Rating:
8.6
Arkona - Гой, Роде, Гой!
28 October 2009


01. Гой, Роде, Гой!
02. Тропою Неведанной
03. Невидаль
04. На Моей Земле
05. Притча
06. В Цепях Древней Тайны
07. Ярило
08. Лики Бессмертных Богов
09. Коло Нави
10. Корочун
11. Память
12. Купалец
13. Аркона
14. Небо Хмурое, Тучи Мрачные


Admittedly, I have been quite critical in the past of this genre called "folk metal". It was novel and fun at first, but after a while - like any other genre - it became watered down with a lot of worthless crap. It's a lot easier for me to put down crappy folk metal than any other genre. I'm a man who appreciates solid riffing above anything else, and when any potential riffing is completely drowned out in accordions or synthesizers (not mentioning a particular Finnish band that begins with a "K"), I get angry. No one likes a rabid reviewer when they're angry. However, every once in a while a band or album will come along to raise the bar for metal as a whole; using the folk sound to enhance the music rather than cover up any lack of song writing abilities with gimmicky child's play. With Goi, Rode, Goi!, Arkona have undoubtedly secured their place next to the more respectable folk acts out there these days such as Moonsorrow and Eluveitie.

So why do Arkona deserve respect above other folk "metal" acts? It's simple - they keep the "metal" in folk metal. Between the staple chants & interludes of various instruments (done tastefully may I add), there is plenty of aggressive riffing, blast-beats, and pissed-off guttural vocals. The impressive part about this album is how well it flows together, end to end, with next to no repetition. The whole thing almost works like a story in itself; you're not going to see the same scene twice.

Like the common problem within folk metal, Arkona appear to be a little too over-indulgent. Unlike most folk metal, the over-indulgent tendencies aren't the instruments themselves, but rather the sheer length of this piece. As I said, it's a seamless, flowing, varied work of art, each section being essential to the overall picture - not so bad, right? Well, in most cases, no, but Goi, Rode, Goi! Is about twice as long as your average album. Sitting through 80 minutes of anything is difficult, but especially so when it's an album that isn't easily broken into more digestible pieces. It could just be my A.D.D. talking, but it's hard not to get distracted after a while, which results in overlooking potential highlights. Long story short Goi, Rode, Goi! could have benefited from being broken down into 2 discs. Unless you're particularly enthusiastic about the genre, an entire play through will leave you with no energy to do anything but sit in your swivel chair and drool on yourself.

Altogether this is what the pinnacle of folk metal could sound like, but needs a little bit of consolidation to offer a more direct punch to be heralded as any kind of instant classic. Oh well, maybe next time.

Performance: 10
Songwriting: 8
Originality: 8
Production: 9


Band profile: Arkona
Album: Гой, Роде, Гой!


 



Written on 02.12.2009 by
Doc Godin
Former EIC. Now just a reviewer guy.
More reviews by Doc Godin ››



Comments

‹‹ Back to the Reviews
Comments: 41  
Users visited: 383  
Search this topic:  


ItalktotheWind - 02.12.2009 at 12:02  
Good review, dually noted on the korpiklaani reference and the length of the album. I must checks it out.
Baz Anderson - 02.12.2009 at 13:26  
Eluveitie are one folk band I won't touch. It just goes to show folk metal is very person-specific.

The length makes this album unbearable. The new Equilibrium album was also this length (well, a little longer), but it was consistently good. This just seems long for the sake of cramming as much on as possible.
BudDa - 02.12.2009 at 13:31  
Written by Baz Anderson on 02.12.2009 at 13:26

This just seems long for the sake of cramming as much on as possible.


What do u mean by that..
Baz Anderson - 02.12.2009 at 13:40  
Written by BudDa on 02.12.2009 at 13:31

What do u mean by that..

It's long without the quality to back it up.
Stigmatized - 02.12.2009 at 14:16  
Written by Baz Anderson on 02.12.2009 at 13:26

Eluveitie are one folk band I won't touch. It just goes to show folk metal is very person-specific.




