Opeth - Heritage review



Reviewer:
7.8

1122 users:
7.29
Band: Opeth
Album: Heritage
Release date: September 2011


01. Heritage
02. The Devil's Orchard
03. I Feel The Dark
04. Slither
05. Nepenthe
06. Häxprocess
07. Famine
08. The Lines In My Hand
09. Folklore
10. Marrow Of The Earth
11. Pyre [DVD bonus]
12. Face In The Snow [DVD bonus]


The general consensus when a great band dares to move away from their original Death Metal sound is usually not positive. However Opeth have done it before masterfully with Damnation in 2003. They are back at it with one of the year's most anticipated albums, Heritage.

Cutting to the chase: Compared to their previous releases, Heritage lacks character. Despite the song structures being very progressive rock and the vocals being crazy good, the absence of catchy guitar riffs or memorable growls is a downer. One can positively recognize Opeth as the artist, especially since a lot of the songs borrow tidbits straight from the Ghost Reveries period. Certainly they manage to perpetuate a dark atmosphere throughout the album, but the mellowness of the whole thing is borderline irritating to someone expecting their trademark sound. I know we have been forewarned by Mikael Åkerfeldt himself about this being a throwback kind of release. Still, I believe this would be either catchier or more aggressive. Nevertheless the album does feature good moments, mostly from the jazz-infused portions of the songs.

Most of the vocal work by Mikael is spot on and even more breathtaking than ever before. And yes, we are talking about clean vocals only, which is unfortunate. Technically there is nothing to complain about, musicianship is at an all-time high. But when your band has members or former members of Bloodbath and Arch Enemy, listeners are bound to expect a little ferociousness whether in the form of harsh vocals or hell-spawn guitar riffs.

This is undeniably the one album that will have fans divided. On its own it is a great 70s-inspired throwback progressive rock album. Assessed as part of Opeth discography it fails to win me over completely. It is grand if you are into progressive rock and the band need to be applauded for the effort and guts to do something like this at this stage of their career. But ultimately the dearth of grabbing melodies endures as the downfall of Heritage.


Rating breakdown
Performance: 9
Songwriting: 7
Originality: 9
Production: 9


 



Written on 20.09.2011 by Bringing you reviews of quality music and interesting questions such as:

"A picture is worth a thousand words. How many words is a song worth?"

I have only got so much patience and skills, you do the math.

Guest review by
SauradipGhosh
Rating:
8.6
Heritage poses more questions than answers. Have Opeth reached a creative cul-de-sac? Have they chucked their "Extreme Progressive Death Metal" for good? Have they finally shed their "Underground Garage Band" (I am quoting Akerfeldt from an earlier interview) and have ventured out into the Pantheon of the "mainstream" Gods from their hallowed underground temple so frequented by hordes of reverent worshipers?

Read more ››
published 29.05.2012 | Comments (32)


Comments page 2 / 5

Comments: 134   Visited by: 1152 users
20.09.2011 - 15:58
malaikat
Written by Milena on 20.09.2011 at 15:50

Written by malaikat on 20.09.2011 at 15:17

I mean, bashing prog band for having "prog wankery" is like bashing thrash metal because it's riff based. Or bashing black metal for being LoFi. Or bashing folk metal for using folk melodies. Or...

Well, there IS a review on MA bashing Ensiferum for folk interludes


Yeah, I remeber it, that's where I got the idea
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 16:11
Richard
Written by Doc Godin on 20.09.2011 at 09:33

I don't get why people complain about points being knocked off for the lack of metal/death growls. To me, that dynamic is what made Opeth interesting in the first place; the interplay between the mellow, ambient parts and the steamrolling death metal parts.


Absolutely, that's a big part of Opeth's appeal - the contrast is what made them interesting.

Having influences from 70's prog rock is fine, but if Opeth have gone completely regressive and retro, then that's surely the opposite of the nature of 'progressive music'? Bloodbath are rehashing 90's death metal, but that makes them progressive compared to Opeth rehashing 70's prog rock - sort of.
----
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 16:29
Enemy of Reality
If this was a new band, everyone would be praising them.
I like it a lot.
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 16:42
Merchant of Doom
Written by Slayer666 on 20.09.2011 at 15:03

A shame Opeth always ruins the good, atmospheric parts with prog wankery.


