Hum... sorry, I'm quite unable to quote correctly, and to edit is even worse ^^



Well, to sum up: saying "they are so cheesy since they are known" or "they turned popish" or despise the newbies IS a poser attitude, BUT a large part of the metal attitude IS a poser thing, and saying things are "pop" (in a quite despisefull way) because they are "accessible", inplying that the very good stuff is less accessible, is DEFINITELY a very poser attitude! But is the "underground" scene anything else than a hip of posers, despising the crowd and narcissicaly thinking that they understand and feel SO better than the vulgum pecus, that they are "true"?
It wasn't a question, I even tried (in vain) to make it appear as least as possible as a judgement, it's just an observation.
And to finish I shall admit I sometimes enjoy this poser attitude

Written by Dagorwen on 30.07.2008 at 00:20
Well, to sum up: saying "they are so cheesy since they are known" or "they turned popish" or despise the newbies IS a poser attitude, BUT a large part of the metal attitude IS a poser thing, and saying things are "pop" (in a quite despisefull way) because they are "accessible", inplying that the very good stuff is less accessible, is DEFINITELY a very poser attitude!

I do not understand why disliking music which has undesirable elements would make someone a poser...

Written by totaliteraliter on 29.07.2008 at 22:42

Dimmu can be considered "pop metal" because their music is (relative to extreme metal in general) at the most accessible side of the spectrum. It's unchallenging, easy to get into for the metal neophyte, full of catchy symphonic hooks, polished, extreme at times but restrained and organized in a safe way.

I am always confused by this sentiment. Anything can be extreme and not easily accessible. If I were to smash rocks against windows, beat dogs with sticks, rape nuns and scream and shout alot, get some untalented drummer to franticly attack some poor drum kit and record it all and mix it into a song that would be pretty damn extreme... and also very inaccessible. It would also still be very shit...

There is absolutely nothing about playing it safe in the music of Dimmu Borgir, they helped invent that style of music and they're absolutely brilliant at it. Extreme music is good music when its played with absolute precision and great degree of musical technique. This is something they have mastered. The elements are accessible because they are brilliant music composers and the human mind is capable of appreciating it. Most underground extreme black metal... does not have the same level compositional adeptness. Ok so maybe they have not been taking great leaps in musical progression over the last few albums, but virtualy no bands with as many albums behind them as Dimmu have ever do. Its still 1000 times better than any Immortal shite.

Why is being polished a bad thing?!?!?!?!?!?! Every self-respecting musician who tries to master his instrument wants to be as polished as possible. I understand that not all music is about being polished and shouldn't be (punk etc...). But if you just get over the whole extreme black metal thing and just appreciate music for music's sake, then Dimmu is really, really fucking good.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 00:49
I am always confused by this sentiment. Anything can be extreme and not easily accessible. If I were to smash rocks against windows, beat dogs with sticks, rape nuns and scream and shout alot, get some untalented drummer to franticly attack some poor drum kit and record it all and mix it into a song that would be pretty damn extreme... and also very inaccessible. It would also still be very shit...

Absolutely. Please note that I did not say anything was inherently bad with "pop metal." Conversely, no matter what amount of "absolute precision and great degree of musical technique" a band uses, their music can still be complete shit, as in the case of Dimmu Borgir.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 00:49
Why is being polished a bad thing?!?!?!?!?!?! Every self-respecting musician who tries to master his instrument wants to be as polished as possible. I understand that not all music is about being polished and shouldn't be (punk etc...). But if you just get over the whole extreme black metal thing and just appreciate music for music's sake, then Dimmu is really, really fucking good.

Dimmu is good for what it is: shallow, background music, mindless pap. Good after a few beers. Great musicianship, nothing to say artistically. Fashion conscious with an ear for a good symphonic hook. Ear candy.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 01:13

Dimmu is good for what it is: shallow, background music, mindless pap. Good after a few beers. Great musicianship, nothing to say artistically. Fashion conscious with an ear for a good symphonic hook. Ear candy.

Sorry mate, I had to do the one thing that annoys me incredibly and check your favourite bands list just to see what to you see as not mindless pap, I know, I know, I hate it when people do that (and vowed never to do it) but in this case I had to make a comparison based on your personal taste in order to illustrate my point.

Deicide? Come on man. You're calling Dimmu mindless? But fucking Deicide? I mean I like Deicide (I love their first album, a classic), why because they fulfill that silly little death metal urge I get every now and then and evoke some kind of hatred and pure anger in me (some nostalgia more than anything else actualy), I don't need to think or be contemplative. Its primal and unthinking and we all need that sometimes. There is not much to it artistically (as you put it) and pretty much the most shallow band in metal these days. They have been doing the same unthinking crap for years. Its not exactly a thinking man's music. The same can be said for 99% of supposedly extreme metal bands out there including early cryptopsy . Obviously you personally prefer music to be elitist rather than of profound musical value. This says more about the people who think the aforementioned sentiments than the music itself.

(BTW, I actualy think you're a pretty clever dude, who approaches arguments well, despite the fact we usually disagree.)

Dimmu Borgir on the other hand you call fashion conscious, how so? simply because popularity for their music has grown with them (as opposed to them growing due to the popularity of the music)? they write admittedly good music with intelligent lyrics to boot. They took Black Metal to its next logical step and never got caught in the same boring crap, the evolved black metal (sound familiar?), along with some others. Perhaps you have never actualy spent the time analyzing how the music is constructed as you dismissed it as sub-par due to its popularity (and therefore not with equal elitism, to which black/extreme metal is notorious).

