Lower Definition The Purpose of the Moon
» Back to review

Comments:Add a Comment 
Hopelust
January 14th 2026


3643 Comments


Honestly a little surprising how much flak this is getting.

Personally, this hasn't resonated with me yet, but like "The Greatest of all Lost Arts," it took me a fair degree of time to tap into the intricacies of that record. This one is no different. This band has always been about growing on the listener. There's an incredible amount of nuance to an album like this.

Matt Geise's vocals sound very Matt Geise +20 years. Not sure how anyone can expect him to sound the same. He's literally twice as old as when they put out the last LP. His vocal timbre has aged. As far as how this COULD have gone, I'm pretty impressed that he still has the chops to hit the notes he does, AND belt out his signature scream.

Anyone who wasn't a fan back in the day (kinda like how I started) seriously missed a boat, and it's doubtful they'll ever catch it. These guys had (and still have) such a particular groove, and the tired argument that they sound like X amount of other groups is pretty much rooted in naivety.

LightAndGlass
January 14th 2026


1774 Comments

Album Rating: 3.0

"Matt Geise's vocals sound very Matt Geise +20 years. Not sure how anyone can expect him to sound the same."



My issue isn't that he doesn't sound exactly the same, it's that it doesn't even sound like him. The few screams on the album are great but I'm not digging the throaty nasally timbre on his voice that much. Claudio from Coheed doesn't sound like he did in 2002 anymore but he still sounds like Claudio. Matt just sounds like a completely different person to me.

OwMySnauze
January 14th 2026


2733 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

To me it sounds like Matt changed his vocal style for this record to fit the mood and theme of the album. His vocals on the previous singles from a couple years ago sounded much more like his previous style.

Lasssie
January 14th 2026


3913 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

(2)

LightAndGlass
January 14th 2026


1774 Comments

Album Rating: 3.0

Yeah I wish they were more immediate for me but I'll keep jamming this and see if anything changes. I also don't think the songs are that great overall but their last album had to grow on me a lot too so I'm not giving up just yet.

Lasssie
January 14th 2026


3913 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Just the fact that you keep jamming it is a good sign!

OwMySnauze
January 14th 2026


2733 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

The album art is just chefs kiss. 👌🏼

Hopelust
January 21st 2026


3643 Comments


Lower D in 2026 is chef's kiss, all around.

Lasssie
January 21st 2026


3913 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

You bet!

twlight
February 8th 2026


10703 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Album really grew on me. Took awhile. Vocals are no doubt the weak part of this, but the guitar work and drumming is so damn good. Excellent album from the boys and glad they’re back

Lasssie
February 8th 2026


3913 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

(2)

Yeah dude!

Instrumentation is on point

Vocals were never an issue for me but i can see the criticism towards it

The most important thing is that the boys are back in business!

twlight
February 9th 2026


10703 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

It’s not that the vocals are terrible or anything, the melodies just get pretty samey throughout the album. But, after the album grew on me a clicked, some of the vocals are total earworms

Hopelust
February 9th 2026


3643 Comments


I'd say the only real gripe I have with the vocals are the somewhat limited range and melodic variance. I'm really not dissuaded by that, though.

OwMySnauze
February 9th 2026


2733 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

I miss Matt’s vocal style from Moths. Had more inflection and character



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