I loved that bit!

Anyway, it's pretty patchy, but it's played beautifully and it's a grower (not a growler, unfortunately). I agree with the reviewer about the missing growls... then, it would have been a 7.9 for me... Good effort, but MA needs to forget about prog for a minute or two. Otherwise they'll turn into Porcupine Tree, eventually (is that a bad thing? lol...)
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 17:00
R'Vannith
ghedengi
Written by Richard on 20.09.2011 at 16:11

Having influences from 70's prog rock is fine, but if Opeth have gone completely regressive and retro, then that's surely the opposite of the nature of 'progressive music'? Bloodbath are rehashing 90's death metal, but that makes them progressive compared to Opeth rehashing 70's prog rock - sort of.


I like the logic in that thought.
But i'm not so sure that using the term '70's prog rock' to describe this album, or any album for that matter, actually captures what it sounds like, even a prog rock album from the 70's. After all '70's prog rock' isn't of exactly the same sound, sure you can use it in general terms but saying that Heritage is fitting of this description is vague. I don't really understand how describing this album in that way actually gives anyone an accurate impression. For those who listen to 70's prog rock, they would find this description frustratingly broad. For those who know next to nothing about prog rock they would base the description of '70's prog rock' simply of what they have heard of it, or think it sounds like.

Basically what I'm saying is when the reviewer says '70's prog rock' I have no idea what they think that that sounds like. Unless there is some common understanding among metalheads, or people in general, as to what '70's prog rock' sounds like that I just haven't picked up on.
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 17:01
pisymbol
Written by Mr. Doctor on 20.09.2011 at 15:58

Written by pisymbol on 20.09.2011 at 04:45

If you are an Opeth fan, I think you will absolutely adore this album. Period.


I'm sorry but I couldn't help wondering wha the hell did you mean by saying this?
Just because I agree with the review (I would give it a 7,0 or so tbh) I'm suddenly not an Opeth fan? Yeah...


Yes, that is what I was saying, if you don't agree with me, you are not a real fan! :-)

No, I was not saying that:

I think the overwhelming majority of Opeth fans (whether metal is their favorite genre of music or not) will generally enjoy Heritage as a solid release.

What I don't like with this review is the reason for the score, not the score itself.
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 17:06
I think a true fan will stick behind:kiss: them band and appreciate all their work , ofcourse we miss harsh vocal but we can just listen to the old albums , i think this is a great album and am enjoying it alooot and if it makes Mikael happy then am happy
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 17:24
Slayer666
Written by malaikat on 20.09.2011 at 15:17

Well, they are prog band, not gothic/sludge atmospheric band.

I mean, bashing prog band for having "prog wankery" is like bashing thrash metal because it's riff based. Or bashing black metal for being LoFi. Or bashing folk metal for using folk melodies. Or...

Nah, you get the picture.


Fair enough, I expressed myself poorly.
What I meant to say was that I kind of enjoy the non-prog, atmospheric parts but the prog wankery parts bore the hell out of me.
And they're not completely a prog band, there is a lot of other stuff going on in their music, so it's not really fair comparing what I said to "it's stupid to bash thrash for being riff based".
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 17:29
malaikat
Written by Slayer666 on 20.09.2011 at 17:24


Fair enough, I expressed myself poorly.
What I meant to say was that I kind of enjoy the non-prog, atmospheric parts but the prog wankery parts bore the hell out of me.
And they're not completely a prog band, there is a lot of other stuff going on in their music, so it's not really fair comparing what I said to "it's stupid to bash thrash for being riff based".


Well, that's ok. As for me, I didn't hear any of the "prog wankery" in their songs, except for Watershed maybe (that SuperMario keyboard bridge always seemed unnatural to me), but that's just me.
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 17:51
Merchant of Doom
Written by R'Vannith on 20.09.2011 at 17:00

Written by Richard on 20.09.2011 at 16:11

Having influences from 70's prog rock is fine, but if Opeth have gone completely regressive and retro, then that's surely the opposite of the nature of 'progressive music'? Bloodbath are rehashing 90's death metal, but that makes them progressive compared to Opeth rehashing 70's prog rock - sort of.


