Aww... photoshop's lens flare? Come on Dave, this is too amateur for Megadeth. The clip is okay.

Written by Guest on 12.04.2013 at 02:58
No one got her post because she said that a photo could not be considered as an album artwork. The only thing I could see that caused confusion is that AS suggested that the term "artwork" in this context is a subjective thing, which it isn't. Anything that appears on an album is a form of artwork. If you ask me the problem here was with no one but AS for not saying outright and simply that the album was not artistically pleasing.

Geez... I did not actually say the photo couldn't be considered as an album artwork, not even in my initial post. My error, was using the word "artwork" instead of "art", it's as simple as that. As what constitutes "art" is at least to a degree, subjective. That an album cover is "cover artwork", is a fact, regardless of the artistic merit of the artwork. Even Marcel himself said that it was only original art "because of the way it was used", and that a normal photo is a piece of art "given the right context". So in actual fact, his opinion on the subject was no different from mine. Lord_Regnier was able to read between the lines, and recognised the point I was making, though I have admitted that it was my fault that others got the wrong idea about what I was getting at. I've acknowledged that I was mostly to blame for the misunderstanding (and a misunderstanding is exactly what it was), and now that I've explained myself, that should be an end to it.

Megadeth going with down-tuned guitars on this sample track...interesting.

That opening riff sounded like something I've heard before (not necessarily from Megadeth. In fact, I'm sure I've heard it from some other band). Early thoughts is that this album, like the last few Megadeth albums, is gonna have one or two good songs and the other nine or 10 will be filler.

Written by Angelic Storm on 12.04.2013 at 04:24


Geez... I did not actually say the photo couldn't be considered as an album artwork, not even in my initial post. My error, was using the word "artwork" instead of "art", it's as simple as that. As what constitutes "art" is at least to a degree, subjective. That an album cover is "cover artwork", is a fact, regardless of the artistic merit of the artwork. Even Marcel himself said that it was only original art "because of the way it was used", and that a normal photo is a piece of art "given the right context". So in actual fact, his opinion on the subject was no different from mine. Lord_Regnier was able to read between the lines, and recognised the point I was making, though I have admitted that it was my fault that others got the wrong idea about what I was getting at. I've acknowledged that I was mostly to blame for the misunderstanding (and a misunderstanding is exactly what it was), and now that I've explained myself, that should be an end to it.

Well I can only take people at what they write. "album artwork" is practically the de facto expression for what appears on the album cover so why you suddenly confuse that term to me is a mystery. And as for Lord Regnier getting what you meant straight away, his initial statement of "for example, I could take a photograph but I can't make a painting." shows to me that he didn't understand the points at hand at all.

Written by Guest on 12.04.2013 at 12:38
Well I can only take people at what they write. "album artwork" is practically the de facto expression for what appears on the album cover so why you suddenly confuse that term to me is a mystery. And as for Lord Regnier getting what you meant straight away, his initial statement of "for example, I could take a photograph but I can't make a painting." shows to me that he didn't understand the points at hand at all.

Except that I never used the exact term "album artwork" in my initial post. So I'm not confusing the term, seeing as I never actually used it. And in my very next post, I said that a photo can be album artwork. So if you're taking me at what I wrote, then you made an error of judgement, just as much as I did.

As for your second point, Marcel himself said that a "normal photo" could be considered a piece of art "given the right context". Whereas you seem to be saying that any photo is automatically classed as art (I apologise if I've misread you). If that is what you're saying, why did you not take issue with Marcel? And if that isn't what you're saying, why have a problem with what Lord Regnier said? I can understand that issue to a certain extent, as anyone can make a painting. However, being able to create a good painting, is a different matter entirely. A piece of art can be completely devoid of artistic merit, but still be a piece of art. That is something I would not argue is the case.

