Written by deadone on 09.04.2014 at 05:20

Epic and orchaestrated puts me off instantly.

Opeth not playing Opeth anymore puts me off. Like, they should just "disband" Opeth, and "reform" under a new name. Would make me, and probably a whole lot more of their fans, feel a whole lot better about the whole thing if they would just change their name.

Same with COB, I'd feel much better about all their post-HCDR music if they would just change their name, then re-release all the post-HCDR albums with new artwork and the new name and font.

Written by psykometal on 09.04.2014 at 05:14
Hope this helps clear the apparently foggy air a little bit for everybody.

You can beat people over the head with with information but they'll see what they wanna see.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 09.04.2014 at 05:52

You can beat people over the head with with information but they'll see what they wanna see.

I know. I just wanted to be the asshole who was going out of his way to burst everybody's proverbial bubbles.

Written by deadone on 09.04.2014 at 06:28

New one is back to CoB though.

It's a familiar step in the right direction, now let's see how the next album plays out.

We better get back on track before I start getting dirty looks for meandering too far off topic.

"Stay on target. Stay on target."

I honestly still haven't bothered to listen to Heritage, which is why I haven't actually commented any specific issues for or against their new style beyond expressing a general discontent with the notion of no more prog melodeath style. *shrug*

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 08.04.2014 at 19:36


Only Blackwater Park was great to good in my book. But after BWPP it has gone downhill fast. Even when Wilson only mixes stuff he makes it sound way to sterile.

If you're referring to the production sound of Deliverance (which I agree was kinda bad) I'm pretty sure that's more due to the shitty original recordings, which Wilson was brought on board to fix, even though they were nearly done with the recording process already. In most interview/bonus footage you can watch, Akerfeldt blames the bad sound not on Steven's production, but on the fact that the band didn't rehearse the material at all before entering the studio (if I'm not mistaken, it wasn't even fully written).

In my opinion, he did an excellent job on Blackwater Park, which sounds a bit sterile, sure, but it sounds fantastically cold in a way that chills to the bone.

If, by chance, you're referring to the overly-sterile production of Ghost Reveries or Watershed (which I think is okay, all in all, just not as interesting as a rawer production would've been), he didn't do those ones at all. He wasn't even involved with them, as he was touring with PT during the recording of those albums.

Written by psykometal on 09.04.2014 at 05:27

Opeth not playing Opeth anymore puts me off. Like, they should just "disband" Opeth, and "reform" under a new name. Would make me, and probably a whole lot more of their fans, feel a whole lot better about the whole thing if they would just change their name.

100% agreed. Like what Chuck did to death, opeth should have been disbanded.

Written by psykometal on 09.04.2014 at 05:27

Opeth not playing Opeth anymore puts me off. Like, they should just "disband" Opeth, and "reform" under a new name. Would make me, and probably a whole lot more of their fans, feel a whole lot better about the whole thing if they would just change their name.

Same with COB, I'd feel much better about all their post-HCDR music if they would just change their name, then re-release all the post-HCDR albums with new artwork and the new name and font.

But why does changing the name above the music change the way you feel about the music itself I think this says more about people than it does about Opeth or any band. That people will change their opinions entirely based on a few characters of text is quite worrying to be honest and kind of shows how shallow a person is. It's therefore an issue with the listener, not the band.

Heritage would still be as meh, and new CoB just as crappy to me under any other name.

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"

The inverse is true: shit under any band name will still be shit

Written by [user id=4365] on 09.04.2014 at 12:56

But why does changing the name above the music change the way you feel about the music itself I think this says more about people than it does about Opeth or any band. That people will change their opinions entirely based on a few characters of text is quite worrying to be honest and kind of shows how shallow a person is. It's therefore an issue with the listener, not the band.

Heritage would still be as meh, and new CoB just as crappy to me under any other name.

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"

The inverse is true: shit under any band name will still be shit

It's a psychological thing. The music style expectation is associated to the band name, so when that style changes so radically, an automatic negative bias against it is created. Notice how many have commented on the Heritage page that at first they hated it, but have come to accept and enjoy it years later. I bet if that album was released as Åkerfeldt solo material, where there wouldn't necessarily be any biased expectation of Opeth's classic prog melodeath sound, it would not have been so negatively received initially.

Sure people like you would probably still hate it, but you're a lot more open-minded about music and band style evolution than the average listener. But then again, you may also have viewed the music differently if it was not released under the Opeth name. You'll probably claim you wouldn't, but nobody knows really knows for sure, and there's no real way to prove it unless I could go back in time and convince Mikey to release it as solo material. Psychology is very interesting in this respect.