I've never thought of them as folk metal. It's basically In Flames with folk instruments. Arkona is more along the lines of actual folk metal IMO.
Ellrohir - 02.12.2009 at 14:27  
Eluveitie sucks imo and it is incredibly overrated...but this doesnt belong here

what i want to say about this review is, that i dont understand, why is everyone so bothered with "long albums"? i listen to music almost all time i sit before my computer at home and this makes sometimes not less then 10 hours pro day...so i really dont mind one album would be 1/10th of it...for me it is even sort of an advantage...
Elio - 02.12.2009 at 15:31  
This review kinda intrigues me, I still haven't heard the album. The 80 mins could be an important question mark though, I don't know if it can be interesting this long. Oh, and latest Eluveitie was really bad.
*!* - 02.12.2009 at 16:11  
Quote:
It's long without the quality to back it up.

just what i was thinking ;P
Chainer - 02.12.2009 at 16:58  
Quote:
i really dont mind one album would be 1/10th of it...for me it is even sort of an advantage...


I don't have anything against long albums in general, and I think that most people agree. But when an album just doesn't deliver over the course of 80 minutes I can see how that would be a huge turn off. Now that being said, I haven't listened to this so I wont make any assumptions about its quality, but if its 80 min of sub-par or even ok folk metal I could see not being interested enough to sit through the whole thing.
Valaskjalf - 02.12.2009 at 18:05  
And above it all, from a personal point of view, I cant stand female-fronted metal. Nothing chauvinistic about it, it just sounds wrong. But yeah, sometimes a lot of variation can be bad when the album is so killer long - Im all for music which takes time to digest but then it should be because of its complexity or musicianship and songstructures - not simply because its so crap long because then it turns into elevator / background music.
Ellrohir - 02.12.2009 at 18:15  
Written by Valaskjalf on 02.12.2009 at 18:05

And above it all, from a personal point of view, I cant stand female-fronted metal. Nothing chauvinistic about it


sorry, but this simply IS chauvinistic
Valaskjalf - 02.12.2009 at 18:26  
Written by Ellrohir on 02.12.2009 at 18:15

Written by Valaskjalf on 02.12.2009 at 18:05

And above it all, from a personal point of view, I cant stand female-fronted metal. Nothing chauvinistic about it


sorry, but this simply IS chauvinistic


lol fair enough it prolly is, but its my preference....for what its worth the woman who sang on the first couple of Dark Moor albums was super good and better than all the guys who followed her so that should count for a LITTLE bit to redeem myself. But yeah, thats just how it is.
Ellrohir - 02.12.2009 at 19:04  
Maybe its just you are jealous Masha can growl better than you...
MétalNoir - 02.12.2009 at 20:08  
The rating is OK, but the comments about the length are irrelevent. I've been let down by many albums that were too short, and this one is long enough to make you fully appreciate what the band wanted you to feel. And, without Na Moey Zemle, the album would have been average in terms of length, but this track is the album's highlight. This is Arkona's best album to date and one of the best folk efforts I ever heard.
Ellrohir - 02.12.2009 at 22:38  
I think their best album is Od Sertsa K Nebu, but this is very good one too
Ernis - 02.12.2009 at 23:13  
Quote:
I'm a man who appreciates solid riffing above anything else, and when any potential riffing is completely drowned out in accordions or synthesizers (not mentioning a particular Finnish band that begins with a "K"), I get angry.

Let's make a club....
I have never liked those "ultra-finnish(so finnish you can tell it's finnish in an instant)" folk metal acts who add so much "jenkka", "humppa" etc into the music it becomes painfully annoying...Finntroll, for instance, being one of the worst examples...the ridiculous Finnish accordion/fiddle style is not my cup of tea at all...the first association I have is overweight drunk Finns dancing some cheap barn-dance and singing something really silly so...no happy lil' boozer for me, thank you : )

Arkona, on the other hand is special....although Eastern-European folk (including Finnish) is also in Arkona's work, it's more closer to me in Estonia and I understand it better...Finnish is distinct from others and thus has some characteristics I find annoying which Russian, Estonian, Wõro, Karelian, Ukrainian etc don't have....