At the risk of going terribly off topic, I remember there being a great deal of furore in the art world a few years ago, when a man won the Turner Prize for an empty room where the lights simply went off and on. There was a lot of debate at the time over whether that could even be considered art, and by people much more well versed in the arts than me. But yet it still won a very prestigious prize in the art world. And I've seen similar debates over things such as an untidy bedroom being displayed as art. Even in the world of the arts, there is much debate over what is and what isn't art.

Quote:
I'm assuming you mean right at the back of the collider, if you look closely, you can see Vic? It does sort of resemble Vic I grant you, but if you take a look at the original photo that was used for this artwork, that exactly same pattern is there. It's a mere coincidence that the pattern in the back of the photo resembles Vic, it unfortunately wasn't purposely put there by whoever doctored the image.

It's clearly Vic Rattlehead at the back, you can see the staples on his mouth. Look for a higher res picture.

The audio sounds decent, maybe he just settled for some more straight-forward stuff instead of trying to make the new best Megadeth album, but I'll have to wait and hear what his take on southern rock/blues sounds like.

Written by Medievalman on 13.04.2013 at 00:26
It's clearly Vic Rattlehead at the back, you can see the staples on his mouth. Look for a higher res picture.

The audio sounds decent, maybe he just settled for some more straight-forward stuff instead of trying to make the new best Megadeth album, but I'll have to wait and hear what his take on southern rock/blues sounds like.

If you look at the original, undoctored photo that was used for the cover, that exact same Vic shaped pattern is there at the back. It's not Vic, though it's a funny coincidence that it does sort of resemble him. I'm amazed nobody involved with the artwork didn't notice that, and put Vic in that spot. All they would have needed to do is add a bit of extra detail to what is already there.

Well, even if we're talking about more straight-forward Megadeth, there has been some great songs of that type for Megadeth in the past, such as "The Scorpion", "Reckoning Day", or "Die Dead Enough". So it's not so much the type of song, rather than the new audio clip sounding pedestrian and dull. Of course, it would be wrong to jump to conclusions about the whole album just based on that one short clip, but it certainly doesn't raise expectations, that's for sure. Apparently David Ellefson said some of the new material sounded like stuff from "Killing Is My Business"... I highly doubt that is the case, though it would be awesome if it was true! I remember my expectations for "United Abominations" were very high after they released "Sleepwalker" a few weeks before that album's release, and was left a bit disappointed when I heard the whole album. My expectations for the new album are low, but hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised by it.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.04.2013 at 15:34

Written by Angelic Storm on 11.04.2013 at 15:25

Why is it always the usual suspects that descend on my posts like a pack of hungry hyenas? With Mr. Doctor in particular being a smartass. :p

I didn't say that a photograph can't be art, I was just misinterpreted.

Why people attack you on this is because of what you said...

Quote:

(I think it's actually a photo, rather than an actual artwork)

Then ytou clearly don't understand the concept of what makes something art. Because a normal photo is an actual piece of art as well given the right context. According to your reasoning none of the Dutch Golden Age painters made art. Like The Nightwatch by Rembrandt. That was a commission piece just like a group photograph is currently.

storm......

1. I completely agree with you regarding the artwork and the music on "the system has failed"

2. don't sweat the annoying criticism over a casual internet post. i appreciate your input on the site as well as your pleasant nature.

if it wasn't for the picky fools on this site i would probably have written mote reviews and shared more of my thoughts. i would think staff members would encourage feedback and maybe choose a different tone to challenge a members comments.

p.s. i wish death on the next person that thinks a band is incorrectly categorized (post metal, alt metal, metal core, industrial metal , nu metal, doom metal, progressive metal, etc.). shut up and stop being a pussy.......it doesn't fucking matter.

p.s.s. i hope i mispelled something in hear that some nerd that lives in his mom's basement picks up on and needs to post about and correct.

Written by bloodface on 14.04.2013 at 10:34
storm......

1. I completely agree with you regarding the artwork and the music on "the system has failed"

2. don't sweat the annoying criticism over a casual internet post. i appreciate your input on the site as well as your pleasant nature.

