Metal Reviews

You're welcome to comment on:


Click here to see the review.

I think the standards have changed for what the listener would call "funeral doom." Bands like Esoteric, Thergothon, and Skepticism are "considered" of the genre. This, however, is for lack of a better categorization, progressive doom metal. I don't think the label of funeral is very fitting, and frankly, misleading. Yes, there is very heavy riffage, but that doesn't necessarily make it funeral. The atmosphere is not nearly as oppressive, nor nearly as depressive as say an album by any of the aforementioned bands. A great album from an ever-evolving band that is doing wonders with subtle experimentation.

[quote="SilkCrimsonMoon"]I think the standards have changed for what the listener would call "funeral doom." Bands like Esoteric, Thergothon, and Skepticism are "considered" of the genre. This, however, is for lack of a better categorization, progressive doom metal. I don't think the label of funeral is very fitting, and frankly, misleading.[/quote]


Agreed, and 'The Giant' was something else as well. Mournful Congregation, Abstract Spirit, or Tyranny is (good) funeral doom, but while recent Monolithe is fantastic, it isn't funeral doom. The funeral doom label itself is almost oppressive in its restriction but it needs to be labelled properly so those brave souls about to listen to any band with a Solitude Productions label are duly warned, because some of them are awful.

I believe it comes from the inexperience the reviewer has with the genre and quite possibly with metal in general. Labeling the new Horrendous as "melodic death metal" is also quite misleading and the conceptualization of this particular labeling comes from an inexperienced ear. The new Horrendous is far from melodic and much more close to drives of different schools of DM with a strong hint of progressive. Maybe more research, and digging a bit deeper is needed for a more concise, educated, and educating review. Also, agreed on "The Giant."

This is actually interesting to me, because funeral doom is one of those genres that have been very easy to define in terms of its pioneers, but seem to become somewhat of a grey area if a band that started in that style starts exploring a bit. I've listened to Evoken, Mournful Congregation, and Skepticism, and I agree that they are quite oppressive, but would, say, The Bitter Veils of Solemnity be substantially more "oppressive" than The Thing That Made Search? What would you consider the defining atmosphere of oppression that the one has, and the other doesn't? More distorted vocals? A deeper bassline? Less melody? Slower speed? All of the above?

I took a risk when labeling this album as "funeral doom", so I won't argue facets of the genre with you and North From Here; and anyway, I agree on The Giant at least. But I'm genuinely curious as to what your definition turns out to be.

Thank you for your mature response. I think it is more of an all-encompassing approach to define genres or the creation of heavy sound, however, I think the existence of "melody" plays a major role. The presence of "Melody," out of drumming, bass-lines, speed, and vocals, play a major role in defining the attitude of a band. For example, take a band like Thergothon, or Esoteric and Evoken: supremely oppressive melodies that conveys a sense of utter dread and desperation. When I listen to Ahab, the melodies are vastly for progressive and much hopeful and much less futile. Ahab is a doom metal band. Anyone denying that is self-evidently ignorant. However, doom metal is a genre, as you very well know. I think Ahab is hard to categorize; but I think when the listener compares them to forerunners of funeral doom, then, Ahab is much more forward-thinking, progressive and colourful.

I don't think we should get overly hung up on the definition (I picked up on that point because I have not heard the whole new Ahab, just very familiar with the Giant and generally have read that Boats of Glen Carrig is a continued progression away from the roots of Ahab's sound) that said, putting something like newer Ahab in the same subgenre as Ea, for example, or as I said most Solitude Productions bands could be very misleading.

But then you brought up a good point on newer Mournful Congregation though Andy, and I appreciate it. The Book of Kings is further away from the classic funeral doom sound than The Monad of Creation was, and at some point I think the issue of 'classic' or 'traditional' funeral doom is rough, raw, or sometimes even poor production. Some of the funeral element from Book of Kings feels lost to me just through clearer, improved production. There are probably elements of that, as well as your other suggestions on the sound itself which combine to make funeral doom what it is.

At its heart I think funeral doom was an exceptionally limited, restrictive genre in its very nature, and most of the bands still active from the first or second wave of the genre have sped up tempo a bit, added clean vocals, or radically improved production, or all three and more. They had to, because the Solitude Productions traditionalist bands (with a few exceptions...Abstract Spirit for example) are largely proof that such a static genre was doomed because there was so little space to innovate within the genre without becoming out of the genre.

Indeed, Funeral Doom is very confined. Although a band such as Esoteric expanded their sound to massive soundscapes and a strong presence of vortex-like atmosphere/melodies/production that added a unique yet eccentric "psychdelia" to them. However, Esoteric is in league of their own, innovators and leaders of the sub-genre.

Rather insightful points from both of your replies, especially about the thrust of Ahab's melodies being more hopeful-sounding than classic funeral doom. I haven't given Esoteric a try at all, I'll check them out.

Hoping these boys will get picked up for on an extensive US tour sometime in the near future.

Nowhere is the distinction between Funeral Doom's hopeless, bleak, atmosphere and the more progressive, melodic, approach taken by Ahab more obvious then if one compares them with Worship. That isn't to say Ahab lack that touch of the melancholy which can almost be said to typify Funeral Doom only that their sound does not fall entirely into those trappings. The continued evolution of bands like Ahab, Mournful Congregation, and company have resulted in a blurring of genre lines which is quite exciting. I quite enjoyed this record, as I have all of Ahab's work, and look forward to more quality releases like The Boats Of Glen Carrig.

But we all agree that Call of the Wretched Sea is funeral doom, right?

isnt funeral doom just slow doom with growling

I vote yes to trapt's question and 'more to it' to Noodles question.

[quote="noodles"]isnt funeral doom just slow doom with growling[/quote]Ummm it's like doom at a crippling slow pace. It is definitely an atmospheric quality that distinguishes it from just Doom Death. I think that last bit is a fine label to distinguish Kuolemanlaakso from Dolorian.