I like the logic in that thought.
But i'm not so sure that using the term '70's prog rock' to describe this album, or any album for that matter, actually captures what it sounds like, even a prog rock album from the 70's. After all '70's prog rock' isn't of exactly the same sound, sure you can use it in general terms but saying that Heritage is fitting of this description is vague. I don't really understand how describing this album in that way actually gives anyone an accurate impression. For those who listen to 70's prog rock, they would find this description frustratingly broad. For those who know next to nothing about prog rock they would base the description of '70's prog rock' simply of what they have heard of it, or think it sounds like.

Basically what I'm saying is when the reviewer says '70's prog rock' I have no idea what they think that that sounds like. Unless there is some common understanding among metalheads, or people in general, as to what '70's prog rock' sounds like that I just haven't picked up on.


well, I 'm quite old and I listened to lots of 70s prog rock when I was young and I know exactly what the reviewer means... it's not vague and I don't find it frustrating, also because 70s prog rock has been mentioned millions of times in relation to Opeth. I find it quite strange that it's vague for you... if you don't get the reference, maybe it's time for you to broaden your horizons and listen to some 70s prog rock? I'm not being patronizing, but lots of "modern" metal is deeply rooted in the past, so it's always useful to listen to old stuff as well as to new.

As far as the comment about progressive music being progressive and not regressive: progressive music has nothing to do with a progressive view of music... it's the structural pattern of the music...
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 17:58
Mr. Doctor
Skandino
Written by pisymbol on 20.09.2011 at 17:01

I think the overwhelming majority of Opeth fans (whether metal is their favorite genre of music or not) will generally enjoy Heritage as a solid release.


In that case that's what you should have written in the first place, the first comment wasn't really good at explaining your point.
Now, my two cents about the review: Regardless if people accept it or not, what most people liked about Opeth in the first place was the contrast between the ambient parts and the death metal parts. It was Opeth's appeal and what was mostly interesting about them.
This album totally lacks any sort of contrast of that kind and I can totally understand people not liking it because of it... and I agree with them but I keep my score at 7,0-7,5 because I just see this album as a curiosity, almost as another band, like... Opeth 2.0 hehehe.

"Hey what about Damnation?!"
Well, prog like Heritage isn't really my thing at all but I can still apreciate it for what it is. Damnation on the other hand is far more atmospheric and simple comapred to Heritage, having a more "Opeth-sound" to it imo.
----
Written by BloodTears on 19.08.2011 at 18:29
Like you could kiss my ass
Written by Milena on 20.06.2012 at 10:49
Rod, let me love you.
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 18:19
BlankFile
I agree with the review. As i said before this album reminds me a lot of bands such as Transatlantic. Its a good Progressive Rock cd indeed, but when it comes to Opeth we always expect a more powerfull, involving and mindblowing cd, with lots of variations, and off course with the Death Metal touch in it. An evolution of Watershed for instance would be fantastic, but the band choose another path and we have to respect that. One thing´s for sure: This album is going to divide Opeth fans for the better and the worse.
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 18:28
malaikat
Written by Mr. Doctor on 20.09.2011 at 17:58



Regardless if people accept it or not, what most people liked about Opeth in the first place was the contrast between the ambient parts and the death metal parts. It was Opeth's appeal and what was mostly interesting about them.
This album totally lacks any sort of contrast of that kind and I can totally understand people not liking it because of it... and I agree with them but I keep my score at 7,0-7,5 because I just see this album as a curiosity, almost as another band, like... Opeth 2.0 hehehe.




YES. This is exactly how I think. Opeth are indeed great musicians and even greater band, but I doubt Heritage will be anymore than a "curiosity" to me. It is an awesome album on it's own, but it's just doesn't have that musical feeling, mise en scène, that made us love Opeth in the first place.
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 19:29
dr.doom
Just picked it up and got done listening to it all the way through (it came out today in America).

Not really impressed, there's nothing compelling on here compared to what I'm used to in Opeth, and it seems like they're forcing this whole prog thing on me a little too hard. Yeah, it get it, you're talented musicians and songwriters. But I want something with a little punch from these guys.

Even when I find sections I really like, the song just kind of drifts off in some odd direction and I completely lose interest. IMO, this release lacks focus.

