Album Rating: 5.0

See above, Chad Kroeger singing for Opeth.

Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off

'More people would be into Opeth if Åkerfeldt sang more like Chad Kroeger. There's no denying that either.'



Nah

Album Rating: 3.5

That's some A class analysis there

Album Rating: 5.0

"not at all no, because that would sound analogous to a toilet flushing"



You're objectively wrong, considering that Kroeger has sold about 45 times as many records as Åkerfeldt...or maybe you're right and most people prefer the sound of a toilet flushing to Opeth's music? Lol.

Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off

People keep saying Dev could release a pop album.



He could probably write some ok pop-ish songs.



Whatever else he tried he wouldn't get a breakout hit (whereas someone like Steven Wilson near enough could) because of his voice imo



I might be wrong but that's the feeling I've always had with him

Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off

Opeth and Chad just seems a genre mismatch :/



He'd have to approximate a doomy growl half the time - I have no idea what the Chad would sound like doing that



Like a Canadian Nick Holmes no doubt

Album Rating: 5.0

"are you suggesting musical quality is directly correlated with record sales.."



Who's talking about musical quality? This conversation is directly related to Doof's "More people would be into" statement. Learn how to read and keep up brah.

Album Rating: 2.0

Åkerfeldt's cleans are about as generic as it gets.



If him and Jerry Cantrell switched places and only did clean i'm not sure anyone would notice.

Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off

"are you suggesting musical quality is directly correlated with record sales.."



No, but I am suggesting some acts remain 'fanboy niche' because certain factors which are often 'universal' in their appeal are lacking.



Such as having an appealing voice with a very broad, nearing universal, appeal.



Anyway - he's not my favourite vocalist lol but he's not terrible - surprised he's a favourite for many but coolio, each to their own

Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off

My response is really a reaction of Sitar falling off his chair in disbelief someone couldn't believe Dev is a supreme vocalist of epic proportions.

Album Rating: 5.0

"Such as having an appealing voice with a very broad, nearing universal, appeal."



Except there is no such thing. Especially when we're talking about metal artists.

Album Rating: 5.0

"My response is really a reaction of Sitar falling off his chair in disbelief someone couldn't believe Dev is a supreme vocalist of epic proportions."



Actually I fell of my chair in disbelief at someone stating that Dev is a barely competent vocalist.

every devin townsend-related album ive heard has been horrible

Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off

I maintain his voice holds him back a little bit on what is otherwise heavily commercial stuff like Ocean Machine (I wouldn't describe it as metal really, so I wouldn't label Dev a metal vocalist on that album).



I mean that album is way more commercially agreeable than a strangely standoff-ish and nasty album like Aenima complete with 'cancer quotes' and swears.



I bring up Tool because the voice is clearly what made them so mainstream and successful and it's effectively the same genre on Ocean Machine at roughly the same time Tool were huge.



Anyway, fear not, his voice is in no way holding him back on albums like this one- this stuff is just for the dyed in the wool Dev fans. Literally no one else could enjoy it and it has zero mainstream appeal. Which is nice in a way, only it is not something I can listen to at all.

Album Rating: 5.0

"I bring up Tool because the voice is clearly what made them so mainstream and successful and it's effectively the same genre on Ocean Machine at roughly the same time Tool were huge."



Yeah, the record sales probably had nothing to do with the fact that Aenima had popular music videos on fairly heavy MTV rotation while Townsend released Ocean Machine independently and without any label support.

Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off

A voice goes a long way.



Why did Guns n' Roses tower over the many other similar bands?



Nirvana?



Pearl Jam?



Soundgarden?



Tool?



Largely down to charismatic, identifiable and stand apart vocalists (song writing had to be good too, but I swear the voice is what lifted them to the next level up).



Will agree to disagree on this - pretty sure if MTV picked up on one song Dev could have been a commercial hit. Guessing he still released videos :/



Listening to 'Ocean' now and the vocals are still the weakest element for me is the truth.

Album Rating: 5.0

Limp Bizkit released Chocolate Starfish in 2000 and sold 6 million records which is nearly double that of any Tool album.



Are you going to tell me that Fred Durst is a more charismatic vocalist than Keenan?

Album Rating: 5.0

And to preempt "they're not comparable" arguments, here's what Bizkit sounds like without Durst.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5jRxCjqwZ0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlgwzR1QsOs



It's basically a dumbed down version of Tool.

Album Rating: 1.0

Doof arguing on the basis of commercial appeal seems odd to me.

Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off

I’m not hearing a standout voice - this was called out as a laughable assertion



If you do have a great voice people usually notice with little need for an invitation - with Dev they haven’t



That’s it