If you prefer primal emotion in music as opposed to well-crafted and constructed music which takes a high level of musical understanding to create (if not to appreciate) then that is your choice, but brand it as shallow and mindless is simply not accurate, I'd advise you to look up these words but I seem to do that everytime.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 00:32

Written by Dagorwen on 30.07.2008 at 00:20
Well, to sum up: saying "they are so cheesy since they are known" or "they turned popish" or despise the newbies IS a poser attitude, BUT a large part of the metal attitude IS a poser thing, and saying things are "pop" (in a quite despisefull way) because they are "accessible", inplying that the very good stuff is less accessible, is DEFINITELY a very poser attitude!

I do not understand why disliking music which has undesirable elements would make someone a poser...

That's EXACTLY my point: read what you wrote about DB: you didn't check out "undesirable elements" but the fact that their music is "unchallenging for the neophyte" or easy to get in, polished etc... assuming that these are "undesirable element" what means the music itself, in absolute, isn't bad BUT it's the fact that it's easily accessible that makes you dislike it, what means that the good stuff should be "challenging for the neophyte" what is a quite "esoteric" (which means reserved for the happy few) conception of music, what is, indeed, VERY snobbish and poser-ish ^^
I don't say that's a bad thing to be a poser, I just say that it's what most of the metalheads are (and perhaps almost everybody who tries to "educate" his taste and distinguish himself from the crowd, what is perhaps an illusion, but still a very noble quest)

PS @Stuart: thank you very much for what you said about DB and the natural will of any musician to reach perfection in mastering his instrument, it was really great!

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 01:13

Dimmu is good for what it is: shallow, background music, mindless pap. Good after a few beers. Great musicianship, nothing to say artistically. Fashion conscious with an ear for a good symphonic hook. Ear candy.

I think that I understand you a little bit. Your'se saying that you don't like [in this case DM] because it might be great musicianship BUT it doesn't "feed" your feelings?

If that's the case... I agree. I don't care if the band is well know or not. Great music and 0% emotions after hearing that... that means that I would not hear that thing again.

I think you've got it backward, original poster...

Dimmu Borgir changed radically since their first album, and by the third, it was clear that "cheesy" (meaning: accessible to the masses) had become the direction.

But good luck with that hipster philosophy of yours.

Written by Conservationist on 30.07.2008 at 16:55

But good luck with that hipster philosophy of yours.

And that suppose to mean.......................... what?

I usually don't look after how skilled are the musicians, Even if they play like amaeturns and the production is shit... that doesn't mean that I would not like the album.

Take as an example Sepultura's debut... Is bad, bad musicians [at that time] and the production is also shit... But hey, guess what... I love that album because when I hear it I feel good.
If you don't get it.. It's ok, like it matters :

Hipster philosophy = one that justifies posing.

In your case, it is probably not deficit of character but inexperience.

I agree entirely with the sentiments of the author of this thread. When bands become well-known, and develop a broad fan base, the so-called 'tr00' or 'elite' crowd suddenly develop a disdain for them, even when they're not doing anything drastically different from when they were 'underground'. I think the explanation doesn't lie in the music itself, but in the new people that like the music. When apparent douchebags start liking the same stuff as 'sophisticated' people, it drives the latter crowd away. Not all that many metalheads listen to bands like Children Of Bodom anymore, not only because of the change in sound but also because of the fact that they are now in the same musical boat as emo kiddies. Regardless of whether we wish to acknowledge it or not, but holy crap metalheads are ridiculously elitist a lot of the time (and I'm guilty of this elitism too, I think we all have been at some point!). Of course, I guess it makes us posers in our own way...

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 01:55
Sorry mate, I had to do the one thing that annoys me incredibly and check your favourite bands list just to see what to you see as not mindless pap, I know, I know, I hate it when people do that (and vowed never to do it) but in this case I had to make a comparison based on your personal taste in order to illustrate my point.

Deicide? Come on man. You're calling Dimmu mindless? But fucking Deicide? I mean I like Deicide (I love their first album, a classic), why because they fulfill that silly little death metal urge I get every now and then and evoke some kind of hatred and pure anger in me (some nostalgia more than anything else actualy), I don't need to think or be contemplative. Its primal and unthinking and we all need that sometimes. There is not much to it artistically (as you put it) and pretty much the most shallow band in metal these days. They have been doing the same unthinking crap for years. Its not exactly a thinking man's music. The same can be said for 99% of supposedly extreme metal bands out there including early cryptopsy . Obviously you personally prefer music to be elitist rather than of profound musical value. This says more about the people who think the aforementioned sentiments than the music itself.

The favourite artist lists allows you to include only band names I think, there isn't room to make a note saying Deicide have been varying degrees of crap post-1992. Classic era Deicide is anything but shallow, it contains some ultimate examples of raw brutality and compositional intensity and complexity, theatric and bluntly poetic themes; metal at its best and most ambitious (in its historical context, of course). I'm the first to trash later albums like Stench, which is just as mindless and tired as anything Dimmu have done.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 01:55
Dimmu Borgir on the other hand you call fashion conscious, how so? simply because popularity for their music has grown with them (as opposed to them growing due to the popularity of the music)?

That was in reference to image rather than music.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 01:55
they write admittedly good music with intelligent lyrics to boot.

For example?

