Written by CobiWan1993 on 05.06.2013 at 19:02

This is actually sounding quite good so far! Sure the production has a modern polish to it, but I like it! This was a totally unexpected surprise!

So you also like Death Magnetic's production then, because that one is just as clipped and in the red as this one. All life is sucked of this one and all dynamics are gone when the band plays louder parts.

This definitely was not as bad as I expected, it's actually a very nice return to form. Sure the production is all modern sounding (loudness war quality and such, which we kind of have to deal with at this point), but the material on the album is actually quite good! I'm looking forward to making my review of this on Youtube!

The only leak of the album currently available is apparently a web rip of the iTunes album stream. Although I haven't heard it myself, I've heard a few people saying that is has very bad audio quality, and inferior to the iTunes stream itself...

I will say however, that the material on this album is crying out for a more organic, and warm production... not as bad as Death Magnetic though!

The best thing of the album is Iommi's riffing. Geezer's bass is present only when he is playing four octaves (dramatization) higher than the guitar and no need to comment on Ozzy's vocals. The songs are good enough, it is a enjoyable album but seriously, why do people keep choosing Rubin?

Written by Unhealer on 05.06.2013 at 21:49
but seriously, why do people keep choosing Rubin?

I have no idea... Metallica and Slayer have said that Rick spent hardly any time in the studio with the band. He usually just leaves the band to their own devices, only very occasionally visiting the studio. To say he's not a "hands on" producer would be a woeful understatement. There may have been a time once when he was a good producer (like back in the days of "Reign In Blood"), but these days he just seems to be happy to take the paycheck and do virtually no producing at all...

I actually enjoyed the album. It definitely isn't among their top 5 albums but it has the vibe of the old days and it just makes me happy that these guys are still around and still have something to offer. and also this is a much better swan song than Forbidden.
Zeitgeist is the one that caught my attention from the first second, it's an instrumental in the vein of planet caravan and solitude. just amazing. The first two tracks are like a forced attempt to recreate their old sound, but then the album gets more creative and original. I think Dear Father is the other song that stands out along with age of reason and live forever.
Btw you can also listen to it at youtube (at least before someone removes it) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqNiAxePuOQ&feature=youtu.be

Regret what I said about Geezer's bass, it's actually decent. I first heard it at work and the speakers there are not good.
Ozzy is still terrible though, Zeitgeist is a good song but he totally ruins it. Sounds like a random youtube guy with his voice high on reverb, singing along to the instrumental track.

Who the ... cares about the title? It is still better than other nonsense album names (or even band names).

I like the album, ofc I must get used to it, but sounds really good.

I'am lucky enough to have had a PPR (promotional pre-realese) for a couple of weeks it's a stunning album and heavy with it.

Simple anyone who thinks this is good to great is tooaly deaf and most probably a fanboy

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 09.06.2013 at 00:22

Simple anyone who thinks this is good to great is tooaly deaf and most probably a fanboy

Haters gonna hate.
But seriously though, you said exactly what I expected you to say on here, even down to the misspelled-because-it-was-likely-rushed word.

It sounds awesome, has a new and old feeling to it. Ozzy was better in the old days, but he's certainly not bad on this one.

I would and will give this and 8 for the good Black Sabbath sound it has got.

Written by Guest on 09.06.2013 at 01:25

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 09.06.2013 at 00:22

Simple anyone who thinks this is good to great is tooaly deaf and most probably a fanboy

Haters gonna hate.
But seriously though, you said exactly what I expected you to say on here, even down to the misspelled-because-it-was-likely-rushed word.

hahaha, classic. I predicted it as well. The guy is like a broken record. Remember those? Marcel probably does - he's old enough.

Is God alive or Is God dead? that is the question...

Written by Wiillak on 09.06.2013 at 13:06

Is God alive or Is God dead? that is the question...

And if dead, what bumped him off? Old age, disease? Car crash? Or is this question one that is asking if he exists or not?

Lovers gonna love

Written by Vengeance Time on 14.03.2013 at 10:12

Suicidal Tendencies new album is called 13 aswell.....what the F**k????

Yeah but that was the thirteenth album and thirteen years since their last album, and it has thirteen songs.

Written by Guest on 10.06.2013 at 02:16

Written by Vengeance Time on 14.03.2013 at 10:12

Suicidal Tendencies new album is called 13 aswell.....what the F**k????

Yeah but that was the thirteenth album and thirteen years since their last album, and it has thirteen songs.

