|
|
|
|
|
Basso - 13.02.2007 at 20:46
|
|
|
| incredible album well worth a rating even above 9. Awesome indeed... |
|
|
|
| An excellent album thats for sure. Deserving of 9 or more thats for sure. |
|
|
|
| Very good music, although I'm not used to Katatonia sound like that, since I prefer their later sound, it's a really good album. It took me quite long to get used to these kind of vocals... |
|
|
|
| just listened to this album.. never heard of katatonia before.. and i liked... since im a great fan of atmospheric music.. its not bad at all.. best song: Without God. |
|
|
CalebWilson - 12.08.2008 at 14:40
|
|
|
I F***ING LOVE THE VOCALS. SO PENETRATING.
I had goosebumps all the way through Velvet Thorns. Read the lyrics, they're really powerful. |
|
|
|
Sadness, Sorrow, Desperation, Loneliness, Depression
Doom=Katatonia |
|
|
|
I thought song-by-song reviews are not allowed on MS. They didn't let me do that kind of a review...
Anyway, cool album. It doesn't actually bring out sorrow and misery, there are a lot better albums for that than this one, but the guitars are amaizing and they really do have that hypnotizing effect especialy with the vocals. And, there is like 8-9 different riffs (oftenly more) for each track! Amaizing!
8.5-9 from me. |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 16:27
I thought song-by-song reviews are not allowed on MS. They didn't let me do that kind of a review...
Look at the date this review was published  |
|
|
|
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 17:18
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 16:27
I thought song-by-song reviews are not allowed on MS. They didn't let me do that kind of a review...
Look at the date this review was published
And why it's not alowed? |
|
|
|
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 17:18
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 16:27
I thought song-by-song reviews are not allowed on MS. They didn't let me do that kind of a review...
Look at the date this review was published
2003... Your point is? |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:09
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 17:18
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 16:27
I thought song-by-song reviews are not allowed on MS. They didn't let me do that kind of a review...
Look at the date this review was published
2003... Your point is?
If I remember correctly we (the staff) decided on the matter of song by song reviews one or two years later so in 2004 or 2005 |
|
|
|
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 18:12
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:09
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 17:18
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 16:27
I thought song-by-song reviews are not allowed on MS. They didn't let me do that kind of a review...
Look at the date this review was published
2003... Your point is?
If I remember correctly we (the staff) decided on the matter of song by song reviews one or two years later so in 2004 or 2005
Now, how was I supposed to know?
And why did you disallow those? |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:16
Now, how was I supposed to know?
Supposed to know what? That song by song reviews aren't allowed? That can be found here in the FAQ.
Or that at the time of this review it was still allowed? |
|
|
|
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 18:20
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:16
Now, how was I supposed to know?
Supposed to know what? That song by song reviews aren't allowed? That can be found here in the FAQ.
Or that at the time of this review it was still allowed?
The second thing. I tried to pass up a song-by-song review myself (Theogonia by Rotting Christ), and found out that you really mean that. What I wonder is, why? |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:26
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 18:20
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:16
Now, how was I supposed to know?
Supposed to know what? That song by song reviews aren't allowed? That can be found here in the FAQ.
Or that at the time of this review it was still allowed?
The second thing. I tried to pass up a song-by-song review myself (Theogonia by Rotting Christ), and found out that you really mean that. What I wonder is, why?
Song by song reviews usually become too long and boring. It doesn't add anything to a review. We like to keep the reviews between 250 and 500 words |
|
|
|
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 18:28
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:26
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 18:20
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:16
Now, how was I supposed to know?
Supposed to know what? That song by song reviews aren't allowed? That can be found here in the FAQ.
Or that at the time of this review it was still allowed?
The second thing. I tried to pass up a song-by-song review myself (Theogonia by Rotting Christ), and found out that you really mean that. What I wonder is, why?
Song by song reviews usually become too long and boring. It doesn't add anything to a review. We like to keep the reviews between 250 and 500 words
But it's neccecary sometimes. I mean, some Brutal Death or Black albums sure as hell don't need it (as you can't tell one track from another) but when an album like Theogonia comes along, you just can't review it well without the use of song-by-song. |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:32
But it's neccecary sometimes. I mean, some Brutal Death or Black albums sure as hell don't need it (as you can't tell one track from another) but when an album like Theogonia comes along, you just can't review it well without the use of song-by-song.
Believe me every single album on this planet can be reviewed well without the use of song-by-song. |
|
|
|
Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 11.02.2009 at 18:33
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:32
But it's neccecary sometimes. I mean, some Brutal Death or Black albums sure as hell don't need it (as you can't tell one track from another) but when an album like Theogonia comes along, you just can't review it well without the use of song-by-song.
Believe me every single album on this planet can be reviewed well without the use of song-by-song.
Well, yeah, but what good is a review like that? It can never fully explain the music. |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:34
Well, yeah, but what good is a review like that? It can never fully explain the music.
