Buy for
$8.00
(5 items)

Release date: 27 May 2013
Style: Thrash metal

Rating:

8.1 | 83 votes

Owners:

70 have it
16 want it


01. Underworld
02. Skull
03. The Naked Sun
04. Head Of The Demon
05. Tomb
06. Words Of The Dead
07. Outsider
08. What You Become
09. New Truth Old Lies
10. A Sinister Call [iTunes bonus]

Review


Line-up
Matthew "Matt" Drake - guitars, vocals
Oliver Michael "Ol" Drake - guitars
Ben Carter - drums
Joel Graham - bass

Guest review by
AndMetalForAll

Rating:
8.5
Finally!! The British thrash metal band was able to demonstrate and potentiate the talent that was hidden until now since the release of their debut in 2007. After six years and in their fourth full length studio album, the band is much more mature e more able to confirm themselves as one of the most important bands in the thrash metal scene.

Read more ››
published 17.08.2013 | Comments (1)

Found in 18 lists
Top lists

LeKiwi Most Talented Vocalists In Metal  | #19
MechanisT XIII  | #204
R'Vannith Albums of interest: 2013  | #86
musclassia 2013 List  | #74
3rdWorld २०१३ - Ex Mea Sententia  | #197
musclassia 2013 List (continued)  | #163
Xylem12345 2013 So Far...  | #43
Alexbridger Metal Top 50 (myFavorites 2013)  | #40
More lists with this album (18) | Create a list! ››



Comments

‹‹ Back to the Albums
Comments: 22  
Users visited: 223  
Search this topic:  


Big-Al - 10.04.2013 at 14:15  
Rating: 9 Preordered!
Angry Chair - 11.05.2013 at 13:35  
  I will definitely be checking this out
AnneCorpse - 27.05.2013 at 23:26  
  Thrash is not dead!!! Amazing album!! \m/
DeathSlyzer - 28.05.2013 at 13:20  
  I've listened through it once, and it's definitely a good album. Much better than the new Megadeth. Luckily this album came at the same time, so we can all forget that disaster.

I gotta say, "Tomb" was a pretty beautiful song. I see that Evile is indeed a band that can create great ballads. And not to mention all the other tracks on here. I have to listen through the album again though, before I can start talking track by track.
Big-Al - 03.06.2013 at 11:39  
Rating: 9 Full album uploaded by Earache Records:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6_qhP3eWX5PtRcVA_3bWvMfIR7eyQ4eX
Daggon - 13.06.2013 at 01:48  
Rating: 7 Take out the ballad of the album and this could become a short and fast Thrash metal album
AndMetalForAll - 17.06.2013 at 17:30  
Rating: 9 Great album! It is most probably their best record up to date...
AtrumHiberna - 20.07.2013 at 03:07  
  I really don't get why this band gets so much praise.
Passinger - 26.07.2013 at 22:45  
Rating: 9 Wonderful sounds, they remembered me Metallica in some sounds.
euronymous - 12.10.2013 at 17:07  
 
Written by Daggon on 13.06.2013 at 01:48

Take out the ballad of the album and this could become a short and fast Thrash metal album

the ballad is shit
Warman - 13.12.2013 at 12:31  
Rating: 8 If someone told me that this was lost songs from "...and Justice for All", I would't be surprised.
majstora - 17.01.2014 at 00:06  
Rating: 10 Unbelievable Trash Metal! Better than Metallica's best days! Just listen to "Tomb"!!!
deadone - 17.01.2014 at 00:10  
Rating: 5 Disappointing especially after Five Serpent's Teeth and Infected Nations. A real step backwards IMO - none of the song have any memorability.
Lit. - 17.01.2014 at 00:16  
 
Written by deadone on 17.01.2014 at 00:10

Disappointing especially after Five Serpent's Teeth and Infected Nations. A real step backwards IMO - none of the song have any memorability.

Disagreed. The albums you mentioned were incredibly mediocre and this is a nice step up in quality for the band since to Enter The Grave.
deadone - 17.01.2014 at 00:42  
Rating: 5 I found Skull doesn't have songs that stick in one's head unlike Five Serpent's Teeth (Centurion, Long Live the New Flest, In Memoriam, Cult).

It's very forgettable and too long for something without memorable stand out tracks.

Enter the Grave was actually better written.