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 01:55
They took Black Metal to its next logical step and never got caught in the same boring crap, the evolved black metal (sound familiar?), along with some others. Perhaps you have never actualy spent the time analyzing how the music is constructed as you dismissed it as sub-par due to its popularity (and therefore not with equal elitism, to which black/extreme metal is notorious).

Evolution? If anything it is regression, it's a return to all the musical restrictions that black metal had long since moved beyond. It's black metal streamlined and simplified in imitation of wanky arena rock.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 01:55
If you prefer primal emotion in music as opposed to well-crafted and constructed music which takes a high level of musical understanding to create (if not to appreciate) then that is your choice, but brand it as shallow and mindless is simply not accurate, I'd advise you to look up these words but I seem to do that everytime.

If I want music that requires "a high level of musical understanding to create" I'll stick with Dvořák, thank you. I think you need to expand your horizons a bit.

Written by Dagorwen on 30.07.2008 at 13:06
That's EXACTLY my point: read what you wrote about DB: you didn't check out "undesirable elements" but the fact that their music is "unchallenging for the neophyte" or easy to get in, polished etc... assuming that these are "undesirable element" what means the music itself, in absolute, isn't bad BUT it's the fact that it's easily accessible that makes you dislike it, what means that the good stuff should be "challenging for the neophyte" what is a quite "esoteric" (which means reserved for the happy few) conception of music, what is, indeed, VERY snobbish and poser-ish ^^

You've lost me. Maybe you can explain what your definition of poser is, because I still don't understand why preferring challenging music would make someone one.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 30.07.2008 at 13:54
I think that I understand you a little bit. Your'se saying that you don't like [in this case DM] because it might be great musicianship BUT it doesn't "feed" your feelings?

If that's the case... I agree. I don't care if the band is well know or not. Great music and 0% emotions after hearing that... that means that I would not hear that thing again.

In a way, perhaps. Musicianship is a tool, it is largely irrelevant when it comes to musical quality. When people place emphasis on it (as in the case of our Dimmu-fan friend above) they are viewing the music too much as craft and not enough as art.

Written by Judas on 30.07.2008 at 17:50
Regardless of whether we wish to acknowledge it or not, but holy crap metalheads are ridiculously elitist a lot of the time (and I'm guilty of this elitism too, I think we all have been at some point!).

Elitism isn't bad, it's what leads to the promotion and creation of great music instead of the tolerance and perpetuation of poor music.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 18:55

Written by Judas on 30.07.2008 at 17:50
Regardless of whether we wish to acknowledge it or not, but holy crap metalheads are ridiculously elitist a lot of the time (and I'm guilty of this elitism too, I think we all have been at some point!).

Elitism isn't bad, it's what leads to the promotion and creation of great music instead of the tolerance and perpetuation of poor music.

Poorness and greatness is all a matter of opinion, remember. What we may find great, another person may find crap, and vice versa. I agree with you that elitism does serve a purpose, but only when it's based on music itself, not on the milieu that one may find oneself in. To stop liking a band just because it's gotten popular with wankers doesn't make you elitist in a good way. It makes you a wanker yourself. However, to stop liking a band because they've actually started making bad music, well, that's positive elitism, you will only appreciate the best.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 18:55

The favourite artist lists allows you to include only band names I think, there isn't room to make a note saying Deicide have been varying degrees of crap post-1992. Classic era Deicide is anything but shallow, it contains some ultimate examples of raw brutality and compositional intensity and complexity, theatric and bluntly poetic themes; metal at its best and most ambitious (in its historical context, of course). I'm the first to trash later albums like Stench, which is just as mindless and tired as anything Dimmu have done.

Agreed on recent Deicide. Yeah intensity goes along way, Tori Amos is pretty intense but she's pop as fuck (I guess you don't think anything which has sold a certain number of albums or isn't in your "genre list" is intense though), so that means nothing. Deicide's music just simply isn't as complex as Dimmu, anybody who knows the slightest thing about musical composition will tell you that. Hey yeah historically they were quite ambitious but so was ABBA (historically of course), I would not ever call them metal at its best though... in fact their whole image is pretty cheesy, especially their silly lyrics.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 18:55

That was in reference to image rather than music.

So image plays an important part in whether music is good or not? well fuck in that case shall we just delete Mayhem, Burzum and all that shit because to me that image is just ridiculous, don't even get me started on Venom. Dimmu's image goes to their music, they do not have an image because that is what is required of them to sell albums as you would have us believe.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 18:55
For example?

Good music in the sense of well played and precise. Lyrically they are miles ahead of 99% of black metal bands, they analyze the why's and wherefore's instead of just screaming teenage angst (maybe some people just get caught up in their own teenage angst and need it though).

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 18:55
Evolution? If anything it is regression, it's a return to all the musical restrictions that black metal had long since moved beyond. It's black metal streamlined and simplified in imitation of wanky arena rock.

Huh, sorry did I miss something? Black metal of the kind you refer to is the most restricted music around, it HAS to sound a certain way to be black plus its just generaly not very well written or performed. Dimmu took the raw emotion of that and added colour (yeah that is how you spell colour) and technique (adding something to something else which is rather basic is always an evolution), you have still not told me what is wrong with being streamlined and polished, I don't get why that is a bad thing.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 18:55
If I want music that requires "a high level of musical understanding to create" I'll stick with Dvořák, thank you. I think you need to expand your horizons a bit.