Eluveitie is grand too...a good example...their antique/celtic/greek style and Gaulish language lyrics are wonderful and very special....they put great effort into what they do plus the overall fiery (south European) style and the distinctive sound of the ancient language form a fine blend....

unlike "LET'S DRINK! (accordion rape) LET'S PUKE! (fiddle/accordion rape)...humppa humppa humppa..."
That's just my taste tho...

But I'm definitely going to check out Arkona's Гой, роде, гой...
GT - 02.12.2009 at 23:20  
I don't really like this album. I can't put my finger on what annoys me, but something does and it's not the length. One moment I find myself thinking "this is actually good" and then five seconds later "this is awful/annoying/boring/pointless".
Nergal - 12.12.2009 at 21:27  
How's that Goi, Rode, Goi has the worst rating among Arkona's albums???
Very strange, it's their best album...
Winterthrone - 14.01.2010 at 00:17  
This review is very good. I agree with almost everything stated in it except for the comment about the length of this awesome album. To me it passes quickly despite it 's over an hour long, just because the music is so diversified and awe-inspiring. This review made me check out that band and I was not disapointed at all!
wes337 - 14.01.2010 at 03:11  
Good review, Arkona is a sick band
Torgo - 25.03.2010 at 19:08  
Written by MétalNoir on 02.12.2009 at 20:08

I've been let down by many albums that were too short, and this one is long enough to make you fully appreciate what the band wanted you to feel.
I completely agree. Many times I will buy a new album and just when Im Really getting into it BAM! it ends! and find myself wanting more then realizing it's going to be another 2-3 years before this band will be releasing a new album With an album like this it gives you alot more to hold you over and I believe the quality is there to back it up

Written by MétalNoir on 02.12.2009 at 20:08

And, without Na Moey Zemle, the album would have been average in terms of length, but this track is the album's highlight.
Again I agree. and also the last track which has a 10 min run time is really only a 4.30 min song the rest is just nature sounds with a little instrumental jig at the end. So there's another 5 min off for you!

Anyways! I think it's great! just ordered one for myself!
MétalNoir - 26.03.2010 at 13:57  
Written by Torgo on 25.03.2010 at 19:08

Written by MétalNoir on 02.12.2009 at 20:08

I've been let down by many albums that were too short, and this one is long enough to make you fully appreciate what the band wanted you to feel.
I completely agree. Many times I will buy a new album and just when Im Really getting into it BAM! it ends! and find myself wanting more then realizing it's going to be another 2-3 years before this band will be releasing a new album With an album like this it gives you alot more to hold you over and I believe the quality is there to back it up

Written by MétalNoir on 02.12.2009 at 20:08

And, without Na Moey Zemle, the album would have been average in terms of length, but this track is the album's highlight.
Again I agree. and also the last track which has a 10 min run time is really only a 4.30 min song the rest is just nature sounds with a little instrumental jig at the end. So there's another 5 min off for you!

Anyways! I think it's great! just ordered one for myself!


And guess what? Ensiferum won the MS folk award! Total bullshit... The awards are not won by worthy albums, they're won by popular bands. I personnally try to listen a bit to many listed albums before I vote. Anyway, Goi, Rode, Goi is in my top ten of folk metal for a long time.
Bovinus - 30.11.2010 at 18:41  
Complainting about "the length of an album" sounds like Emperor Joseph II about Mozart's "Marriage of Figaro", which contained "too many notes". In two words : total bullshit.
Doc Godin - 02.12.2010 at 07:17  
Written by Bovinus on 30.11.2010 at 18:41

Complainting about "the length of an album" sounds like Emperor Joseph II about Mozart's "Marriage of Figaro", which contained "too many notes". In two words : total bullshit.

