Time for a Name Change?

[Seance]

from being disjointed and immature

to even more disjointed and immature in Morningrise. it's Orchid 2 for most intents and purposes, besides To Bid You Farewell.

MR -> MAYH is their biggest progression, MAYH -> SL is their second biggest (how is this not another stylistic leap?), and it continues with this pattern

 

[Netheral]

LOL

The Mikael Akerfeldt Band

 

[Arjen W.]

Orchid and Moningrise is vastly different, if you only look beyond the obvious aesthetic similarities (vocals, acoustics and production, if I remember correctly). The song writing took a massive leap, in that they went from being disjointed and immature, to the more predictable but structured, "using each riff once before moving on" setup that they had on Morningrise.

And I'll agree that "Still Life" is by no means a carbon copy, and a very nice little album in its own right. It's just that The 'Peth had already found their sound at this point, and weren't going out of their way to progress, like they had in their past. And this is, in my humble opinion, even more obvious on BWP. I'm not saying it is bad, per say, it's just not as interesting or fresh as their earlier outputs.

I don't think Orchid and Morningrise are 'vastly' different, although there is indeed a noticable progression. I don't think the Orchid/Morningrise leap is bigger than the MAYH/Still Life leap. Yes, Opeth found the basis for their new sound on MAYH, but still, I might go as far as to say that Orchid and Morningrise are much more similar than MAYH and Still Life.

I think every album is unique, and that there are no signs that the band is running out of ideas. Anyway, each to his own I guess.

 

[Crimson Velvet]

^
But they are. Objectively.

to even more disjointed and immature in Morningrise. it's Orchid 2 for most intents and purposes, besides To Bid You Farewell.

MR -> MAYH is their biggest progression, MAYH -> SL is their second biggest (how is this not another stylistic leap?), and it continues with this pattern

Morningrise may have a very basic and simple approach to song writing, but at least it is structured. Orchid is not.

And Still Life is basically a mellow version of MAYH. Hardly anything to cry 'genius' over.

 

[Seance]

Morningrise may have a very basic and simple approach to song writing, but at least it is structured. Orchid is not.

how is it anymore structured than Orchid? BRI is a mess and Opeth at rock bottom.

And Still Life is basically a mellow version of MAYH.

hardly. there's a pretty large stylistic difference.

 

[stardrowned]

this thread makes no sense

.

 

[Crimson Velvet]

how is it anymore structured than Orchid? BRI is a mess and Opeth at rock bottom.

BRI is structured much the rest of Morningrise. Why the hell would you single out that track?

Orchid is just a bunch of riffs all over the place. At least there is a system to Morningrise, simple as it may be.

hardly. there's a pretty large stylistic difference.

If you say so.

 

[hibernal_dream]

Is MAYH really a progression from MR at all? Conceptually it is, no doubt, but most other things are simplified and streamlined if anything.

 

[Seance]

BRI is structured much the rest of Morningrise. Why the hell would you single out that track?

because it's a horrible mess.

Orchid is just a bunch of riffs all over the place.

as is Morningrise (once again, see BRI especially)

At least there is a system to Morningrise, simple as it may be.

no, there isn't.

If you say so.

not a hard observation.

Is MAYH really a progression from MR at all? Conceptually it is, no doubt, but most other things are simplified and streamlined if anything.

christ

 

[Crimson Velvet]

because it's a horrible mess.

as is Morningrise (once again, see BRI especially)

no, there isn't.

Congratulations, you have proven to us all that you are an idiot. Even a tinnitus ridden, 80 year old, christian missionary could recognize the structure on that album.

Now, I'm done with you.

 

[Don Corleone]

Is MAYH really a progression from MR at all? Conceptually it is, no doubt, but most other things are simplified and streamlined if anything.

whats wrong with you lately?

 

[coolsnow7]

Actually, I'm a tinnitus ridden, 80 year old, christian missionary, and I can't see the structure on MR.

 

[hibernal_dream]

whats wrong with you lately?

Am I not allowed to pose questions, or is the forum doomed to repetition of existing (and unchallenged) dogma? Christ, I feel like i'm in the book 1984 under the watch of the Thought Police.

