'Land Of Snow And Sorrow' is one of the best songs I've ever heard! The album is a masterpiece.

For people who are saying that this only has 3 musics, remember that this is only the first part of the album, yet lack the Time II.

Written by [user id=35732] on 20.10.2012 at 00:23

Written by Death_95 on 20.10.2012 at 00:19

This might be a stupid question but I never really got what people mean by the 'overproduced' term? What does it mean?

It means nothing. Things are produced differently. There's no standard. There's no constant. It can't be over or under.

People might use it when they don't know how to describe something.

'There's too much of something I can't describe!'

Though there may be no standard in production values saying something is "over" or "under" -produced is perfectly valid. This album is a prime example of overproduction, which is inevitable really considering their notability and the amount of time they spent on this album.
The overproduction really inhibits the music for me, while I really find the band's style nothing exceptionally enjoyable in the first place (their debut was pretty good) the songwriting feels bloated. At moments it sounds like having two film soundtracks playing at the same time as a metal album.

It's not a matter of having "too much of something I can't describe!" It's just a matter of having too much, whether you can describe it or not is irrelevant.
And it is amazing really considering how simplistic this band's style is how they manage to make it sound as top heavy as it is.

What really amazes me though is how so many seem to lap this up.. their sound really doesn't grab me in any special way, I guess I'm just ignorant of their magnificence.

Written by R'Vannith on 20.10.2012 at 06:18

The overproduction really inhibits the music for me, while I really find the band's style nothing exceptionally enjoyable in the first place (their debut was pretty good) the songwriting feels bloated.

Overproduction inhibits the music? The music here IS the "overproduced", "bloated" version (as you describe Time I).

Take these, we would be listening to a non-orchestrated demo.

Written by Death on 20.10.2012 at 08:49

Written by R'Vannith on 20.10.2012 at 06:18

The overproduction really inhibits the music for me, while I really find the band's style nothing exceptionally enjoyable in the first place (their debut was pretty good) the songwriting feels bloated.

Overproduction inhibits the music? The music here IS the "overproduced", "bloated" version (as you describe Time I).

Take these, we would be listening to a non-orchestrated demo.

I'm not sure of your point, you just seem to restate my own opinion. I said that this album sounds overproduced and bloated, which inhibits the music. That's how I describe the music, the overproduced and bloated nature of it is inherent.

If this were not overproduced I would likely have a more positive opinion, a great deal of this sounds completely unnecessary and over-the-top for it's musical basis, which is a fairly standard but well performed melodic death/extreme power (however you would like to define it).

To put it simply it's glossing over (i.e. vamping up the production job by stuffing it to the brim with orchestral/symphonic elements) something which really isn't all that spectacular, a plodding and simplistic melodic metal line. Granted it is certainly catchy at points, but these points are really lost in a sea of unnecessary layers. All the added elements simply stretches out a melodic metal style that makes it overbearingly tedious for me to listen to for the most part.

The three songs of the album are very good but the sound of the drums, specially the snare and the hi-hat?????, is awful; and orchestrations are horribly mixed, imo. Too 'noisy' for me. Too high.
Their first album is faaaaaaar better.

Maybe its more like Symphonic Extreme Metal.. Anyway i love this album so much.. Everything is awesome.. except the mixing and the short length.. I think it will be perfection if they remixing and adds more song into this album.. cant wait for Time II

Written by basquetal on 20.10.2012 at 04:27

For people who are saying that this only has 3 musics, remember that this is only the first part of the album, yet lack the Time II.

Everyone knows that. The problem is that we're paying for a full album. So as has been mentioned before on this thread, I will also buy it when both parts are released in one volume.

This is nothing compared to their first album.Nothing.
They should have waited one more year and release a full length Time.

Written by basquetal on 20.10.2012 at 04:27

For people who are saying that this only has 3 musics, remember that this is only the first part of the album, yet lack the Time II.

Which is exactly why I'm not going to buy this album until there's a 2CD-pack of Time I & II.

Did anybody notice that this album has fewer blast beats in comparison to the debut?

