Sounds like you're a bit biased and have had this opinion of them before they started putting out records. That's fine, and you're entitled to that, but saying their only talent lies in their guitars is baffling. I've seen them a couple times and Jake's voice is flawless live. Maybe it's been a few years, or you've just been unlucky in the sets that you've seen, but I have never heard anyone make any complaint about his talent as a live singer.

And "the riffs and songs don't go anywhere" is an insane argument for this kind of music. This isn't prog, it's straightforward heavy metal. Riffs don't need to evolve, and songs don't need to meander and throw curveballs. The riffs are badass, the choruses are catchy: that's literally all that matters in this style.

Well songwriting still matters. It's the difference between mid to late-era Iced Earth and something like Maiden's classic period, the progression and fluidity of songs, how they hold your interest, etc.

This is what I'm talking about. It's not like a song needs a million riffs to be exciting, but if they're not that special to begin with, they can't really carry a song over several repeats. The same goes for the vocals. Even if they sound good tonally, they can't really carry choruses as long as they're employing.

To the other point, there may be some personal bias from my history with them, but I did see them as recently as a few months ago. I'll admit that the vocal performance was better this time, but it only lead to making the shortcomings of the drums and bass more obvious where I hadn't paid as much attention before. Maybe I'm expecting too much, but even the bar is set lower for some listeners that are chomping at the bit for more of this style, I still don't see Visigoth as "the new leaders of heavy metal" or whatever they're being heralded as. What does it do that their idols didn't do a whole lot better? Nothing that I can discern. That's not to say that something has to be wildly original to be good, I enjoy plenty of music that sits within the confines of its genre, but they have have some conviction and do at least something to make it their own. That's what it seems like is missing, that they're too busy "playing by the rules" to really define themselves. Again, I'm perfectly open to being wrong if I'm missing something, but I really can't figure out what the hype is about.

So far as I can tell it just comes down to disagreement on the quality of the songwriting, really. You think the riffs and vocals are uninteresting and can't carry the songs, most of the people posting in this thread disagree. Neither viewpoint is "missing" anything. That being said, I don't think anyone here views them as the second coming of heavy metal - just an enjoyable newer band.

The good old "riffs and/or songs don't go nowhere", a phrase so overused that just sounds like "I don't know what else to say, I just don't like this, fuck you".
The music is not just going where you want it to go, that's it.

Me neither. Listened to that latest album a couple of times and it did nothing for me.

No "fuck you" involved, I just don't hear any of the energy, flow, or excitement that I enjoy from classic heavy metal, or even other retro acts like Metalucifer and October 31. It just seems like a case of style over substance to my ears, that they're so focused on embodying that epic metal Omen/Manilla Road type of sound that they forgot to put their own mark or vigor on it. The fact that the internet loses its shit every time Jake Rogers farts makes me think that I'm listening to a different band than everyone else. I read the descriptions that you're all throwing out about them and think "that sounds great on paper, but I don't think it applies to this band". Hopefully that clarifies what I'm getting at, I know I'm not great at stating my opinion.

A guy doesn't like the band; big fucking deal. Dio forbid people have any differing opinions or anything in a music forum People sometimes simply don't like stuff. No need to make a thesis about why you don't love X band or release to justify your dislike.

With that said, I think the album's great. Follows the steps of The Revenant King, though in a much more compact format I enjoy a fair bit more. Some songs in the debut were more than a little trudging for their own good, and that doesn't seem to be the case here, so I'm super happy. Gonna be spinning this a lot in the weeks to come.

People sure do get testy when anyone makes any slight critique of this band.

My post was not intended to defend this band or attack anyone, It was more a general comment in regards to the "X going nowhere" argument pretty common in musical criticism and reviews. I just find it empty and vague, like, it could mean anything.

True enough, but this guy seemed to explain his rationale well enough to where it wasn't some trollish kind of complaint. I'm listening to the album again now and it's definitely good, but I can see how people would find it very generic and standard in a lot of ways.

"Outlive Them All" and "Hammerforged" are really fucking good songs - I like that they're dialing back the excess a bit here and showing they know how to write shorter, more straight-up metal tunes. Speaks well to their variety. I think they've got a bright future.

I think these guys are better as a straightforward rocking band, as "Salt City" shows, I'll be honest.

Yeah, it's kind of bizarre, really. I love the band and stuff, but people are allowed to like what they like.

I've noticed. I thought the Gallowbraid EP was decent, but it seems like any dissenting opinion of any of Jake's bands really gets under people's skin. He almost always performs well instrumentally, especially since he's handling multiple instruments on his own in some cases, but all of his bands seem like a pale imitation of something else to me. Most people compare Gallowbraid to Agalloch, but I hear more Falkenbach in their sound. Still, I don't hear anything to go nuts about, same with the Venom/Motorhead worship of Befouler or the Summoning worship of Caladan Brood, and yet these bands seem to inspire insanely strong feelings in people where I feel nothing. I guess I would rather just hear the originals...