Skulls seems tired and recycled - maybe it was a result of Ol Drake already being burned out?
Lit. - 17.01.2014 at 02:01  
 
Written by deadone on 17.01.2014 at 00:42

I found Skull doesn't have songs that stick in one's head unlike Five Serpent's Teeth (Centurion, Long Live the New Flest, In Memoriam, Cult).

Nothing remotely memorable about those songs, aside from that horrible chorus in Cult.

At any rate, memorability's not important. Quality and consistency is, and that's what Skull has.

And dude, learn to quote so I don't waste my time checking back to see if you actually responded.
deadone - 17.01.2014 at 02:16  
Rating: 5
Written by Lit. on 17.01.2014 at 02:01

At any rate, memorability's not important. Quality and consistency is, and that's what Skull has.


Consistency in what? I've heard some very consistent albums that were rubbish or boring or at best mediocre. I agree Skull is consistent but it's consistently mediocre.

Memorable, stand out songs are important in my opinion, not some sort of emphasis on consistency at the expense of everything else. Without stand out songs, the album becomes background noise like so many Death and Thrash Metal albums which are performed well but the music is boring.


Ideally all songs should be stand out and memorable but I don't think many albums achieve that - even Number of the Beast has the very average Gangland.


As for quality that's very subjective.



Quote:
And dude, learn to quote so I don't waste my time checking back to see if you actually responded.


Fair enough.
Lit. - 17.01.2014 at 02:46  
 
Written by deadone on 17.01.2014 at 02:16

Consistency in what? I've heard some very consistent albums that were rubbish or boring or at best mediocre. I agree Skull is consistent but it's consistently mediocre.


Consistency goes hand-in-hand with quality in this case. You're probably thinking of when a band sticks with the same old sound and it doesn't come out good. If the sound is consistent and merges with quality, then it comes out good, regardless of whether it's the same sound or not.

Written by deadone on 17.01.2014 at 02:16

Memorable, stand out songs are important in my opinion, not some sort of emphasis on consistency at the expense of everything else. Without stand out songs, the album becomes background noise like so many Death and Thrash Metal albums which are performed well but the music is boring.


Again, disagreed. Memorable songs =/= a good album. Memorable songs may mean "the only songs worth remembering on the album among a multitude of unmemorable/horrible songs (such is the case with Evile's previous two albums). The album could not have any songs that stick out immediately, but if you enjoy them anyway, it won't matter, because you'll keep coming back to that album. For instance, my favorite album from 2012 that I often play back to back is Blood For The Master by Goatwhore. Not exactly groundbreaking or full of songs that make you wanna play it to death on replay, but so chock full of good shit and riffs I don't even care.

If I rated albums based on memorability, I'd barely like anything, because I rarely ever remember songs upon the first few listens. I'd prefer albums that make you wanna play them consistently, not albums that make you wanna play certain songs instead. That's pop music mentality, and it rarely works in metal.


Written by deadone on 17.01.2014 at 02:16

Ideally all songs should be stand out and memorable but I don't think many albums achieve that - even Number of the Beast has the very average Gangland.


First of all, I like Gangland. If there's any filler on that album, it would be Invaders.

Second of all, you just proved my above point (and contradicted your "stand-out songs" belief) . Number Of The Beast would be one of those "quality as a whole" albums rather than "quality in certain songs" album, even if Run To The Hills and the title track are always played over radio are there are a few weak, unmemorable songs (Invaders, Total Eclipse).

If you're expecting an album that has perfect song through perfect song, don't hold your breath. Albums like that come out only in a blue moon, if at all. I've never seen one myself.

Written by deadone on 17.01.2014 at 02:16

As for quality that's very subjective.


Written by deadone on 17.01.2014 at 02:16

in my opinion


I find it hilarious that you think that means anything here.
deadone - 17.01.2014 at 03:08  
Rating: 5
Written by Lit. on 17.01.2014 at 02:46


Consistency goes hand-in-hand with quality in this case. You're probably thinking of when a band sticks with the same old sound and it doesn't come out good. If the sound is consistent and merges with quality, then it comes out good, regardless of whether it's the same sound or not.



Define "quality."

Evile is sticking with same old sound and aren't doing anything interesting with it.



Quote:
Again, disagreed. Memorable songs =/= a good album. Memorable songs may mean "the only songs worth remembering on the album among a multitude of unmemorable/horrible songs.


Totally agree. I think Helloween's Straight Out of Hell is a great example of this as some of the memorable/stand out songs are actually shit .e.g. Arsehole and Wannabe God. They are memorable in their crapness.


