Holy fuck that band is awesome
Advertisement
by Cadonica » Wed Oct 07, 2015 7:38 am
by Impaled Nazarene » Wed Oct 07, 2015 7:49 am
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by Impaled Nazarene » Wed Oct 07, 2015 7:53 am
Impaled Nazarene wrote:So i figure i'd do a St. Anger Review
Initial rating: D-
So as seen above i went in with very low expectations and was very much expecting auditory suicide. After spending a day listening to the album i have come to hear that this album is actually less than decent but better than bad. St. Anger demonstrates James Hetfield's and to a much lesser extent Kirk Hammet's rhythm skills, and I will go as far to say that this album demonstrates some of Metallica's best guitar work. The bass in incredibly underrated and i think that people need to get off their Newstead and Burton higher than fucking god horses and appreciate how above average Bob Rock's bass playing is on this album (Granted James wrote everything). The worst part of this album is the drumming. Lars Ulrich should be arrested for his annoying setup nuff said. Now onto the second worst part of the album: The song length the shortest song is 5:14 holy fucking shit everything goes on for too long if the average song length was 4:30 maximum it would be tolerable but it goes on for so long it's annoying. James' vocals aren't completely terrible and have their good moments but overall they seem immature and annoying especially the pronunciation of vowels for fucks sake James you're not Canadian you're from the Bay Area. It's like he took the worst vocals from load and reload especially Memory Remains and decided this was a smart idea to dedicate an album to the horrible pronunciation of vowels. I can enjoy the vocals to an extent.
Pros: Guitars, some vocals, BASS, and no Kirk
Cons: Most vocals, Lars, and song length
Overall ranking: C-
Final thoughts: Time to listen to Lulu
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by Kar-Esseria » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:18 am
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Kar-Esseria wrote:
But- but what is it?
It's basically a bunch of piss babies obsessed with being as obscure anti-christian, low-fi and original as possible even though that means they rip of darkthrone and fail to rip off Mayhem whereas they bash Immortal for not being trve obscure Norwegian metal and by fusing thrash and melodeath into their albums
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Impaled Nazarene wrote:So i figure i'd do a St. Anger Review
Initial rating: D-
So as seen above i went in with very low expectations and was very much expecting auditory suicide. After spending a day listening to the album i have come to hear that this album is actually less than decent but better than bad. St. Anger demonstrates James Hetfield's and to a much lesser extent Kirk Hammet's rhythm skills, and I will go as far to say that this album demonstrates some of Metallica's best guitar work. The bass in incredibly underrated and i think that people need to get off their Newstead and Burton higher than fucking god horses and appreciate how above average Bob Rock's bass playing is on this album (Granted James wrote everything). The worst part of this album is the drumming. Lars Ulrich should be arrested for his annoying setup nuff said. Now onto the second worst part of the album: The song length the shortest song is 5:14 holy fucking shit everything goes on for too long if the average song length was 4:30 maximum it would be tolerable but it goes on for so long it's annoying. James' vocals aren't completely terrible and have their good moments but overall they seem immature and annoying especially the pronunciation of vowels for fucks sake James you're not Canadian you're from the Bay Area. It's like he took the worst vocals from load and reload especially Memory Remains and decided this was a smart idea to dedicate an album to the horrible pronunciation of vowels. I can enjoy the vocals to an extent.
Pros: Guitars, some vocals, BASS, and no Kirk
Cons: Most vocals, Lars, and song length
Overall ranking: C-
Final thoughts: Time to listen to Lulu
Nobody wants to yell at me?
by The republic of Kosh Naranek » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:32 am
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Thrashing Is Our Business...
but but BENEATH THE REMAINS would make a better title!!!
by Cadonica » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:37 am
by The republic of Kosh Naranek » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:39 am
by Hurdegaryp » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:44 am
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.
by Kiaculta » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:48 am
Kar-Esseria wrote:Cadonica wrote:This makes me moist.
In other words, that came in today. I also got Gallowbraid's Ashen Eidolon and Revelation's Salvation Answer today.
The only con in that Slayer box is that there's no cover for the vinyl, except that box.