Personally I think where the band succeeds is the songwriting, but maybe it's just a right place, right time thing. Lets be real, most metal bands aren't churning out riffs we haven't heard before, especially in retro styles, it's all how it comes together. Maybe I just heard it when I was really wanting to listen to some trad stuff and I didn't realize it . I listen to so much metal that I find quite boring and faceless, sometimes to the point where I question if I even like the genre anymore, but this album was instantly enjoyable to me, and I think it's really down to the arrangements. I think the placement of the leads and especially the vocal arrangements and delivery really make this album. You can tell the lyrics were written with the songs in mind, which I find most metal bands really suck at (ie: trying to fit too many or too few syllables into a line, no care for a consistent rhythm or delivery during verses, lending a haphazard and unmemorable experience). Take the "I vomit and spit upon your name" line from Traitor's Gate. You can really feel the venom in his voice, and the point where it's delivered just feels very deliberate and well placed.

Just some thoughts. Emp is right though, people stan for this band so hard it's embarassing. I can't remember who it was, but someone was trying to aha! him a while back when he mentioned he didn't like the vocals that much by bringing up other bands he likes and it's just like wtf. Liking music isn't always objective and logical, lol. It's just about what it makes us feel.

It's easy to see why people like them - they're simple, clear songwriters and dabble in influences from Jag Panzer, Omen, Manilla Road, etc but make it very streamlined and accessible. They're entertaining and have a shitload of energy. They're basically a sort of palatable standard for the genre and do everything well enough to stand out.



Exactly, yeah. Thinking all music has to be judged by one standard is kind of limiting. You make opinions on a case by case basis all the time and there are so many variables that will strike you different ways, so it's weird that people would be so baffled as to "discrepancies" in taste... it's all just random and you never know what you'll like. For me the mark of a truly great band is if I can't stop playing it, and Visigoth just haven't had an album I've wanted to play over and over yet. I've been much more enamored with the new Saxon this year, for example... but that isn't to say this is a bad album; it's still good. Just not the best ever, etc.

The album is pretty ok, but there are lots of better stuff out there. Traitor's Gate is a monstersong though.
Most of the stuff sounds like a mixture of Twisted Tower Dire, Grand Magus and Falconer.

I still don't get it, and I'm not hearing this "energy" that you guys are talking about, but to each their own I guess. Good conversation though, thanks for contributing.

Yeah, I don't think there isn't really anything to "get" here. Most clear cut case of different strokes for different folks I've seen here in a while.

Got it today. On first listen sounds better than the first album. Nothing new but enjoyable.

I don't really get the super-hype for Visigoth. I am going to echo the words of Empyreal and say that the vocalist is the real killer for me..."too grandiose and over-the-top dramatic". The band is super tight musically, good riffs, fantastic fat guitar tone, but still seems to fall a bit short. I actually find their debut to be a bit more palatable. I think the longer songs leave less time for vocals which I like better, plus I think the vocal delivery was a bit more raw...less layered and dramatic. The Revanant King I can let play and get through it, but Conqueror's Oath I fond myself skipping songs after 2 rounds of verse/chorus/verse/chorus. I can definitely see why people dig it but I don't see them as the saviors of heavy metal like it seems some people do.

So far the new record is good but I"m not sure what kind of staying power it will have. Its not sticking that much with me.

Late to the party, I gave this a chance as there was a lot of talk about the album and the band lately and I wanted to hear for myself.

I was not blown away but this is very enjoyable heavy metal. It straddles the line between good ol' hard rocking heavy metal of the early 80s with the big, catchy choruses and true epic heavy metal. I think the Falconer reference someone made earlier is spot on in some songs.

I find the vocals fine for the songs, not out of this world by any means, in fact I am missing some kind of distinctive quality in the timbre, that would immediately make a big difference. But the man is using what he has to the fullest. And the layering of vocals in the choruses works very well.

But to the point, if I had bought this I would spend a lot of time spinning it and perhaps it would grow on me. As it is, Steel and Silver, Traitor's Gate and to a lesser extent Conqueror's Oath stood out immediately. Not the other songs were bad, they are fine, they do not overstay their welcome and the album flows like a breeze on a warm summer's night. Maybe they are growers but after a couple of listens, I have now put the aforementioned songs (esp. the two) on repeat. Fucking great songs. I don't see why anyone wouldn't like them, esp. someone who likes this kind of music.

So, not a masterpiece by my tastes but a very good album with a couple of exceptional songs.

Visigoth is not a groundbreaking band, but I enjoy them pretty well. The Revenant King grew on me, and I like this one somewhat more. I do find them fairly energetic and while the vocalist is not typical, his approach is nevertheless to my satisfaction. The rhythm section is nothing special, but they are not hurting the music either. Frankly, I usually forget that they are mediocre, they are, "hidden," quite well and are not asked to do too much to carry the music. Overall, Conqueror's Oath is my favorite album that I have heard so far this year though last year had a few albums that I preferred, so I expect them to slide a little as the year progresses.