Don't ask me to expand my musical horizons, my horizons are very broad, I'm not going to fling names at you to prove it because we all have access to the internet and can bring up million names in an attempt to sound smart. Dimmu fills the gap between the two your elitist black metal and master composers. It's also about what their message, which is quite well rounded as opposed to the ridiculousness of a Deicide.

Finaly you have not addressed my comments of primal enjoyment as opposed to a thinking man's music. Perhaps if you managed to grasp that concept you would be more open minded.

Written by Conservationist on 30.07.2008 at 16:55
it was clear that "cheesy" (meaning: accessible to the masses) had become the direction.

Since when is the definition of cheesy accessible to the masses?!? You cannot simply give words new meanings, when that is not what they mean. If I went to work and said to my boss "well today Fuck means, sure boss no problem" I'd get the sack.

Its amazing the amount of people who do not own dictionaries.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 21:17
Agreed on recent Deicide. Yeah intensity goes along way, Tori Amos is pretty intense but she's pop as fuck (I guess you don't think anything which has sold a certain number of albums or isn't in your "genre list" is intense though), so that means nothing.

Lol. Yes, Tori Amos is intense, which is what makes Boys For Pele such a great album. It also has very loose structures for the most part, spontaneous vocal delivery weighed down heavily with sincerely held emotion, raw and unfiltered. No compromises to be found. It is perhaps most like Deicide's s/t in this sense.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 21:17
Deicide's music just simply isn't as complex as Dimmu, anybody who knows the slightest thing about musical composition will tell you that.

Perhaps. So what?

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 21:17
Hey yeah historically they were quite ambitious but so was ABBA (historically of course), I would not ever call them metal at its best though... in fact their whole image is pretty cheesy, especially their silly lyrics.

It's blunt, empowering blasphemy taken to its greatest extreme. You say "silly", I think you mean powerful and direct.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 21:17
So image plays an important part in whether music is good or not? well fuck in that case shall we just delete Mayhem, Burzum and all that shit because to me that image is just ridiculous, don't even get me started on Venom. Dimmu's image goes to their music, they do not have an image because that is what is required of them to sell albums as you would have us believe.

...

Good music in the sense of well played and precise. Lyrically they are miles ahead of 99% of black metal bands, they analyze the why's and wherefore's instead of just screaming teenage angst (maybe some people just get caught up in their own teenage angst and need it though).

...

Huh, sorry did I miss something? Black metal of the kind you refer to is the most restricted music around, it HAS to sound a certain way to be black plus its just generaly not very well written or performed. Dimmu took the raw emotion of that and added colour (yeah that is how you spell colour) and technique (adding something to something else which is rather basic is always an evolution), you have still not told me what is wrong with being streamlined and polished, I don't get why that is a bad thing.

It's all becoming clear here: Dimmu Borgir is black metal for people who don't like black metal. For people who don't identify with black metal, who don't understand it. You display some fantastic praise of mediocrity in typical hipster fashion: the classic artists of the genre can be enjoyed ironically or for novelty value (certainly not to be taken seriously!) while it is the populizers like Dimmu who have dumbed down the music enough to make it acceptable who are deserving of accolades.

I was seeking an example of Dimmu's brilliant lyrics, so that the enlightened among us could have a good chuckle.

This: "adding something to something else which is rather basic is always an evolution" - is absolutely hilarious. What a profound example of style over substance, of wank over composition, of craft over art, of praising gimmick and novelty and decoration. Black metal exists and succeeded initially because it stripped down all that pretense, it reduced metal to its most basic elements, it found true and direct honesty, it did not hide behind musicianship or accepted standards of listenability. Dimmu is going away from that accomplishment and embraces all those things that black metal had already escaped - they are regressors, not an evolution of the genre. They are hardly even "of the genre."

Streamlined = commercialized, the rough edges and ambition and danger removed to make room for safe predictability. The polished aspect is their to ensure the broadest appeal: so those seeking instant gratification are not turned away, and for those fools who drool over musicianship don't have to work hard to get their guitar-porn fix.

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 21:17
Don't ask me to expand my musical horizons, my horizons are very broad, I'm not going to fling names at you to prove it because we all have access to the internet and can bring up million names in an attempt to sound smart. Dimmu fills the gap between the two your elitist black metal and master composers. It's also about what their message, which is quite well rounded as opposed to the ridiculousness of a Deicide.

Please detail:
- the relevance/importance/sincerity of Dimmu's message
- in what way(s) Dimmu strives closer to the works of master composers than other (black) metal

Written by Stuart on 30.07.2008 at 21:17
Finaly you have not addressed my comments of primal enjoyment as opposed to a thinking man's music. Perhaps if you managed to grasp that concept you would be more open minded.

You have created an artificial distinction that does not hold true. Primal music can be thinking man's music - Burzum, Deicide, Spear of Longinus, Beherit, etc. Polished/"evolved" music can be mindless - Opeth, Dragonforce, Dimmu Borgir.

Written by Conservationist on 30.07.2008 at 17:39

Hipster philosophy = one that justifies posing.

In your case, it is probably not deficit of character but inexperience.

O shit.. I thought you were talkin at me at first.. that's why I quoted.. LOL
I didn't get the thing with "original poster" until I saw the beginning of the second page [I always look at thread from the first page... So I din't knew there was the first post on the second page..

Written by Conservationist on 30.07.2008 at 16:55

I think you've got it backward, original poster...

Dimmu Borgir changed radically since their first album, and by the third, it was clear that "cheesy" (meaning: accessible to the masses) had become the direction.