Ugh, Slayer is so overrated. Even more than Metallica.
Still, that does look kind of cool.
by Cadonica » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:49 am
by Soviet Haaregrad » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:49 am
by The republic of Kosh Naranek » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:50 am
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Chaos AD is good, but Beneath the Remains might be perfect.
Roots is a solid album that practically redefined metal in the 90s/early 2000s.
by Kar-Esseria » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:51 am
Kiaculta wrote:Hurdegaryp wrote:Man, it's been a while since I last listened to that album. Always liked it myself, it has quite a few solid tracks.
I think it's slightly underrated. Like a 7/10. Then again I kind of like Roots too.Kar-Esseria wrote:
Ugh, Slayer is so overrated. Even more than Metallica.
Still, that does look kind of cool.
Wait, you're actually saying Metallica is overrated now?
This is a serious question.
by Kiaculta » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:52 am
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Chaos AD is good, but Beneath the Remains might be perfect.
Roots is a solid album that practically redefined metal in the 90s/early 2000s.
by Kiaculta » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:54 am
Kar-Esseria wrote:What are you guys talking about?Kiaculta wrote:
I think it's slightly underrated. Like a 7/10. Then again I kind of like Roots too.
Wait, you're actually saying Metallica is overrated now?
This is a serious question.
I never disputed that Metallica was overrated, they most definitely are overrated.
But so is just about every popular artist that has ever existed.
Overrated doesn't mean bad, it just means people jerk off to them way too much.
by Hurdegaryp » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:56 am
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.
by Kiaculta » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:57 am
Hurdegaryp wrote:The republic of Kosh Naranek wrote:What about Arise?
First cd of Sepultura I ever got my hands on. A death/thrash classic, that one.Kiaculta wrote:If you can call it a nu-metal album, I call it one of the better releases of that scene.
Well, there are a few Korn influences on Roots. Mind you, 'nu metal' should be considered to be a marketing term instead of a proper description of a musical genre. Many bands branded as such would have been called crossover in the eighties.
by Corrian » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:59 am
Kiaculta wrote:I personally say an overrated band is a band that is usually hailed as very good but in my opinion isn't as good as people say. This has nothing to do with popularity.
by The republic of Kosh Naranek » Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:04 am
Kiaculta wrote:I personally say an overrated band is a band that is usually hailed as very good but in my opinion isn't as good as people say. This has nothing to do with popularity.
by Kar-Esseria » Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:05 am
Kiaculta wrote:Kar-Esseria wrote:What are you guys talking about?
I never disputed that Metallica was overrated, they most definitely are overrated.
But so is just about every popular artist that has ever existed.
Overrated doesn't mean bad, it just means people jerk off to them way too much.
That's a close minded way of thinking. A band is overrated by being popular? Some bands deserve that popularity. Iron Maiden ahem?
I personally say an overrated band is a band that is usually hailed as very good but in my opinion isn't as good as people say. This has nothing to do with popularity.
by Cadonica » Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:05 am
by Kiaculta » Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:05 am
by Kiaculta » Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:06 am
Kar-Esseria wrote:Kiaculta wrote:
That's a close minded way of thinking. A band is overrated by being popular? Some bands deserve that popularity. Iron Maiden ahem?
I personally say an overrated band is a band that is usually hailed as very good but in my opinion isn't as good as people say. This has nothing to do with popularity.
Close, but no banana.
Overrated means they're not as great as many would claim. I don't claim Metallica is "OMG THE GREATEST FUCKING THRASH BAND EVER THEY'RE METAL GODS!!!!!!" or anything like that. That's a fanboy comment on YouTube. I recognize the importance of Metallica in metal, and how good a band they are when they aren't making garbage like St. Anger or mediocrity like Load.
IMO, I actually think Iron Maiden is better and severely underplayed on the radio.
by Cadonica » Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:08 am
Kiaculta wrote:^ I'm interested in knowing.
Kiaculta wrote:I personally say an overrated band is a band that is usually hailed as very good but in my opinion isn't as good as people say. This has nothing to do with popularity.
by Corrian » Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:08 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement