|
i dont understand because im high and dont give a FUCK
| | |
Latin joke
"the blessed shithole"
| | |
Save Toby from Expulsion
oh wait wrong site
| | |
Wtf?
| | |
Re-reading this review again and I have to say your whole argument is flimsy at best. I can more that understand down-rating an album because you deem it un-original, and to a point I agree with you. But in writing a review which yoo even admit to in the writing is going to be in the minority you might want to consider going into greater detail than by simply spending 3 paragraphs comparing it to other bands by saying "see this idea here, yeah some other band I listened to did that like 3 years ago." Its liking writing off listening to any new thrash metal band simply because bands did that in the 80's, I mean there has to be a balance between comparison and letting it breathe on its own.
Expansive, slowly-building riffs that attempt to erupt in one, pinpointed moment of fury? Brand New coined that one in 2006. Catchy post-hardcore-lite riffs and choruses? A City Safe From Sea nearly perfected that one last year. Vaguely passionate lyrics? As Cities Burn caught that one in 2007 while it was hot.
This is also The Felix Culpa's second album, their first, Commitment came out in 2004. So unless you plan to follow that paragraph up with some thesis on indie/post hardcore bands and their love of time travel......
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
Agree with Deviant completely. And also the fact that this album was in making for 6 years tells that the band didn't started fresh this year/last year (Since it came out in January) looked at the bands they like and re did what those bands had done.
Idk I'm not the biggest fan of either brand new or as cities burn but there's something too this album.
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
Just got this. I'll be back to settle the dispute.
| | |
ireallylikecatchforusthefoxes
| | |
these guys were doing this shit before As Cities Burn and way before A City Safe From Sea have you heard their earlier material?
| | |
Album is fantastic, but ive only listened a handful of times as the length is REALLY fucking tendious. Pos'd that shit.
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
there's not alot of an argument in there imo
its well-written though
| | |
thanks for the criticism deviant, I think I know where you're coming from.
But in writing a review which yoo even admit to in the writing is going to be in the minority you might want to consider going into greater detail than by simply spending 3 paragraphs comparing it to other bands by saying "see this idea here, yeah some other band I listened to did that like 3 years ago."
I know, this is the most obvious complaint about my analysis. Like I said in the review though, "It may irk some that comparisons to similar bands are the most prominent descriptor for Sever Your Roots, but that’s just it-- The Felix Culpa craft a product so derivative that their album doesn’t demand any better. Comparisons to too-like albums are the most apt way to describe Sever Your Roots, and also telling of the album’s glaring weakness."
Its liking writing off listening to any new thrash metal band simply because bands did that in the 80's
No, I'm saying that the material here is not only derivative, but it also adds nothing new to the equation, is tedious, uninventive, stale, etc. There's nothing exciting about this, and a big reason for that is that it's been done before many times... and much better. Say, if a thrash metal band released an album that was stale and uninventive and simply rehashed old, already-thin ideas, it would be received pretty critically.
This is also The Felix Culpa's second album, their first, Commitment came out in 2004. So unless you plan to follow that paragraph up with some thesis on indie/post hardcore bands and their love of time travel.
I haven't listened to their other material and admittedly I didn't know that the band had been slaving over this for 6 years (seriously!? waste of time), but I'm judging the album based on the present, based on the release date... I don't really care that they were playing this style before. I mean, I could argue that that makes this even worse... re-recycling ideas and such. I mean maybe, in that sense. their 2004 album is better because it's not so derivative, but that doesn't change the quality of this album that was released in 2010.
But yeah, I knew there were going to be some complaints with this, especially because a lot of users I tend to agree with loved this. Anyway, thanks for reading and commenting Deviant.
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
the review is definitely well-written, no complaints there. and I actually agree with your argument quite a bit -- although this style of music isn't really my area of expertise and I guess I feel like The Felix Culpa pull it off pretty well, and their songwriting is really good, if unoriginal.
I mean, I love the Throats EP that came out this year but I don't think they really do anything there that Converge and Dillinger didn't cover close to a decade ago.
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
Was just checking up on some things I think they began working on the album 5 years ago. Just want to give the correct info.
Still feel a little iffy over you analysis and reasoning still, but if you don't like it you don't like it.
| | |
I mean yeah there's hardly ever a need to reinvent the wheel, there's plenty of releases that I love that wear influences
on their sleeves, problem is-- all those bands that do that and I do like remember to bring SOME sort of unique or
extraordinary element to the table, something that makes me say 'hey, I want to listen to Band B over Band A, who did it
better!'
whereas I listened to this many times and could not find a single element that stuck out for me like that, which is
actually really uncommon. even bad albums usually have something unique to them.
EDIT: Felix Culpa, you know you could offer a differing viewpoint, maybe as to why you think it's a classic and
worthy of being your username?
| | |
they should add a vibraphone.
| | | Album Rating: 3.5
I see your point Sea, I guess I just thought this band brought some nice tunes to the table with some progressive elements that you don't really hear in a Brand New record (I haven't really given mewithoutYou or As Cities Burn much of my time)
I mean, it seems like you don't like really anything about this record, from the songwriting to the instrumental/vocal performances or even the production (lack of originality is usually not the sole basis for giving an album a 2), so I think people were looking for a bit more depth on those topics.
again, only a minor qualm in my opinion, but someone who gives this a 5 will probably want some more reasoning for thinking this is an overall "poor" album.
| | |
seems like you were just trying to write a negative review and decided this album would a good one to lash out at no matter how flimsy the argument
| | |
again, only a minor qualm in my opinion, but someone who gives this a 5 will probably want some more reasoning for thinking this is an overall "poor" album.
yeah trust me, I know what you mean-- I mean whenever I give advice on reviews that tear apart sputnik-loved albums it's usually "write more." IN retrospect, I could have gone into more detail, but decided to concentrate on the album's 1 or 2 overarching flaws instead.
and like I've said before... it's really not that the performance on the album is necessarily bad, it's simply that other bands have done them so much better, and it's impossible to separate a critique of this album from its much-better counterparts. I mean, this is just soooo lifeless and stale compared to others, but I just kinda threw those descriptors under the "uninventive" argument I made for this.
And I don't know... in some cases I think inventiveness and lack of originality, especially when it so deeply hinders the album, is more than enough to warrant a 2.
| | |
seems like you were just trying to write a negative review and decided this album would a good one to lash out at no matter how flimsy the argument
yeah probably a good idea to not elaborate on that
| | | |
|
|
