Action Jesus wrote:
That doesn't matter. I don't really give a flying fuck what a band is being marketed as. I only care if they are any good and worth listening to.
It's deceptive advertising, and irritates me. Doesn't have any impact on the quality of the band beyond perhaps a disappointed first impression.
Quote:
Maybe you need to listen to the song again. It isn't THAT long and the chorus is only sung about three times. Opeth's music has always consisted of certain sections that last longer than a typical amount, but this song isn't even that unrealistic as far as repetition goes. I find it far more interesting than most other acoustic pieces played by many other bands and I listen to it far more because of it. I do indeed love this song. It isn't unusual in the least for bands to repeat riffs many times over that end up making a song last longer than usual. Why is it such an outstanding issue for you now?
Because it's two minutes of material stretched to six without any new ideas. There are bands that do this well and create interesting atmospheres with the device of repetition, but Brutal Truth is not one of them (the failed experiment of Prey) and Opeth isn't one either. At least if I'm listening to Bleak I know there's a new riff coming up sometime soon and that I haven't heard the entire song in two minutes when it's three times as long as that.
Quote:
Last time I checked, emotion was subjective to the person feeling or not feeling it (in your case). I, on the other hand, disagree and it seems that many others do as well. Theres no sense in arguing this one because there isn't any sort of standard of how "emotive" a piano passage is.
Agreed.
Quote:
I always viewed Patterns in the Ivy as a more transitional acoustic piece. Would I listen to the track on it's own? No. However, I think it fits perfectly when listening to this album as a whole and I do not hear anything wrong or "rehashed" about it.
It seems to come down to a matter of opinion, but I think it ruins the mood set up by the previous tunes and just bores me. Opeth's acoustic noodling is predictable enough without making entire songs out of it or inserting minute-long intros as seperate songs.
Quote:
Jarringly structured? Opeth's intros are rarely like this (with Mikael singing cleanly along with a few acoustic strums) and I actually think it's one of their LESS structured ones compared to others. Sheesh... I would have picked a different song than that to call "jarringly structured." Finally the song doesn't even END like a typical Opeth song. The vocals? The singing isn't perfect, but at least it invokes EMOTION in my opinion. More so than simply adding simple, meaningless clean singing to the chorus which many bands already employ. The growling is just fine as well. Did you just pick a random song to bash?
No, Dirge for November is easily the worst song on BWP. The riffs don't flow half as well as they do on Bleak. Flow is missing from that song, and most Opeth songs: the transition into new passages is jarring, even moreso than their other tunes. That's what I meant.
I keep using Bleak as an example because it's the best song on BWP. It's one of their more sensibly written songs, and they don't play any of the riffs for too long.
rio wrote:
I'd say that the last two of those bands have so far provided the very definition of "meh" for me, and I really do find it hard to muster up that much enthusiasm for Klabautamann as well... Nevermind. On the other hand, I was listening to "Orchid" last night and realised how it gets better every time it is listened to. But I suppose that's exactly what Opeth's zombie drone fans have been conditioned to think.
*Eye rolling*
Indeed it is.
Wink.