But good luck with that hipster philosophy of yours.

ok, well, I guess I'm part of the ones who don't look as frequently as required in the dictionnary, I'm sorry for that: I used the word "poser" in its french meaning, a "poseur" is somebody who exagerates his attitude, has an unnatural behaviour based on what he wants to represents, like he were playing his role on a stage. It doesn't mean that he doesn't know deeply what he claims to like or represent. In french, "poseur" does'nt mean "superficial" but "artificial"! A "poseur" is an elitist, a dandy.

But I guess that in english "poser" refers to some kind of wannabe, somebody who pretend to know everything about a subject when he only read books about it or saw something on the TV. But correct me if I'm wrong!

So, everywhere I wrote "poser" I meant "elitist" or "exagerately trve", best of all "purist".
Back again, I sum up my point: to say that a band is cheesier because it gets well knowed is VERY snobbish, "over played" what I admit is a frequent temptation and not only in metal, but this attitude has no rational foundation, it's only a kind of elegance, a will to appear supperior, what is somtimes very ridiculous in a music style that claims to be br00tal, primal etc... because this attitude is somehow... fag like ^^ (you know, paying attention to what the others think of you, wanting to have your little show while despising the newbies). BUT this elitist attitude reflects also one of the best part of human: the will to rise over the crowd, a kind od "hybris". It's ridiculous and noble, outrageous and terribly cute to ^^

So, you got is now?
And again, I'm terribly sorry for the misunderstanding of "poser"!

I actually... don't see a lot f people that stop listening to a band just because it became popular...

The fans of a band should be glad if their favorite band get the credit they think they deserv...
I just stop hering the following albums of a band just in the case that the music turned boring.

Written by Dagorwen on 30.07.2008 at 22:36
Back again, I sum up my point: to say that a band is cheesier because it gets well knowed is VERY snobbish,

I think this is a largely imagined attitude. Most of the arguments here have been that the opposite happens: a band is hated because of the undesirable factors that make it popular, not because it is popular. The poser can't tell the difference - he hates popular bands because he thinks he is supposed to, he fails to comprehend the reasons for which the intelligent metalhead dislikes certain popular bands.

Written by Dagorwen on 30.07.2008 at 22:36

BUT this elitist attitude reflects also one of the best part of human: the will to rise over the crowd, a kind od "hybris".

Interesting.

Elitist has always meant, in all ways outside of metal, someone who values quality over anything else and is unashamed to avoid or look down upon lesser quantity.

Poseur was always an actor -- someone who didn't understand what was at hand, but wanted to look like they did, and always put others down.

So there's more overlap between our definitions than it seems at first...

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51

Lol. Yes, Tori Amos is intense, which is what makes Boys For Pele such a great album. It also has very loose structures for the most part, spontaneous vocal delivery weighed down heavily with sincerely held emotion, raw and unfiltered. No compromises to be found. It is perhaps most like Deicide's s/t in this sense.

I don't know what you mean by s/t but its one of her worst albums, still, like always it is intense. I like Scarlet's Walk. (I have an unhealthy love for Tori Amos' music BTW). Anyway it proves that intensity is not something unique to metal.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51

Perhaps. So what?

It gets back to my beating dogs with sticks, raping nuns argument, yeah talent is imperative in extreme music otherwise its meaningless.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51

It's blunt, empowering blasphemy taken to its greatest extreme. You say "silly", I think you mean powerful and direct.

This shows where YOU come from and your experiences that you find christian blasphemy so empowering. I live in an irreligious world where I do exactly what i want, when I want, how I want (as far as money allows me). Religion plays absolutely no part in my life, rebellion plays no part in my life, I am totally free to do whatever I want as long as I avoid being arrested. Society does not care how I dress, talk, walk or drink or do anything I want to. So what the fuck is so empowering about some fucker shouting about how shit jesus is and Satan and shit like that. IT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING (to me, or anyone else who has ultimately forced himself into this position), unless you are living in a society that this allows you to feel elite. This says more about your entrapment in christian ideals than anything else. The moment someone uses the word blasphemy in a positive sense to me I laugh at them because "what the fuck is blasphemy", it is rebellion against a meaningless nothing, a rebel against nothing is a nobody!

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51

It's all becoming clear here: Dimmu Borgir is black metal for people who don't like black metal. For people who don't identify with black metal, who don't understand it. You display some fantastic praise of mediocrity in typical hipster fashion: the classic artists of the genre can be enjoyed ironically or for novelty value (certainly not to be taken seriously!) while it is the populizers like Dimmu who have dumbed down the music enough to make it acceptable who are deserving of accolades.

Um no, I did not say that I did not like those bands, i said if it was based on image alone I would not like them (find them ridiculous in fact) however I do enjoy them for the novelty value as well as the primal aggression I mentioned earlier. I like good black metal, I like BM that is innovative (which is never these days because the moment a band tries something new the entire black metal fraternity accuses them of selling out) as well as the BM classics who invented the genre (for historical value of course).

Black Metal was pretty fucking dumb without bands like Dimmu (although the raw energy is undeniable). There was virtualy no intelligent ideal imbedded in the philosophy of black metal until bands like Dimmu. Satyricon (yeah Dimmu preceded Satyr) and the like came around.

I still deeply admire and even feel the pure emotion of black metal on occasion. Anyone who lives that however, is niave to the big bad world. Dimmu philosophically minimize the gap between society and the underground black metal ideology. ie: they explain how they relate to each other and the reason for both existing as opposed to "Freezing Mooooooooooooooon".