Still album of the year for me. Gonna take something massive to shake it.

How funny, I just listened to the album in full yesterday for the first time since the week it came out. It really is a great record and perfect for summer. Still hoping for a tour since they haven't done one in three years.

I was wondering how you compare it to the first one. I saw the earlier posts but I would be interested to see the comparison now, after a few months.

This record fell out of rotation very quickly. Just didn't feel it. A big step down from the debut.

Took until page three but finally in the last comment someone shares my opinion that this album is not as good as the debut. I know the popular opinion is that the songs on the debut were too long and they needed editing, and most people seemed to appreciate that they were going for shorter, more direct tunes this time, but fuck me, I loved the long tracks on the debut. I guess someone did say earlier, not a wasted minute (well, I would argue that the Manilla Road cover is the low point of the album - it's a great song of course and a fine enough cover, but the stylistic shift from the originals was significant enough to make the center-album placement a bit questionable).

Anyway, this album just hasn't stuck with me as much as the debut, for whatever reason. Maybe it'll take more attentive listens or just wind up being a grower, or maybe not, but I'm having trouble remembering more than 4-5 parts of the album while the whole of the debut is wedged pretty deep in my brain. Still a great album, I just wish it were greater.

Also: why can't this band have cooler shirts? I honestly haven't really liked either of their albums' cover images very much and their standard shirts are pretty dull. Their 2018 European tour shirts look really cool though. They should make normal shirts like that!

Both albums have their strengths and weaknesses and both are good. The debut had a couple of doom passages that were pretty cool, but also had a touch of bloat here and there. Nothing can beat that chorus of "Iron Brotherhood" though.

https://www.indiemerch.com/metalbladerecords/item/55440 - I thought this was a pretty cool shirt.

agree on all fronts that the album is a tad weaker than the debut, and maybe even the EP. Oath is much more focused on lead guitar and faster riffs, and I don't think it suits their strengths. i.e the most memorable parts of the songs are the more epic/slower moments (HAIIIIL THE COOOOMEEING OF THE CONKOROR, etc). All the songs are still really good in their own right, but I like this band best when they slow it down and let the riffs hit a bit harder. Little here lives up to unforgettable tracks like Mammoth Rider and Blood Sacrifice or fucking Arcane Mists of Prophecy.

also where is the fucking US tour??!?!?

Oh, forgot to mention re: Jake's singing voice: I really like it. It never once came across as over the top or melodramatic to me. Something about that lower register just makes it feel a lot more down to earth than the higher pitched wailing that's in a lot of other trad metal (not that I dislike that kind of thing, mind). There's just something...familiar and comfortable about his voice that I really dig. I think the band would be much worse off with a different style of vocals.

It's an incredibly warm and powerful voice. Really drives forward the fantasy songs in an epic way. His singing is 10/10 to me, and definitely the biggest strength of the band.

I like his style and his performance very much and it suits the music perfectly. But it's not the most special of voices, his timbre is rather unspectacular. That's not his fault obviously but in such a meat and potatoes band a unique voice really makes a difference.

I haven't heard the debut carefully and the reason I asked the question is that the people I asked about in Greece were really split down the middle regarding which of the two is the best. No middle ground whatsoever too.

I like it how Vic always informs us how an album has been received by the great metal nation of Greece.

It's hard to say whether I prefer the debut or Conqueror's Oath at this point. They share the issue of having a couple of weaker tracks towards the back, but while the debut's weaker songs dragged on longer, they weren't quite as pedestrian as Blades in the Night. Salt City is fine as a song but so different from the rest of the album that it ends up being kind of jarring, moreso than the Necropolis cover was on the debut IMO. There's plenty enough good stuff on both records to enjoy them all the way through, though, and I think I'll end up liking both about the same amount.

Conqueror's Oath has grown on me a bit, but I still prefer The Revenant King. I agree that both albums are weaker toward the end, but I think the highs on The Revenant King are better than the highs on Conqueror's Oath. Choruses on songs like the title track, Blood Sacrifice, Mammoth Rider, etc. are massive and I'm still singing along every time after who knows how many listens.

Ι hope you say that unironically! But yeah, I am always fascinated by the various differences in perception or reception of albums in different places and cultures.

I'm still spinning Traitor's Gate daily. I can't get bored of that chorus.

Hey, I've been to Up the Hammers! I've seen you Greeks at concerts all over Europe! It is a great heavy metal nation. I'm interested in it, too, each scene perhaps has its own favourites and so on. Might be interesting to do a thread about it, actually.

That would be a cool thread, do it!

I like the album, though I prefer the debut by far.
I usually skip to track 3 when I play it. The first two songs don't really do much for me. After that, it's all good IMO.
Still need to see 'em live someday.