Written by PanzerPriest on 11.01.2015 at 12:12

Noone should expect something original from the classical black metal bands.

So we can't criticize older black metal bands for not being original because we're used to them not being original?

Written by Zap on 11.01.2015 at 12:20

Written by PanzerPriest on 11.01.2015 at 12:12

Noone should expect something original from the classical black metal bands.

So we can't criticize older black metal bands for not being original because we're used to them not being original?

No-no. I just expressed my opinion. There are people who expect something new from the bands, there are people who expect to get the same old tunes, you know. That is why it was my own opinion. Because I've really liked new Marduk album)

I think some people put way too much emphasis on stuff like inovation or originality in today's metal when you can barely find anything original today. Today we have bands that either follow an already established formula by releasing quality albums, or they just try to combine different elements from already established formulas and lay something that might seem original while it isn't. This makes like 90% of the whole metal movement today and the remaining 10% are those avant-garde bands that are pushing boundaries further and further into bizarre and weird soundscapes (this is what I do consider truly original, though not really inovative).

Anyway, people that still make a fuss over stuff like the ones mentioned above miss a lot in terms of enjoying an album. I listened to Frontschwein and it isn't an overall bad album (prolly around a 7.5-8). Nothing like Rom 5:12, much like Serpent Sermon. It has a couple of good tracks like the first 3-4 and the last one, a couple of so-so tracks and fillers. I ain't a Marduk fan (though I have to admit I love PDM and HSBWWG) but I kinda like their relentless, aggressive and ruthless way of playing black metal.

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 11.01.2015 at 13:08

I think some people put way too much emphasis on stuff like inovation or originality in today's metal when you can barely find anything original today. Today we have bands that either follow an already established formula by releasing quality albums, or they just try to combine different elements from already established formulas and lay something that might seem original while it isn't. This makes like 90% of the whole metal movement today and the remaining 10% are those avant-garde bands that are pushing boundaries further and further into bizarre and weird soundscapes (this is what I do consider truly original, though not really inovative).

Anyway, people that still make a fuss over stuff like the ones mentioned above miss a lot in terms of enjoying an album. I listened to Frontschwein and it isn't an overall bad album (prolly around a 7.5-8). Nothing like Rom 5:12, much like Serpent Sermon. It has a couple of good tracks like the first 3-4 and the last one, a couple of so-so tracks and fillers. I ain't a Marduk fan (though I have to admit I love PDM and HSBWWG) but I kinda like their relentless, aggressive and ruthless way of playing black metal.

Damn, man! A great comment!

Let's just form a band and release the same albums over and over for ten years, obviously people have no problem giving 8/10 to albums that do not have more than two highlight tracks and do not build anything on their previous releases. And if people complain, let's tell those people they shouldn't expect anything interesting and it's their fault if they get bored of the same shit after a while.

Written by Ilham on 11.01.2015 at 13:20

Let's just form a band and release the same albums over and over for ten years, obviously people have no problem giving 8/10 to albums that do not have more than two highlight tracks and do not build anything on their previous releases. And if people complain, let's tell those people they shouldn't expect anything interesting and it's their fault if they get bored of the same shit after a while.

That would mean that Cannibal Corpse and Motorhead should get only below average just because they have released pretty much similar albums for 20-30 years. Now that's a nice way of judging quality. Sorry, but I do not share the same views you have and I have different standards of appreciating an album. I am not interested in inovation, nor in originality, I am interested in a band or an artist to deliver quality material. And while this album might not be their milestone, is far from being an awful one. And I find it odd that people are expecting something new (original?) from Marduk which is pretty much the Motorhead of black metal.

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 11.01.2015 at 13:25

That would mean that Cannibal Corpse and Motorhead should get only below average just because they have released pretty much similar albums for 20-30 years. Now that's a nice way of judging quality. Sorry, but I do not share the same views you have and I have different standards of appreciating an album. I am not interested in inovation, nor in originality, I am interested in a band or an artists to deliver quality material. And while this album might not be their milestone, is far from being an awful one. And I find it odd that people are expecting something new (original?) from Marduk which is pretty much the Motorhead of black metal.

What kills me is that I don't even think it's awful. You're overreacting because instead of giving this a nice and round 7.5, I gave it a 6.9? And that makes me too critical and expectant of that much originality? Did you even really read the review where I say I am a Marduk fan? Would I be if I valued originality as much as you want to make it sound? My main problem with the album is actually its length and boring tracks, not originality.

Also, it's not because I know that Marduk isn't going to turn mathcore all of a sudden that I'm going to give it a 8 for originality. I even think I was generous with the 5.

Written by Ilham on 11.01.2015 at 13:30

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 11.01.2015 at 13:25

That would mean that Cannibal Corpse and Motorhead should get only below average just because they have released pretty much similar albums for 20-30 years. Now that's a nice way of judging quality. Sorry, but I do not share the same views you have and I have different standards of appreciating an album. I am not interested in inovation, nor in originality, I am interested in a band or an artists to deliver quality material. And while this album might not be their milestone, is far from being an awful one. And I find it odd that people are expecting something new (original?) from Marduk which is pretty much the Motorhead of black metal.