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51

I was seeking an example of Dimmu's brilliant lyrics, so that the enlightened among us could have a good chuckle.

Yeah man you're enlightened and I'm fool, based purely on musical tastes.... Arrogance is a strange phenomenon.

Dimmu are respected for a reason by the major players in BM, because they put forth words which put forth BM ideology far more eloquently and subliminally than any other (despite the occasional harp interfering) BM band around. Read them, analyze them, otherwise don't fucking comment!

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51

This: "adding something to something else which is rather basic is always an evolution" - is absolutely hilarious. What a profound example of style over substance, of wank over composition, of craft over art, of praising gimmick and novelty and decoration. Black metal exists and succeeded initially because it stripped down all that pretense, it reduced metal to its most basic elements, it found true and direct honesty, it did not hide behind musicianship or accepted standards of listenability. Dimmu is going away from that accomplishment and embraces all those things that black metal had already escaped - they are regressors, not an evolution of the genre. They are hardly even "of the genre."

If you like metal in its most basic that is fine, so do I!!!!!!! Substance for me for is a complimentary factor, I do not think that basic music with ultimately meaningless motives has any substance. But I do think it's place in a primal urge for elitism and general narrow mindedeness is warranted. Style is not always substance as can be expressed in Yngwie Malmsteen etc... which has plenty of style but zero substance. There is a degree of gimmickry in Dimmu but this is merely to exacerbate their strong standpoints on certain issues (what YOU call the novelty factor). I personally do not give a flying fuck about genres or what black metal meant or has meant to anybody. I like music that resonates something in ME so whether black metal broke music down to the most basic crap or not is irrelevant it still sounds like teenagers who are lost to me (most of it, not all of it). I do not think Dimmu has thought for one moment what is an acceptable standard of listenability, they thought of grand epic ideas, and made the music to compliment them, if it happens to be listenable to a wide range of people its not their fault or even a bad thing. And yeah, DB are black metal, for many reasons depending on what argument you want to take on.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51

Streamlined = commercialized, the rough edges and ambition and danger removed to make room for safe predictability. The polished aspect is their to ensure the broadest appeal: so those seeking instant gratification are not turned away, and for those fools who drool over musicianship don't have to work hard to get their guitar-porn fix.

No streamlined does not mean commercialized, it means completely adept without error and honed to perfection in a musical sense (that dictionary idea again man). Dude if you think that danger in life surrounds how a power chord is recorded you have lived a very sheltered life!!!!!!!!!... I could tell you real stories of danger... How the fuck does rough edges equate to ambition?!?!?! complete utter nonsense to make such a comparison.

I appreciate Dimmu not for their musicianship but their composition (I do not rate them incredibly highly as individual musicians, except some of their drummers). There is alot to their music which is not gained instantaneously but I guess you've never given their music enough time to actualy listen to those aspects.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51
Please detail:
- the relevance/importance/sincerity of Dimmu's message
- in what way(s) Dimmu strives closer to the works of master composers than other (black) metal

1. I have already stated some of my opinions above and the rest can be quite easily found through reading their lyrics and listening to their music with an open mind. I do not claim to interpret words for anyone!! each has his own understanding.
2. By combining sooooooooo many genres and taking the best pieces from each to create a majestic conglomeration plus just pure musical compositional ability, ie: themes in music which have a story in music; as opposed to three riffs played intermittently and nonsensically as in early deicide.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 21:51

You have created an artificial distinction that does not hold true. Primal music can be thinking man's music - Burzum, Deicide, Spear of Longinus, Beherit, etc. Polished/"evolved" music can be mindless - Opeth, Dragonforce, Dimmu Borgir.

NO, the primitive and the thinking man is a contradiction in terms. It is not my distinction, but primal urge does not take into account intelligent thought. This is what differentiates us from PRIMATES. None of the bands you mentioned above are to me half intelligent or thought provoking.

You completely misunderstood me, I did not say because it is polished that it is good music, no way, I think Dragonforce is utter shite!!!! why because it is meaningless bullshit full of guitar "wankery" as you put it. I like music that has something intelligent to say and delivers it in a way that effects the subconcious. Dragonforce does not do this. its shit, yet they are good guitarists and musicians (average composers), still I hate them, because any dumb fuck can spend hours messing around with his guitar and become good at it, this doesn't make him "enlightened".

I will not discuss Opeth as one discussion is plenty for now.

You have now stated that polished "can" be mindless where previously it was the cause for much more negativity, please explain your position on why polished is a bad thing?

Written by Bad English on 28.07.2008 at 19:36

Written by Sick Girl on 28.07.2008 at 19:12

I usually am like that, but for certain bands I can't bring myself to hate them because of a little more spotlight than usual. Cradle Of Filth and Opeth for example, both brilliant bands with amazing music, they have been around for quite sometime, so I can't help but to think they deserve more admiration. Those bands I can deal with getting a little mainstream, but bands that just pop out of nowhere and suddenly everyone loves them, I could careless how good they are. Fuck mainstream.

Opeth and CoF in same cathegory Opeth even try hard cant eb so ovareted and let down how cof , and Opeth are more lifestyle, sorrow, poetry but CoF are more realise album because fans need it

I didn't mean to put them in the same catagory. Sorry. I was just choosing 2 bands I like that I have tend to notice this happen with.

since when are populair bands cheesy? Rhapsody and Manowar are cheesy not bands like Slipknot and Korn.

