Album ding dongs hard

Album Rating: 4.5

@SowingSeason

Try some Death--Human, Individual Thought Patterns, Symbolic, The Sound of Perseverance. Way more accessible than Ulcerate and will give you some foundation to build from. It helps that they were one of the pioneering DM bands so you'd be starting near the beginning. They're the only DM band I've given two 5/5's to for Symbolic and TSOP. Then I'd highly recommend Gorguts's Obscura and Immolation's Close to a World Below if you want to hear where Ulcerate are coming from (both of those are 5/5 for me too).

Album Rating: 4.0

Have you heard Death - Symbolic Sowing? The vox, whilst growled are decipherable and more palatable than most, plus it’s catchy as hell for DM and leans towards prog. It’s what introduced me to DM.



Looks like this guy had the same idea.

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

"I really wish this guy would SING SOME CLEANS"



so lemme make sure I got this



A dude who dont like dm is like I dont like dm but I wish this guy would sing some cleans



But we delete perfectly good lil ugly mane reviews???



Bring back old sput

Album Rating: 4.5

It's OK dude maybe some day I'll be as good of a user as you.

Album Rating: 4.0

It’s what we all aspire to Sow. At least you received a couple of serious suggestions. Nothing wrong with stating what you would personally prefer, although I’m sure you know that already.

Album Rating: 4.5

I know it's probably ridiculous (I appreciated the banjo jest, because it exposes how silly my desires may be as an outsider who knows nothing of the genre), but yeah, perhaps DM just isn't for me then. This is still decent and I may check Solrage's suggestions.

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

Album is badabadabing

Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off

Well, if you'd dig banjo in metal, maybe you should give a listen to the song 'Myr' by Taake. It has a sick banjo solo, hahaha!

I’ll sowingify it for ya sowing pal.

The cataclysmic tone is countered by the delicate almost waif like deliberation of a tremulous Satan.
An uncertainty of treading into the unknown and ultimately an act for Beazulbub himself to question and ponder.

Like a child taking their first unstabalized ride into an autumnal leaf strewn park in the New England fall forever cycling forward into a new beginning without guidance or reassurance from a comforting parental hand.

Album Rating: 4.0

So wait, do you like this Zak lol

Album Rating: 4.5

@Solrage – In response to your first comment:

Now, I certainly contend that “we share some similar psychology merely by being a part of the same species”, however our psychological make-up, simply by being part of different socio-cultural, socio-economic and historical environments, or even going to different schools, being raised by different people et cetera, is going to render the psychologies of human individuals at least partially dissimilar. The more different the environment we exist in, the more dissimilar they psychologies will be. Certainly, we there are similarities between people, within the same societies, and even within different societies, seemingly completely detached from one another, but to suggest these can be directly, or meaningfully indirectly explained, through evolutionary psychology, is to suggest they are entirely the product some type of unaltered adaptation, which would have existed, regardless of whether it was somehow reproduced on a cultural level, throughout several historical stages. I contend that such adaptations simply do not exist, they’re an ontological impossibility. Evolutionary psychology might one day come to explain how our Darwinist past shaped part of our brain, but it can’t adequately account for the way in which that brain, simultaneously shaped by its environment and interacting with that environment over thousands of years of historical and cultural mutation.

The central point I made is that a comparison between two not entirely identical cultural elements, and certainly concerning symbolic representations such as a ‘monomyth’, is always going to be relative to the culturally and historically conditioned, subjective, perspective of the observer and that the formulation of such principles is a text, a narrative, whose only ontology is in your head, not inside some imaginary, unprovable, collective psyche, not inside some transcendental metaphysical substrate of cultural expression. Such theories are unscientific and cannot escape this type of relativism, making them fundamentally inapplicable. Identical brains, do not per se produce entirely identical cultural manifestations, otherwise every culture would literally be the same. How evolution plays into culture, is going to be determined by the very specific historical and environmental contexts which brought forth that culture, and how that culture was reproduced, which is more so a question of political economy, than it is evolutionary psychology. I’m certainly a Darwinist, but I don’t presume that it automatically proves archetypes, for there is no evidence that it does and mostly, because archetypes are ideological narratives, not biological ones, they cannot be explained thusly.

