Although I think that Katorz is a good album, it is overly simplistic compared to their classics. Honestly, I don't see why some tend to think that Nothingface is so 'overbearing' or 'technical.' It's a fairly accessible if somewhat complex album to my ears, and a masterpiece in every regard.

Looking over the other stuff he's reviewed, I get the feeling this guy consumes a lot of basic, entry-level material and little else.

Nice.

A bit like that review from some time ago, where the reviewer gave a 100% and concluded the review with the statement that the band in question "never fails to disappoint".

Even though I rather appreciate it someone else besides me is listening to the Czech band Minority Sound, this reviewer made me chuckle quite a bit.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... /eagle_dan

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/P ... LastSavior

-The plural of "solo" is not "soli".
-Writing in general is fragmented
-Randomly capitalized words (Genre, CD-Player).
-The meaning of of the word goosebumps immediately makes me think of the books when it's capitalized.

"Soli" is a possible plural in German, so that's probably where that mistake came from.

I corrected it and the capitalization issues. Not sure if it should be nuked or not, let's see what Derigin (he approved it) has to say.

Subrick, I loved reading that AoaA review, but that second paragraph had me begging for a paragraph break in the middle of it.

I honestly wasn't a big fan of it. I think it ironically had an awful lot of the tough guy shtick that he was rallying against, plus it kind of perpetuates the whole stereotype of "not metal = not good" that MA gets pegged with a lot. Not rejectable, obviously, but personal quibbles I had with it.

I was gonna do a line break in there, but I couldn't find a good place to do it in without unnaturally breaking the tone of the review.

Also, for those that haven't read it yet:

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... 65/Subrick

This is probably the first and last time I will ask for assistance but I really do need some sort of critical analysis of a recent review of mine: http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/G ... 3/zeingard.

Does it seem too robotic? I've been deliberately avoiding exaggeration and hyperbole but I feel like I've gone too far in the other direction and lost all humanity in what I write.

Just want people to weigh in with their opinion. No chance I will return to being a terrible Ultraboris rip-off but I'd like to get an idea of what people enjoy to read so I can keep that in mind for my next few reviews.

I prefer that tone, zeingard. If the writer is actually witty like Acrobat, it's a perfectly fine way to write, but approach such as yours is desirable for most writers.

Out of all of those AoaA Dark Days reviews I will ahve to say Subrick's was my favorite. Plus there is a "Heil Honey, I"m home" Reference, how could I not like the review?

Why thank you. I think that review is my most BastardHead influenced review, right down to quoting a section of lyrics.

The newest Dimmu review is pretty much a step-by-step guide on how to write a review that's acceptable, but also 100% guaranteed to make me hate it and maybe even you as a result. I've never heard Abrahadabra, but the reviewer just lays into a few negative stereotypes that drive me up the wall. Taking a clearly symphonic album and then complaining that there are too many symphonic elements is like complaining that the drumming is too fast on any death metal record. Saying they suck because they're louder than the guitars is like complaining that you can't hear the straight 8th note rhythms under the melodies in an Iron Maiden song. And then there's this awesome passage:



It's like he realized midway through his review that all the cool kids wouldn't take him seriously if he had anything good to say about post SPD Dimmu Borgir so he had to backpedal. My least favorite kind of review is the kind with awful reasoning behind the opinion, but are well written and descriptive enough to not be rejected.

Someone named RonPaul2012 is pissing you off by being technically acceptable but terrible despite that? Nah, I never would've guessed that!

That's probably the worst reason to dislike something I've ever heard. "It's a good song, but it's by a band I don't like, therefore it sucks".

He thinks that HHIH is bad? That's how I could not like it!

Heil Honey, I'm Home is incredibly unfunny and gets old very quickly. There are a couple so bad it's good moments in the show but most of the time it's just really stupid.

I'd like to commend BastardHead on his review for W.A.S.P.'s The Crimson Idol. Totally nailed it, man (unlike your Think This review ).

I might have to review that album at some point, it's a noticeable step-down from The Headless Children.

I disagree, ANA. The Headless Children is great on its own (the titletrack by itself is worth the album's purchase, if you ask me), but The Crimson Idol, as stated by BH, has an emotional scope which is yet to be matched in a metal context. That, coupled with the fact that it retains all of the heaviness and darkness of its predecessor (plus the step up in the songwriting department) makes it the better album.

Emotional scope = the "wah, wah wah... being a rockstar is soooooo difficult, Jonathan is actually me!" from Blackie "I'm a real artiste now, I've ditched the codpiece, too!" Lawless. Combined with not enough W.A.S.P rocking (and the lead guitarist not being half as good as Chris Holmes) and too many ballads makes it a considerably flawed, if still enjoyable, album. Plus, it's got that Operation: Shitecrime "must serve The Concept" thing going on.

