I dunno, I just think the over-specification of genres gets silly sometimes. Saying Sabbath is the first metal band AND the first doom metal band, for instance, just seems odd to me. I like to keep things broad when it comes to genres. Usually my policy with genres is that we don't have to categorize every little influence in a band's sound and then add a dash and another descriptor onto it.

But they really are...

And After finally getting to that track... Lol, I barely hear the dax style singing. I understand what you're talking about, the pentatonic scale in the chorus, but Dax would have done it in more of a wailing kinda way.

We told you, man

Where else? huh? is there any sources on the internet that are remotely reliable? No, nothing! He asked for a description of what grunge was, I found one, nothing more. Marketing term or not, it doesn't matter. All genre names are invented by the media! Punk, metal, rock it was journalists that coined all the terms. And most of the times the musicians don't relate to them. Go do some research yourself before you judge other people.

They are Grunge band, doesn't matter if "metal-heads" like the term or not. "I hate Nirvana, and love AiC, so they can't be Grunge"... Not all bands sound exactly alike. Shining and Deathspell Omega sound completely different, but they are still Black Metal.

Even metallum have them under Grunge: http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Alice_in_Chains/753

It does seem strange to see people call an album like this metal and then try to tag, say, Load and Reload as hard rock. That's not a comment on the quality (I happen to like all three), but it comes off as cognitive dissonance in a bad way.

around 50 listens in at this point, and it's getting better and better. one of those albums (their last one was like this too) where each listen brings something new, a small detail i hadn't noticed before. i guess that's what they call "atmosphere", hey. so glad it didn't disappoint.

I admit wikipedia is helpful in some areas and I use it once in a while as well. But thousand questions are hanging over its quality and reliability. So, I'm one of those persons who like and dislike it for contradictory reasons. Now, I'm asking you a different question. If Alice in Chains were from Maryland or Texas instead of Seattle would you call them 'grunge'?

No, since Grunge is the Seattle scene just like Iron Maiden wouldn't be classified as NWOBHM if they were Swedish.

Hey..... Not that I'm trying to do Tony's job or anything, but wasn't this thread about AIC's newest album?

I would do something if I thought the thread was off topic. We're discussing their genre and the new album is not exactly dubstep, eh?

Oh, okay, just saying.

While on the subject of their genre; am I the only one who gets kind of a country vibe in some of their more mellow numbers? Or am I just crazy?

Yeah, Cantrell told on several occasions that he grew up listening to lot of Country music and it's also a part of their sound.

I don't exactly remember but I've seen somewhere they were described as "The kings of mood metal". "Mood metal", huh! weird but I like that term for AiC.

Nah, both of their acoustic EPs are really heavy on the country side. The ones on the albums don't give me that vibe, but "Brother," "Don't Follow" and "Swing on This" are basically country songs, among others.

Ah, I didn't know that Cantrell had been actively influenced by country music. But..... Yeah, it is kinda obvious when you think about it. So, let's throw another label into the band's genre blender!

Speaking of their newest album, I actually managed to listen to the song 'Hollow' when they released it last year, and that song just flat out sucked. Today I listened to the song 'Stone' but for some reason that song never really got to me. It was dull, boring, and just sucked all together. Maybe I should just cross off The Devil Put the Dinosaurs Here off my lists of albums I want to get during the summer.

I personally like those songs the least on the new album. And I don't like Hollow at all... But I like some of the other songs.

I'm going to get massacred for this, but does anyone else think that the way the two triceratop skulls are arranged on the cover make the very centre look a bit like a four-horned Jester Head?

I do. :3

I need to get through this a time or two more first but my early impressions are it's AIC, it's very good, and it jams well bleeding my ears in the car.

Read through the thread.

First of all, I would like to say that I always took more to the modern sounds, the oldest bands I have in my library being Meshuggah and Katatonia, both from 1987. That being said, Alice in Chains was always a band I had a curious enjoyment for. Probably the only band that my father ever offered to me that I took a significant liking to. Which is not to say that old stuff is bad; it just doesn't click with me, you know? Different generation, I guess. Alice in Chains' recent material in particular is definitely rocking my socks off every time I treat myself to it.

But anyway, I see this little debate that we're having on their genre: noticed the remarkable reluctance some of you seem to have in labelling them as anything related to doom metal. For that, I have a question:

What if Alice in Chains is a doom metal band? Certainly on the stoner/sludge side of things, and certainly retaining that almost-traditional heavy metal flavour that allows them to appeal to "underground" metalheads and more mainstream listeners alike. But why not? I listen to all these songs they've been releasing lately, like "A Looking in View", "Hollow", and "Stone", with their slow tempos, thick, massive sound, and brooding, ominous temperament, and while I admit that it's weird for me too, I am forced to nod and think, "This is doom metal. Or at least, 'doom metal', 'sludge metal', and/or 'stoner metal' are among several legitimate labels you can apply to it, along with 'heavy metal' and 'grunge' (if the latter is understood to be a genre and not a scene)."

Yeah... why not?

...

What? Why are you torturing yourself dude? See a therapist.