Not really. As listening to basically the same thing for too long is tiresome.
Bovinus - 02.12.2010 at 12:43  
Written by Doc Godin on 02.12.2010 at 07:17

Written by Bovinus on 30.11.2010 at 18:41

Complainting about "the length of an album" sounds like Emperor Joseph II about Mozart's "Marriage of Figaro", which contained "too many notes". In two words : total bullshit.

Not really. As listening to basically the same thing for too long is tiresome.


Then the problem is how do you like the album, rather than its length. If folk metal is not your cup of tea, forcing yourself listening to folk metal for 75 minutes long is probably not the most reasonable thing to do. But again, there are "stop" buttons on a CD Player. And someone who enjoys folk metal would on the contrary be pretty happy to get such a long album for the price of a "normal" one. Only my 2 cents.

By the way, Doc Godin, may I ask how did you get that 8 for the songwriting part of the review ? Do you speak russian ? I studied it, and I still don't get the half of the text, even with the lyrics right under my nose. This is not even russian, this is ancient russian. I also got the english version of the booklet, which contains basically nothing. Not trying to be agressive here, just wondering.
Marcel Hubregtse - 02.12.2010 at 12:52  
Written by Bovinus on 30.11.2010 at 18:41

Complainting about "the length of an album" sounds like Emperor Joseph II about Mozart's "Marriage of Figaro", which contained "too many notes". In two words : total bullshit.


Ever heard of the saying "less is more"? Most of the times that applies. Loads of albums when going over the 50 minute mark lose punch and become less effective.
And too many notes usually also is a weakness, sipmlicity is the key to great works of art
I love doom and old school death metal and old school thrash metal. And most of the great albums in those genres clock around 50 minutes. There are only couple of exceptions. Esoteric - The Maniacal Vale which is over 100 minutes being one.
Bovinus - 02.12.2010 at 13:45  
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 02.12.2010 at 12:52

Written by Bovinus on 30.11.2010 at 18:41

Complainting about "the length of an album" sounds like Emperor Joseph II about Mozart's "Marriage of Figaro", which contained "too many notes". In two words : total bullshit.


Ever heard of the saying "less is more"? Most of the times that applies. Loads of albums when going over the 50 minute mark lose punch and become less effective.
And too many notes usually also is a weakness, sipmlicity is the key to great works of art
I love doom and old school death metal and old school thrash metal. And most of the great albums in those genres clock around 50 minutes. There are only couple of exceptions. Esoteric - The Maniacal Vale which is over 100 minutes being one.

Heh, I hate death metal. From my point of view, any death metal album longer than 1 minute is already way too long
But I can understand that there are people out there who like this genre, and probably are able to enjoy a death metal album 75 minutes long.
Mr. Doctor - 02.12.2010 at 19:20  
Written by Bovinus on 02.12.2010 at 12:43

By the way, Doc Godin, may I ask how did you get that 8 for the songwriting part of the review ? Do you speak russian ? I studied it, and I still don't get the half of the text, even with the lyrics right under my nose. This is not even russian, this is ancient russian. I also got the english version of the booklet, which contains basically nothing. Not trying to be agressive here, just wondering.


The songwriting doesn't have anything to do with the lyrics... at all. It's just about how the SONGS are build. The composition, etc...

My 2 cents here: Yes... You can judge an album by it's lenght, some bands don't have the skills to back it up and make you focus on the music.
Doc Godin - 02.12.2010 at 19:27  
Written by Mr. Doctor on 02.12.2010 at 19:20

Written by Bovinus on 02.12.2010 at 12:43

By the way, Doc Godin, may I ask how did you get that 8 for the songwriting part of the review ? Do you speak russian ? I studied it, and I still don't get the half of the text, even with the lyrics right under my nose. This is not even russian, this is ancient russian. I also got the english version of the booklet, which contains basically nothing. Not trying to be agressive here, just wondering.


The songwriting doesn't have anything to do with the lyrics... at all. It's just about how the SONGS are build. The composition, etc...

My 2 cents here: Yes... You can judge an album by it's lenght, some bands don't have the skills to back it up and make you focus on the music.