Written by psykometal on 09.04.2014 at 14:48

It's a psychological thing. The music style expectation is associated to the band name, so when that style changes so radically, an automatic negative bias against it is created. Notice how many have commented on the Heritage page that at first they hated it, but have come to accept and enjoy it years later. I bet if that album was released as Åkerfeldt solo material, where there wouldn't necessarily be any biased expectation of Opeth's classic prog melodeath sound, it would not have been so negatively received initially.

Sure people like you would probably still hate it, but you're a lot more open-minded about music and band style evolution than the average listener. But then again, you may also have viewed the music differently if it was not released under the Opeth name. You'll probably claim you wouldn't, but nobody knows really knows for sure, and there's no real way to prove it unless I could go back in time and convince Mikey to release it as solo material. Psychology is very interesting in this respect.

It's possible, but I find it hard to believe it would enjoy something by a band depending on their name. I like sounds and styles. I fully admit I would be drawn to trying something out if I knew a certain artist was associated with a project but the idea of liking something more if it had a different name, despite knowing it's by the same person, it's an odd concept to me.

I also know cover art can influence how I perceive the music in a small way, but probably not that significantly (though I will much more likely check out something if it has nice art, but then that's because I think there is a correlation with art and music quality much of the time.)

Can´t wait to ear this one.

Written by [user id=4365] on 09.04.2014 at 14:54

It's possible, but I find it hard to believe it would enjoy something by a band depending on their name. I like sounds and styles. I fully admit I would be drawn to trying something out if I knew a certain artist was associated with a project but the idea of liking something more if it had a different name, despite knowing it's by the same person, it's an odd concept to me.

I also know cover art can influence how I perceive the music in a small way, but probably not that significantly (though I will much more likely check out something if it has nice art, but then that's because I think there is a correlation with art and music quality much of the time.)

Well, let's try to create some perspective for you; may or may not be possible for you since you're so open-minded.

Mories, a man with multiple projects for his different musical personalities. Let's say Mories decides he wants to write a total radio rock album, something totally out of left field from what's expected of the seemingly infallible Mories.

Would you prefer A) he release said album under a new project name (thus maintaining the expectations of the name he's given to each of his musical personalities, and creating a new musical personality expectation) , or B) release it under one of his current project names (thus radically altering the stylistic expectations of whatever current personality/name he chose to release it under)?

Musicians write what they want to write. Why should they have to go through the hassle of forming a completely different side project just because you can't differentiate between good and bad without the help of a separate moniker? Seems a bit selfish coming from "fans" to assume bands have to change their name whenever they happen to take their sound in another direction.

Written by psykometal on 09.04.2014 at 17:49

Well, let's try to create some perspective for you; may or may not be possible for you since you're so open-minded.

Mories, a man with multiple projects for his different musical personalities. Let's say Mories decides he wants to write a total radio rock album, something totally out of left field from what's expected of the seemingly infallible Mories.

Would you prefer A) he release said album under a new project name (thus maintaining the expectations of the name he's given to each of his musical personalities, and creating a new musical personality expectation) , or B) release it under one of his current project names (thus radically altering the stylistic expectations of whatever current personality/name he chose to release it under)?

I could objectively say that it's an odd decision on his part to release such an album under one of the current monikers because he's already established himself as an artist that segregates different styles under different names, however my judgement of quality wouldn't be altered so much. If he released something awful and put it under the GTT name I wouldn't like it more or less than if it had its own name. I've no issue calling bands I love out on releasing rubbish, and I often appreciate side projects they do, and vice-versa.

So, to answer your question I would prefer he make a separate project but that's for convenience sake, rather than wanting it to overcome my expectations.

Mories is somewhat of a bad example as fans of his tend to expect experimentation and surprises; his projects occasionally overlap and tend to offer something new on each record.

@Joe Fair enough.

@Troy Because that's what being a fan is all about, right? Expecting bands to conform to the will of the fans, instead of having their own agenda. Bands are supposed to cater to theirs fans, and when they don't, they're just downright selfish pricks. Gah. Figured you would know this kind of stuff by now. >.>

Written by bazinko on 08.04.2014 at 18:56

Opeth never disappoint!

They don't disappoint? Heritage sure was a disappointment to me and many others.

Looking forward to this album nonetheless. At the very least it must be better than Heritage. I'm not really expecting a masterpiece such as Blackwater Park from them. Those days are long gone.

Written by [user id=101272] on 08.04.2014 at 20:37

Written by Lethrokai on 08.04.2014 at 20:34

Your thoughts?

Not positive.

Same here. Why does Steven Wilson have to meddle with everything Opeth does? It's damn annoying, that's what that is.

Written by deadone on 09.04.2014 at 02:31

I'm hoping for proggy NWOBHM personally.

