Metal Reviews

Adam, you took the words right out of my mouth. I REALLY wanted to like this album when I listened to it, being that it's not only one of the most influential "metal" albums of the 90's but also considered by many metal fans to be the only Korn album worth bothering with. But, try as I might, I just couldn't get into it. I hate Davis' voice (there, I said it!). The songs were repetitive. And the album as a whole just didn't a chord with me. Which is, I suppose, shocking since my views of nu-metal are typically more charitable than most metal fans feel is warranted.

I do, however, disagree with Zad somewhat about Shoots And Ladders. Not so much with regards to the quality of the song, but more with regards to its lyrics. The song was supposed to point out how a lot of nursery rhymes (like Ring Around The Rosie) are really about topics like death and murder but have been sanitized over the years so that they're now seen as kidstuff. Check it out on Wikipedia, if you're curious.

On a sidenote, am I the only one who noticed that Machine Head almost directly borrowed the Blind riff for the second half of Struck A Nerve? Pretty indicative of the direction the band would temporarily take a couple years later, eh?

What makes Korn really sad is that Davis still whines about his childhood, even though he's banged a porn star, has money to the gills, and has the pop-metal world at his feet.


Their foray into "experimental" with their "Untitled" LP was completely awful and even their fanbase thumbed their nose at it. So they're probably due to do one of those "return to roots" albums.

Oy vey.

i'd love to see a review of the untitiled album
great piece of prog rock

Yeah, I think it can. "Classic" to me just means something paradigmatic. It can, of course, be a paradigm of shit.

I don't really like this album. However, I dig Follow the Leader quite a lot. It has kind of a cool twisted vibe. So does this, but I just find the delivery a bit week.

Thats a short sighted, biased and all around retarded review.

Even if you don't like it, its undeniably a classic album based not only on its impact, influence and commercial success. But also on its musical merits as hard as that may be for "metal" fans to admit.

An undeniably original sound. The effective melding of opposing genres, creating its own genre to an extent and then defining that genre. Its historical impact on the industry, its fresh sound (at the time certainly) catchy, heavy etc.

There's obviously an argument to be made about it being dated now and not holding up well in hindsight. Things I wouldn't necessarily disagree with. But to pretend it wasn't what it was in its time is just dishonest.

It was a pile of shit then and is a pile of shit now. What's the musical merit of creating something that sucks? I just can't understand...

This album sucks. It even did back then. Follow the Leader and Issues always had more substance to them then this drivel.

But seriously, what? Calling anything Korn has done "prog rock" is in all ways ridiculous.

Follow The Leader has too much Rap influence, if you ask me. The song with Fred Durst is just painful.

Those last four words are the only intelligent thing you've said in this entire thread. You completely ignore everything fagporn says previous to that last sentence, all of which completely shits all over any opinion you may have on the subject.

You know, I think the Beatles are pretty shitty. I don't like Elvis one bit. Johnny Cash can lick my sack. Guess that means they've always sucked.

Oh gosh I don't even remember it. I may have shoved it from my memory. I haven't heard that album in years.

Beatles? Elvis? Nothing to do with Korn, except they were teen icons, and still I don't understand what's the merit in creating shitty music. That's the last thing I'll say in this thread.

Thanks.

Yes. That's why I think this is a Classic. More classic than the "classic" Elias reviewed this week, that i suposse (I haven't listened it) it far better musically than this, but less influential (half the forum, me included, haven't heard it).

Korn debut changed music (not in a good way, imo), so it's a classic.

I think I dealt with pretty much every point here in the review. Musical merits? HA! I listen to everything from classical to Jazz to Prog to Metal, to claim with a straight face that Korn has musical merits is ridiculous. It's NOT an original sound, as I said in the review. They took Primus, added hip-hop, and dumbed it down to a massive extent. Not original at all. Fresh sound? Huh. Catchy? Maybe, but if you honestly think DUNH DUNH DUNH is heavy you need to broaden your horizons, chum. An album that sold a lot and influenced shitty bands does not make it worthy of praise, in my eyes, as I said before.

This album changed some music. So there would be no complaints if I reviewed Nirvana's back catalogue next week?

For me is ok, first, you did it with Pearl Jam, why not with Nirvana? Nevermind is a classic (in influence terms, and musically far better than Korn) and Bleach is a good album.

But i think Soundgarden deserves some reviews first. Badmotorfinger is one hell of an album.

WAT

Oh, you got my plus one there.

Funny, the reaction to this in general. A year or two ago, everyone would have been Korn SUX! Now it's just a few of us that don't like 'em.