Not to say I don't enjoy it, but it's more background music for me, not something I would want to sit and listen to on its own (again).
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 20:24
BitterCOld
Gringo
Written by Hammer Pie on 20.09.2011 at 11:39

Written by BitterCOld on 20.09.2011 at 06:41

DT split the wickets between the haters who will completely freak out and froth at the keyboard because a progressive metal band just chucked aside every single metallic element and the hordes of fanbois who think everything Opeth ever recorded is the best thing put to tape and that Mikael >>> Beethoven.

and there will be some rational people in the middle, but for the most part, brace for whining from the two extremes.

I've never understood this "rational middle" cliche. How is it different from saying anyone whose opinion is too far from your own is an idiot?


there is a massive difference between having a differing of opinion and the standard MS tanking/score inflation.

if someone has the Opeth discography scored between 7's and 10's, with a spread, i'll take their opinion seriously, even if they differ from mine. if someone has Opeth's entire discography scored at 9+, or write reviews like this one, i have no problem ridiculing their tastes and just flat out discarding their opinion. Just as i disregard anyone who tanks an artist's entire discography...


i have my favorite bands, but it doesn't mean that everything they've ever put out is a 9 or 10.

but then again, this is MS, where apparently to 70% of our users, every album ever recorded is a 9, 10, or a 1... and a score like a 7 (Good) or 7.8 (almost very good) is viewed as a slam and attack on the artist.
----
get the fuck off my lawn.
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 21:47
MaiSweettShaadow
Loading...
20.09.2011 - 23:42
TheLostChord
I was the 420th user visitor to this review. huh huh.

As far as the album goes, I was totally surprised all the way through it. It is FUCKING AWESOME to listen to in an altered state of mind! The mixing and atmosphere is really trippy!

The songs are decent. I need to hear it more to really wrap my mind around it. I'm not disappointed, but I'm not blown away either.

The album is decent.
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 00:11
Fat & Sassy!
Nomcat
Written by malaikat on 20.09.2011 at 15:17

Written by Slayer666 on 20.09.2011 at 15:03

A way too generous review/rating for this boring album.
A shame Opeth always ruins the good, atmospheric parts with prog wankery. You're awesome musicians, we get it already. This goes for all of their albums, not just this one.


Well, they are prog band, not gothic/sludge atmospheric band.

I mean, bashing prog band for having "prog wankery" is like bashing thrash metal because it's riff based. Or bashing black metal for being LoFi. Or bashing folk metal for using folk melodies. Or...

Nah, you get the picture.


Another example of how misunderstood progressive music is. "Sophisticated" artistry and experimental tendencies =/= wankery. If shamelessly flaunting your talent in being great at playing an instrument defined progressive rock, then a good amount of bands that fall under the metal genre is progressive. There is so much more to bands that fall under the progressive music label, and "wankery" is not what defines the music.

Written by Slayer666 on 20.09.2011 at 17:24

And they're not completely a prog band, there is a lot of other stuff going on in their music...


Which makes it what? Progressive, right?

And although this album is not the best example of awesome prog rock, I think (for the most part) Mikael and the gang keep the music tight, focused and tasteful. I think Beardfish's release this year is much better though, but they also have been doing this kind of thing for years.
----
"Information is not knowledge
Knowledge is not wisdom
Wisdom is not truth
Truth is not beauty
Beauty is not love
Love is not music
Music is THE BEST..." ____Frank Zappa
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 02:27
Hammer Pie
Written by BitterCOld on 20.09.2011 at 20:24

Written by Hammer Pie on 20.09.2011 at 11:39

Written by BitterCOld on 20.09.2011 at 06:41

DT split the wickets between the haters who will completely freak out and froth at the keyboard because a progressive metal band just chucked aside every single metallic element and the hordes of fanbois who think everything Opeth ever recorded is the best thing put to tape and that Mikael >>> Beethoven.

and there will be some rational people in the middle, but for the most part, brace for whining from the two extremes.

I've never understood this "rational middle" cliche. How is it different from saying anyone whose opinion is too far from your own is an idiot?


there is a massive difference between having a differing of opinion and the standard MS tanking/score inflation.

if someone has the Opeth discography scored between 7's and 10's, with a spread, i'll take their opinion seriously, even if they differ from mine. if someone has Opeth's entire discography scored at 9+, or write reviews like this one, i have no problem ridiculing their tastes and just flat out discarding their opinion. Just as i disregard anyone who tanks an artist's entire discography...


i have my favorite bands, but it doesn't mean that everything they've ever put out is a 9 or 10.

but then again, this is MS, where apparently to 70% of our users, every album ever recorded is a 9, 10, or a 1... and a score like a 7 (Good) or 7.8 (almost very good) is viewed as a slam and attack on the artist.