Unsurprisingly, the rocking songs 'Chainsaw Charlie' ( ) and 'Doktor Roktor' are the best

Disagree again (and also disagree on Operation: Mindcrime being crap), but hey, I love The Wall, so it's no surprise that I also adore TCI. But yeah, Chainsaw Charlie is infinitely badass

I actually agree with Acrobat. I've always tried to see what is so brilliant about The Crimson Idol, and I do think it's pretty good - but just not nearly WASP's best work. It's got too many ballads and not every song is really very memorable. "Chainsaw Charlie" is great, as is the title track, but you also get stuff like "The Gypsy Meets the Boy" and "Doctor Rockter"...yeah.

The Crimson Idol is basically Blackie's elaborate homage to The Who's Quadrophenia, and it probably helps matters that that's not my favourite album from The 'oo either.

Despite adoring all the previous WASP albums for their balls out rock n roll attitude, I don't mind all the ballads here. I often allude to this notion that I don't like ballads, since they're usually my least favorite songs on any given album, but I really think the abundance of them works to the album's advantage here. It keeps the mood consistently bleak and downtrodden, and The Crimson Idol is all about mood. I love how everything comes together.

The Headless Children is probably a better mixture of hard rocking fun and darker moments, but I love how this one just went off the deep end in one direction. I really think it worked beautifully.

And thanks XL, I knew I could win you back <3

You never lost me, BH. We just had a bit of a disagreement But thou art forgiven!

The best WASP album is The Last Command. That is just a pinnacle of kick ass riffs, irreverent attitude and hooky as shit choruses.

I like slow, moody stuff, but the ballads on Idol just make it feel really sappy to me rather than the darkness I feel like I'm supposed to be getting. Just doesn't click for me really.

What kills the album from being one of the top 5 WASP albums for me is the mediocre drumming. The drummer is playing practically the exact same patterns for every song, and it gets boring. Rest of the music rules, though.

This is exactly how I would describe Into the Electric Circus.

That's how I described it as well, in part. I ended up preferring it after reviewing it, and even considered it better than Crimson Idol in terms of immediate listening experience. BH, will you review anymore WASP stuff? I want to continue mine, but having read some of them again I recall how over-enthused I was at the time.

Probably not. I leave for Basic in March and I have no idea when I'll be able to review again with any regularity, so I'm pretty much trying to knock out the big important stuff while I have time. Which basically means I've been working feverishly on that sixteen part Running Wild series I've been talking about for like four years.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... ingEdge133

I suppose it's nice for fairness' sake to have a well-written negative The Chasm review, but I really don't buy many of its arguments. What'd everyone else think?

Apart from being a bit repetitive I tend to agree with the sentiment, as well as with most of the points being made. One of my best friends is raving mad about The Chasm and we have intense discussions on why I can't seem to like them, given that we have a similar taste in metal and all.

What don't you buy about my arguments? I couldn't have possibly been more clear about my objections to the album and The Chasm as a whole. Is it that you want specific examples or something? I stated in my review why I thought this would be pointless, because all I would have to do is pick any random riff from the album practically and it would serve my argument (because the whole album follows the same formula, which is described in my review). I wasn't out to convince The Chasm fans to convert and come to the dark side with me, this is just simply how I feel about their style. I really.... REALLY dislike it. The Chasm has virtually nothing I look for in a death metal band and several things I specifically DO NOT EVER (there may be one or two exceptions) want in my death metal. It's just that simple.

It's nice to have a dissenting opinion on that album in particular, which is a bit overrated on this site, but I still don't agree with anything you said there, personally. The Chasm aren't going for brutal and dark, they are going for epic and transcendental - a journey via music, if you will. That's what all of their albums are like...not really trying to satisfy death metal's quotient for brutal or dark or whatever. I think they're really good at what they do and don't find any of their stuff too long, bloated, boring or anything like that.

And that's kind of the entire point. I don't like or want "epic" or "transcendental" in my death metal. Perhaps they weren't aiming for brutal or dark, and they most god damn certainly didn't hit either of those.... even remotely. The band plays light death metal.... this is not good. Shouldn't death metal be at least a LITTLE bit brutal and/or heavy? I mean it's fucking death metal. Even if you say no to that, it still doesn't change the fact that I DO want that in my death metal and they don't have it, so like I said, they don't have what I look for in death metal.

Edit: Also, the lacking of brutal and dark in their music is only one of several problems I highlighted. The lyrics/vocals issue is just as big of a problem for me, and I spent a great deal of the review pointing out and defending this.

I don't really see The Chasm as normal DM at all. I'd actually lump them in more with epic metal than anything. It's certainly not light conceptually or songwriting-wise; it's just not dark, which is an important distinction to make. The feeling I get from their music is epic and triumphant and singular, like many bands in the epic heavy metal subgenre. They're very Morbid Angel-influenced, but also very Maiden/Manilla Road influenced. They're a unique band.

So not really death metal-y at all then? Sounds like they are a USPM band to me.

Sure, I kind of pointed this out in my closing paragraph. I agree. But unique != good.

I don't think you can really lump them into one genre because they take in influence from several. Not trying to be all highbrow and claim that they're artistic because of it, but they are what they are. They take death metal and do it up with epic metal songwriting. And yeah unique doesn't mean good, never said it did, but to me they are good, so not much more to be said there.