The irony of that album having cover artwork which closely resembled Ed Repka's style of art, certainly wasn't lost on me. Whilst it wasn't a full on return to the glory days of the band's sound (1985-1990), it certainly is the closest that Dave has come to recapturing the attitude and spirit that Megadeth had in those days. If anything, it sounds like the album they should have followed Rust In Peace with. As it shows progression, and more melodic sensibilities, but not at the expense of the macabre edge and aggression that the first 4 albums had. I actually like quite a bit of Megadeth's "sold out era" (1992-1999) stuff, but the band had definitely lost some of it's mojo during that time, and "The World Needs A Hero" just sounded like a half-hearted attempt at a "return to the roots" to me.

About the criticism, I don't really want to comment further on that.

Have we spoken before? I don't recognise your user name... did you once have a different user name? Because I definitely haven't spoken to a member called bloodface before. I thank you for your kind words though, it's appreciated.

Quote:
The irony of that album having cover artwork which closely resembled Ed Repka's style of art, certainly wasn't lost on me. Whilst it wasn't a full on return to the glory days of the band's sound (1985-1990), it certainly is the closest that Dave has come to recapturing the attitude and spirit that Megadeth had in those days. If anything, it sounds like the album they should have followed Rust In Peace with. As it shows progression, and more melodic sensibilities, but not at the expense of the macabre edge and aggression that the first 4 albums had. I actually like quite a bit of Megadeth's "sold out era" (1992-1999) stuff, but the band had definitely lost some of it's mojo during that time, and "The World Needs A Hero" just sounded like a half-hearted attempt at a "return to the roots" to me.

About the criticism, I don't really want to comment further on that.

Have we spoken before? I don't recognise your user name... did you once have a different user name? Because I definitely haven't spoken to a member called bloodface before. I thank you for your kind words though, it's appreciated.

i was on previously, but my account died after being off for a while and i couldn't get it resuscitated. whoever shows as the reviewer for testaments "the gathering", twisted sisters "stay hungry", judas priests "defenders of the faith" and anthrax's "the greater of two evils" is me.

it's nice that there are tons of record stores here in chicago, but the annoying elitist pricks that work in them kill me. they need to lighten up and listen to van halen, but the perception of the music they are listening to is more important to them than the music they listen to. i always found that metal was less judgmental.....the fans are generally less snotty. i could go to a testament show and see older people (like me) and younger people / men and women / someone with a dokken shirt and someone else with a burzum shirt......metal can be corporate darlings (motley crue), recent indie success stories (mastodon) or a darker more underground band like mayhem (i am pretty sure someone without a life will chime in and say that mayhem is not underground and that they only like their first release.....we all know that generally you give yourself crediblity if you say you only like a bands early work even if you don't know what you are talking about).

when i see a staff members and seasoned users copping a snotty attitude on this sight it makes me want to listen to godsmack rather than explore something that i don't know, which is what their input should be more geared towards.

i also hate seeing staff members referring to people as fanboys. why the hell would most people spend time posting a review or comment on something that they didn't really care about one way or the other. the input of every user should be appreciated (you wouldn't be "staff" if you didn't have traffic) and it should be expected that most user reviews are going to be coming from fans of the band, which inflates the review. most people aren't going to waste their time on a review that they will rate a 6 since there is know fuel energizing the person to write it.

Written by bloodface on 14.04.2013 at 19:07
i was on previously, but my account died after being off for a while and i couldn't get it resuscitated. whoever shows as the reviewer for testaments "the gathering", twisted sisters "stay hungry", judas priests "defenders of the faith" and anthrax's "the greater of two evils" is me.

Well, there's 2 reviews of "The Gathering", but I'm assuming you're amerislave, cos when I clicked on that profile, I was redirected to the Metal Storm homepage. I don't recognise that user name either, and I don't believe we have ever spoke, but it's nice to hear your positive words about my contribution to the site.

Is it really important the artwork?

