Metal Reviews

You're welcome to comment on:


Click here to see the review.

Do you know that, after seven (that is 7) paragraphs of text, you still have not provided any information on what actually the album sounds like? People do not want to read a band history in a review section, mate. They just want to understand what the album sounds like and what is the reviewers opinion, based on the information he/she has provided in the review.

K.

I think I understand how it sounds, although it was given more implicidly than usually, it's a good review. My only problem is the 70, everything in the review points at that it is a mediocre album, mediocre albums deserve 50/100 or something...

By the way, it looks like it that you quote exactly the same as I used to do here: with steps of 5 points, or is that just a coincidence?

I spent the bottom half of the review explaining what I disliked about it. What do you want me to do, give you a song by song review? I dislike reviews that are all "informative information" only because they are incredibly paint by numbers. I consider myself a writer, I take pride in my work (not saying any of the other reviewers here or anywhere else do not), and I try to make it as interesting to the reader as possible. If you want standard "this album sounds good or bad, and here's why", I would suggest not reading my reviews. Certain opinions go through my head when I listen to an album, just like everyone else--I merely write down those opinions. Sorry if you disapproved.

Yup! :-) I dunno, it makes more sense to score in increments of 5. I just can't see myself giving a score of 69 or 71. This isn't a term paper or anything. lol

As for the score, I gave it a 70 because for all intensive purposes it is a pretty good album, it is just subpar for Arch Enemy's standards.

Good review. It definitely echoed what I felt when I listened to this album. Good thing I kept my expectations low.

Nicely done review.I think the score should be a little lower than this but i guess thats ok.I agree on most of the things you said about this album.I listened to the promo but when i played Doomsday Machine it seemed to me like one song going through the entire album.And in the end i didn't remember a single one.
Some things started to get implanted in my head after several listens but there were still stuff that i couldn't get into.I think this album deserves to be in the fair category.

hell, i fucking loved the album. No melodies?? it has the most guitar melodies since stigmata.
And about the change: the (too?) slick production creates that illusion. underneath the pro tools lies a great arch enemy album. Far better than the mediocre anthems of rebellion

How come this is a major event?

Good review. I've only listened to this once so there is the possibility that my opinion will change but as of right now i found the album rather dull.

less speed? SAY IT ISN'T SO!

seriously? it has less fast thrasy songs?

i haven't heard it, but now i'm not quite as eager...

just one thing though - imo angela's vocals are just as harsh as johan's, just in a different way..

Because it is a release from a popular band that would garner quite a bit of interest from our readers. Its nothing insanely important, but in my opinion, it is a major event in the world of metal releases.

Oh, I do enjoy Angela's vocals, I'll even go as far to say that they are on par with Johan's. However, many people did not like the transition as Johan's pipes are alot more primal sounding than Angela's.

I disagree with that statement 100%. This is clearly not the Johan Liiva-era Arch Enemy, so one should not expect that sound. If you enjoyed Anthems Of Rebellion and Wages Of Sin you should like this album. In fact, I think it's much better than Anthems Of Rebellion, especially on the vocal front!

Oh well. Even if the dueling guitarwork is sorta gone, I will just keep listening to DT's "Character" album instead. That damn thing has trouble leaving my cd player.

This band has been dead to me since Liiva left. Nice review though.

My aren't you getting prissy. I did not say write a song by song review. These are ridiculous. All I said was that this is supposed to be a review and not an essay. A 'writer', as you profess you are, knows the boundaries in which they should work in.
If anything else, concise and well formed sentences that do not meander for no reason, make for interesting reading. A band-history for a band that has been around for more than 10 years, is not an interesting read in a review. Read Chedsey if you want to understand what I am saying. If you don't know Chedsey, then maybe you should do some more research in your field.

K.

I would suggest you read my other reviews, and if you still think I write the same way as you say, then please let me know. Otherwise, my "meandering" could have just been what I felt I needed to write on this album. I am not getting prissy from your comments, nor am I getting offended or anything like that, I am merely defending myself from a detractor's criticisms.

And despite what you may think, I will take your comments under advisement (as I do with all my comments both good and bad). I had not heard the name Chedsey (why is he so significant, I'd think someone like Popoff, who I do read, would be more important than this fellow), but I researched the name and came across Satan Stole My Teddybear which I am familiar with. SSMT writers, including Chedsey (if its the same guy), are good writers, but they write 1 to 2 paragraphs with, possibly, a little 3rd closing paragraph. Its obvious you like brief, cut to the chase kinda stuff. If you want that kind of review, go someplace else. Virtually every MetalReviews reviewer has well structured 4 to 5 paragraph reviews (if not more), and our readers tend to enjoy the spirit of that style. Those that don't, like yourself, will most likely leave.

I think that this album much better than Anthems Of Rebellion and Saying this album is the most accessible is a bit misleading considering there is no way in hell you are going to here this on your local metal station (well at least not IN MY CONTRY) and it certainly isn't going to get heavy rotation on MTV. Did CODY like Anthems Of Rebellion?

Just to clarify, I didn't personally say that the band's sound was evolving as a way to become more accessible, merely that alot of critics are voicing their opinions about that. From my personal view, I really love Arch Enemy, and with the road Soilwork and In Flames have taken in recent years, its making me nervous seeing Arch Enemy follow suit with simpler songs and slick production values (I sincerely hope they do not end up taking the same route). As for Anthems, it was weaker than their previous albums, but I did quite enjoy that record.