Written by VPeter on 31.07.2008 at 18:19

since when are populair bands cheesy? Rhapsody and Manowar are cheesy not bands like Slipknot and Korn.

Slipknot...and Korn? Ew.

I'm hoping you are saying you are NOT fans of their work.

Written by VPeter on 31.07.2008 at 18:19

since when are populair bands cheesy? Rhapsody and Manowar are cheesy not bands like Slipknot and Korn.

Rhapsody and Manowar are much better bands like Sipklot and Korn

Written by Sick Girl on 31.07.2008 at 18:26

Written by VPeter on 31.07.2008 at 18:19

since when are populair bands cheesy? Rhapsody and Manowar are cheesy not bands like Slipknot and Korn.

Slipknot...and Korn? Ew.

I'm hoping you are saying you are NOT fans of their work.

I am not, I think they are crap but not cheesy.
cheesy is like Manowar and Rhapsody way to over the top keyboards rough guitars and high vocals don't make me feel like a kinght in a shinig armor heading towards an epic battle. but still Manowar and Rhapsody are better then Slipknot and Korn, eventough I consider Manowar a clown band.

Written by VPeter on 31.07.2008 at 18:52

Written by Sick Girl on 31.07.2008 at 18:26

Written by VPeter on 31.07.2008 at 18:19

since when are populair bands cheesy? Rhapsody and Manowar are cheesy not bands like Slipknot and Korn.

Slipknot...and Korn? Ew.

I'm hoping you are saying you are NOT fans of their work.

I am not, I think they are crap but not cheesy.
cheesy is like Manowar and Rhapsody way to over the top keyboards rough guitars and high vocals don't make me feel like a kinght in a shinig armor heading towards an epic battle. but still Manowar and Rhapsody are better then Slipknot and Korn, eventough I consider Manowar a clown band.

Ok, well I agree. I think some bands think if they follow the whole wailing vocals of the 80's but add harder riffs and "badass" keyboarding, they can be like the new Iron Maiden or Dio, when most of the time they sound like a rip off. I do, however, think the whole "mask wearing" idea of Slipknot's, is a tad cheesy, and making them seem like they are too much about appearance.

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
I don't know what you mean by s/t but its one of her worst albums, still, like always it is intense. I like Scarlet's Walk. (I have an unhealthy love for Tori Amos' music BTW). Anyway it proves that intensity is not something unique to metal.

Who said intensity was unique to metal? (s/t = self-titled)

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
It gets back to my beating dogs with sticks, raping nuns argument, yeah talent is imperative in extreme music otherwise its meaningless.

That's a rather shallow viewpoint. And surely you are not arguing that [greater complexity = better music], although that is an implication I am tempted to draw...

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
This shows where YOU come from and your experiences that you find christian blasphemy so empowering. I live in an irreligious world where I do exactly what i want, when I want, how I want (as far as money allows me). Religion plays absolutely no part in my life, rebellion plays no part in my life, I am totally free to do whatever I want as long as I avoid being arrested. Society does not care how I dress, talk, walk or drink or do anything I want to. So what the fuck is so empowering about some fucker shouting about how shit jesus is and Satan and shit like that. IT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING (to me, or anyone else who has ultimately forced himself into this position), unless you are living in a society that this allows you to feel elite. This says more about your entrapment in christian ideals than anything else. The moment someone uses the word blasphemy in a positive sense to me I laugh at them because "what the fuck is blasphemy", it is rebellion against a meaningless nothing, a rebel against nothing is a nobody!

Sorry, if you don't understand metal by this point you probably never will. I don't think I can help you here.

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
Um no, I did not say that I did not like those bands, i said if it was based on image alone I would not like them (find them ridiculous in fact) however I do enjoy them for the novelty value as well as the primal aggression I mentioned earlier. I like good black metal, I like BM that is innovative (which is never these days because the moment a band tries something new the entire black metal fraternity accuses them of selling out) as well as the BM classics who invented the genre (for historical value of course).

Black Metal was pretty fucking dumb without bands like Dimmu (although the raw energy is undeniable). There was virtualy no intelligent ideal imbedded in the philosophy of black metal until bands like Dimmu. Satyricon (yeah Dimmu preceded Satyr) and the like came around.

I still deeply admire and even feel the pure emotion of black metal on occasion. Anyone who lives that however, is niave to the big bad world. Dimmu philosophically minimize the gap between society and the underground black metal ideology. ie: they explain how they relate to each other and the reason for both existing as opposed to "Freezing Mooooooooooooooon".

There's nothing I can say really; this is textbook hipster rambling. Like I said, black metal for people who don't like black metal.

This kind of comment always makes me laugh: "I like BM that is innovative - which is never these days because the moment a band tries something new the entire black metal fraternity accuses them of selling out." Appeals to open-mindedness in the defense of pop metal, what a surprise.

:

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
Yeah man you're enlightened and I'm fool, based purely on musical tastes.... Arrogance is a strange phenomenon.

Dimmu are respected for a reason by the major players in BM, because they put forth words which put forth BM ideology far more eloquently and subliminally than any other (despite the occasional harp interfering) BM band around. Read them, analyze them, otherwise don't fucking comment!

For example...