Yeah, I agree that score inflation is silly. People know that if they vote everything a 1 or a 10, it gives them more pull over the average score than someone who votes honestly, and that's a fatal flaw with tallying average votes from the public.

But if you think not everything your favorite band has put out is a 9 or a 10, that's still just your opinion. If someone does think Opeth is the best band ever and has the entire Opeth discography scored a 9 or a 10, I still don't see how that makes their opinion any less valid. Everyone has their favorite albums, but that's not okay if several of those favorite albums come from one band whose style you really like? And if someone thinks Opeth is boring and has their whole discography voted low, does that automatically make them a bandwagoner or an idiot? When you're dealing with subjective taste, I don't understand how "I really love this band" and "I really hate this band" are extreme, label-worthy opinions.
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 02:36
Fat & Sassy!
Nomcat
Written by Hammer Pie on 21.09.2011 at 02:27

...


Although what you're saying does make sense, you cannot argue that *most* people who have voting patterns like that are senseless fanboys or whatever. Most people who rate things 1's or 10's usually go with the "I like it" or "it sucks, cus I don't like it" perspective. No middle-ground. Sure their opinion is valid in *my* eyes, to an extent. But that's not how the rating system works, and personally, I think most of us don't think like that. Our views and opinions are a bit more complicated than that... Hence the more than yay-or-nay voting system!
----
"Information is not knowledge
Knowledge is not wisdom
Wisdom is not truth
Truth is not beauty
Beauty is not love
Love is not music
Music is THE BEST..." ____Frank Zappa
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 03:12
R'Vannith
ghedengi
Written by Merchant of Doom on 20.09.2011 at 17:51

well, I 'm quite old and I listened to lots of 70s prog rock when I was young and I know exactly what the reviewer means... it's not vague and I don't find it frustrating, also because 70s prog rock has been mentioned millions of times in relation to Opeth. I find it quite strange that it's vague for you... if you don't get the reference, maybe it's time for you to broaden your horizons and listen to some 70s prog rock? I'm not being patronizing, but lots of "modern" metal is deeply rooted in the past, so it's always useful to listen to old stuff as well as to new.

As far as the comment about progressive music being progressive and not regressive: progressive music has nothing to do with a progressive view of music... it's the structural pattern of the music...


When you say it's not vague for you, '70's prog rock' instantly brings some aspect of the music to mind? My problem wasn't so much with being able to identify something which I think sounds like '70's prog rock', it's more a problem of how do I know if that is the same thing the next guy is thinking of. You know what I mean?

I've listened to quite a bit of 70's prog rock, but when it says that this album sounds like that, that would obviously refer to some similarity that all that genre shares. But it seems to be implied that what I understand as having a '70's prog rock' sound is more-or-less the same as what anyone else would think. That's what I don't get.

I mean it's difficult to define 70's prog rock in the first place. If you're listening to Heritage and say, 'Yep, that's some 70's style prog rock right there' how can I be sure that what that is for you is exactly what it would be for me? I mean you might draw comparisons between particular bands that you've heard from 70's prog rock, but what if I've heard completely different bands?

I have no worries being able to understand the reference in the review. Describing it as '70's prog rock' brings plenty of things to mind. I just wonder if that's the same as what everyone else is thinking, particularly the reviewer. That's what I meant by it being a 'vague' description. But if what I think '70's prog rock' sounds like is similar to what the reviewer thinks then, obviously, there is no problem.
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 03:21
BitterCOld
Gringo
Written by Hammer Pie on 21.09.2011 at 02:27

But if you think not everything your favorite band has put out is a 9 or a 10, that's still just your opinion. If someone does think Opeth is the best band ever and has the entire Opeth discography scored a 9 or a 10, I still don't see how that makes their opinion any less valid. Everyone has their favorite albums, but that's not okay if several of those favorite albums come from one band whose style you really like? And if someone thinks Opeth is boring and has their whole discography voted low, does that automatically make them a bandwagoner or an idiot? When you're dealing with subjective taste, I don't understand how "I really love this band" and "I really hate this band" are extreme, label-worthy opinions.


