Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

whack

huh, well alright.

idk it all connects fine and equally for me. Like I dont hear, "Oh here is a big epic song, and now here's a bunch of smaller tracks after it." Like it flows well as an album, big song being in the front or not, so I just listen to it as an album and care little for track lengths.

Album Rating: 2.0

it isn't just about the track lengths - that'd be a very shallow observation. but the shorter tracks definitely don't deliver on their scope or ambition. they just aren't as interesting structurally.



like the shorter tracks on phan i really fit well because they felt like they were there to pace things out better - but they were interesting tracks in their own right. here i just... don't get what they were going for with the pacing and for a band that uses a lot of progressive tendencies it just doesn't sit right to have a record that's front loaded like this. *especially* when it's a part two of a record series.



like to me it almost feels like part 1 and 2 were mixed up musically. they genuinely flow better if you listen to part 2 and then 1 (if you ignore the lyrics and concept) so with that in mind... they kinda fucked up.

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

Dude it's just 50 minutes of music, the division shit is in your head.

It's pretty weird to witness you trying to argue your way through this very arbitrary criticism.

Album Rating: 4.0

I don't get why the Mesozoic is so short, comparatively. They made Triassic/Jurassic/Cretaceous all exactly proportionate to the length of those eras, then made 65 million years the same as 160. Like, I'm all about nonsense science but at least make it consistent nonsense. It's like how Ant-Man carried a building in a briefcase even though it's supposed to maintain its mass.

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

I still think Robins description of the record fits the best: its a free fall. Phan 1 had structure and was what we sort of expected of the typical The ocean sound. Phan 2 starts off with that paticularly with Jurassic and then the rest of the record is free fall of various styles and experiments that all flows in a cohesive manner. Also as a coneptual idea the free fall and style changes work with the idea of the shifting time periods

Yeah, Im on a different page from you Noctus (I think?).

Both parts do sound different for me, and yeah I wish they didn't. I find this more dynamic (and more memorable, catchy, better, etc.) than pt. 1, and in playing both back to back, I wish the quality was the same overall. I like both, though, but yeah, not perfect across the project.

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

yeah thats a good mental image to keep in mind.

like, this kind of concept was what helped make pelagial such a fascinating experience, right?

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

Its still really cool that Pelagial was written as one giant singular song.

Album Rating: 4.0

I didn't realize that about Pelagial but I don't really think it sounds like a singular song. They did well to break it up like they did. Album rules. Band is one of a kind.

Album Rating: 2.5

Yeah Pelegial sounded a bit fractured at some points, certainly a few songs melded into each other but not the entire album

Album Rating: 4.0

It's nuts that it was originally supposed to be instrumental.

Album Rating: 4.0

There is cuts in between multiple songs on Pelagial, not just one song, but it is a conceptual piece separated into sections

Album Rating: 3.0

Noctus's points are perfectly fine, goodness.

I was hoping this would continue the direction that the ending of the last album hinted at, but it wound up being a very contemplative record. That's fine I suppose but not quite my style.

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

narrow cat

Album Rating: 4.0

"I was hoping this would continue the direction that the ending of the last album hinted at, but it wound up being a very contemplative record. That's fine I suppose but not quite my style."



agree with that hard

Album Rating: 2.0

"Dude it's just 50 minutes of music, the division shit is in your head."



the more i read this the more meaningless this seems, like what the fuck does this even mean



do you ordinarily respond to assessments of music with "dude it's just x minutes of music it's in your head" or is it just when people say certain things you disagree with



"It's pretty weird to witness you trying to argue your way through this very arbitrary criticism."



i'm not arguing anything i'm just saying why i don't like a record on the internet are you OK

Album Rating: 3.0

A narrow cat I am not, I'm at a healthy weight!

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

No I am not ok

Album Rating: 2.0

would you like a hug



i am full of hugs