Then you're probably the only one...

Written by Erik M. on 09.04.2014 at 20:48

Why does Steven Wilson have to meddle with everything Opeth does? It's damn annoying, that's what that is.

Maybe they're lovers who just haven't come out of the closet to the public yet...

InnerSelf will not allow the negative comments to ruin his boner.

Written by psykometal on 09.04.2014 at 18:15

@Troy Because that's what being a fan is all about, right? Expecting bands to conform to the will of the fans, instead of having their own agenda. Bands are supposed to cater to theirs fans, and when they don't, they're just downright selfish pricks. Gah. Figured you would know this kind of stuff by now. >.>

Opeth a.k.a. Mikael Akerfeldt (the dictator) is a selfish... guy. I used to like him a lot, but he kind of ruined it by saying he doesn't care about what Opeth fans want, and he just does whatever suits him and no-one else. I hope you're being sarcastic by the way. I'm not saying Opeth needs to do what most of the fans want, but he should at least be grateful to the fans. Without fans they wouldn't even be popular (or exist) in the first place.

Written by psykometal on 09.04.2014 at 20:56

Maybe they're lovers who just haven't come out of the closet to the public yet...

Yeah, Mikael has 2 daughters and a wife, but apparently that still doesn't stop him from messing around with Steven.

Written by Erik M. on 09.04.2014 at 20:42

Written by bazinko on 08.04.2014 at 18:56

Opeth never disappoint!

Heritage sure was a disappointment to me and many others.

Heritage was a slow-burner for me. It's all about expectations really... but what I love about Opeth is that they keep on changing. Too many others bands revel in their glory days and never really break their own mold. Opeth can't stand still!

Written by Erik M. on 09.04.2014 at 21:18

I hope you're being sarcastic by the way.

Nope. Totally furrealziriuz. 100% fans should dictate every aspect of a band. WE PAY THEIR SALARIES, WE SHOULD GET A RETURN ON OUR INVESTMENTS!!!

Quote:

Yeah, Mikael has 2 daughters and a wife, but apparently that still doesn't stop him from messing around with Steven.

Wouldn't be the first queer in history to "have a wife and kids" for a cover up.

Written by [user id=4365] on 09.04.2014 at 12:56

That people will change their opinions entirely based on a few characters of text is quite worrying to be honest and kind of shows how shallow a person is. It's therefore an issue with the listener, not the band.

Forming a new band and publishing stuff under its name would not change the quality of material.If heritage was released under any other name, I still considered it as weak record. It's just a fan wanting his favorite band discography to be only full of great records.

Written by mz on 10.04.2014 at 00:35

It's just a fan wanting his favorite band discography to be only full of great records.

Not necessarily "great records", just records that sound like what the band made their name synonymous with sounding like.

If a band is going to completely change their style and sound from what people expect, then I don't think it's unreasonable for fans to wish they would release said material under a new name. Swordmaster did it, why can't others.

Written by psykometal on 10.04.2014 at 00:15

Nope. Totally furrealziriuz. 100% fans should dictate every aspect of a band. WE PAY THEIR SALARIES, WE SHOULD GET A RETURN ON OUR INVESTMENTS!!!

We pay for services, i.e. live shows, and we pay for products, i.e. merch and music media. It's not like we fund their activities before the music is made without getting something for it. They have the right to do whatever they want with their music, and we have the right to buy or not to buy their wares. We don't have the right to dictate what they can and can't do

The good news is that it's very easy for this album to be better than the previous one. Nevertheless my expectations aren't very high, specially after reading some Mikael's words.

Written by psykometal on 10.04.2014 at 01:04

If a band is going to completely change their style and sound from what people expect, then I don't think it's unreasonable for fans to wish they would release said material under a new name. Swordmaster did it, why can't others.

Swordmaster did it, but on the other hand, dozens of others band did not. Do you imagine the guys in Darkthrone or Blut Aus Nord splitting their bands in 4 or 5 coz their new record doesn't sound like the previous one ? It'd be ridiculous... Plus it implies a band can no longer experiment and search for new musical approaches, how boring would that be....

I personnaly don't care, like said above by others, it's all about the music and no need to be so picky over a few letters. Oh, and I'm glad Opeth released Heritage, their only record that doesn't make me instantly fall asleep

Bad points are bad. And bands should only change when the impac of the change is going to be negative. So Darkthrone and Blut Aus Nord don't count. Argument invalidated. Try again. #YouAllFail

Opeth's change was to something better. So by your own logic, you are wrong. Stop contradicting yourself.

Written by Vombatus on 10.04.2014 at 02:24

Opeth's change was to something better. So by your own logic, you are wrong. Stop contradicting yourself.

Not according to the masses.