Album Rating: 4.5

@Solrage – In response to your second comment:

I’d firstly like to add, in response to your first paragraph, that I think cultural studies, history and political economy, should also be our primary frameworks for working out how a certain, at least partially evolutionary, adaptations we’re integrated into a historically reproducible cultural structures and by which mechanisms these structures we’re reproduced. When discussing how it is that tonality exists in the first place, requires primarily a historicized framework, a genealogy, which analyses its socio-cultural and socio-economic mutations, not it’s genetic history.

In response to this point, “why their music has failed to capture the hearts and minds of people”, I’d imagine cultural studies could explain how their music was propagated and reached different cultures in the first place and why the musical frameworks within those cultures shaped a population receptive to this type of music. Certainly, if Japan had a different cultural history and had had a dominant atonal traditions at the time, things might have been different. Again, it is history, cultural studies and political economy which form the most useful theoretical frameworks.

Within the link you provided, that author uses the term chaos, metaphorically, and the parameters by which they define that term are certainly ‘relative’, while atonality might be “chaotic sounding” (as the article puts it, which is the only use of the term, and it’s the journalist writing it, not one of academics they cite) to some, might be terrifying to others, while seeming mathematically structured to another listener. The very definition of chaos is itself relative, and it is a non-deictic term, a metaphor, similar to all archetypes, and therefore something that doesn’t exist outside the domain of language. There is no such thing as a ‘chaos molecule’ no ‘essence of chaos’, merely culturally and historically conditioned subjects referring to perceived similarities using overarching metaphors. How usage of music within film can be interpreted, whether something sounds unpredictable to someone and whether these elements are, within our cultural context, considered chaotic, is absolutely and inescapable relative to time and place, is absolutely relative to perspective.

Album Rating: 4.5

@Solrage – Final remarks regarding your last comment:

My emphasis on cultural relativism and social constructivism, is to note the inescapably relative and socio-cultural character of the very concept of tonality, the very theoretical framework of evolutionary psychology, the very fabric of the language we employ within this discussion and the specific constitution of the interpretative frameworks through which we formulate our convictions. If the question becomes, whether we can appeal to something beyond culture to explain a cultural manifestation, I see this a rather moot point: of course we cannot. Every explanation we give, even if entirely evolutionary, is still going to be historically and culturally conditioned.

My main argument is that for something to be integrated into a cultural framework, it has to be, to refer back to my previous comments: requires primarily a historicized framework, a genealogy, which analyses its socio-cultural and socio-economic mutations, not it’s genetic history – why/how was the cultural element created, how where its principles formulated, how was it integrated into the cultural fabric, how was it maintain and reproduced across thousands of years of cultural mutation, how were the mechanisms of its reproduction created, how were the instruments through which it was expressed created, how has it changed and evolved over time, etc.

To explain why tonality was, how it still is, is to answer these sorts of question, to see it directly, and also indirectly as a socio-cultural phenomenon situated within a specific historical context. Evolutionary psychology might play a part in determining the why question, although even then the first (Neolithic) cultural expressions were created within a specific environment, shaped around agricultural production, which is a non-biological phenomenon anyway, so it will only explain this question partially. But every other question can only have a non-evolutionary answer, and therefore requires a non-biological framework through which to research and answer it. How one would go about hypothesizing such research, is a question I cannot adequately answer, but I think it is fair to suggest it will be within the domain of sociology, history, social-psychology and cultural studies more broadly, that the question of why we have the tonality, will be answered.

Oh bloody hell

"but I really wish this dude would sing some cleans"

try cryptopsy discog

oh and also: what in the ever loving fuck did u smoke

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

Again the cultural debate? Ait lets talk about lobsters again or something

wheres the frikkin ignore function btw

Album Rating: 4.5

Get this, it's inside your own mind.

that zak comment, followed by memento going at it again. i am wheezing