What kills me is that I don't even think it's awful. You're overreacting because instead of giving this a nice and round 7.5, I gave it a 6.9? And that makes me too critical and expectant of that much originality? Did you even really read the review where I say I am a Marduk fan? Would I be if I valued originality as much as you want to make it sound? My main problem with the album is actually its length and boring tracks, not originality.

Also, it's not because I know that Marduk isn't going to turn mathcore all of a sudden that I'm going to give it a 8 for originality. I even think I was generous with the 5.

I do not overreact over the rating. Did you hear me complain about it? It is your rating, and I am fine with it, even if you gave it lower than that I wouldn't have had a problem with it. I just can't comprehend people that seek originality so relentlessly while that is like a drop in the ocean of today's music scene. I myself do not search for any, I listen to music without thinking of such trivial matters. If I would think of only wanting to see originality, then I might've discarded much of my collection and much of what I currently like. Also, I did not mean 8 for originality, I meant 8 for my overall experience. Like I said, I do not care about originality. That can get even a 1, I do not care.

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 11.01.2015 at 13:36

I do not overreact over the rating. Did you hear me complain about it? It is your rating, and I am fine with it, even if you gave it lower than that I wouldn't have had a problem with it. I just can't comprehend people that seek originality so relentlessly while that is like a drop in the ocean of today's music scene. I myself do not search for any, I listen to music without thinking of such trivial matters. If I would think of only wanting to see originality, then I might've discarded much of my collection and much of what I currently like. Also, I did not mean 8 for originality, I meant 8 for my overall experience. Like I said, I do not care about originality. That can get even a 1, I do not care.

You're still missing my point. Maybe caps lock will help: I EXPECT NOTHING ORIGINAL FROM MARDUK. Is that okay now? The album is just BORING and lacks a LOT of dynamism. I should add "in my opinion" or you'll come back with a tirade about people who expect too much good songwriting in an album.

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 11.01.2015 at 13:08

I think some people put way too much emphasis on stuff like inovation or originality in today's metal when you can barely find anything original today. Today we have bands that either follow an already established formula by releasing quality albums, or they just try to combine different elements from already established formulas and lay something that might seem original while it isn't. This makes like 90% of the whole metal movement today and the remaining 10% are those avant-garde bands that are pushing boundaries further and further into bizarre and weird soundscapes (this is what I do consider truly original, though not really inovative).

Anyway, people that still make a fuss over stuff like the ones mentioned above miss a lot in terms of enjoying an album. I listened to Frontschwein and it isn't an overall bad album (prolly around a 7.5-8). Nothing like Rom 5:12, much like Serpent Sermon. It has a couple of good tracks like the first 3-4 and the last one, a couple of so-so tracks and fillers. I ain't a Marduk fan (though I have to admit I love PDM and HSBWWG) but I kinda like their relentless, aggressive and ruthless way of playing black metal.

The problem with this attitude is that it renders reviews an almost totally pointless endeavour as it reduces them to practically entirely personal taste-oriented perspectives. One of the few measurable, near-objective criticisms we can levy at or "judge" an album by is how original, or unique, or unusual sounding it. Saying "you can barely find anything original today" is borderline fallacy because you lump virtually all bands, 9 out of 10, into a percentage bracket and suggest one is no more unique than another, which is of course not true in the slightest, at least not the world perceived through reviews of critics that bother to hunt down new and interesting music / end of year lists / many talked about albums etc. (because in reality 9 out of 10 existing bands are never even heard of by the average metaller because they simply fail to make it). You're using originality in an unorthodox and extreme manner to justify your argument that recognisably generic musical endeavours deserve the same adoration as something that has a more distinct or novel approach. Marduk is a good example of a band that is almost universally recognised as a repetitive entity and often considered to be lacking in new ideas, and there is no reason why that shouldn't work against them in a review when other bands successfully manage to push boundaries, create or splice new sounds and just generally have more interest in furthering an idea. You might disapprove of people and reviewers that hold originality in high regard, but to me originality is the key to new forms of musical expression and should be cherished and explored as much as possible. Personally I find people that complain about it, or try to marginalise what innovation is by suggesting that there are no original bands to be subverting the facts of the matter, or simply apologists for bands they like that are stuck on autopilot. Being able to recognise what is and isn't original, for me, is one of the most important aspects of being a good reviewer, as it directly correlates to their experience and ability to recognise what is new and what is old. Originality also extents to many people's tastes. Humans get bored by repetition, by experiencing the same thing over and over again. They relish new experiences. These things all apply to music too. You may be able to listen to the same thing over and over again, but it doesn't mean others have to. Or should do. Additionally, I think there's a distinct different between "doing something well" and "doing something again." One of the finer points of reviewing is determining when a band can take old ideas and make it sound fresh or distinct from the pack. That's a form of innovation in itself. Ultimately though, you cannot cater a review to everyone's individual tastes, their "enjoyment," so concepts of originality, innovation and uniqueness (along with how successful it is at doing it) remains the best way to gauge an album as a piece of art.