Guy just wants to bitch because he's butthurt I didn't give a favourite album of his 10/10.
Doc Godin - 02.12.2010 at 19:37  
Written by Bovinus on 02.12.2010 at 12:43

Written by Doc Godin on 02.12.2010 at 07:17

Written by Bovinus on 30.11.2010 at 18:41

Complainting about "the length of an album" sounds like Emperor Joseph II about Mozart's "Marriage of Figaro", which contained "too many notes". In two words : total bullshit.

Not really. As listening to basically the same thing for too long is tiresome.


Then the problem is how do you like the album, rather than its length. If folk metal is not your cup of tea, forcing yourself listening to folk metal for 75 minutes long is probably not the most reasonable thing to do. But again, there are "stop" buttons on a CD Player. And someone who enjoys folk metal would on the contrary be pretty happy to get such a long album for the price of a "normal" one. Only my 2 cents.

By the way, Doc Godin, may I ask how did you get that 8 for the songwriting part of the review ? Do you speak russian ? I studied it, and I still don't get the half of the text, even with the lyrics right under my nose. This is not even russian, this is ancient russian. I also got the english version of the booklet, which contains basically nothing. Not trying to be agressive here, just wondering.

I enjoy folk metal very much. It doesn't take some profound understanding to "get" this genre so it's nothing like doom or black where I may be approaching it from the wrong angle. The complaint on length applies to an album of any genre. I've heard bands play a 35 minute album that was too long for it's own good. There was a lot of dead parts in this album that could have been cut out, making 80 minutes wholly unnecessary.

As for your second point. Think that over a few times, and if you still don't quite understand why it's a silly question, read Mr.Doctors response, as he seems to have a grasp on what criteria music should be judged on.
Bovinus - 03.12.2010 at 03:40  
Written by Doc Godin on 02.12.2010 at 19:27

Written by Mr. Doctor on 02.12.2010 at 19:20

Written by Bovinus on 02.12.2010 at 12:43

By the way, Doc Godin, may I ask how did you get that 8 for the songwriting part of the review ? Do you speak russian ? I studied it, and I still don't get the half of the text, even with the lyrics right under my nose. This is not even russian, this is ancient russian. I also got the english version of the booklet, which contains basically nothing. Not trying to be agressive here, just wondering.


The songwriting doesn't have anything to do with the lyrics... at all. It's just about how the SONGS are build. The composition, etc...

My 2 cents here: Yes... You can judge an album by it's lenght, some bands don't have the skills to back it up and make you focus on the music.

Guy just wants to bitch because he's butthurt I didn't give a favourite album of his 10/10.

Nah, you don't get it. I just like to understand things. As someone already pointed it out, comments about the length seem irrelevant to SOME people (me included). There are people who think the contrary, well, I guess there is nothing wrong with it, but we can still talk, right ?

About the songwriting, thanks for enlightening me. If the lyrics do not count in it, I guess 8 is even too generous. 6.5-7 would have been more appropriate imo.

Now, about my opinion on Goi Rode Goi, since Sir Godin seems concerned... well, I would say this album deserves a bit less than 8, so, it looks like you appreciated it a tad more than I did In case you would wonder why I gave it a 9, well... I've browsed through random accounts, and many people only seem to have like 3 ratings : 10, 9, sometimes 8. On the other hand, I'm totally newb on this site, so I'm still toying with the features, the rating system, the collections, the lists, and all this stuff. It's very possible that I don't fully understand the rating system and how it should work. I mean, there is a lot of stuff out there that seems heavily overrated, isn't it ? Many albums considered like "classics" only have an average rating around 9.2 or something like (good example : Rust in Peace), which means that this new Arkona record should be in fact rated at 6 or 7. Honestly, do we have a legendary album here ? No way. On the other hand, if Goi Rode Goi had a rating of 6, people would think it's shit, when it is not for sure.

Being objective is not easy at all
Doc Godin - 03.12.2010 at 04:18  
Written by Bovinus on 03.12.2010 at 03:40

Nah, you don't get it. I just like to understand things. As someone already pointed it out, comments about the length seem irrelevant to SOME people (me included). There are people who think the contrary, well, I guess there is nothing wrong with it, but we can still talk, right ?

