Album Rating: 4.0
idk, the one paragraph you mentioned punk influencem while that was a very good mention, you then ruined it by calling them thrash metal which is incorrect. I consider them "technical punk" (more metal on fortress though)
|
| |
controversy
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
wtf is techincal punk?
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0
Uhm, it doesn't say anywhere that they're thrash metal, it never has.
And technical punk, isn't that more like A Wilhelm Scream?
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
I consider them funk metal
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
"Striking the medium between unlistenable shred and loveable thrash"
while your not directly saying its thrash, your implying it has strong thrash influences.
|
| |
i say they're stfu metal
|
| |
^^^Werd. That's always enormously productive.
|
| |
They strike a line somewhere between technical thrash and mainstream.
the thing is there is nothing thrash about them that's all
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
I think there's a little bit of post-thrash in them
|
| |
wtf is post-thrash???
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
a very, very little bit, and only on the song spoils
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0
Okay, this is why genre-naming is bad.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
wtf is techincal punk?
wtf is post-thrash???
|
| |
genre arguements make us better human beings
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
Technical Punk = Punk with strong influences of technical metal.
Post-Thrash = Modern thrash, such as Deathchain.
|
| |
post technical thrash punk, I get it now.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
pretty much think that the ethos of punk is lost when you add technicality to it.
Modern thrash, in most cases, is faggotry
|
| |
Si1v3RfaNg being ridiculous this makes a change oh wait
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
He did teach me what technical punk and post thrash are though.
|
| |
|
|