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
If you like metal in its most basic that is fine, so do I!!!!!!! Substance for me for is a complimentary factor, I do not think that basic music with ultimately meaningless motives has any substance. But I do think it's place in a primal urge for elitism and general narrow mindedeness is warranted. Style is not always substance as can be expressed in Yngwie Malmsteen etc... which has plenty of style but zero substance. There is a degree of gimmickry in Dimmu but this is merely to exacerbate their strong standpoints on certain issues (what YOU call the novelty factor). I personally do not give a flying fuck about genres or what black metal meant or has meant to anybody. I like music that resonates something in ME so whether black metal broke music down to the most basic crap or not is irrelevant it still sounds like teenagers who are lost to me (most of it, not all of it). I do not think Dimmu has thought for one moment what is an acceptable standard of listenability, they thought of grand epic ideas, and made the music to compliment them, if it happens to be listenable to a wide range of people its not their fault or even a bad thing. And yeah, DB are black metal, for many reasons depending on what argument you want to take on.

Again, this illustrates the specific appeal of Dimmu. It's not black metal at its most unique and successful, it's black metal with everything unique, ambitious, forward-thinking, dangerous, etc. removed. It's black metal diluted into something safe and familiar.

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
No streamlined does not mean commercialized, it means completely adept without error and honed to perfection in a musical sense (that dictionary idea again man).

Thus cleaner, safer, more easily marketable. If you're going to be pedantic at least have an interesting point.

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
Dude if you think that danger in life surrounds how a power chord is recorded you have lived a very sheltered life!!!!!!!!!... I could tell you real stories of danger... How the fuck does rough edges equate to ambition?!?!?! complete utter nonsense to make such a comparison.

Ideas can be expressed through music. Production reflects this. Is this really a foreign concept to you?

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
I appreciate Dimmu not for their musicianship but their composition (I do not rate them incredibly highly as individual musicians, except some of their drummers). There is alot to their music which is not gained instantaneously but I guess you've never given their music enough time to actualy listen to those aspects.
...
1. I have already stated some of my opinions above and the rest can be quite easily found through reading their lyrics and listening to their music with an open mind. I do not claim to interpret words for anyone!! each has his own understanding.
2. By combining sooooooooo many genres and taking the best pieces from each to create a majestic conglomeration plus just pure musical compositional ability, ie: themes in music which have a story in music; as opposed to three riffs played intermittently and nonsensically as in early deicide.

- you really can't give me a hint as to what eloquent and profound statements Dimmu makes with their music? Not one example?
- please expand upon the compositional differences between Deicide and Dimmu (I hope you aren't going to count riffs...), since you seem to have trouble conveying their compositional superiority thus far.

Aside: I'm not really sure what early Deicide you're referring to, surely not the narrative structure of a song like "Sacrificial Suicide" or the compositional and technical intensity of a song like "Satan Spawn, The Caco-Daemon"...

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
NO, the primitive and the thinking man is a contradiction in terms. It is not my distinction, but primal urge does not take into account intelligent thought. This is what differentiates us from PRIMATES. None of the bands you mentioned above are to me half intelligent or thought provoking.

Wow. Maybe you're just too close minded to appreciate the more esoteric offerings of black metal, maybe you haven't given it a chance, maybe you just prefer your music thematically predictable and obvious? And let me guess, you aren't a John Cage fan. How about Klaus Schulze? Fripp's Soundscapes?

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
You completely misunderstood me, I did not say because it is polished that it is good music, no way, I think Dragonforce is utter shite!!!! why because it is meaningless bullshit full of guitar "wankery" as you put it. I like music that has something intelligent to say and delivers it in a way that effects the subconcious. Dragonforce does not do this. its shit, yet they are good guitarists and musicians (average composers), still I hate them, because any dumb fuck can spend hours messing around with his guitar and become good at it, this doesn't make him "enlightened".

I will not discuss Opeth as one discussion is plenty for now.

I wasn't suggesting you equated polished with good music, you have enough shallow ideas about music that I have no need to invent new ones to accuse you of. I was merely working to debunk your rather asinine primal/intelligent music distinction.

Written by Stuart on 31.07.2008 at 04:04
You have now stated that polished "can" be mindless where previously it was the cause for much more negativity, please explain your position on why polished is a bad thing?

I didn't realize that was my position.

Written by totaliteraliter on 30.07.2008 at 23:00

Written by Dagorwen on 30.07.2008 at 22:36
Back again, I sum up my point: to say that a band is cheesier because it gets well knowed is VERY snobbish,

I think this is a largely imagined attitude. Most of the arguments here have been that the opposite happens: a band is hated because of the undesirable factors that make it popular, not because it is popular. The poser can't tell the difference - he hates popular bands because he thinks he is supposed to, he fails to comprehend the reasons for which the intelligent metalhead dislikes certain popular bands.

but isn't the degradation of the music and the "undesirable" stuff largely imagined to? My aim is to understand the reason that make someone criticize the bands he once liked just when they are having success. OF COURSE the sentence "they are so cheesy since they are known" is a caricature, nobody will say it aloud, but other sentences and the general attitude of "old" metalheads somehow just mean it. I think first they despise the crowd and THEN the imagine that the music has to get worse to attract such dummies, and when you listen at a music (the same with reading a book or watching a movie) with a bad prejudice, you'll find bad stuff: if one looks for shit, he founds shit.

Look at it this way:

To get popular, you have to dumb down... so most bands that "become" popular change to pander to their audience.

This isn't true of all, but most.

There are ALSO some people who are fucking poseurs who will down a band just because it became popular.

This isn't limited to metal. Look at what happened to REM, or even U2, if you swing that way.