To clarify, it is not that I am deliberately avoiding older acts. It just so happens that I never got into anything older than that, sans Alice in Chains. Not to sound pretentious or anything, but I think I have relatively good taste when it comes to the more modern stuff.

What an amazing album! Phantom Limb and the title track are definetily the darkest and heaviest songs the band has ever made, really haunting stuff. Maybe BGWTB was darker and heavier, but this album it's totally on par with it in terms of quality. The only thing I don't really enjoy is Duvall being too low on the mix and not having the same importance he had in the previous album... I mean, he shared vocals with Jerry in an equal way, and he was the lead singer in some of the tracks (Acid Bubble, Last of my Kind, etc.), but on this, I think Jerry clearly took over the main vocals, which is kinda disappointing; anyway, this album gets better and better with each sping, and it's very consistent (maybe a little too long).
And one more thing: maybe it's the leak, but I think the production it's weak compared to BGWTB, don't you agree? And there are certain things I don't like in the sound, like when Hollow ends and Pretty Done starts, it seems like a completely different sound... but again, maybe it's the leak.

I really do wish DuVall had more room to breathe on this record, he's got a great voice. He's much more powerful than Jerry. Not to say I don't like Jerry's vocals, I just think he should let DuVall in on the action.

I kind of agree with that. But one should definitely mention "Acid Bubble". It's their doomiest offering so far.

Personally, I don't prefer one over the other. William is surely more about raw power, yes, but Jerry has a great talent for vocal hooks and melodies. Hell, just listen to Your Decision from BGWTB and you'll see what I'm talking about. I do agree that DuVall's abilities should be more exploited though.

First of all, if you look at their band page on this site, you'll see that Alice in Chains formed in 1987 (1984 if you consider their glam band Diamond Lie). In fact, Alice in Chains' debut came out before Katatonia's or Meshuggah's. Just thought I'd clarify.

Second, I do think Alice in Chains have some doomy songs, but I don't think you can pigeonhole the band into one particular genre or another. It would be a disservice to their sound to do so. Songs like "A Looking in View" and "Frogs" (to pick a song that exemplifies doom from the two eras of Alice in Chains) certainly can be classified as doom; then if you take "Man in the Box" and "Lesson Learned" (again, picking a song from each era to stress a point), you see they most definitely are not a full-out doom metal band.

Overall, Alice in Chains jump around genres, playing songs that sound sludgey, doomy, alternative, country, bluesy, or just plain old rock n' roll-y, or heavy metal-y.

great album. Played it numerous times since friday. My fave song's the titletrack btw - quite hypnotic chorus.

I thought AiC were the new alternative rock sound for the 90s, I need a goatee and a bottle of Zima to enjoy this

And the Jaws of Life to remove your head from your ass.

I absolutely agree. I'd just like to hear his talents put to better use. The only thing they've really lacked since Layne passed away are those moments where Layne would just put every ounce of breath into a line. Like Man In The Box, and I think DuVall can fill that void with no problem.

Just got my copy today and am halfway through listening to it now. Stone, Voices, and the title track are immediately great and I can definitely get behind the doomier sound of it. It doesn't seem like this will top Black Gives Way To Blue but I'll definitely give it some more time to develop.

I like it. It's easily the most accessible work they've ever done though (well maybe the first two albums were very accessible too...), with a bright, warm sound and lots of catchy choruses, and the production I wish was a tad dirtier and muddier than it is. But it's got a lot of cool songs and no straight up filler like on some of their albums. The second half seems like it's better on first spin, with "Phantom Limb" and "Hung on a Hook" being prolly my initial favorite songs.

Just about through with my first listen, and this album is definitely on par with it's predecessor. I really like the band's moodier, "wavy" sounding tracks, and this album has a good bit of those types of songs.

I have to say, it's great to read a thread about Alice in Chains without a bunch of people bitching about how the band continued on without Layne. I think the new album is great, possibly even better than BGWTB. I'm glad Jerry's vocals are front and center on most of the tracks, I'm a huge fan of his solo work and feel he's very underrated as a vocalist. Standout tracks so far are the title track, "Voices", "Phantom Limb" and "Scalpel".

People bitch about the band continuing without Layne?

haha, pick ANY of their videos on youtube and read the first comment. the % of them that don't mention staley in one way or another is pretty small.

still loving the album. even ordered a copy of it to show my support (i don't buy CDs anymore), so hopefully this fucking thing charts and the whole LMFAO crowd have to put up with AIC for a few weeks. that's the most teenage thing i've written on the net in a while.

Great title!

I still remember everyone bitching from about 2005 to 2008. Yeah, Black Gives Way To Blue more or less shut them all up for good

Not amazing as Black Gives Way to Blue, but this is a solid effort. I honestly believe that the people who say AiC shouldn't continue without Layne aren't actual fans of the band. Jerry IS AiC.

Only just listened to it for the first time in full, but right now it's not doing much for me, Lab Monkey and Hung on a Hook aside. A lot of moments that skirt the lines of excessive self-awareness, and pretty safely performed on a whole. Nothing remotely bad, but like the previous one, standard reunion-fodder.