Metal Reviews

Ken, you know my name, feel free to use it.

I have listened to four (4) of this bands albums, two of which I bought legally about two years ago at my favorite used-CD outlet in Manhattan. Upon listening I was initially intrigued by the catchiness and as such sought out more material, which shortly grew irksome. It was like biting into a fruit that tastes amazingly sweet at first and then you look down and there's maggots writhing in the hole you made.

I think I've given them enough of a shot to say that they aren't any good. The only album I didn't listen to was Group Therapy, though I heard Burn on YouTube.

I know, I couldn't remember your name at the time. I was all fired up! Haha. Kidding.

Either way, I don't think this band is that good myself. My comments were more general in nature, even though I was responding specifically in this thread. You guys know me enough to know I just don't understand people dwelling on bands they don't like. I find it to be a complete waste of time and energy.

I don't even think reviews should be negative, unless an album is just absolutely worthless. And very few albums are worthless. I could write a positive review on the new NKOTB album, and I surely don't like that shit.

It's that 'differing philosophy' mojo.

personally, I can't orgasm without some hate. I keep a picture of Pol Pot in a drawer next to my bed for emergencies.

I write negative reviews for bands that make poor albums. Poor albums are either albums with no originality whatsoever that regurgitates a well-known band, and/or albums that are full of boring songs. Music is quite capable of being bad.

I call bullshit on this. I rarely buy books but I still appreciate them, even the ones I get for free, oh my!

My guess would be that 99% of the albums out there are unoriginal. People who look for originality will never be pleased. And generally what they insist is original is in fact nothing of the sort.

Music is capable of being bad, but you're not writing reviews for yourself.

I agree with ya there.. On the originality thing.. And, what's the point of doing something original if you are amazing at doing it the unoriginal way?

Haha, that was pretty much my reaction too.

Man, I don't like everything. Damn.

I for one am glad that my review of such an awful album (in my humble opinion of course) has sparked such thought provoking discussion

Wait until they read what I think of Korn's debut. Not backwards and in German, alas.

You do know I'll go bonkers if you completely ignore the wonderful dynamics plays they do. That album's a kick in the balls.

i agree with this because whenever i don't like something i ignore it and hope it goes away

also it's silly to say i need to spend money on something to truly appreciate it. i might be quicker to dismiss something if i haven't spent money, but i can appreciate the stuff i don't dismiss just fine

but what about someone who's trying to find info on a band and would be spared wasting his money because he gets warned by a negative review? IMO the purpose of the site should be to provide objective reviews for as many albums as possible, whether good or bad.

+1

Of course one shouldn't start hating on the album. Just avoid the attitude the reviewers on GD have.

I don't see anything wrong with Zad's review at all.

Only that this is Khelek's review?

Oh my bad, it's the pot.

I don't see anything wrong with Khelek's review.

All this bantering still doesn't change the fact that this album still sucks donkey balls.

I thought about it for a little while, but I honestly don't see this as being good.

Alright, first of all, we are gonna have to agree that MR is trageted towards a certain market, that being underground metal (whether or not it became mainstream is beyond the point)

Now, why is MR writing reviews for mainstream Nu-metal acts? Obviously, no regular viewer of this site is coming here for that. I started coming here because I wanted to see what promotional material from the indie labels was worth listening to and MR succeeds at that.

Now, I consider the attitude towards mainstream metal acts to be hostiule at best and honestly don't believe anything written in this vein because it is biased towards believing there is no way these bands are good. Historically, it has been shown the vast majority of these acts were not very good and are poorly regarded now.

I am not one that can go back in time and change the way i thought about something during inception, so i tend to have a solid opinion once it is formed. It doesn't shift from year to year as some others might.

I am a fan of almost all the NM bands I used to listen to and coming from that perspective, I don't see the point in going back and retroactively giving these albums shitty reviews. They are no use to me or anyone that likes this form of metal, they seem to only exist as a way to justify current opinions and suggest that in the grand scheme of things the underground metal this site has covered for years has now become more important historically and musically.

Calling the new slipknot record a piece of shit doesn't do anything but make the site look elitist, snobby and too good to review anything anyone's heard about in the mainstream press.

Simply ignoring these bands and records is the most effective way to not only marginize these efforts (since I believe that is the goal here) but make them historically irrelevant.

People can say whatever they want about being fans, but the reality is that when you see nothing but retroactive bad reviews for nu-metal and even worse reviews for the new stuff coming out, there doesn't seem to be an credibility to the effect that this music is appreciated at all, thus, why would you take it seriously as a viewer? If MR had the opinon that rap sucks (not saying it does or doesn't either way) why would they bother reviewing any albums from the genre? no one that enjoys it would consider it credible and those who never liked it would have their opinion reaffiremed, most likely in error.

The responsibility of giving us your insight comes at the cost that you must remain credible and shitting on a sub-genre constantly acheives nothing in this regard. I'm far less inclined to trust a review when obvious polotics and historical manuevering have worked their way into the albums reviews and quotes.

I like this site better when experts reviewed things within their realm of expertise rather than stretching out and taking the opportunity to make it known that anything deviating from such isn't worth your time.