Review Summary: An album that tries to push the boundaries, but ultimately fails at leaving a lasting impression.
1 of 2 thought this review was well written
Dirtfedd is a band from Nebraska that was discovered by Shawn Crahan of Slipknot because he supposedly "sniffed out their talent". While they are arguably better than the current form of the band that helped them obtain a record deal, they still have a long way to go before they can even hope of becoming as talented as the bands they are influenced by.
The album starts out in a predictable fashion, with an almost now-mandatory gradual fade into the actual first track, which is appallingly immature and standard. The first thing introduced is gang vocals, which are relatively well done and never drag any part of the album down. Underneath the gang vocals is a bland, uninspired chug that is halfway interesting due to the electronic sample played with it. Next come in the atrociously terrible high-pitched shout of the primary vocalist, who actually would be a decent vocalist if he used his lower register vocals, which sound like a less enunciated Randall Blythe growl, and his surprisingly soothing singing more than the afforementioned shout. The drummer occasionally shines, but when he isn't showing off a bit, he barely does anything other than crash strikes and snare hits, which is a severe disappointment, considering he does have moments where he demonstrates true talent. The bass is completely inaudible, causing the album to lack a certain power that could have been remedied by an existent low-end presence.
While the first track does its job of introducing us to the band, it is represented poorly, and is far too long to keep a casual listener's attention, especially because it is dominated by the grating vocal style. However, that track was apparently a simple misstep because the rest of the album is much better. Yet, there are still problems. You will get the constant feeling that you've heard it all before, because truth be told, it all has. The guitars tend to repeat themselves a bit too frequently to keep the listener interested for the album's entire duration. The tracks themselves do differentiate to an extent, yet you never really know when one has ended and another has begun, because there really is nothing separating them from one another other than the choruses. The choruses, however, are very catchy and will leave you with a glimmer of hope that the band can become something better.
In conclusion, Dirtfedd is a band that has some potential to be a relatively potent force in the world of mainstream Metal. While this effort was wildly underwhelming, it was at least a showcase of what could possibly come from them in the future.
First of all, music is subjective, if you can't handle being so, then don't "wow" us with your mediocrity. If you're going to bitch about your opinion without really giving the album a fair chance, and simultaneously making jabs at the band you're trying to expose to the world, it's just not fair to the consumer. The band is from Lincoln, Nebraska, it's not heavily inspired by Slipknot at all, and they have played the stage with some heavy swingers including Shadows Fall, Otep, the aforementioned Slipknot, and dozens of others. However, if you can't listen to music without giving the album more than one listen or find yourself criticizing the band who found them (and also brought metal to the forefront and made it a more mainstream phenomenon supporting countless musicians and changing even more lives due to their music), then you shouldn't be putting your nose where it needn't be, you simply misrepresent the music. If you aren't the target audience then you'll never be satisfied by what you hear.
'but ultimately fails at leaving a lasting impression.'
highly opinionated, and also sweeps a little.
'(If you're reading this sentence, you're probably cringing.) because he supposedly "sniffed out their talent".'
The brackets are unnecasary, and there are some full stop/capital letter grammar issues.
'they still have a long way to go before they can even hope of becoming as talented as the bands they are influenced by.'
Sweeping statement, which is a vague, un-backed up statement. ( i do this too, it works itself in as a habit)
Your whole second paragraph needs re-working. It reads choppy and your ideas feel a little play by play.
'The bass is completely inaudible, so I have no possible way of describing it.'
Not trying to be deliberately mean(or arseholic), but as a reviewer mentioning this in a review you kinda need to, at least go in depth, explain how this reinforces you rating, combined with the main thesis of your review.
'and is far too long to keep a casual listener's attention, especially because it is dominated by the grating vocal style'
maybe a re-wording is needed, with the terms 'lacks levels of diversity'. Something like that, maybe The contextual ideas are good. Just needs some polishing.
This is not overly bad for a first, but needs some serious work, i hope you don't find me too blunt. I'm not trying to be an ass, i have just found blunt works better for me when people are critiquing my reviews. Some parts seem simply not needed, while others need more depth. Your rating also sounds higher than what your review sounds like, sometimes really important when giving negative reviews. Have this pos ( just for encouragement okay) and when you write up another review, shoutbox me. Ill at least give it a look over. Hope this helps, i'm moving onto the next review now. Cheers