Rating:
6.0
Six Feet Under - Undead
22 May 2012


01. Frozen At The Moment Of Death
02. Formaldehyde
03. 18 Days
04. Molest Dead
05. Blood On My Hands
06. Missing Victims
07. Reckless
08. Near Death Experience
09. The Scar
10. Delayed Combustion Device
11. Vampire Apocalypse
12. The Depths Of Depravity


You all seemed to have no problem with me shitting on generic death metal acts before, this time around should be no different.

Seriously, people, there's three things this band has which separates them from the army of other death metal bands duplicating at an exponential rate with no sign of stopping. 1) The well known associated names of some of the members, 2) Being under one of the biggest metal labels out there today, and 3) The slick production reasons 1 & 2 can buy you. Between the decently sized backing label, and the highly experienced members involved, you'd think Six Feet Under would have some kind of arsenal to make them stand out, good or bad. The only thing that really makes them stand out is the fact that they are successful, despite being just as boring as any number of other bands out there. Are people not actually listening? It's some kind of pyramid-scheme-like mass conspiracy; someone (probably the label) will convince a few people this is something special, those few people convince another few people and so on. Before you know it, you've got a large audience of people celebrating a band that doesn't exactly warrant celebrating. Nobody stops to ask themselves why this band is so popular. Enough people like it, that means it must be good, right?

Enough conspiracy theory jabbering, though. The music? It's the same shit, new year. Plain, straight-forward death metal. Undead has enough infectious riffs to make it worth listening to briefly, but not enough to make it worthy of any repeat listens. The only real identity here is Chris Barnes unmistakable sloppy growls. If you haven't heard those before, maybe Undead will hold something new for you. It would be easy enough to tack on another couple dozen words here trying to explain the sound in further detail, but you've heard it all before, so no asinine wall-of-text explanations are going to be given. It's the same story as pretty much any of the other generic crap you've seen reviewed on here, so we'll leave it with the same score as is appropriate for one-time-use types of albums like these.


Band profile: Six Feet Under
Album: Undead


 



Written on 28.05.2012 by
Doc Godin
Former EIC. Now just a reviewer guy.
More reviews by Doc Godin ››



Comments

‹‹ Back to the Reviews
Comments: 10  
Users visited: 232  
Search this topic:  


Butters49 - 29.05.2012 at 00:39  
Some songs are obviously fillers,
but some songs on this album are some of the best SFU ive heard in awhile:
18 days, Molest Dead...

18 days is actually a really really really fucking awesome song.
strade - 29.05.2012 at 02:54  
The first thing that this band has done that hasn't urged me to begin projectile-vomiting across the room upon first impact. That still doesn't make it good. I pretty much agree; generic.
Bones222 - 29.05.2012 at 07:19  
Great review, been checking out the hype surrounding this release the last couple of weeks, nearly bought the new album thinking it was going to be an epic release... cheers just saved me $18 i'll hold off for the moment...
Morbidron - 29.05.2012 at 08:00  
Totally agree. That's more or less my entire view on this band. Never really understood why so many metalheads loved them...
deadbraincells - 29.05.2012 at 15:37  
I'm willing to give credit where it's due - this is likely the best SFU album, period. Whether that makes it any good is up to you to decide yourself. In my case, I already have this on my iPod which is something that can't be said for the other 9 albums listed in the top 10 over there on the left.
Troy Killjoy - 29.05.2012 at 21:58  
I wouldn't call this the same shit as ever - in fact, I'd venture so far as to say this is their best overall album since... ever.

Catchy hooks are more apparent and the groove aspects are toned down slightly, making more room in the songwriting department (which is still typically underutilized, but at least the album works cohesively with different riffs as opposed to four-minute groove licks). There is a lot more energy and aggression this time around, whereas before the band seemed content with their unenthusiastic approach to music.

Still not even a 7/10 in my eyes, but definitely a step above the rest of the crap they've been doling out.
TrollandDie - 29.05.2012 at 22:51  
Does an album termed ''generic crap'' really warrant a 6/10?

I mean, I know that a 6.0 is often given to signify a band's mediocrity but why don't reviewers lower it more? A 5.0 seems more agreable if it's redunant crap; at least then it's balanced between diabolically foul-smelling shit and something worthwhile. Also, it seems like a more effective way to actively tell record labels ''stop signing these talentless hacks'' when ratings are less generous.

A good review regardless.
Troy Killjoy - 29.05.2012 at 23:17  
Written by TrollandDie on 29.05.2012 at 22:51
...why don't reviewers lower it more?

I keep trying!
thefallenalchmst - 30.05.2012 at 17:53  
Written by Troy Killjoy on 29.05.2012 at 21:58

I wouldn't call this the same shit as ever - in fact, I'd venture so far as to say this is their best overall album since... ever.

Catchy hooks are more apparent and the groove aspects are toned down slightly, making more room in the songwriting department (which is still typically underutilized, but at least the album works cohesively with different riffs as opposed to four-minute groove licks). There is a lot more energy and aggression this time around, whereas before the band seemed content with their unenthusiastic approach to music.

Still not even a 7/10 in my eyes, but definitely a step above the rest of the crap they've been doling out.


Definitely agree, Troy. I gave this disc a 9.0 because it was better than anything I've ever heard from them. But there are ten times as better death metal albums out there. It certainly didn't get repeated listens, that's for sure. But it was good for a while. A little while...
Doc Godin - 31.05.2012 at 10:20  
Written by TrollandDie on 29.05.2012 at 22:51

Does an album termed ''generic crap'' really warrant a 6/10?

I mean, I know that a 6.0 is often given to signify a band's mediocrity but why don't reviewers lower it more? A 5.0 seems more agreable if it's redunant crap; at least then it's balanced between diabolically foul-smelling shit and something worthwhile. Also, it seems like a more effective way to actively tell record labels ''stop signing these talentless hacks'' when ratings are less generous.

A good review regardless.

Well, labels generally don't listen to reviewers anyways, generally, they listen to sales, or if their one of those hobbyist sort of labels, then the label owners personal tastes.

Secondly, I did actually enjoy this album for one play through. The replay value however was nada. Hence why the score is as generous as it is.

Advertise on Metal Storm


Login or register to post here.



Similar topics

Forum Topic Similarity Started
Reviews Six Feet Under - True Carnage 7 14.09.2007 by Joey Jo Jo
News Six Feet Under - Announce New Album, New Song Streaming Online 6 11.02.2013 by LeChron James
Reviews Liberteer - Better To Die On Your Feet Than Live On Your Knees 6 01.02.2012 by Mr. Doctor
News Six Feet Under - Working On New Album 6 20.07.2009 by Hamird
News Six Feet Under - Two New Songs Online 6 24.03.2007 by Shadowthrone



Hits total: 3433 | This month: 50