And it's 2013

Written by Guest on 09.06.2013 at 01:25

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 09.06.2013 at 00:22

Simple anyone who thinks this is good to great is tooaly deaf and most probably a fanboy

Haters gonna hate.
But seriously though, you said exactly what I expected you to say on here, even down to the misspelled-because-it-was-likely-rushed word.

good catch

In fairness though Marcel is probably right. Sabbath are a band that, short of releasing a metalcore album, can do no wrong in people's eyes. Even when they release sterile, depth-less, tired hacks of an album like this. People praise it because it's Sabbath and think that everything they release is gold. If they dialled down the doughy eyed love for them and took a step back and saw it for what it really is they'd probably get a different impression of the record.

Written by Guest on 10.06.2013 at 03:40

In fairness though Marcel is probably right. Sabbath are a band that, short of releasing a metalcore album, can do no wrong in people's eyes. Even when they release sterile, depth-less, tired hacks of an album like this. People praise it because it's Sabbath and think that everything they release is gold. If they dialled down the doughy eyed love for them and took a step back and saw it for what it really is they'd probably get a different impression of the record.

I've got no problem if you, or Marcel, don't like the album, but there is no need to be arrogant dicks about it and criticise others judgement about music.

For me, I've had a couple of listens now and the album is growing on me. I think it's great to hear Ozzy singing with Sabbath again. I suspect I'll end up giving this a rating of 7.

Written by Guest on 10.06.2013 at 03:40

Sabbath are a band that, short of releasing a metalcore album, can do no wrong in people's eyes.

Well, taking a look a their discography, I think they can actually do a LOT wrong in people's eyes. Even reducing it to the Ozzy period only...
Either way, it's true fanboyism (and same thing for haters) can drive someone to exaggerate his feelings on the actual music, but I think It doesn't get to the point where it makes the difference of liking it or not.

Yeah, i'll second that. there is a lot of variance. haven't heard this year, not expecting the best Ozzy-Sabbath album, but probably won't be the worst either.

I don't think I've seen a single thread here on a modern-day album by a popular band (who have also been around for many years, and whose old stuff is usually classed as legendary), where some haven't labelled anyone expressing a like for the album as a "fanboy", and that they must be "blinded by the band name" if they like it. It happens every single time. It's so predictable, it's embarrassing. It could just as easily be argued that a big band name being on an album can blind certain-minded people to positive aspects of an album, and I think that certainly does happen sometimes.

I'm not a sucker for everything that BS release, but this is a pretty decent album. 6,5

Very good album!! Incredible instrumental arrangement with Tony Iommi in amazing shape

Written by Angelic Storm on 10.06.2013 at 07:22

I don't think I've seen a single thread here on a modern-day album by a popular band (who have also been around for many years, and whose old stuff is usually classed as legendary), where some haven't labelled anyone expressing a like for the album as a "fanboy", and that they must be "blinded by the band name" if they like it. It happens every single time. It's so predictable, it's embarrassing. It could just as easily be argued that a big band name being on an album can blind certain-minded people to positive aspects of an album, and I think that certainly does happen sometimes.

I've also noticed it happens in reverse: some people are so determined to hate on some bands that they'd rate anything they release as the worst thing ever just on principle, no matter how good it actually is. An example that springs to mind is Metallica: some people act like every little thing Metallica does is further proof they are selling out harder and hate them for every album since their self-titled, yet act like Megadeth haven't sold out at all (or, at least, not as badly as Metallica) despite the fact that Risk came close to being a actual pop album at points and actually simplified their sound after Metallica did the same thing (in other words, Megadeth probably sold out worse than Metallica did). Maybe I'm looking at things the wrong way, but it's one thing which really annoys me when I notice it, as it seems very hypocritical. I'll stress, that's just how I see it having listened to metal since the beginning of 2011, so I might be missing something important that everyone else sees, but Megadeth seem like they should be getting the same amount of criticism, if not more, than Metallica do.

Anyway, getting back on topic before someone roast me alive for my previous statement, I've only heard "God Is Dead?" off this album so far and, while I don't think it was bad, I cannot help thinking that it's not as good as it should have been. It just felt too long overall (which sounds familiar from somewhere...) and the last third of it probably had a better riff to write a song with than the other two thirds did. If that's the standard patten for the songs, then I have to say it doesn't sound like something I'll particularly enjoy. I'll give the whole album a listen when I can, but I have to say that "God Is Dead?" didn't exactly set my expectations that high (although the Orchid album that came out recently also struck me as more Sabbath-sounding than 13 has so far, so I might be a bit biased in favour of Orchid at the minute)...

Pretty half decent medi-good album.