I exchange originality creativity in valuations

Written by Guest on 11.01.2015 at 18:34

I exchange originality creativity in valuations

That is inherently comprised in the term "originality" in my opinion. That's how some bands who play things by the norm still manage to get high scores in that category.

For the record, I don't believe any album recently made by CC or Motorhead should ever be awarded more than 7. For me that kind of relentless retreading of a sound means it could never be more than "good" and 7 should be the cap.

However has much merit bring over 20 years in music and not bore

I think originality is more suitable for the music of Lady Gaga or similar

Creativity is more related to art

And music isn't art now?

art sometimes...often the music is only business

Written by Guest on 11.01.2015 at 19:56

art sometimes...often the music is only business

Thanks for the fuckton of notifications. Ever heard of paragraphs?

Art isn't about business? Have you heard of art auctions?

Written by PanzerPriest on 11.01.2015 at 13:06

No-no. I just expressed my opinion. There are people who expect something new from the bands, there are people who expect to get the same old tunes, you know. That is why it was my own opinion. Because I've really liked new Marduk album)

My point was that - even though it's fine to expect nothing new from a band - when you write a review it's perfectly normal to touch upon the fact that it's unoriginal and give it a low score on originality. Your comment seemed to imply that the review was somehow being too critical regarding originality.
I'm really tired, so I might have interpreted that incorrectly/formulated my thoughts incorrectly.

Jajajajaja art auctions...prostituted art

Written by Guest on 11.01.2015 at 20:59

Jajajajaja art auctions...prostituted art

Can you STOP spamming this thread? If you have something to say I advise you to take ONE post to do so. It's not even as if you had something of value to say.

O.k. nothing more to say, sorry and be happy

Written by Ilham on 11.01.2015 at 21:00
Can you STOP spamming this thread? If you have something to say I advise you to take ONE post to do so. It's not even as if you had something of value to say.

Did a little cleaning up for you.

Also is this your first time reviewing an album by a well-known band? If so, congrats on popping that cherry. The complaints only get more critical from here on out. :p

Written by Troy Killjoy on 11.01.2015 at 23:22

Did a little cleaning up for you.

Also is this your first time reviewing an album by a well-known band? If so, congrats on popping that cherry. The complaints only get more critical from here on out. :p

Thanksies.

Hmmm I'd say Machine Head was the first on MS, last month, then there was Marilyn Manson. But I have reviewed in the past for a French webzine. It feels as if the cherry gets popped every time to be honest.

Written by Ilham on 11.01.2015 at 23:26
Hmmm I'd say Machine Head was the first on MS, last month, then there was Marilyn Manson. But I have reviewed in the past for a French webzine. It feels as if the cherry gets popped every time to be honest.

I haven't listened to this yet (let's be honest, probably won't until like the end of the year) but your review seems pretty fair. I know people on here tend to get up in arms over any review score that isn't at least an 8 but a 69% isn't too shabby for standard Marduk fodder.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 11.01.2015 at 23:31

I haven't listened to this yet (let's be honest, probably won't until like the end of the year) but your review seems pretty fair. I know people on here tend to get up in arms over any review score that isn't at least an 8 but a 69% isn't too shabby for standard Marduk fodder.

Thank you. I personally wouldn't urge you to, even if it isn't an unpleasant listen if you like what they usually do.

But you know, it's easier to build theories on how one should view music as a whole and have this or that expectation of x band, than try to understand a rating + a few negative remarks on the latest album by your favourite band. So hard some people need to resort to patronizing ways of expressing themselves. Ah the internet <3.

Written by deadone on 12.01.2015 at 03:01
It means "fog launcher/mortar" cause originally it was meant to fire smoke and chemical weapons.

Deadone missing an internet joke that was even LINKED in the review .

Quote:
- you know, that thing that werfs nebels.

I cannot compare "modern" Marduk to "old" Marduk because I've never listened to the old one, but I love "modern" Marduk. Yet I have to admit that this album is pretty soulless... All tracks sound okish but so far I don't remember any of them :/ Of course rom 5:12 is my fave, yet Wormwood is very good and even Serpent Sermon includes a few memorable tracks like Temple of Decay. Won't buy this one for sure...

Album kills!!!

Written by Zap on 11.01.2015 at 20:24

Written by PanzerPriest on 11.01.2015 at 13:06

No-no. I just expressed my opinion. There are people who expect something new from the bands, there are people who expect to get the same old tunes, you know. That is why it was my own opinion. Because I've really liked new Marduk album)

My point was that - even though it's fine to expect nothing new from a band - when you write a review it's perfectly normal to touch upon the fact that it's unoriginal and give it a low score on originality. Your comment seemed to imply that the review was somehow being too critical regarding originality.
I'm really tired, so I might have interpreted that incorrectly/formulated my thoughts incorrectly.

Yes, I really wanted to imply what you have mentioned. It all came about because of the low points for the album. You see, there are a lot of people who usually decide whether to buy or to upload some albums after having studied the review. That is why I was aliitle bit confused after having seen the final score.

But anyway, I'm not trying to prove somebody wrong. I'm just expressing my opinion.. It's a metal forum and a wonderful one, isnt'it?))

OK, the album is not very original, but is VERY listenable! Marduk still rules!