Ah! Thanks! That was a pretty spur of the moment "it's 2am and I can't sleep" review, and I think I still can't precisely put into words what it is about those songs that I like so much, but I'm glad somebody else appreciated and understood whatever the hell I'm trying to say, haha.

Ever heard of Spotify?

And yeah, the thing really runs together for me. The riffs barely sound distinct from each other. You yourself say it's amongst your favourites, which means you'll have absolutely no chance of even hearing what I hear. I don't really like the album that much and the guitar sound makes it a lot worse than it could have been.

Playing devil's advocate here, but listening to an album on Spotify doesn't involve "spinning" anything.

EDIT: Also, why would you blow €12 on an album that you don't even really like, "just to have it"? That's your hard-earned cash, man. Don't blow it on shit that you feel obligated to own just because everybody else thinks it's good.

Some albums just have that "magic" that makes them great and you just can't put your finger on why. That Hoth album is one of those albums. I have a feeling it will be in my top ten this year.

But well-liked albums tend to have decent trade/resale value so it's not like there's no way he can get something he likes for it. This is why I never really considered buying albums a "risk". Even if it's shit you can trade it for something cool.

On topic: I'm liking this guy's reviews: http://www.metal-archives.com/users/Felix%201666

Covers some cool stuff and has good insights.

Yeah, but that usually involves either waiting around until you find somebody interested (which can be difficult for something in as heavy supply as a Suffocation album), or swallowing your pride and trading it into a store for half of the original price's worth of credit. LeMiserable is obviously listening to the albums he buys before he does so (as any sensible person in 2014 should unless they're feeling super-adventurous), so why shouldn't he save his money for things that he doesn't feel the need to complain about? I dunno; personally, if I have any sort of glaring complaint about an album that hinders my enjoyment of it, I won't pay more than $5 for it. I don't have the money to go around paying full price for things I'll hardly listen to because a better version of them exists.

Eh, if I put a first press CD of Effigy of the Forgotten on MA's trading board, it probably wouldn't stay that long. By the way, I don't download before I buy... it spoils a lot of the fun. I might sample a couple of songs to see if I like it, but not the whole album. Also, I still do plenty of blind purchases because as I said I can usually find a trade for it.

It sounds weird, but as overrated as I find it, I really, really wanted to have it. I can not explain you why, but I just did.

Acrobat is a dreaded oldnoob, he probably prefers his music to be etched into a clay pot and thinks album art is best when painted on a cave wall.

In LeMis's defense, I tend to use spun/spinning interchangeably with listened/listening, but that was still worded confusingly. And it doesn't really matter whether or not I like the album or not, it doesn't change the fact that "Reincrimation" has a much thrashier vibe than "Infecting the Crypts". If it runs together for you, whatever, but I find that incredible to not pick up on all the different ideas at play in that album. The review also seems to have too high of a score for the writing, but the score isn't really important so I don't care but it does kinda seem like you're making concessions because you're afraid of pissing off people who love the album.

And yeah, why buy an album you already know you don't like? "Man I've had this coffee like 20-30 times this month and it's always sucked, but I think I'll get it again"

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Patrons_of_the_Rotting_Gate/The_Rose_Coil/387700/cunt_destroyer666/341210

The second I saw the score, I knew exactly how the review would go. Not that there is anything wrong with the actual writing (its ok). I just cant stand this opinion. The entire four paragraph review basically says "too modern, not old school enough" as though all Metal should be judged on the strength of its influences.

And it is not even an original opinion. .. you cant escape this nonsense even here.

Why is half of the first paragraph dedicated to a bonus track, which isn't even a part of the album per se? And can someone please explain to me what the fuck is "post-metal noodling"?!

That review leaves me very, very confused.

I don't know, it was ok for me. I haven't listened to those guys, so maye that has to do with the review's impact on me. What I did not like was that line where he said that "Battle of Chamdo" was the crowning part of a musical catasthrope, but I couldn't care less.

Whenever I see a "0" score on something by either a notorious low score giver or a newcomer, my first inclination is to listen to the album with an expectation of it being decent or mediocre. In the case of "The Rose Coil", I think it's actually a half-decent attempt to merge a post-black metal sound with a modern death metal character. I may end up reviewing it just to give readers a clearer perspective on how the album actually sounds.

I wouldn't call Coloured Sands a "musical catastrophe", but it was a pretty damn boring, uninteresting album, and Battle of Chamdo was the best song by about 42 miles on there. A musical catastrophe would be Lulu, or certain songs on the 90s Overkill albums.

