The Official Metal Thread

**icarusfall** · 23 Jan 2007, 08:32 AM

cheeks, he said earlier that 'Domination' and 'Slaughter of the Soul' are bad records on the level of Cold Lake.

That's just fucking stupid - pay no attention.

**jyoung** · 23 Jan 2007, 01:34 PM

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

you contradict yourself here. This statement says nothing for progression. You are assuming that they achieve this by the means that you have previously described as ideal. Also, Metallica probably still felt they were doing this all through out their career. Hell, their effort to do this for the most possible people possible is why they probably "sold out."

There is no contradiction; the distinction that you seem not to have noticed is that the true artist seeks to transform those eternal aspects of life that may be ordinary yet unnoticed, visible yet unexplored, vital yet forgotten, and so on, into a specific artifice, containing within it some mystical and transcendent power that may enlighten—or as some might say, “awaken”—and evoke new emotions in its audience.

In contrast, the pop artist (which in itself is essentially an oxymoron) aims to recreate that which is already known, or more specifically, the familiar, the comforting, the cliché, etc.; this is why hundred-year-old conventions of harmony and theme have been a part of popular music for several centuries now: musicians established long ago a theoretical command of how to recreate the abovementioned feelings, and frankly, most of humanity wants little more from music than something that will be soothing and reassuring, claming and comforting, pleasant and appealing (in the decorative sense), etc. However, true art, especially as it relates to metal, is anything but that: it finds beauty in the grotesque, significance in the mundane, and most importantly, does not shy away from, but seeks out reality, however harsh or “depressing” that reality may be.

Originally Posted by icarusfall

cheeks, he said earlier that 'Domination' and 'Slaughter of the Soul' are bad records on the level of Cold Lake.

That's just fucking stupid - pay no attention.

If we weigh each of these albums on its individual merits, then yes, “Cold Lake” is by far the worst of the bunch (with “Slaughter of the Soul” following close behind and “Domination” only a bit further back), but to do so is to miss the grand point, that being: each band had fallen into some degree of musical and artistic descent on previous albums, and that descent ultimately culminated with the rock-bottom performances listed in my previous posts. That each album represents a differing degree of failure only suggests that certain bands fall further and harder than others. Besides, what’s truly important is that we recognize these failures and discard them as such without wasting much energy over their varying degrees of ineptitude; we should instead save that energy for discerning the differences between what’s merely good and what’s truly great (i.e., the music that is not only worth listening to, but also worthy of intense mental engagement).

**icarusfall** · 23 Jan 2007, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by wEEman33

(with “Slaughter of the Soul” following close behind and “Domination” only a bit further back)

That each album represents a differing degree of failure only suggests that certain bands fall further and harder than others.

what’s truly important is that we recognize these failures and discard them as such

It's not the albums, it's you.

To think Slaughter of the Soul is a shitty record is just plain wrong. SotS is universally considered At the Gates' best record. To say it's a failure on par with the useless Cold Lake (which even the band wishes they could disown) is absurd. This album is untouchable.

Domination. I'll give you that Domination is different than its predecessors. If you're not down with that, that's cool, but again, it's not a bad record. It didn't sound like anything else at the time, so you can't really make the Untr00 argument. It's technically proficient, so no faults there. It's because the band wasn't stuck in the same rut of cranking out album after album of the same stuff that you're criticizing them. I saw ATG and Morbid Angel together many years ago, and you would have been the only one not having a fucking life affirming time with the songs from these records.

Your argument reeks of self importance and a generally childish mentality. What you're saying is the battle cry of People Who Don't Create. If music is in such a bad way, learn an instrument and make music you'd be happy with.

Also, music doesn't have to be so serious all the time. Sometimes I want to listen to something that doesn't require my full attention. That someone made the record when they could have spent more time making the parts more complex (just an example) doesn't detract at all from the listening experience - sometimes it enhances it. Not all music is art, just as all painting isn't art. Sometimes it's just pleasant sound.

**ElCapichan** · 23 Jan 2007, 05:44 PM

wEEman and buttcheeks wrote some pretty damn long posts that I am way to lazy to read right now, yet I am going to respond anyway.

First, I want to say that wEEman is an elitist snob who thinks his opinions on music are final and absolute. His subjective opinion on bands and music in general have almost no relation to that of those who actual are able to enjoy music. I say this because I know wEEman personaly, but I honestly think he does not enjoy music for the sake of music, but rather to just be an elitist snob.

I don't think anyone here is disagreeing that progression, to simplify lets just say to an extent vastly different from previous albums, is a bad thing. The problem is that musicians are human. They aren't perfec beings that can keep pushin the envelope to the next level. A personal example for me would be Dream Theater. Their sound is constantly changing, while remaining true to the band. The problem here is that there are only a few songs of theirs I enjoy on the later albums as opposed to earlier albums where I like pretty much all the songs.

In the case where a band changes their sound, progresses their music so to speak, the outcome is 100% subjective. In my Dream Theater example, someone else who may not have been a huge Dream Theater fan may turn out to like a vast majority of the songs on the new album while I like only a few. I can see where you are coming from wEEman, but my problem with what you are saying is that it seems like you are trying to play it off as fact while music taste is subjective. As station said, taste in music can change. I can honestly say that I would never had thought in a million years that I would be listening to Jurassic 5 and Gorillaz, yet here I am today finding that some of their songs entertain me.

Rambling aside, I guess what I am trying to say is that what you view as progression may not seem that way to someone else and vice versa. An even more personal example is that you prefer Porcupine Tree's older albums while I like their newer ones.

**icarusfall** · 23 Jan 2007, 07:08 PM

You like anything recent they've done over Lightbulb Sun? Weird.

I agree by the by, as I pointed out with the ATG / Morbid Angel concert analogy.

**Fe 26** · 23 Jan 2007, 08:07 PM

Originally Posted by ElCapitan

First, I want to say that wEEman is an elitist snob who thinks his opinions on music are final and absolute.

I think you are going a little far with that comment. His opinion may seem odd, but so far he has remained civil in sharing it. Don’t attack him just because you don’t agree with him.

**ElCapichan** · 23 Jan 2007, 11:01 PM

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

I think you are going a little far with that comment. His opinion may seem odd, but so far he has remained civil in sharing it. Don’t attack him just because you don’t agree with him.

Might have put it earlier, but ment to put that I was just being hard on him because we are actually good friends. i still think he is a music snob though.