About the songwriting, thanks for enlightening me. If the lyrics do not count in it, I guess 8 is even too generous. 6.5-7 would have been more appropriate imo.

Now, about my opinion on Goi Rode Goi, since Sir Godin seems concerned... well, I would say this album deserves a bit less than 8, so, it looks like you appreciated it a tad more than I did In case you would wonder why I gave it a 9, well... I've browsed through random accounts, and many people only seem to have like 3 ratings : 10, 9, sometimes 8. On the other hand, I'm totally newb on this site, so I'm still toying with the features, the rating system, the collections, the lists, and all this stuff. It's very possible that I don't fully understand the rating system and how it should work. I mean, there is a lot of stuff out there that seems heavily overrated, isn't it ? Many albums considered like "classics" only have an average rating around 9.2 or something like (good example : Rust in Peace), which means that this new Arkona record should be in fact rated at 6 or 7. Honestly, do we have a legendary album here ? No way. On the other hand, if Goi Rode Goi had a rating of 6, people would think it's shit, when it is not for sure.

Being objective is not easy at all

As you said before, it is my opinion. All opinions are irrelevant to the people who don't agree with those opinions.

As for how to gauge things when it comes to the voting system you'll notice (if you've been paying attention) when you're voting next to the number there's a word or two, exactly like so:
10 - Perfect
9 - Excellent
8 - Very Good
7 - Good
6 - Average
5 - Not Good
4 - Bad
3 - Very Bad
2 - Pure Shit
1 - Worst Ever

Your vote should reflect that, it's a pretty fool proof system that's kinda hard to screw up (which people somehow manage anyways). However, by the way you stated things, it seems your voting is entirely relative to other peoples votes, which renders any fool-proofing pretty much useless.
Bovinus - 03.12.2010 at 21:21  
Written by Doc Godin on 03.12.2010 at 04:18

Written by Bovinus on 03.12.2010 at 03:40

Nah, you don't get it. I just like to understand things. As someone already pointed it out, comments about the length seem irrelevant to SOME people (me included). There are people who think the contrary, well, I guess there is nothing wrong with it, but we can still talk, right ?

About the songwriting, thanks for enlightening me. If the lyrics do not count in it, I guess 8 is even too generous. 6.5-7 would have been more appropriate imo.

Now, about my opinion on Goi Rode Goi, since Sir Godin seems concerned... well, I would say this album deserves a bit less than 8, so, it looks like you appreciated it a tad more than I did In case you would wonder why I gave it a 9, well... I've browsed through random accounts, and many people only seem to have like 3 ratings : 10, 9, sometimes 8. On the other hand, I'm totally newb on this site, so I'm still toying with the features, the rating system, the collections, the lists, and all this stuff. It's very possible that I don't fully understand the rating system and how it should work. I mean, there is a lot of stuff out there that seems heavily overrated, isn't it ? Many albums considered like "classics" only have an average rating around 9.2 or something like (good example : Rust in Peace), which means that this new Arkona record should be in fact rated at 6 or 7. Honestly, do we have a legendary album here ? No way. On the other hand, if Goi Rode Goi had a rating of 6, people would think it's shit, when it is not for sure.

Being objective is not easy at all

As you said before, it is my opinion. All opinions are irrelevant to the people who don't agree with those opinions.

As for how to gauge things when it comes to the voting system you'll notice (if you've been paying attention) when you're voting next to the number there's a word or two, exactly like so:
10 - Perfect
9 - Excellent
8 - Very Good
7 - Good
6 - Average
5 - Not Good
4 - Bad
3 - Very Bad
2 - Pure Shit
1 - Worst Ever

Your vote should reflect that, it's a pretty fool proof system that's kinda hard to screw up (which people somehow manage anyways). However, by the way you stated things, it seems your voting is entirely relative to other peoples votes, which renders any fool-proofing pretty much useless.


