Written by Zap on 01.10.2015 at 19:00

I'll do my best to give a thoughful, analytical, in-depth explanation as to why some people prefer Spirit The Earth Aflame:

People like different things.

There's no possible "thoughtful" explanation to argument that a mediocre album is better than an extraordinary one. Relativism has its limits. Leaving personal factors behind, which obviously contribute to one's appreciation of a determinate album, TGW is, strictly artistically speaking, immensely better than STEA. It's more cohesive, more mature, better musically and lyrically and lacks some of the plainly bad sections that plague the other album.

Written by Cavernous on 28.10.2015 at 17:59

There's no possible "thoughtful" explanation to argument that a mediocre album is better than an extraordinary one. Relativism has its limits. Leaving personal factors behind, which obviously contribute to one's appreciation of a determinate album, TGW is, strictly artistically speaking, immensely better than STEA. It's more cohesive, more mature, better musically and lyrically and lacks some of the plainly bad sections that plague the other album.

I don't prefer Spirit The Earth Aflame to The Gathering Wilderness, but I'm sure there's someone out there who does and who can give a thoughtful review of why he/she likes it.

As for your arguments:

More mature: doesn't necessarily make something good or bad
better musically: subjective
better lyrically: subjective
lacks bad sections: subjective
more cohesive: slightly less subjective
And "strictly artistically speaking, [it's] immensely better" has basically the same meaning as "it's better." So again, subjective.

The Gathering Wilderness is one of my top 10, if not top 5 albums of all time, across all genres, but what you're saying is just nonsense.

Written by Zap on 28.10.2015 at 18:31

Written by Cavernous on 28.10.2015 at 17:59

There's no possible "thoughtful" explanation to argument that a mediocre album is better than an extraordinary one. Relativism has its limits. Leaving personal factors behind, which obviously contribute to one's appreciation of a determinate album, TGW is, strictly artistically speaking, immensely better than STEA. It's more cohesive, more mature, better musically and lyrically and lacks some of the plainly bad sections that plague the other album.

I don't prefer Spirit The Earth Aflame to The Gathering Wilderness, but I'm sure there's someone out there who does and who can give a thoughtful review of why he/she likes it.

As for your arguments:

More mature: doesn't necessarily make something good or bad
better musically: subjective
better lyrically: subjective
lacks bad sections: subjective
more cohesive: slightly less subjective
And "strictly artistically speaking, [it's] immensely better" has basically the same meaning as "it's better." So again, subjective.

The Gathering Wilderness is one of my top 10, if not top 5 albums of all time, across all genres, but what you're saying is just nonsense.

Yes, I probably sounded a bit arrogant. I'm an enemy of the concept "subjective", because I'm convinced that we should consider some art better than other regardless of our personal taste (of course, sometimes, that line is difficult to draw, but in other times it isn't).

Spirit The Earth Aflame sounds to me like an overly affected album, which tries too hard to sound emotional. It's so over the top that sometimes is ridiculous (like the growling parts in Gods to the Godless). The Spoken parts are lame, there's no balance between heavier and mellow parts and the lyrics sound porly and hastily written, which wouldn't matter if you couldn't understand them so clearly in the singing. And the band members themselves consider this their weakest album (as it is stated, if I remember well, in the booklet of this same album). Of course that is not an argument, but it gives some tricks. The album has great parts, but it is almost ruined by the errors I had named, none of which are to be found in The Gathering Wilderness

Written by Cavernous on 28.10.2015 at 19:01

Yes, I probably sounded a bit arrogant. I'm an enemy of the concept "subjective", because I'm convinced that we should consider some art better than other regardless of our personal taste (of course, sometimes, that line is difficult to draw, but in other times it isn't).

While I agree with most of what you say about the album (except that I think Gods To The Godless is phenomenal start to finish), I'm the complete opposite when it comes to subjectivity.
Throughout the years I tried to convince people that the stuff I listen to is far superior in every way to the shlock they listen to, but I soon realized that there is no definitive argument that can be made, no undisputable way to measure the quality of a piece of music (or a film, book, painting, etc). Sure, there are some aspects that are more objective than others (technical ability of a band, production of an album) but even those can be used as arguments for or against something depending on your perspective (90s black metal didn't have good production or good 'technical' players (for the most part,) yet it still is a thing that people like, including me.) I'm convinced now that anyone can think of anything as a masterpiece or a piece of shit and that's their full right. I don't have to agree with them, but as long as they're not assholes about it (which I used to be and can still be sometimes) I'm fine with it.