I was prepared to be greatly disappointed, but gotta admit I really liked it and I'm excited to see them live for the first time in 2 weeks !
however, I would have preferred a full release even though SoWaS and Time are decently long tracks

Written by [user id=135634] on 20.10.2012 at 16:10

Did anybody notice that this album has fewer blast beats in comparison to the debut?

Jari said in an interview some years ago something like this: "Last album was maybe 60% fast-40% slow. TIme will be 60% slow and 40% fast"

Written by moe5512 on 20.10.2012 at 17:13

Written by [user id=135634] on 20.10.2012 at 16:10

Did anybody notice that this album has fewer blast beats in comparison to the debut?

Jari said in an interview some years ago something like this: "Last album was maybe 60% fast-40% slow. TIme will be 60% slow and 40% fast"

Oh, I see.

40% Blind Guardian + 40% Rhapsody + 20% symphonic metal standards = BOREDOM

I don't understand that so many people claim that there are only three songs .. why? just because the other two are instrumental? do none of you appreciate classical or baroque music? almost everything from that epoque is instrumental..

Edge of Sanity's "Crimson" album lasts also for only 40 minutes, contains only 1 song in which several parts are repeated 2 or 3 times and nobody seemed to complain so much about it

"Time I" is definitely the best release of 2012 for me ! Thank you Jari

Written by Dinruth on 20.10.2012 at 18:54

I don't understand that so many people claim that there are only three songs .. why? just because the other two are instrumental? do none of you appreciate classical or baroque music? almost everything from that epoque is instrumental..

Well, the first song is an average/poor typical intro and Darkness and Frost is... just for fill another 2 minutes. Two boring minutes. Reminds me a lot to Angtoria's The Awakening. And of course, this is nothing classical or baroque
And truly, the first song could easyly be part of SoWaS (I think that really it is); and the fourth part of Time. Soooooo three songs!

Written by Sojgenske on 20.10.2012 at 19:14

Edge of Sanity's "Crimson" album lasts also for only 40 minutes, contains only 1 song in which several parts are repeated 2 or 3 times and nobody seemed to complain so much about it

"Time I" is definitely the best release of 2012 for me ! Thank you Jari .

Crimson is much more elaborated music than this. And where could we find a song that is not repeated at least two, three or four times? 98% of the songs are built this way. intro, verse, bridge, chorus, verse, chorus.... bla bla. Mix it thosand ways and you build a song

Now it made its way to top albums all time...my gosh...where this ends?

anxiously waiting for the staff review

Written by Sojgenske on 20.10.2012 at 19:14

Edge of Sanity's "Crimson" album lasts also for only 40 minutes, contains only 1 song in which several parts are repeated 2 or 3 times and nobody seemed to complain so much about it

"Time I" is definitely the best release of 2012 for me ! Thank you Jari

Yes but Crimson I is an unmitigated masterpiece, whereas this is mush and fluff at best

Array is defending this as if it was his mother who made it

Incindentally any album can be under or overproduced. Both are valid terms that carry well-recognised connotations. There are indeed standards and constants in each field of music.

It's not really a case of that though. I don't understand why suddenly two very descriptive and relatively specific terms have suddenly lost all their value.

Written by [user id=4365] on 20.10.2012 at 21:42

It's not really a case of that though. I don't understand why suddenly two very descriptive and relatively specific terms have suddenly lost all their value.

Because it's an album he "loves" that your bashing, if it were anywhere else it would still be a valid way of describing sound.


Also, I still need to hear this.

The intro into Songs of Winters and Stars was hugely promising, but the rest of the album then became little disappointing. AND only 40 minutes long. For now I am rating it 8/10.

The only people who complains about this album are just jealous fanboys who are pissed that their favorite band isn't ranked first in charts!

Written by Ahmed Mohamed A on 20.10.2012 at 21:48

The only people who complains about this album are just jealous fanboys who are pissed that their favorite band isn't ranked first in charts!

^Pure logic right there. Makes perfect sense.

really?

Logic.

I can't find it here. Whether it comes from reasons to why people don't like it or some weird explanation about a "meaningless" word that is actually perfectly valid to say when it comes to describing music. Language revisionism is a funny thing

Oh well... I'll search for logic in another thread.

Written by Boxcar Willy on 20.10.2012 at 21:45

Also, I still need to hear this.

You'll hate it, but you probably already knew that