Metal Reviews

Just reading Amon Amarth reviews on Metal Archives:

http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Amo ... 50#Reviews

Notice average score is mid-80s.

Even albums with less than 80 score are often dragged by 1-2 outliers where score was below 50.


Now I like Amon Amarth but let's face it: they've released the same album over and over again.

They are more predictable than anything ever done by Bolt Thrower or Cannibal Corpse.

You own 1 album and that'll do you.

So are they really deserving of 80-100/100 scores, especially for such weak and uninspired albums as "The Crusher"?

Some Amon Amarth is superb of course - Twilight of the Thunder Gods comes to mind and is probably the peak of their style. But every album?

Did you read the recent review thread on their newest album? I think the two different philosophies regarding Amon Amarth and changing/not changing came to the foreground there.

Btw, The Crusher was much better than Twilight of the Thunder Gods, so as usual, I have contempt for what you are talking about.

Yeah, this was a WTF moment if I ever saw one.

Versus the World is the zenith of their discography, I reckon no one will contradict that, but I can follow dead1 for the rest of his habitual one-line paragraph diatribe. You think they're a great band if you listen to your first album of theirs, probably the second as well, but once into the third album you start to find out how simple yet cunning the mechanics behind the songs really are and you grow weary of it.

After that it's just a case of being an oblivious fanboy or not.

Good post Karmakosmonaut.

I actually listened to most of their back catalogue over the last week (with three albums yesterday - Fate of Norns, Versus The World and Surtur Rising).

I did this after listening to their latest "Deceiver of the Gods" and finding it to be more of the same.

In fact it all sounded too familiar. Hence I listened to prety much their entire back catalogue and saw a lot of repetition and not much variety. In fact the albums blend into one another and after a while I forgot which album I was listening to.

Versus The World is the pinnacle of their style but you don't need any of the other albums.




As for Crusher (as well as Avenger), it's monotonous. Twilight of the Thundergos is more "bouncy" with more stand out songs.

Only reason I keep Crusher in my CD collection is Bastards of a Lying Breed and Eyes of Horror cover (originally by Possessed - Amon Amarth make it sound like Bolt Thrower circa 1989!).

I'm sorry but I like my metal to be about songs that stand out, not droning.

Also Surtur Rising was a disappointment after Twilight of the Thundergods.

When the only true standout track is a System of a Down cover, you're in trouble.

Well, yes. Certainly not 100/100, but 80/100 is a minimum for all of their albums I think, despite the repetitiveness. At their lowest they're 7/10 band, I cannot think of any AA song that I hate or do not like, but I'm a fanboy so...

Unfortunately fanboys make bad critics. Don't ask me to say bad things about Megadeth's Super Collider (though Risk is utter shit, even a fanboi can't defend that one).


If every Amon Amarth album is 80-100, then how does that score compare to classic albums say Metallica's Master of Puppets, Iron Maiden's Number of the Beast or Slayer's Reign in Blood or Morbid Angel's Blessed Are The Sick?

Or even comparing to classic of Melodic DM - In Flames Jester Race or At The Gate Terminal Spirit Disease or whatever?

Can we say that Crusher or Surtur Rising is comparable to any of those?

I guess I view scores as some of attempt to place a universal qualitative assessment, whereby if I look at a score I can judge the quality of an album.

Of course this is all subjective, hence the usage of something like Metal Archives multiple reviews or the old Metal Judgement websites where a panel of 3 reviewers each gave their own review.

But if fanboys just dish out high scores and praise, the reviews are pointless.

In fact best reviews to read on Metal Archives are the ones that rate about 50-80. Usually these are more level headed reviews.

The Crusher is much better than Terminal Spirit Disease. That was probably the second worst At the Gates album.

Like a lot of bands, they have a style that acts like filler, but I find their songwriting to be high quality. Even Surter Rising has some great songs. They are definitely the AC/DC of metal.

I do agree that The Crusher is their weakest album however.

More like Motorhead in my opinion. The band have developed a formula for producing consistent, quality albums and a sound which is unique to them. Musically there isn't a whole lot to differentiate between a good or bad AA record (much like 'head), but the songwriting is just stronger on some records than others. With Oden on Our Side represents their high water mark in my opinion with nary a bad tune in the whole lot. Cry of the Blackbirds is the perfect distallation of the Amon Amarth sound. Sooo righteously bad-ass.