However a great album will consistently have stand out memorable songs.



Quote:

The album could not have any songs that stick out immediately, but if you enjoy them anyway, it won't matter, because you'll keep coming back to that album.

....


If I rated albums based on memorability, I'd barely like anything, because I rarely ever remember songs upon the first few listens. I'd prefer albums that make you wanna play them consistently, not albums that make you wanna play certain songs instead. That's pop music mentality, and it rarely works in metal.



I agree on this.

I find I need about 6-10 listens to fully appreciate an album, especially for Death and Thrash Metal (surprisingly Carcass' Surgical Steel was a mere 3-4, even Iron Maiden's last few have required 6-10).


I don't see the point of listening to albums that are consistent but unmemorable when a more memorable one by the same band exists.

I'd rather an album with 2 awesome songs, 4 average songs and 2 shit songs than an album of 8 average songs.


Quote:
First of all, I like Gangland. If there's any filler on that album, it would be Invaders.


Funnily enough I like Invaders!




Quote:

Second of all, you just proved my above point (and contradicted your "stand-out songs" belief) . Number Of The Beast would be one of those "quality as a whole" albums rather than "quality in certain songs" album, even if Run To The Hills and the title track are always played over radio are there are a few weak, unmemorable songs (Invaders, Total Eclipse).


Actually most of the songs on the Number Of The Beast are generally memorable in themselves. It's why it is such an album an excellent album as a whole.

The sinergy effect (i.e. whole is better than sum of all parts) is usually found in more extreme genres where there is less emphasis on song writing and more on vibe, aggression etc.

Also Total Eclipse was not on original release of Number of the Beast. It was a B side on Run To The Hills single.


Quote:
If you're expecting an album that has perfect song through perfect song, don't hold your breath. Albums like that come out only in a blue moon, if at all. I've never seen one myself.


I totally agree.

However plenty of albums where number of "stand out" songs far exceed average or poor ones.

Here's my ratings to give an insight into what albums I think are near perfect: http://metalstorm.net/users/album_votes.php?user_id=146138&r_order=rating



Quote:
I find it hilarious that you think that means anything here.


It's the crux of the matter though.


In the end I don't think Skull has any synergy going on or much in the way of memorable songs.
Troy Killjoy - 17.01.2014 at 03:43  
Rating: 6 Hey guys if you wanna continue discussing the psychology of what makes a great album great, maybe take it to the private messages.
Lit. - 17.01.2014 at 04:46  
  I'm done anyway. No point in arguing with a guy that constantly plays devil's advocate.

The point is, this album is better in quality compared to the last two. Considering it already has a better rating nearing 100 votes, it seems the majority agrees.

All right, now I'm done.
deadone - 17.01.2014 at 05:34  
Rating: 5
Written by Lit. on 17.01.2014 at 04:46

I'm done anyway. No point in arguing with a guy that constantly plays devil's advocate.

The point is, this album is better in quality compared to the last two. Considering it already has a better rating nearing 100 votes, it seems the majority agrees.

All right, now I'm done.



1. Not playing Devil's advocate. I'm not a fan of this album and see it as retrograde step.

2. Majority? Five Serpent's Tongue has 40% more votes than Skull. So of course 7 "10" votes for Skull will have more of an impact than 7 "10" votes for Five Serpent's Tongues.


3. Fans tend to buy albums sooner than casual listeners. Fans also vote higher.

Hence of course Skull's rating is going to be higher.

Let's see if Skull retains rating in 2016.



4. The votes actually show a band declining on popularity:

Enter the Grave: 197 votes
Infected Nations: 134 votes
Five Serpent's Teeth: 113 votes
Skull: 81 votes

Advertise on Metal Storm


Login or register to post here.



Similar topics

Forum Topic Similarity Started
Reviews Evile - Skull 4.5 10.12.2013 by deadone
Albums When The Deadbolt Breaks - Drifting Toward The Edge Of The Earth 3 17.11.2013 by 3rdWorld
Albums Alice In Chains - The Devil Put Dinosaurs Here 3 15.02.2013 by Ace Frawley
Albums Thaw - Thaw 3 24.05.2013 by Pazdzioch
Albums Five Finger Death Punch - The Wrong Side Of Heaven And The Righteous Side Of Hell - Volume 1 3 24.07.2013 by MetalLives5150



Hits total: 3567 | This month: 83