 | Tracklist:
1. "Fire"
2. "Crawl Back In"
3. "Too Late"
4. "Inside of Me"
5. "Let Down"
6. "Give Me Your Love"
7. "My Suffering"
8. "Condemned"
9. "Into You"
10. "End of the World"
11. "Walking in Circles"
12. "In the Darkness"
Release Date: 10/13/2009 | |
| | other reviews | BassDemon333 (3.5)
Chester Bennigton forms a new band and releases a debut album that shows he’s actually capable of ... | Michael Roberts (2)
Don't quit your day job Bennington... |
On 1 Lists
|
| Summary: Out of Ashes teaches us that Chester Bennington is much better fit with the nu-metal atmosphere of Linkin Park than the mainstream rock feeling of Dead By Sunrise. |
1 of 1 thought this review was well written
Sigh.
I've been a longtime fan of Linkin Park. I've followed them ever since they broke through with Hybrid Theory in 2000. OK, so I didn't know they existed until around 2004. But I still grew fond of Hybrid Theory, and I found the heavier atmosphere of their follow-up, Meteora (2003), even more satisfying. Now here's what surprised me - the mellow, poppy atmosphere of Minutes to Midnight (2007), which was more of an experimental effort for them. Still, Minutes to Midnight never grew old on me - on top of that, one of the album's singles - "Given Up" - is easily one of my all-time favorite songs.
So, what significance is Linkin Park to Out of Ashes? I recently saw that Dead By Sunrise's debut single, "Crawl Back In", hit the Top 25, and I went, "An underground newbie band is getting a chart hit? Well, congratulations for them!" But these aren't newbies. You see, Dead By Sunrise is the side project of Linkin Park frontman Chester Bennington. As soon as I found that out, I thought, "I MUST listen to this online!" And I did.
I had fallen for the atmosphere of Linkin Park's previous albums. I could excuse (and maybe even commend) Minutes to Midnight for straying away from Linkin Park's trademark sound and still sounding good. But this? This is inexcusable. I had expected a melodic, alt-metal sound. What I got was a Chevelle-meets-Daughtry load of crap. I admit that I do like "Fire", the album opener, for being a heartfelt love song. But Chester seems to force every word he says, while the rest of the band plays along, almost without emotion, like robots. After that, "Crawl Back In" has SOME potential, but not all that much. Again, it's a hollow, awkward mainstream rock number.
Come to think of it, just about the whole album rolls up into one giant, lumbering, hollow, awkward mainstream rock number from start to finish. Middle tracks "My Suffering" and "Condemned" are rather forgettable fillers, although I do applaud them for utilizing Chester Bennington's all-too-absent screaming. Then again, they sound the same. The whole album sounds the same. Just listen to "Crawl Back In" and "Give Me Your Name" back-to-back - you almost won't recognize they're separate tracks. "Walking In Circles" is probably the only sufficiently decent song on the album, and even THAT sounds like it's forced, and weak. The whole album is forced and weak.
I hope Linkin Park's upcoming album sounds a lot better than Out of Ashes. Chester sounds like he's forcing himself with every lyric he sings on a mainstream rock song. His voice flows much better on works of nu-metal.
|
Chester Bennington proves, once again, how untalented he is, and why Linkin Park should do themselves away.
Digging: Minus The Bear - Planet Of Ice
| | | Album Rating: 1
Quick note that this review was kinda rushed, so I'll accept any feedback on how to improve it.
Digging: Slipknot - Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses) | | | Album Rating: 2.5
Some users say its best not to refer to yourself in the review too much, but then again I think it adds character.
No offense man, but the first two paragraphs really don't serve any purpose in actually reviewing the album.
Digging: Max Richter - The Blue Notebooks | | | Album Rating: 1
I used the first two paragraphs as an intro into what I thought of Out of Ashes in comparison to Linkin Park, and for what led me to pick up Out of Ashes in the first place.
| | | Album Rating: 2.5
Alright and I can understand that, but that intro takes up half of the review. Also, is it right to compare this band exclusively to that band alone? You even said you hope that Linkin Park's next album is better than this, even though this is a different band with two other members that aren't related to Linkin Park.
I don't know; I could be wrong. Sorry to nitpick. Those two issues aside, I think this is a servicable review and gets the job done. Pos.
| | |
Review almost sounded like a whine
Didn't sound like a 1 either
Digging: Pixies - Surfer Rosa
| | | Album Rating: 1
I suppose the 1 was a bit harsh - I've upped it to a 2.
Meanwhile, how does the review sound like a whine?
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
Personally, I hate reviews that are mostly supported by comparisons to past work's either by the band or landmark releases in their designated genre. 90% of a review should be objective material on the lyrics, vocals, musicianship and presentation of this piece of music. Chester Bennington could release a 1.5 hour piano record for all I care but the review should be about the music that is presented, not why this is better or worse then something else. Not to say small parts can't be pos or neg's on other stuff but most of your review should be towards the music at hand and how you view the quality of it. From your review, I really have no idea the feel for this record or what it really is other than you think it's filler for the most part, sub par and you just don't like it. I want to read a review that describes the music such that I could almost hear it in my head when reading, almost like any piece of literature when read about any topics. Just my two sense and constructive criticism.
Also, I believe too many reviews describe the background of an album more then the album itself. We ALL know Chester's in Linkin Park, mentioning this is a real easy way to start an intro and getting a written piece to flow into your material but I just think it's way overused to lengthen an article that really should be about the album at hand.
Digging: The Killers - Live from the Royal Albert Hall | | | Album Rating: 4
Crawl back in and give me your name dont sound anything alike. Btw, this is a great album
| | | Album Rating: 3
review should be about the music that is presented, not why this is better or worse then something else. I see your point, but in all honesty, I can't see what's wrong with mentioning other stuff by an artists (in this case Bennington), and then recommend that instead if it's better than the release presented. Vice versa if the presented album is much better.Also, I believe too many reviews describe the background of an album more then the album itself. again, if we are talking about Linkin Park, then your point is solid and truthful, but if you are talking about reviews in general for other, possibly less known artists, then it's sometimes really good to know the background of the artist amd the album at hand.
Overall this is a good enough album that I thought was going to blow chunks. If LP's next album will be more like this and less like Minutes To Midnight then I'll actually be satisfied.
Digging: Dark Age - Acedia | | | Album Rating: 2.5
Background information in the introduction of a review is something I prefer to see too; however, well over half of the review contains it.
| | |
|
Stumble
Digg
Twitter
Del.icio.us