because 10's should only be absolute stand-outs. the best of the best. landmarks, with 9's being still near the absolute pinnacle. when 10's are handed out like (insert current equivalent of those AOL disks in the late-90's) and 9's for anything just a note shy of perfect (what should be between good and very good), it inflates the entire scoring system to where virtually everything is overhyped and it's routine to see a grade of a "Good" in a review (as i said before) treated like a personal attack on the band because the reviewer had an "ax to grind" or is "unobjective" (not a word) - that last one has come up so frequently i wrote a fucking article on it so someone could post a link in the thread rather than re-hash the same entire arguments again.

Every band that has put out more than three records has strong albums and albums that don't live up to those expectations.

when someone likes a band to the point you are blind as to shortcomings, or dislikes a band to the point where you cannot acknowledge quality even if it's not of your taste (say, anyone who has an album currently ranked in the top 100 of all time a "1") their opinion, in my eyes, is worthless. i'd much rather take the opinion of someone capable of looking at something with a critical eye.

but this is all offtopic.
----
get the fuck off my lawn.
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 07:29
M C Vice
Ex-polydactyl
The cover looks like something the Beatles would have done in the 60s. And I assume the heads in the tree are the band members, but is the one falling away from the tree Per Wieberg? (cause he left the band after the album was recorded)

And BitterCOld, I rated all the albums by my faverite band 9 or 10 (admitadly they've only got 3 albums though). Does that mean that I'm a biased moron, or are they my faverite band BECAUSE I liked their works so much?
----
Mum - 21/10/1955 - 19/6/2015. R.I.P.

"I'll fight you on one condition. That you lower your nipples."
"Thinking quickly, Dave constructs a homemade megaphone using only some string, a squirrel and a megaphone."
Sharks 2016 Premier
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 07:46
Opethian
Gave the album about 4 spins and IMO its amazing! I can see where some of the 'Hate' is coming from, over all i would give
Heritage' an insanely strong 8 and i know it will become an Opeth classic!
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 10:05
Monolithic
♠♠♠
Expectations, expectations, expectations...
Funny thing is, the higher they become, the harder they get to deal with.
Opeth's reaction may seem like "just deal with whatever the fans want, they want an OPETH ALBUM, so we'll give them an album."
It's not like that ... AT ALL! Anyone who appreciates music that you can touch with your soul knows there is more to feel beneath those songs than what you think about them when your listening to it for the first time. I think Opeth just made a big difference by releasing Heritage, they just made it "untouchable" for one who only cares about Death Growls and brutality. Maybe it's better for all of us to look at the album from a different angle, I guess it's worth it.

Good job on reviewing the album, though.
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 10:10
Fredd
Account deleted
Written by BitterCOld on 21.09.2011 at 03:21

because 10's should only be absolute stand-outs. the best of the best. landmarks, with 9's being still near the absolute pinnacle. when 10's are handed out like (insert current equivalent of those AOL disks in the late-90's) and 9's for anything just a note shy of perfect (what should be between good and very good), it inflates the entire scoring system to where virtually everything is overhyped and it's routine to see a grade of a "Good" in a review (as i said before) treated like a personal attack on the band because the reviewer had an "ax to grind" or is "unobjective" (not a word) - that last one has come up so frequently i wrote a fucking article on it so someone could post a link in the thread rather than re-hash the same entire arguments again.

Every band that has put out more than three records has strong albums and albums that don't live up to those expectations.

when someone likes a band to the point you are blind as to shortcomings, or dislikes a band to the point where you cannot acknowledge quality even if it's not of your taste (say, anyone who has an album currently ranked in the top 100 of all time a "1") their opinion, in my eyes, is worthless. i'd much rather take the opinion of someone capable of looking at something with a critical eye.

but this is all offtopic.

Hey, as far as I see, staff reviewers more often than not give 9+ scores for albums the users rate ~8... inflation not just the users' fault.

You have yourselves to blame for the reviewing system.. for instance, why should the album at hand (a retro 70s rockish prog album) score 9 for Originality? this is plain wrong.. and what's the point of the Production rating? In my trivial opinion, it doesnt matter, unless the record is obnoxiously produced... Performance and songwriting, now these two are the essentials, yes.