Written by Nemo Atkins on 10.06.2013 at 18:51
I've also noticed it happens in reverse: some people are so determined to hate on some bands that they'd rate anything they release as the worst thing ever just on principle, no matter how good it actually is. An example that springs to mind is Metallica: some people act like every little thing Metallica does is further proof they are selling out harder and hate them for every album since their self-titled, yet act like Megadeth haven't sold out at all (or, at least, not as badly as Metallica) despite the fact that Risk came close to being a actual pop album at points and actually simplified their sound after Metallica did the same thing (in other words, Megadeth probably sold out worse than Metallica did). Maybe I'm looking at things the wrong way, but it's one thing which really annoys me when I notice it, as it seems very hypocritical. I'll stress, that's just how I see it having listened to metal since the beginning of 2011, so I might be missing something important that everyone else sees, but Megadeth seem like they should be getting the same amount of criticism, if not more, than Metallica do.

I think... yep, there are people who are basically like blind fanboys, but in reverse. I think all opinions on things like music are to a certain extent at least, subjective. But opinions that are completely subjective with no objectivity to them (which are the majority, I would say) lack a clarity and a genuine honesty, which whilst I can still respect them, means I can't take them entirely seriously. Metallica is a good example. Some people simply want to hate Metallica, and so anything they release is placed under a far greater level of scrutiny than would be applied to other bands. They want to find fault with their releases, which means that their opinions, just like those of blind fanboys, are coming from a place of pre-disposed bias. And going into listening to any new album by a "classic" band with biased ears, be they negative or positive, means that the judgements reached can't really be taken seriously as any sort of definitive statements on the album in question.

And the ironic thing is, that both fanboys and their reverse counterparts treat their opinions as inflappable facts, and therefore have to rubbish opinions that are contrary to their own. It's not enough to simply say they don't agree with your opinions, they also feel the need to belittle you for holding a different opinion to them.

As for Megadeth, yep, they have largely managed to evade the heavy backlash given to Metallica for commercialising their sound, even though they did the exactly same thing, and if anything, Megadeth went further in their sell-out attempts than Metallica did. But because Megadeth failed to achieve the mega stardom of Metallica, their attempts at breaking into the mainstream are forgiven, or even simply ignored, by many of the same people who bash Metallica. I would say it's only quite recently, with Dave's conversion to Christianity, and some of his outlandish political statements, that I've really started to see quite a lot of criticism levelled at Dave and Megadeth, which in turn has transposed itself into criticism of Megadeth's music too. Now, I think it certainly is the case that Super Collider is a very poor album, but I also feel that had that album been released say... just 10 years ago, many of the people criticising it would be praising it instead.

Back to Black Sabbath, I'm still going to listen a couple more times before I completely make up my mind about it, but I can say that whilst I wouldn't place it up there with the likes of the debut or "Master Of Reality" it is certainly quite a bit better than I was expecting it to be. And whilst I never disliked "God Is Dead?", I do feel it sounds much better in a full album context than it did as a single. "Live Forever" or "Zeitgeist" would have made much better singles I think.

Written by Nemo Atkins on 10.06.2013 at 18:51
]
but Megadeth seem like they should be getting the same amount of criticism, if not more, than Metallica do.

May I direct your attention to Megadeth's latest release --> http://metalstorm.net/bands/album.php?album_id=69143&band_id=163&bandname=Megadeth
Megadeth hasn't received as much criticism b/c they did Risk and shortly after returned back to thrash and semi-decent music, System, United, Endgame, etc. Metallica has stayed wallowing in the shitty music cesspool they created back with Load, and arguably the Black album. But as you can see from the link, now that Megadeth has stepped into some uncharted land of shitty music, people are bashing them all the same, so your argument is invalid.
I didn't really want to do this because Megadeth/Metallica is a burnt out argument, but seeing as your new to metal this debate is also unfortunately a right of passage...


Back to Black Sabbath! I'm also kinda surprised by the high rating here. The album is kinda boring to be honest... Sounds like the simple stoner metal songs me and my friends would make up on the spot back as teens, just for funjamtime. The album would work really well for music to fall asleep to though! Very simple, Very slow, if I get insomnia anytime soon I know how to fix it. Ozzy's voice seems to be gone, as the autotune and FX are completely obvious, gone is the raw vox feeling of the first albums.

The Zeitgeist song really? Sounds like a stoner band trying to knock off Planet Caravan.

Alright enough with the bash. It really could be worse, at least it's metal and it sounds like some vestige of what Sabbath used to be, I mean these guys are Grandpas now.