I've been listening to the Bathory discography again, just because. As usual there's that bit where my attention drops off a bit - the duo of 'thrash' albums Requiem and Octagon.
Often when I listen to something I'll go and find reviews just to see what other people are saying about the songs on it. Now, since they came out, Requiem and Octagon sound almost identical to me. Apart from the obvious being different songs, there is so much the same. The 'saucepan' snare sound, the muddy sounding basslines and the riffs and tones. To me, they are no different to each other, both in regard to sound and also to quality. Both are probably the two albums I'd leave behind from the discography if i was to be marooned on a desert island.
The thing that puzzles me, though, which I've always been meaning to ask - is why Requiem is generally more 'liked' than Octagon? Even the reviews on these archives as well in many other places too. Both albums don't necessarily generally rank very highly, but there is that profound difference - in terms of public response - to the two albums, where basically Requiem is spoken of more positively - in a relative sense - than Octagon. But what are people hearing that is different between the two when to me they sound pretty much identical? What is the actual difference between the 'meh' Requiem and the universally disliked Octagon? In fact, personally, I'd probably rank Octagon slightly higher because of the Deuce cover, which is for me the only track I moderately like across the two albums. Hoping to hear from people with less 'untrained' ears than mine, because I'm clearly missing something.
_________________
Quote: Dick is fucking big Fuck off shaving pussy
I will please entry anus Oh my god! Give me spicy pussy Pussy is good smell Shit is bad smell
|