Generally, the number 9 is pretty overused when subscoring, which leaves very little room for maneuvering... The best staff reviews here in my opinion are jupitreas's scorelesses.

Anyway, for me, nines are for those albums that give me eargasms, tens are for the albums I'm going to tell my children and grandchildren about.. And that's how it should be.
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 10:20
Merchant of Doom
Written by R'Vannith on 21.09.2011 at 03:12

Written by Merchant of Doom on 20.09.2011 at 17:51

well, I 'm quite old and I listened to lots of 70s prog rock when I was young and I know exactly what the reviewer means... it's not vague and I don't find it frustrating, also because 70s prog rock has been mentioned millions of times in relation to Opeth. I find it quite strange that it's vague for you... if you don't get the reference, maybe it's time for you to broaden your horizons and listen to some 70s prog rock? I'm not being patronizing, but lots of "modern" metal is deeply rooted in the past, so it's always useful to listen to old stuff as well as to new.

As far as the comment about progressive music being progressive and not regressive: progressive music has nothing to do with a progressive view of music... it's the structural pattern of the music...


When you say it's not vague for you, '70's prog rock' instantly brings some aspect of the music to mind? My problem wasn't so much with being able to identify something which I think sounds like '70's prog rock', it's more a problem of how do I know if that is the same thing the next guy is thinking of. You know what I mean?

I've listened to quite a bit of 70's prog rock, but when it says that this album sounds like that, that would obviously refer to some similarity that all that genre shares. But it seems to be implied that what I understand as having a '70's prog rock' sound is more-or-less the same as what anyone else would think. That's what I don't get.

I mean it's difficult to define 70's prog rock in the first place. If you're listening to Heritage and say, 'Yep, that's some 70's style prog rock right there' how can I be sure that what that is for you is exactly what it would be for me? I mean you might draw comparisons between particular bands that you've heard from 70's prog rock, but what if I've heard completely different bands?

I have no worries being able to understand the reference in the review. Describing it as '70's prog rock' brings plenty of things to mind. I just wonder if that's the same as what everyone else is thinking, particularly the reviewer. That's what I meant by it being a 'vague' description. But if what I think '70's prog rock' sounds like is similar to what the reviewer thinks then, obviously, there is no problem.


well, you can only compare it to YOUR idea/concept of 70s prog rock... it's a reference point. Then, you listen to the album and find out what the reviewer exactly means. "Heritage" draws inspiration from so many prog bands that it's impossible to pin point any, really. And who cares what's the next guy is thinking? Music is a personal experience and you can only base your opinion on your musical experience as a whole.
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 12:17
Panterica
I haven't heard the album yet, and I suppose I'll give it a higher mark than you did (hopefully...), nevertheless I find the review fair enough- There's no bashing and childish arguments. So as far as I'm concerned, you can give it a 4 cause it's your personal opinion, so who the fuck are we to judge him for that?!

Good review, keep on with the good work.
----
Li'ed - Prog-Metal from Jerusalem
https://www.facebook.com/LiedBandMusic
http://lied-band.bandcamp.com/
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 13:19
Ace Frawley
The Spaceman
I've only had a few listens thus far and generally Opeth albums take time to grow on me but my early impressions are that the album lacks brutality/aggression and doesn't "rock out" enough. For some, this may be preferable but for me it is a disappointment. I don't think it is a METAL album. Some sort of weird PROGGY album. Brilliant musicianship and I still have complete respect for Akerfeldt and the others.
----
The sun shines over The Fool...
Loading...
21.09.2011 - 17:20
DragonWisdom
After listening to this album a good 3 times I am in love with it... I love all the different sides that Opeth can show... To me that is what puts them above so many other bands... They can be haunting and beautiful, scary and dark, melodic and soulful and with Heritage spacy and jazzy... What solidifies this album for me also is the tracks played live. I saw last night in Hartford and the entire show was "death growl"less and it was amazing... The set flowed so nicely together, the acoustic mini set was PHENOMENAL... Did I want them to play the heavy stuff? Of course, but its there prerogative to play what THEY want to play... Its THEIR band and I have total faith in what they want to write and what they want to play...
----
Keep it Brutal!!!
Loading...

Advertise on Metal Storm

Hits total: 21722 | This month: 34