Metal Reviews

I gotta say, what I'm really interested in is what this stuff is gonna sound like live.

Yeah there's nothing wrong with saying a bands new direction is dumb. Lots of metal bands get praised for being creative and whatever when they change in ways people like.

Yes, not all experiments end well. Experiments I did like: Helloween's Dark Ride, JP's Jugulator, Angel Dust changing from 80's german thrash to Power Prog, Maiden's more proggy works at the end of the 80's....

I bought this album for as much curiosity to why it was getting slated as I am a fan of MA. Normally I'll pick up a new album from a band I like, months after its release but I got this one in much, much quicker due to the hype. If anything, it rounds off my collection!

Initially I thought it was MA doing a twisted SYL/kmfdm tribute; not what I was expecting and I turned it off without listening all the way through because MA aren't as good at doing this sort of industrial as those bands. However, I gave it a few days and tried again, managing to get through. I have to say, I'm with Zad 100%. It's not necessarily bad, just 'different'. The musicianship is there, no problem, but the whole... essence just isn't quite right.

I'll give it a generous 70/100 because it's not dreadful and there are some fantastic moments (Nevermore stands out in particular), and even the much mentioned 'Too Exetreme!' is a grower. However, the overall feel of the album just makes me think this album will severely date in time and become known as MA's 'St Anger', although it is far better than that rubbish. It's unique, in the acquired taste sense.

I bet in 10 years time, my 70 will become a 30 as I can't see me turning to this for quite a while - I'm already tiring of it as a whole. In 10 years time, I'll play the album by accident and just smack my forehead in the thought 'what were they doing'. Ah well.

Ah, you are correct, sir- thannx for the correction.
Alters was awesome, too

Still waiting for one of my friends to spin this.
Have a feeling I might be waiting for a hot minute. Heh.

Nevertheless, I like when a band genuinely tries to re-invent itself. It might not always be satisfying, especially to those who hold dear the band's "trademarked" sound, but it's a logical step in a musician's career.
Imho, the anomalies are the bands that never ever changed their sound a bit... à la AC/DC if you catch my drift...

AC DC is a case on its own. It's like hearing the same song over and over again... I agree that stagnation equals artistic death.

This album sucks for the following reasons:

1. The industrial bits are badly done. Really leave this to Rammstein.

2. The DM bits are generally ok and are generally an improvement over Heretic. They're still not as stellar as albums A,B,C,D.

3. There is no flow to the album. The traditional DM songs mixed with blues songs mixed with industrial songs makes the album frustratingly disjointed. It's even more badly done than Korn or Faith No More's later albums which were truly all over the show.

4. The lyrics are crap. I don't mind this crapness with Soulfly but I expect more from Morbid Angel.



As for being close minded:

If I want to listen to Dean Martin album, I put on a Dean Martin album. (Man has the best voice ever)

If I want to listen to Queens of the Stone Age, I put on a Queens of the Stone Age album.

If I want to listen to Death Metal album, I put on a Death Metal album.

I do not want to pick up a CD from a Death Metal band and get badly played QOTSA or Dean Martin (like Devin Townsend or Dee Schneider trying to do Frank Sinatra - really sounds crap).

By the same token I do not want to pick up a QOTSA album and get badly played Death Metal. Or pick up a Living End rockabilly punk album and get badly played Thrash Metal.


The "open minded" guys always amaze me - they prefer Metal bands to not play Metal. If you don't like Metal, don't fucking listen to it. Simple.

But don't tell Metalheads who like Metal that they're close minded idiots for not liking other stuff or for not liking supposed progression (I call it selling out or losing the plot).

Same thing with Ozzy.

So obviously I liked the album, but I'm with this for the most part. I think this has to do with different definitions of what a "band" is--namely, a fan's definition and a band member's definition. if you're in Morbid Angel, the phrase "Morbid Angel album" probably just means "album my band made" in your head. But to a fan, "Morbid Angel" doesn't really refer to four dudes; it refers to their body of work, to its aesthetic and its essence. You might respect and admire Trey Azagthoth, but when you buy a "Morbid Angel album," it's not because he's such an awesome dude that you're willing to pay for whatever he just made. You're paying for your version of "Morbid Angel." That doesn't mean it should sound exactly like what already exists; it just means it should feel like it's part of the same progression/series/aesthetic/idea/however you want to put it. It's kind of pompous to think that fans of your work should be such huge fans of YOU YOURSELF that you can sell them whatever you feel like selling them. Sure, an artist should be and is free to be true to his art and make what he wants to make, or what comes to him; but if you're gonna make X because you've been making Y for years and you want to try something new, you can't just call it Y , sell it to Y's fans and tell them they're being unfair if they don't like it. This is why side projects exist.

I guess where we differ is that I ultimately felt IDI didn't feel as different from the other albums as it sounds on paper. To me it was what a "new direction" or "evolution" for a band should be: a different route to the same place. The nuts and bolts were broken down and arranged differently than they had been, but still added up to "Morbid Angel." The songs' emotional color, if you will, fit with what the name means in my head. But that's entirely subjective. I really recommend being patient with the album, but if you have and it genuinely doesn't work--or if you just decide you'd rather not have to put in the time--that's your prerogative.

Jake I really do agree with your first paragraph.

As much as music is art, it's also a product. Consumers develop expectations from a product. If those expectations are not met, many consumers feel outraged because they've been a loyal consumer for many years.

If bands expect loyalty from their fan base, they need to meet the fan bases expectations.

So in other words you like music to be neatly packaged into bite-sized pieces... Fuck you, surprise!

Stefan was a little bit harsh... he is like the paramilitary wing of the Open Minded Brigade, whereas me and Goat are perhaps the parliamentary moderates.

I don't think people who don't like this album are idiots- I don't really like it myself and agree almost entirely with the four points made in the first half of dead1's post. But I'll tell you who I do think are idiots: people who say things like this:



For you 'progression' and 'selling out/losing the plot' are synonymous... Yes, I must confess, to me this seems like the viewpoint of an idiot.

Oh, and GTFO

Morbid Angel is not Wal-Mart... they are not contractually obliged to give you a forced grin and prostrate themselves in front of your self-righteous consumer wrath.

They are "obliged" to have their album get skewered for reviews, and added to the other abominable albums such as St.Anger for the record.

I can't believe people are comparing this to St Anger. Illud has two things that St Anger didn't - great solos and songs that fit in with what the band are known for. Comparing it to St Anger as a way of description is just lazy.

I'm not sure what your point is.

Well, since St Anger is kind of a landmark for suckiness (before this we had Judas Priest's Turbo though it's a slightly better album) it's logical to see people prone to hasty comparisons... If you will, comparing an album to St Anger means it sucks beyond (the author's) belief.

(the more i see where this thread's going, the more I want to listen to this album! )

Really? I mean Turbo is bad within the JP discography, mainly because it's not classy heavy metal anymore, but radio friendly hard rock or whatever it is, but it's hardly a landmark for suckiness otherwise. Judged outside JP context, it's a decent rocking album with some pretty good tracks here and there, like Turbo or Out In The Cold. St. Anger is bad anyway you look at it.

Judas Priest was a landmark of suckiness when it came out. Far worse albums have been released by major metal bands since.

Turbo is indeed a sucky album, and I'm a big JP fan.