Album Rating: 4.5

The whole thing with the vocabulary is that dictionaries are easily accessible on the internet; i think he tries to compensate a lot of the time with using ridiculous wording to convey his point, except he's so caught up in his pretense that he forgets to even make a point. And to be fair, I loved this record at the age of 14, lol.

Album Rating: 4.0

you left out the completely essential "let the flood swell" part in shade

bitchfork actually used a fake word in a soundoff for one of my album masterpieces though


"adeptuous"

Notice that these were very broad examples and I can go into paragraphs about each of them if you really want me to. I can also point out specific instances (ie. times) of these errors because I have my iPod handy. If you want a lyrical analysis, I could also give you that.

also the "fake word" thing was a joke but yeah syncretic really isnt necessary here at all; total fucking puff word

im getting wannabe MJ vibes tbqmfh

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

Crowquill's constant whirlwind of gag-traps and different styles of skramz and mathcore.



THAT DOESNT MEAN ANYTHING OMFG

Album Rating: 4.5

Same Shade as Concrete has three important sections. The beginning emo entry. The electronic "post-wade in the water" sect. And lastly the "THERE'S SO MUCH HOPE BURIED UNDERNEATH TRAGEDY" tidbit. However, there are about eight sections total. The five unimportant parts are basically genre-shifts and unintelligible takes on the last section but with a "twist" (i.e., a new vocal pattern).



my goodness, that sounds awful!



Your criticism of their songs being too long is just you lacking the attention span to absorb them, and it helps with the driving tension to a final culmination of sound. You and others claiming a lot of this is indistinguishable seem to care a great deal for the lyrics.

"you left out the completely essential "let the flood swell" part in shade"
that is part of the "tragedy" bit. I actually like that part, but it could be developed and tweaked for maximum effect.

Did I robertsona? Whoops! Probably meant adept but was being sarcastic or something and made that up as I went.

Album Rating: 4.0

Let the flood swell part is so BA.

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

your analysis, which actually sometimes makes sense, is held back by your ridiculously holier-than-thou diction. And also, as far as the lyrics go.....The lyrics are delivered brilliantly by both Drew and Kathy, and the vocals are great, if a little raw and inaccessible for most, but in my opinion, the lyrical content is a little ridiculous. There are way to many metaphors within metaphors and I'm starting to think that the album sometimes lacks any meaning, but the music is fantastic, the chaotic structure is orgasmic, the post-rockish buildups are excellent, the melodic theme is nice and repeated in all the right places, the shifts are dynamic and may seem pointless but they are simply sections that give relief from the chaos. Your reading so much into it that I'm starting to think that you are obsessed with the album.

Album Rating: 4.0

here's the problem:



bitchfork is saying that most of the transitions are purposeless and do little to enhance the tracks



the rest of us think they do.



now quit it with the genre-juxtaposing bullshit

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

waiting for Ire to do 'something' with my response above

Album Rating: 4.5

As in sorrow, so shall ye weep, as in reason, so shall ye sleep.

Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off

Crowquill's constant whirlwind of gag-traps and different styles of skramz and mathcore

Album Rating: 4.5

here's the problem:



bitchfork is saying that most of the transitions are purposeless and do little to enhance the tracks



the rest of us think they do.



now quit it with the genre-juxtaposing bullshit



I guess it doesn't help his case that the transitions are seamless, eh

hes just mad that its not the same five-second loop repeated over and over again for an hour AotD

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

Electric City=win



btw, AGAIN, skramz tends to be chaotic and mathy, so saying that they 'incorporate different styles of mathcore' (how many styles of mathcore are there? Mathcore is simply a more technical approach to metalcore that experiments with chaotic structure and odd time patterns, of course each band is their own sound, but there's only one definition for mathcore). Seriously, using big words doesn't make your argument make any sense

Album Rating: 2.5 | Sound Off

your analysis, which actually sometimes makes sense, is held back by your ridiculously holier-than-thou diction. And also, as far as the lyrics go.....The lyrics are delivered brilliantly by both Drew and Kathy, and the vocals are great, if a little raw and inaccessible for most, but in my opinion, the lyrical content is a little ridiculous. There are way to many metaphors within metaphors and I'm starting to think that the album sometimes lacks any meaning, but the music is fantastic, the chaotic structure is orgasmic, the post-rockish buildups are excellent, the melodic theme is nice and repeated in all the right places, the shifts are dynamic and may seem pointless but they are simply sections that give relief from the chaos. Your reading so much into it that I'm starting to think that you are obsessed with the album.

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

Emim: 1

Syn: 0

guys, this is what's happening in this thread:

bitchfork had some valid points (and some ludicrous ones) that backed up his opinion but our opinion is different than his.