Yea, I did notice what is corresponding to each number. However, allow me to develop this a bit further : it's not only about the "absolute value" of an 8 or a 7, but also about who it is supposed to be addressed to. I mean, are we voting for selves ? Certainly not, since we should know what we do prefer in our collection without the help of any ratings. The act of voting is a message to people who will see this rating and perhaps decide on its basis if an album is worthy or not, and if it is, to what degree in comparison to an another album. In other words, most people probably use the rating system as a tool to inform the community about what they do like or do not, instead of using it as an impartial evaluation tool. This explains why one can be tempted to add or remove a point or two, "relatively to other peoples votes" (exactly as you stated it). Which explains why an album that deserves an 8, for example, finally gets a 9 (or a 7). Nothing really bad so far, however, there are plenty of "very good" albums out there (in fact, I suppose that most of albums produced nowadays are at least good). Sorting them more precisely becomes even harder. Which ones will you still listen to 10 years later ? Which ones will be forgotten ?

I guess the first one to rate an album is also the only one to do it without being influenced by the opinion of someone else, since he does it "blindly". When the album is already rated, you have no choice but to rate it relatively to the existent rating (or to not rate it at all). Basically, your rating says that :
- you do agree with the opinion of previous people (you rate it as close to the actual rating as possible)
- you do disagree ; from there, the question is only to state how much.

In both cases, you're not "objective" anymore (objective relatively to your own personal criteria, which is an another long story). In both cases, the purpose of rating gets somewhat screwed, since you only have the choice between doing like everyone else. or to contest the main opinion. The only way to make it so that one would always vote "blindly" would be to hide the ratings for good ; however, we would lose the possibility to know how people rate the albums that we do not know.

Well, this is how I do see the picture. Am I wrong somewhere ?
bozgy - 13.06.2012 at 13:01  
Written by Mr. Doctor on 02.12.2010 at 19:20

Written by Bovinus on 02.12.2010 at 12:43

By the way, Doc Godin, may I ask how did you get that 8 for the songwriting part of the review ? Do you speak russian ? I studied it, and I still don't get the half of the text, even with the lyrics right under my nose. This is not even russian, this is ancient russian. I also got the english version of the booklet, which contains basically nothing. Not trying to be agressive here, just wondering.


The songwriting doesn't have anything to do with the lyrics... at all. It's just about how the SONGS are build. The composition, etc...

My 2 cents here: Yes... You can judge an album by it's lenght, some bands don't have the skills to back it up and make you focus on the music.


Really? The songwriting doesn't have anything to do with the lyrics... at all?
OoooK... If you say so....
Mr. Doctor - 13.06.2012 at 13:04  
Written by bozgy on 13.06.2012 at 13:01

Really? The songwriting doesn't have anything to do with the lyrics... at all?
OoooK... If you say so....


If you feel that you can judge the music based on LYRICS then it's your choice but I don't find it correct, specially if by chance you happen to not understand a single word of what the singer is saying then the vocals just work as another instrument (and that's in fact what vocals are... another instrument), making the content of the lyrics quite trivial.

I wouldn't take out points in the rating of an album with fantastic music just because I don't like the lyrics. I find it stupid... Specially if we are talking about instrumental, growling/singing made-up words or a language you don't understand... It makes the whole "judging the lyrics" thing completely pointless.
bozgy - 13.06.2012 at 16:08  
Quote:


If you feel that you can judge the music based on LYRICS then it's your choice but I don't find it correct, specially if by chance you happen to not understand a single word of what the singer is saying then the vocals just work as another instrument (and that's in fact what vocals are... another instrument), making the content of the lyrics quite trivial.
-----------

I see your point, still I cannot believe we're debating if lyrics should be considered when reviewing an album
If the reviewer doesn't understand them then the review is not complete. We appreciate the effort and read it as it is....
However, if somebody who understand the language can add some perspective on the lyrics, I think this should be saluted since it makes the review more complete.

All the best
Mr. Doctor - 13.06.2012 at 17:26  
Written by bozgy on 13.06.2012 at 16:08

If the reviewer doesn't understand them then the review is not complete. We appreciate the effort and read it as it is....