And a song-by-song review can fully explain the music?
Nah, the only wait to understand is to listen to the music. |
|
|
|
Written by Mr. Doctor on 11.02.2009 at 18:49
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 18:34
Well, yeah, but what good is a review like that? It can never fully explain the music.
And a song-by-song review can fully explain the music?
Nah, the only wait to understand is to listen to the music.
And how do you know weither it's your kind of music or not before listening to it? You need a lenghtly song-by-song. Of course, it's not needed for many albums, but there are some that so despratly do need it. |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 19:04
And how do you know weither it's your kind of music or not before listening to it? You need a lenghtly song-by-song. Of course, it's not needed for many albums, but there are some that so despratly do need it.
I think you can make a review of any album without even talking about every single song. Giving some sort of explanation of the overall feeling, performance, each instrument, production, originality and etc,etc... |
|
|
|
Written by Mr. Doctor on 12.02.2009 at 17:29
Written by Slayer666 on 11.02.2009 at 19:04
And how do you know weither it's your kind of music or not before listening to it? You need a lenghtly song-by-song. Of course, it's not needed for many albums, but there are some that so despratly do need it.
I think you can make a review of any album without even talking about every single song. Giving some sort of explanation of the overall feeling, performance, each instrument, production, originality and etc,etc...
Yes, yes, yes. That can go for about 92% of albums out there. What about the other 8%? Songs on some albums are so different from one another, they don't even create the same feeling, instruments may be completely different or at least used completely different etc. |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 12.02.2009 at 18:17
What about the other 8%? Songs on some albums are so different from one another, they don't even create the same feeling, instruments may be completely different or at least used completely different etc.
Nothing is impossible. There's always a pattern in an album... Otherwise... It would be a REALLY inconsistent piece of music.
And if you want another explanation to why those kind of reviews are not allowed here is because they are waaaaaaaay to long and boring to even care. |
|
|
|
Written by Mr. Doctor on 12.02.2009 at 22:35
Written by Slayer666 on 12.02.2009 at 18:17
What about the other 8%? Songs on some albums are so different from one another, they don't even create the same feeling, instruments may be completely different or at least used completely different etc.
Nothing is impossible. There's always a pattern in an album... Otherwise... It would be a REALLY inconsistent piece of music.
And if you want another explanation to why those kind of reviews are not allowed here is because they are waaaaaaaay to long and boring to even care.
Care about what? |
|
|
rageing atheist - 13.02.2009 at 01:38
|
|
|
| I personally dislike song by song reviews because they may spoil the album for me prior to hearing it. For example I do not want to read from an album review about unexpected changes during the course of the album, I'd rather hear them firsthand. I'd like reviews to give me a general idea about the music and maybe also of the concept of the album, nothing more. |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 13.02.2009 at 00:12
Written by Mr. Doctor on 12.02.2009 at 22:35
Nothing is impossible. There's always a pattern in an album... Otherwise... It would be a REALLY inconsistent piece of music.
And if you want another explanation to why those kind of reviews are not allowed here is because they are waaaaaaaay to long and boring to even care.
Care about what?
...This is getting off topic but if I really need to to explain something that I don't need to explain:
What I wanted to say is that a person who suddenly see a song-by-song review that is very fucking long. They will just don't care of reading it. And that's a probem frm the staff and so on. |
|
|
|
| The first time I've listened to Katatonia, and what an epic album i'm totally shocked by this album it deserves a 10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good lord, this is awesome. I know it's stupid to comment on it again after having done so many times before, but shit, this is the single greatest Doom album ever to grace our ears. I don't see how it can be topped, ever.
"Velvet Thorns" is a 14 minute piece of pure sorrowful, mesmerizing perfection, and it alone is worth the entire album. This is the only release by any band that I can listen to again and again and again, and don't get tired of for a second. |
|
|
|
| Underrated doom metal masterpiece |
|
|
|
Written by Slayer666 on 05.11.2010 at 17:05
but shit, this is the single greatest Doom album ever to grace our ears. I don't see how it can be topped, ever.
I think you mean "My ears" instead of "our ears". You might think this is the best doom metal album ever but I believe many would beg to differ.It's a fantastic album and all, but to me it doesnt even compare with other albums which I believe embrace far more of what Doom Metal can do. Like Warning, Candlemass or in the extreme part of the spectrum, Esoteric for example. To me this album doesn't cover enough ground to really deserve a "best of genre" tag..... At most it would be a "Best black/doom" which is something I could probably agree at this point. |
|
|
|
Written by Mr. Doctor on 13.05.2012 at 18:55
You might think this is the best doom metal album ever but I believe many would beg to differ.
Ugh, yea. Like...duh. I've no doubts about it. The way I wrote that post served to illustrate how much I love the album, not to state how everyone feels the same way. |
|
Advertise on Metal Storm
|
