Album Rating: 4.5

this is blasphemy

Album Rating: 2.0

The review is correct. This is probably my least favorite album of theirs.

the subgenre is generally awful so yea review is probably correct

Album Rating: 4.5

probably not tho

the subgenre is generally awful so yea review is probably correct

Album Rating: 4.5

album rules



review is meh yea I can't agree on any of it

Band is good in small doses.

Album Rating: 4.5

Review is pretty funny. It tries to use Meshuggah's defining characteristics as faults, such as repetition and calculated riffs.



This is highly calculated music that makes use of repetition to create very complex hyper meters. They basically invented this style of playing in metal, and are the only ones that continue to find new inventive ways to further explore these rhythmical music theories. Moreover, some of the new ideas they came up with on Obzen, was proof that they weren't getting stale even after all these years writing music. Dancers to a Discordant System is one of the few songs that they layer 3 distinct rhythmic meters over one another all at one time. The 5/4 lead guitar part that is layered over the 4/4 drum back beat and vocal pattern, while the rhythm guitars are playing their usual complex compound meter is easily one of the most inventive things they have ever come up with.



If you don't like the style, don't listen to it. To rate it so bad and then support your argument with the things that actually make them unique and a great band just shows you don't understand their music one bit.

Album Rating: 3.0

knowing about about time signatures doesn't make your comment any less stupid.



here's a tip: MUSIC IS SUBJECTIVE

Album Rating: 3.5

Disagree so hard with this review

You rated this lower than Periphery II what the fuck

Album Rating: 4.5

"here's a tip: MUSIC IS SUBJECTIVE"



My least favorite response I always see on here. People far too often use it as a crutch to say whatever they want without taking any responsibility for the response they get. There is plenty of music that I don't like for whatever reason, that I would never say is bad. When someone writes a review that is arguing a point, in this case that Obzen is a terrible album, and then cites for their reasons the exact things that many other people like about the album, it shows ignorance, not subjective taste.



An example of this would be me saying that I think atonal music is awful because it lacks a sense of tonality. My taste according to tonality in music is of course subjective, so I don't have to like it. However, for me to judge the quality of a piece of atonal music as bad and cite its lack of tonality as my prime reason, is just illogical and ignorant. This is exactly what this review does. It tries to use as faults, the very characteristics that make Meshuggah such a revered band in the vast genre of metal.

Album Rating: 4.5

"Just because you dislike a certain kind of music doesn't mean you're forbidden from giving your view on it"



True. But there is a difference between me saying I don't like something, and me saying something is bad. One describes your subjective taste, the other tries to make a claim about the quality of something. If you write a review that gives a very well liked album a 1.5, you are now judging quality not just stating personal taste. Now it is open game for people to judge and respond to your reasons that use to build up an argument as to why the quality of this music is bad. In this case, the reasons used don't support an argument about poor quality in this music at all.

Album Rating: 3.0

but all you said in your original reply basically boiled down to was 'all the things you criticize are actually strengths, because i say so, hence your review is wrong'



that's just invalid

Album Rating: 4.5

This still comes down to the difference between not liking something and judging quality. This reviewer is trying to assign quality to these elements. I'm not saying that repetition and calculated riffs is a strength or a weakness at all. They are just elements of the music itself.



If Meshuggah's music is built up from these elements, It is fine for me to say that I do or don't like those elements in the music I listen to. If I try to assign quality to these objective elements, or say that the music is bad because of them, this is where I start to sound ignorant. Again, its like me saying atonal music is bad because I only like music that is based on tonality. You can't logically use the element that makes the music itself unique in an argument about quality against itself.

Album Rating: 4.0

Nice review, you back up your stance really well.



Pos

Album Rating: 2.0 | Sound Off

"True. But there is a difference between me saying I don't like something, and me saying something is bad. One describes your subjective taste, the other tries to make a claim about the quality of something. If you write a review that gives a very well liked album a 1.5, you are now judging quality not just stating personal taste. Now it is open game for people to judge and respond to your reasons that use to build up an argument as to why the quality of this music is bad. In this case, the reasons used don't support an argument about poor quality in this music at all."



All the negative points I stated were obviously not just about personal taste; I've listened to this album for years, and in fact, I used to enjoy it a lot. But as time went by, I simply noticed more and more flaws, which are the ones you see in the review. These are also problems I find with the band itself, which is why I don't like them very much in general with the exception with some earlier records where I feel they used their style to a much greater effect. I hear you coming across as somebody who can't take in the fact that one of your beloved bands ended up getting a 1.5 from somebody on this site; I remember coming across a very similar thing in my Big Boi review when somebody neg'd me because of how I thought about the album and Big Boi himself. Either way, I try not to have a bias, but with a band like Meshuggah, I had to use some subjectivity. But I stated the problems with the album's quality very clearly, so don't even go there.

Album Rating: 4.5

I have no problem with a 1.5 rating of any band. Your rating however is very strong, and I feel that you didn't really give many great examples to back up such a harsh as dement about the quality of the record. In some of your examples actually hurt your argument, say when it comes to their songwriting becoming stale. I will responds with specifics if I have time later. By the way, I think you are a good writer I general, I just happen to disagree with your argument in this case and think there are specific reasons why it is an unsound argument.

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

Everyone's music taste is different so idk I disagree but I don't like a lot of music people like soooooo no use in shitting urself over a band somebody else doesn't like

Album Rating: 2.0 | Sound Off

@Philalethes: Alright, thanks for clarifying. Admittedly, I'm still working on solidifying my negative reviews, although I feel this was huge step up from my Slayer review I did months ago. I actually might do a positive review of Destroy Erase Improve soon, so stay tuned for that if you want :]