Cynic Focus
» Back to review

Comments:Add a Comment 
Hawks
Staff Reviewer
January 28th 2009


116209 Comments

Album Rating: 4.8

Yeah you definitely do.

NOTINTHEFACE
January 28th 2009


2167 Comments


I just really like to see how a band progresses through their career. Which is why I asked for this one first. By some accounts Traced In Air is more accessible.

Hawks
Staff Reviewer
January 28th 2009


116209 Comments

Album Rating: 4.8

Its like a better version of this. It also has better clean/robot vocals. Plus this is a lot more death metal than Traced in Air. Traced in Air is pretty much straight progressive metal.

NOTINTHEFACE
January 28th 2009


2167 Comments


That equals win for me. I'm totally in love with the progressive sections on this, but I find the metal sections hard to get into.

Hawks
Staff Reviewer
January 28th 2009


116209 Comments

Album Rating: 4.8

Well then you'll definitely love Traced in Air. Way more mellow than this is and its mostly all clean vocals. Only a few growls throughout that album.This Message Edited On 01.28.09

NOTINTHEFACE
February 10th 2009


2167 Comments


Scratch everything negative I said about this album before. This is too completely incredible. Has grown on me like none other...

McP3000
February 10th 2009


4121 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

i know exactly how you feel. this started off at like a 3.25ish and is now a



well

fireaboveicebelow
February 10th 2009


6835 Comments

Album Rating: 2.5

this has always been a 2.5 for me and now its a



well...

Hawks
Staff Reviewer
February 10th 2009


116209 Comments

Album Rating: 4.8

This will never go higher than a 4 for me. I'm sticking with a 3.5 for now though.

Lunarfall
February 10th 2009


3178 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

No way in hell I could ever consider Focus "average" by any means.

Hawks
Staff Reviewer
February 10th 2009


116209 Comments

Album Rating: 4.8

Yeah I definitely don't think its just average. It's still very good, just not classic.

NOTINTHEFACE
February 10th 2009


2167 Comments


Well, this is actually pushing classic for me. But I don't award albums that status until they've stood the test of time.

Hawks
Staff Reviewer
February 10th 2009


116209 Comments

Album Rating: 4.8

But you gave Ashes Against the Grain a 5 and it came out 3 years ago. This came out 16 years ago.

gloop
February 10th 2009


4 Comments


maybe focus hasn't stood the test of time for him

it's really hard to understand

fireaboveicebelow
February 11th 2009


6835 Comments

Album Rating: 2.5

it's really not hard to understand by any means

gloop
February 11th 2009


4 Comments


um what yes it is i can't even begin to comprehend

fireaboveicebelow
February 11th 2009


6835 Comments

Album Rating: 2.5

that sucks for you

superae
February 11th 2009


80 Comments

Album Rating: 1.5

this album has not stood the test of time well, and those robot vocals still sound as laughably dumb now as they probably did when it was first released. gawd, this album is geekier than a fuckin' pocket protector.

Lunarfall
February 11th 2009


3178 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

and radiohead isnt?

superae
February 11th 2009


80 Comments

Album Rating: 1.5

lol... no. but thanks for playing



You have to be logged in to post a comment. Login | Create a Profile





STAFF & CONTRIBUTORS // CONTACT US

Bands: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z


Site Copyright 2005-2023 Sputnikmusic.com
All Album Reviews Displayed With Permission of Authors | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy