Nah, I'm just kidding. Call it whatever you want.

 

[Zephyrus]

First of all, lyrics are a part of the music. Secondly, as I've already said, it depends on one's own personal values. The image that a band portrays for themselves represents how they intend people to see and to judge them. If bands didn't think that image mattered, they wouldn't bother having an image, would they? I think that immediately says enough to support the argument that image can matter. Also, more generally, the more knowledge that you have of a band, the band members, the way that they think and act, etc., the more informed you are regarding their music, which may expose you to things in the music itself that you weren't aware of before, which may or may not be a good thing.

Thank you. I now understand your mindset. Luckily for me, if a band's image/lyrics prove distasteful, I'm able to ignore it. But as you say, a better image/lyrical presentation "can" affect the experience, well for me it can only enhance it rather than potentially detract from it.

 

[Thoth-Amon]

Thank you. I now understand your mindset. Luckily for me, if a band's image/lyrics prove distasteful, I'm able to ignore it. But as you say, a better image/lyrical presentation "can" affect the experience, well for me it can only enhance it rather than potentially detract from it.

si senior

 

[skeptik]

I highly doubt that neither of you have ever heard an album and then either read the lyrics or saw a band photo or read something about the band and thought even ever so slightly less of them afterward, even if it was subconsciously.

 

[Zephyrus]

I'll take Anorexia Nervosa for example. Their image is retarded goth crap, but their music is top-notch symphonic black metal. I think no less of them, even with all the lipstick and bondage whips.

 

[Thoth-Amon]

I highly doubt that neither of you have ever heard an album and then either read the lyrics or saw a band photo or read something about the band and thought even ever so slightly less of them afterward, even if it was subconsciously.

i totally agree actually... when i was first getting into metal and i saw all of these 'evil' looking slayer shirts i was like "fuck that looks awesome! i need to hear this band!" and low and behold it was.
on the other hand when i started looking at Marduk albums i was like "fuck that looks awesome!" and then after i listened to it i was like "fuck... that was disappointing!"
i mean i can enjoy deicide even though glen's lyrics are bordering on retarded... so yeah image and lyrics can have an effect or influence but its possilbe to enjoy the music solely for its own sake also

 

[zabu of nΩd]

I highly doubt that neither of you have ever heard an album and then either read the lyrics or saw a band photo or read something about the band and thought even ever so slightly less of them afterward, even if it was subconsciously.

That's happened to me a lot, but never enough to drastically alter my enjoyment of a band's music.

 

[Omni]

It's no surprise that image doesn't deter you from liking a band, since the fact that they make horrible music doesn't stop you either.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Ooh, you got me there.

But seriously, if a band's image is critical to their listeners' enjoyment, that's not a very good statement about their songwriting, is it?

 

[Omni]

I never said it was critical to the listeners' enjoyment. I just said that I wouldn't expect it to deter someone who enjoys terrible music.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

That was more of a general comment, not really directed at you.

Anyway, Dimmu had a great sense of melody in the '90s, and EDT has a ton of memorable songs. They're mediocre-to-terrible in the 2000s, but I can still like them without having to acknowledge the newer albums.

 

[Alter]

I'll take Anorexia Nervosa for example. Their image is retarded goth crap, but their music is top-notch symphonic black metal. I think no less of them, even with all the lipstick and bondage whips.

Bondage whips are fucking metal.

 

[Zephyrus]

I'd say it's very rare for extreme metal songs to stick in one's head as well as many of theirs do. They're mediocre-to-terrible in the 2000s, but I can still like them without having to acknowledge the newer albums.

tisk-tisk.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Okay, nevermind the blanket generalisation. One thing that does seem to differentiate DB from most black metal, though, is the more conventional song structure. Because of this, they don't really have the 'black metal ambience', which may be why a lot of purists give them shit (well, not the only reason, but a major one). Of course, that may be a positive for me, since they seem to 'rock' more than orthodox BM because of the clearer beats.

Just a thought. It'd be nice to hear from the DB critics here what specifically it is about the music they don't like. There really hasn't been anything pointed out so far besides the lyrics.

 

[Omni]

I already specifically stated that I don't like how they've clearly deliberately made their music more palatable and accessible over time, how terrible the vocals are and the way the metal parts of their songs are generally extremely simplistic and have to hide behind the symphonic parts. I've never even read any of their lyrics.

 

[Thoth-Amon]

Okay, nevermind the blanket generalisation. One thing that does seem to differentiate DB from most black metal, though, is the more conventional song structure. Because of this, they don't really have the 'black metal ambience', which may be why a lot of purists give them shit (well, not the only reason, but a major one). Of course, that may be a positive for me, since they seem to 'rock' more than orthodox BM because of the clearer beats.

Just a thought. It'd be nice to hear from the DB critics here what specifically it is about the music they don't like. There really hasn't been anything pointed out so far besides the lyrics.

DB may have 'more conventional' song structures than some other BM bands but in the grand scale of things its way more unorthodox than say pop music... not too mention there are plenty of great and classic bands who's song structures are even simpler and more conventional than DB.

 

[DarkBliss]

The way I see it, the reason why Dimmu Borgir are so disliked is because the managed to piss off true BM fans by popularizing one of the most inaccessible genres in extreme metal, turning it into something shallow that anyone with tolerance for extreme vocals can pick up and enjoy.