Written by Maco on 17.04.2013 at 03:38

Is it really important the artwork?

For me, good artwork is merely a bonus for an album, and nothing more than that.

Written by Angelic Storm on 17.04.2013 at 14:32

Written by Maco on 17.04.2013 at 03:38

Is it really important the artwork?

For me, good artwork is merely a bonus for an album, and nothing more than that.

why? i don't get it

Written by Maco on 18.04.2013 at 00:00

why? i don't get it

There are people who, like me, buy physical copies of their music (CDs, Vinyls, box sets etc.) It's much more pleasant to have a collection of Vinyl covers hanging on your wall that actually look good than ones that contain good music but look like shit.

Written by Zap on 22.04.2013 at 19:11
There are people who, like me, buy physical copies of their music (CDs, Vinyls, box sets etc.) It's much more pleasant to have a collection of Vinyl covers hanging on your wall that actually look good than ones that contain good music but look like shit.

I also buy physical copies of my music, and I nonetheless feel that the artwork/packaging of an album is very much secondary to the music contained within it. Then again, I don't hang my vinyl covers on my wall.

I do value good artwork, and it can enhance the overall experience of owning an album. But at the end of the day, as long as an album is great musically, I can overlook the artwork if it isn't very good. Some of the later Helloween albums have had bad artwork, but the music on those albums were great, and that was the most important thing.

Written by Angelic Storm on 22.04.2013 at 20:22

Written by Zap on 22.04.2013 at 19:11
There are people who, like me, buy physical copies of their music (CDs, Vinyls, box sets etc.) It's much more pleasant to have

I also buy physical copies of my music, and I nonetheless feel that the artwork/packaging of an album is very much secondary to the music contained within it. Then again, I don't hang my vinyl covers on my wall.

All my vinyl on the wall? or all cd artwork? My God, who will buy me a castle with enough wall space?

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 22.04.2013 at 20:28
All my vinyl on the wall? or all cd artwork? My God, who will buy me a castle with enough wall space?

Ditto. I'd need a mansion or a castle to hang up all the album artwork I have on the walls.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 22.04.2013 at 20:28


All my vinyl on the wall? or all cd artwork? My God, who will buy me a castle with enough wall space?

I hang all my Vinyls on the wall because I mostly have CDs .

Written by Angelic Storm on 22.04.2013 at 20:22


I also buy physical copies of my music, and I nonetheless feel that the artwork/packaging of an album is very much secondary to the music contained within it. Then again, I don't hang my vinyl covers on my wall.

I do value good artwork, and it can enhance the overall experience of owning an album. But at the end of the day, as long as an album is great musically, I can overlook the artwork if it isn't very good. Some of the later Helloween albums have had bad artwork, but the music on those albums were great, and that was the most important thing.

About the whole album art thing being secondary to the music: of course it is, but it's always nice if the cover is good

Written by Angelic Storm on 11.04.2013 at 17:10

Written by Guest on 11.04.2013 at 17:02

The artwork would be better if it wasn't so saturated. I'm also pretty sure those lens flares are entirely manufactured too.

Yep, I suspect if they had just used the actual photo itself, without touching it up at all, it would have looked better. I think the "photoshopping" is the reason why it looks so saturated.

I think this is the actual photo used in the artwork:

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/wiredscience/2010/03/l11_00000001.jpg

Actually, I think it was closer to this one:



Not that it really matters--it's nearly the same thing--except it shows that they probably didn't even do the work that it took to crop it. They just took this picture and added two or three effects to it, nothing more. How ridiculously lazy and pathetic.

Anyway, here's a link to the site where that comes from. Just in case you wanted to know more about supercolliders.

http://www.dezeen.com/2012/11/30/a-lot-of-science-is-design-chris-hatherill-of-supercollider/

EDIT: I guess I lied, the album art is cropped slightly different than the picture I posted. Whatever, it still sucks.

Here, I made myself one in Paint in, like, 10 minutes.