 

[Metalstrm]

It is 1984.

 

[Opethian666]

Congratulations, you have proven to us all that you are an idiot. Even a tinnitus ridden, 80 year old, christian missionary could recognize the structure on that album.

Now, I'm done with you.

Then you've just proven that you are even more of an idiot than a tinnitus ridden, 80 year old christian missionary, since you can't even attempt to explain why there is more structure on morningrise than on orchid. If you can't explicitate why you implicitly feel that there is more structure in the songs on morningrise than on the songs on orchid, it means that you have no rational foundation for this idea, and shouldn't even be discussing it, much less insulting people for disagreeing with your unfounded opinion.

 

[Crimson Velvet]

If you morons had bothered to read more than two lines before getting your panties in a bunch, then you would have noticed that I did point out the system behind their song writing on Morningrise. Shall I repeat myself?

Each riffs is used once, then never heard again.

Is it good song writing? No. Is it even worthy of being called writing? By a hair's breath. Is it a system, at least. Yes, and a bloody obvious one. Childlike in its simplicity, but even that didn't stop you people from having it shooting straight over your head. Comical!

 

[Opethian666]

Am I getting this straight? Are you saying that the only musical aspect that you analyse to determine whether an album is "more structured" than another album, is the amount of times riffs are repeated? That must be the most narrow and fallacious interpretation of the word structure that I've ever seen. Of course most if not all of the people that have posted in this thread will have noticed this "system", it's just such a tiny aspect among all the aspects that can be compared between different albums, that most people, including myself, didn't realise that you were actually using this aspect to defend the statement that morningrise is a more structured album than orchid.
Let's first define more structured. Since you can't really measure amounts of structure in this context, that is not what we are talking about here. More structure generally means a more noticeable, clearer structure, one that can be more easily analysed. Clearly, the "system" that you noticed actually works against your statement that morningrise is more structured than orchid, since more repetition leads to a clearer song structure, making morningrise's one riff repeat system cause it to feel more disjointed than orchid, without any clear recognizable parts that return and form the basis of the song. Second of all, because of the one riff repeat system, eliminating the possibility of letting riffs return to heighten atmospheric and melodic coherence, many transitions in songs on morningrise do not work, making it seem as if these songs are actually multiple songs glued together, which can hardly be seen as a gain in structural clarity. The songs on morningrise are also longer in general than the ones on orchid, amplifying the first effect. There is much more to be said about this issue, but from your previous posts, it is clear to me that there is not much to be gained from discussion with you. There is only one thing worse than arrogance alone, and that is arrogance combined with ignorance.

 

[Crimson Velvet]

Am I getting this straight? Are you saying that the only musical aspect that you analyse to determine whether an album is "more structured" than another album, is the amount of times riffs are repeated?

What the hell! I never said anything of the sort.

Of course most if not all of the people that have posted in this thread will have noticed this "system", it's just such a tiny aspect among all the aspects that can be compared between different albums, that most people, including myself, didn't realise that you were actually using this aspect to defend the statement that morningrise is a more structured album than orchid.

I never claimed that Morningrise was well-structured album. I only claimed that it had a system to it, unlike Orchid, which is "a mess".

Clearly, the "system" that you noticed actually works against your statement that morningrise is more structured than orchid, since more repetition leads to a clearer song structure, making morningrise's one riff repeat system cause it to feel more disjointed than orchid, without any clear recognizable parts that return and form the basis of the song.

Wrong, yet again. Repetition, does not equal structure. On Morningrise, there is a clear red line through the songs, although it is not found in actual repetition, but rather their sense of melody. Hardly a good way of doing things, but Opeth never were too good when it came to song writing. Orchid, on the other hand, does not even have this, but rather, disjointed songs, melodies all over the place, lackluster riffs and solos that just don't make sense (so does BRI, but I digress...).

Second of all, because of the one riff repeat system, eliminating the possibility of letting riffs return to heighten atmospheric and melodic coherence, many transitions in songs on morningrise do not work, making it seem as if these songs are actually multiple songs glued together, which can hardly be seen as a gain in structural clarity. The songs on morningrise are also longer in general than the ones on orchid, amplifying the first effect.

Hehe, I agree with this, actually. Like I said, I never tried to elevate Morningrise beyond what it is, I merely said that it showed clear progress from Orchid, which I believe even you should have realized by now, if you could only get over your personal dislike towards me.

There is much more to be said about this issue, but from your previous posts, it is clear to me that there is not much to be gained from discussion with you. There is only one thing worse than arrogance alone, and that is arrogance combined with ignorance.

Indeed. Just to salt the wounds, though, I believe it quite ironic that I am lectured in the art of structuring by a boy who can't structure a single internet forum post.

 

[Opethian666]

What the hell! I never said anything of the sort.

Let me remind you:

The song writing took a massive leap, in that they went from being disjointed and immature, to the more predictable but structured

You clearly state here that Orchid is more disjointed and less structured than Morningrise.

Morningrise may have a very basic and simple approach to song writing, but at least it is structured. Orchid is not.

You clearly state here that Morningrise is structured and Orchid is not.

Congratulations, you have proven to us all that you are an idiot. Even a tinnitus ridden, 80 year old, christian missionary could recognize the structure on that album

After I replied to this, you replied with your comment about the one riff repeat system, while the comment I replied on and my reply itself were based upon the general concept of structure, not just the simple riff repeat aspect you are trying to narrow it down to.

see here:

since you can't even attempt to explain why there is more structure on morningrise than on orchid

To which you replied with the one riff repeat post.

I never claimed that Morningrise was well-structured album. I only claimed that it had a system to it, unlike Orchid, which is "a mess".

You did not simply claim that it had a system to it, you claimed that it was more structured and less disjointed, unless someone else was posting on your account at the time...

Wrong, yet again. Repetition, does not equal structure. On Morningrise, there is a clear red line through the songs, although it is not found in actual repetition, but rather their sense of melody. Hardly a good way of doing things, but Opeth never were too good when it came to song writing. Orchid, on the other hand, does not even have this, but rather, disjointed songs, melodies all over the place, lackluster riffs and solos that just don't make sense (so does BRI, but I digress...).

Repetition is an aspect that contributes to verifiable structure, and I clearly stated that it was only an aspect, I never said it "equalled structure", unlike you, who tried to equal the aspect of your "system" to the global concept of structure, which can be verified from your posts. The clear red line of melodies that match that you claim is present in Morningrise, must be a terribly cut up red line, which is evident by the bad transitions leading to a "multiple songs in one song" feeling one gets when listening to Morningrise, especially present in BRI, and also clearly evident in one transition in Nectar, off the top of my head. These bad transitions, causing disjointedness, are not that clearly evident in Orchid.

Hehe, I agree with this, actually. Like I said, I never tried to elevate Morningrise beyond what it is, I merely said that it showed clear progress from Orchid, which I believe even you should have realized by now, if you could only get over your personal dislike towards me.

I personally like Morningrise better than Orchid, but because of the individual riffs, melodies and atmospheres, and certain transitions that do work. Certainly not because it has better structural coherence, which it does not. I do not have a personal dislike towards you, I'm just in my exam period, I've been lazy throughout the semester, and I have a tendency to act out my stress on people who make themselves an easy target by making statements that can be easily refuted. Perhaps I'm also playing a little bit of an internet forum asshole persona. That does not, however, change the fact that what I post is correct, unless you can show me that I am incorrect.

Indeed. Just to salt the wounds, though, I believe it quite ironic that I am lectured in the art of structuring by a boy who can't structure a single internet forum post.

There is a difference between can and doesn't feel the need to. For these types of short posts, I don't really see how additional paragraphs and spaces would really be needed. Anyway, I wouldn't make too big a deal out of anything I post at this time. I just get enjoyment out of debates about things that don't really matter much at all, since after studying all day things that would seem boring during normal periods do give me satisfaction. I do think however that you cannot defend your point, whether you think it is worthwhile to attempt it, is up to you.

 

[i aint play this]

wow this trainwreck reached four pages