I have to disagree with the "If the reviewer doesn't understand them then the review is not complete". This feels harsh and unreasonable on the reviewers specially when some lyrics are (let's face it) not particularly interesting. Not every album deserves a dissection of their lyrics. If they are very good, they can be named, if they are very bad... they can be named as well.... If they are neutral in quality, no good or bad... Then it's up to the reviewer I guess. But to say that the reviewer didn't finish his work is just wrong as there's not a guide of how to write a "good review". You can't mention every single thing in a review. There are so many reviews out there which discuss the album perfectly but don't give much talk (if any) to the lyrics. Look around many other official reviews out there in other websites, the amount of them that take the time to discuss the lyrics is a minority and it's understandable because not every album deserves an explanation of that... are they lesser reviews because of that? Hell no. Not even the professional music/movie reviewers that do it as a living need to do it.
Troy Killjoy - 14.06.2012 at 02:56  
Of all my reviews, maybe three of them make mention of the lyrical content - and even then, it's usually done with a single sentence. This review is in no way incomplete or bad because it doesn't spend an unnecessary amount of time discussing the lyrics, because it describes the music. In metal, the music is far more important than the words.
Doc Godin - 15.06.2012 at 04:34  
Written by Troy Killjoy on 14.06.2012 at 02:56

Of all my reviews, maybe three of them make mention of the lyrical content - and even then, it's usually done with a single sentence. This review is in no way incomplete or bad because it doesn't spend an unnecessary amount of time discussing the lyrics, because it describes the music. In metal, the music is far more important than the words.

Besides, if I were to put such a large emphasis on lyrics, I'd be handing out a lot more 2's around here. One of my favourite bands is 3 Inches Of Blood for fuck sakes, I'm in no position to talk about quality of lyrics.
Troy Killjoy - 15.06.2012 at 05:49  
Written by Doc Godin on 15.06.2012 at 04:34
Besides, if I were to put such a large emphasis on lyrics, I'd be handing out a lot more 2's around here. One of my favourite bands is 3 Inches Of Blood for fuck sakes, I'm in no position to talk about quality of lyrics.

A good chunk of bands I listen to don't even post their lyrics. And another good chunk sing in a language I don't even understand. I judge them as an additional instrument when it comes to metal, although with decipherable vocals (doom metal and various forms of pop and rock) I find it difficult to appreciate the music if the lyrics are disruptively bad.
Boxcar Willy - 15.06.2012 at 06:11  
Written by Troy Killjoy on 15.06.2012 at 05:49

Written by Doc Godin on 15.06.2012 at 04:34
Besides, if I were to put such a large emphasis on lyrics, I'd be handing out a lot more 2's around here. One of my favourite bands is 3 Inches Of Blood for fuck sakes, I'm in no position to talk about quality of lyrics.

A good chunk of bands I listen to don't even post their lyrics. And another good chunk sing in a language I don't even understand. I judge them as an additional instrument when it comes to metal, although with decipherable vocals (doom metal and various forms of pop and rock) I find it difficult to appreciate the music if the lyrics are disruptively bad.

Precisely this, I listen to see if they mix well, and are in key, and, unless they are hideously bad I tend to overlook them. But on the other end of the spectrum some vocalists are poets. Take David Gold for example, a lot of why I like him is due to the lyrics he writes. they definately add an atmosphere I love.

Advertise on Metal Storm


Login or register to post here.



Similar topics

Forum Topic Similarity Started
Albums Arkona - Гой, Роде, Гой! 6 14.11.2012 by Fredd
Reviews Angel Witch - As Above, So Below 4.5 18.04.2012 by Marcel Hubregtse
Reviews Syn Ze Sase Tri - Sub Semnul Lupului 4.5 08.05.2012 by TrollandDie
Reviews Primate - Draw Back A Stump 4.5 12.06.2012 by Loathera
Reviews The Firstborn - Lions Among Men 4.5 17.03.2012 by Milena



Hits total: 7793 | This month: 53