As for his review, it reeks of just hating something modern because it's modern. The writing is fine, but the opinion is insufferable.

Whats with the hate for For All Tid all of a sudden?, i love that album

Why don't you like what I like??

It's because Dimmu Borgir are one of the worst things man has created and tried to call metal.

Also that Patrons of the Rotting Gate album - how is it that they made a cover of Gorguts' "Battle of Chamdo" that soon after the Gorguts album came out? What the hell?

That album is complete shit. I even dig Enthrone Darkness Triumphant and get some kicks out of Puritanical Euphoric Misanthropia and Death Cult Armageddon, but the debut is a bumbling disaster. It is almost like a bad joke. I can sorta see why people dig the first iteration of Stormblast, but For all tid is horrendous.

Ahhh the Dimmu Borgir hate. That's some funny shit really. For All Tid is not a perfect album but it's not complete shit, either. The worst moment is "Over bleknede blåner til dommedag." Who the fuck told Aldrahn his clean vocals were good?? However, the album has some good moments.

As for Dimmu being the worst thing in metal, etc? Come on. You can't tell me that most of Enthrone Darkness Triumphant is not fucking spot on metal. "King of the Carnival Creation" from Puritanical is a fucking beast of a song. Stormblast (original version) has some great moments. Spiritual Black Dimensions is another with some great moments on it. Deathcult is kick ass. There were even some moments on In Sorte Diaboli that were really good. I just think it's cool to bash Dimmu Borgir but in actuality they have some really good if not great things going on in most of their albums.

Honestly, I thought Abrahadabrabrablablaskibadeedooda had some nice cuts, namely the band-titled track, Ritualist (I'm a sucker for Snowy Shaw's vocals), Chess with the Abyss, and Endings and Continuations (woohoo Garm!) Felt a lot more focused than SBD, PEM and most of ISD.

Yeah, "Dimmu Borgir" is a good song. The rest is complete throwaway, though.

Death Cult Armageddon is bloated, but honestly the best post-Enthrone Darkness Triumphant album. Some killer riff-driven songs like "Cataclysm Children" and "Lepers Among Us" alongside balanced epics like "Allehelgens Død I Helveds Rike."

In Sorte Diaboli was a horrible failed experiment, with very little to see again.

Stormblast MMV really strikes a chord with me. The production values are beastly, as are the downtuned riffs. Totally blows away the original version of the album.

Shoutout to dystopia4 for his Jenovavirus review a few months back (I only read it recently, I'm slow). He's got a bit of a reputation for being dry but this review is as purple as the ass end of a rainbow and describes absolutely everything that makes this bizarre demo so good. This line in particular:



Is just the most apt description of any style of vocal I'd ever heard. I was planning on reviewing this but god damn there's nothing I could say that he didn't already say better.

I'm normally not a big fan of brutal DM/that vocal style, but that was pretty cool. Thanks for bringing it up.

I also just-realized that he has-four, count em, FOUR, hyphenated-words in that one-sentence!

Eh, looking back the first two were probably unnecessary so I guess I'll change them (I'm constantly fucking up grammar and misspelling, always have to proofread my reviews). Anyway, thanks for the shout out!

Also, I totally think you should review it, too.

Sometimes I don't notice or realise whose review I'm reading, when I'm just scrolling down a longer list of reviews. I commend hells_unicorn for beginning most of his reviews in a way that immediately make clear that they're written by someone who has very little of worth to say, which helps me not to waste time reading further to make that conclusion.

Thanks Metantoine for what I'd consider an accurate review of the new Pallbearer.

When the first album came out, I heard a lot of praise and comparisons to Warning which prompted me to snag a copy asap. The only epic thing about the experience was my disappointment. Maybe I was too excited and my expectations were unrealistic, but if it had brought me even half the satisfaction of a Warning or 40 Watt Sun album I would've been quite pleased.

Haha, thanks, fuck these hipster neckbeard trendhoppers.

.

I'm with Tony on this one Pallbearer is doing nothing for me...but will give it some time.

Heh, yeah well the interesting abstraction regarding his stance on conventional wisdom is that he generally seems to follow popular opinion. If anything, he is quite lenient a reviewer if one takes scoring standards into account.

The only thing that really, truly rubs me the wrong way with him is his repeated insistence on shoving his "esteemed" status as a guitar teacher and musician into many of his reviews. It just reeks of pretension and is almost universally unnecessary to prove 'X' point. Going on some lengthy harangue, or diatribe, or whatever revolving around some perceived musical theory hamartia is rarely fun for the reader, no matter how grammatically eloquent it may be.

While we're at it, can we all agree that Loss are boring as shit and basically Pallbearer for extreme doom and also vastly overrated?

Yes, indeed we can!

And this is precisely why your review sucked. No offense dude, but reviews that do almost nothing but bitch about the band and it's fans for stupid reasons (also known as a lot of BastardHead reviews) is just weaksauce. I don't like the band, or the album, but your review told me nothing and was just poor.
As for Loss, yes they suck as much as Pallbearer.

I haven't actually heard Pallbearer, but unless the band is actually made up of a bunch of jackasses who look down on metal and yet simultaneously make a form of it anyway, reviews bitching about the "hipster" aspect are pretty useless. Tony admits in the first paragraph the review was spawned from the Pitchfork comments regarding the band as the future of doom - not a good sign there, man.

The "for fans of" part made me chuckle.

I'm going to have to agree with Necroticism174 and Empyreal here. I haven't heard the band, but the review just comes off to me as a knee jerk reaction to "hipsters" without really thinking it through. The musical description can be summed up as "repetitive and boring riffs". In addition, the criticism of the cover art at the end of the first paragraph seems really unnecessary.

She’s ridden to the Sabbath… She’s made love to the Devil… She is a witch!

Best possible opening to that first review for the Death Penalty album. Made me grin.

Mumford & Sons.

Even though I'm a fan of Pallbearer's debut, I can easily understand (and am even starting to relate to) the majority Tony's qualms, particularly the band's seeming inability to be dark. Even though I like the music, there's precious little sense of either sorrow or extinction. I'm not a doom purist at all, I just like what's good and the fashion of the performers is immaterial, so the hipster comparison/catch-all buzz-slander is irrelevant. However, once one's eyes are shut the music is all that's left, and it isn't dark. It's "emotional," (and borderline at that) but in the interview I watched, it was claimed that their main theme was dealing with grief. Well, I just don't see it. There's an album with some depth and distance to the production, but as far as grief or catharsis or loss or sorrow or extinction, even as a fan I can't account for the apparent lack of those elements. While some allowances are afforded a debut to be a bit rocky or even shallow, I can't say I'm disturbed by Zodi and Tony's low scores. Unnerved, maybe. Or perhaps even the sobering chill that occurs when a doleful prophecy comes true. I've had what I can only call "an intuitive sense" that the sophomore would be a disappointment. Or at least more of the same. They are just not good enough to be more of the same.

Also, I don't mind Tony's comment on the cover art, either. There's no reason to leave art direction out of a review. That's like saying plating and presentation is irrelevant in a food review. Just because you can't download food doesn't mean all that matters is how it tastes.

I saw them live, enjoyed myself, and yeah they look like "hipsters." But for me, that doesn't make their music worse. They apparently are doing fine on that score irrespective of the state of their beards. I'll definitely give it a spin or three, but I'm not expecting much, and may offer a review of my own to follow.

I think both the Pallbearer reviews up right now are pretty poor, and they're from two writers who are normally very good. There's a ton of knee-jerk IT'S NOT ACTUALLY METAL IT'S INDIE HIPSTERS DONNING METAL CLOTHES alarmism that was (and still is) so rampant with Deafheaven. I mean, Zodi calling them a post-rock band that borrows metal aesthetics is just demonstrably stupid*. I'm still on my first listen through, but there's been like, one or two purely atmospheric clean parts amidst 90% heavily fuzzed out (albeit boring and lame) doomy/stonery chugs. I mean yeah, I get the influence is there (a band like Gifts from Enola does this same kind of thing much better (though they focus like 90% on the delaydelaydealy and reverby bing bong leads and only put riffs in like twice per album)), but it's so far off the mark to peg that as some sort of affront to what doom stands for.

Basically Zodi's review is one of his patented "the album is lazy so my review is lazy but it's okay because symbolism" reviews and Metantoine's is "A band I don't like plays a style I do like but a fanbase I don't like does like it so I don't like this band extra hard because the people I don't like now like something similar to what I like and they think it's what the style is like but it isn't and like that's stupid because you don't like this style when you only like one shitty band and like like like like hipster". You can both do way better.


EDIT: * - Okay, as the album goes on, this part gets less stupid, but it's still hyperbolic and I still think the review is lazy.