Written by [user id=100467] on 28.09.2010 at 22:19

Great review. I appreciate you breaking DerRozzengarten's string of reviews, haha. I could use a different perspective on albums.

Quote:
The problem is not so much the narrations in themselves (as cheesy as they are) as the way they use them. They don't blend them into the songs. I mean, if it would be some background 'vocals' just put as a complement to music, it would be much less annoying and they would sound less cheesy. As it is now, they just kill the songs by destroying the pace of the music. Listen to "Unholy Warcry" for example. The music just cuts suddenly, the song stops, and then the talking starts.
Also, the talking is way too long at times since SOEL II. Sometimes, it feels more as you're listening to the recording of someone reading a book than to music. They even seem to believe that spoken parts can be an entire song.

Yeah, everyone of their songs with narrations are all long, boring, and out of place. They even feel embaressing to listen to most of the time, imo, the cheesiness is just too much. The only Rhapsody song I can stand with their narrations is "Rain of a thousand flames" because the narration, kinda flows with the song and is only a few seconds long, but if it was a few seconds longer it probably would have butchered the song.

Written by Kratos on 30.09.2010 at 00:30

Yeah, everyone of their songs with narrations are all long, boring, and out of place. They even feel embaressing to listen to most of the time, imo, the cheesiness is just too much. The only Rhapsody song I can stand with their narrations is "Rain of a thousand flames" because the narration, kinda flows with the song and is only a few seconds long, but if it was a few seconds longer it probably would have butchered the song.

Exactly. I don't mind the narration on "Rain Of A Thousand Flames"because it blends with the music. Guitars and drums don't stop like on "Unholy Warcry".
Though, to tell the truth, I haven't really listened to Rhapsody in years. And yes, since SOEL II, the narrations are way too over-the-top cheesy. It's just bad and laughable.

Written by BitterCOld on 29.09.2010 at 08:38

Written by Andreas on 29.09.2010 at 07:55

Written by Edmund Fogg on 28.09.2010 at 21:41

Because any band with enough money to put on a record will have a great production quality.It doesn't mean the album is any good.(Used production as an example but you get the idea)

And you used the most generic example. Performance is good, songwriting and originality are maybe not that good, but 7 isn't too bad. So where does the actual rating (6.0) come from?

just because a band is skilled at their instruments, creates a song with a decent structure and great production does not mean it's actually a GOOD song...

the final overall score represents an overall opinion of the album.

i realize this is apparently really difficult for a lot of people to process, as this is the 4th or 5th time i've seen it brought up offhand, including this being the second time on this particular discussion.

buck up, Baz, i think the biggest reason people are having a hard time digesting your score is because they haven't been able to digest the music yet. my guess is if you gave it a 6, it must be pretty dreadful as you are usually a tad nicer than i.

Well still the question stands: where are the other ratings for if it's only minor side information?

Written by Andreas on 30.09.2010 at 07:53

Well still the question stands: where are the other ratings for if it's only minor side information?

there aren't other. it's a list of primary components and overall opinion. sorry this is apparently lost on you. i'm done talking about it here, although undoubtedly will again when other folks on another review on another day have a problem.

Baz says it's a 6. it's mediocre. well produced mediocrity by guys who know their instruments... which doesn't really make it any better than mediocrity put out by guys who are mediocre with their instruments.

I'd suggest to drop those four "mini ratings" completely and those discussions will magically stop...anyway, honestly - who of you really pay attention to themand do they affect your opinion about the album? or is it more likely based on the "overall score"?

Written by BitterCOld on 30.09.2010 at 08:19

Written by Andreas on 30.09.2010 at 07:53

Well still the question stands: where are the other ratings for if it's only minor side information?

there aren't other. it's a list of primary components and overall opinion. sorry this is apparently lost on you. i'm done talking about it here, although undoubtedly will again when other folks on another review on another day have a problem.

Baz says it's a 6. it's mediocre. well produced mediocrity by guys who know their instruments... which doesn't really make it any better than mediocrity put out by guys who are mediocre with their instruments.

It does. They know their instruments ...

A cheesy album with narrations, orchestrations and hollywood metal? I'm going to buy it right away!

Written by Lysion on 30.09.2010 at 23:43

A cheesy album with narrations, orchestrations and hollywood metal? I'm going to buy it right away!

finally a word

Written by Lysion on 30.09.2010 at 23:43

A cheesy album with narrations, orchestrations and hollywood metal? I'm going to buy it right away!

Sorry to be so negative but, from my point of view, it's bands like Rhapsody who bring down the genre and turn it into a joke. Imo, it's not a coincidence if the Power/Speed Metal genre went downhill at the same moment bands like Rhapsody started to be popular. Bands like Rhapsody stand for all that is wrong with modern Powermetal. Such bands draw the attention of people on anything not metal, childish, cheesy or not even musical sometimes. It sounds fake, even more a studio trick than Dragonforce can be. It's just all flash no substance.

What is Rhapsody since SOEL II, really? A mix of mediocre Powermetal and simple orchestrations (nothing comparable to a real movie soundtrack or classical music). Some people would tell you it's genius because they mix Powermetal and classical music. But how is it done? By watering down both Powermetal and classical music immensely. That's what you can see if you look below the surface.

And I often love medieval lyrics but their lyrical ability is non-existent. It just comes out as cliched and unintentionnally hilarious because it is intended as something serious and deep but the result is completely the opposite.
Even most of those who like the band are saying that it must not be taken seriously and that it's cheesy but they like the over-the-top cheesiness and enjoy this band for a good laugh.

Perhaps I'm taking it too seriously. However, judging by what I read from interviews, Turilli takes it much more seriously than me.

My comment was more implying that you can't expect anything else out of a Rhapsody - of - fire-disc. Customers knows what they'll get when buying this.

Written by BitterCOld on 30.09.2010 at 08:19

there aren't other. it's a list of primary components and overall opinion. sorry this is apparently lost on you. i'm done talking about it here, although undoubtedly will again when other folks on another review on another day have a problem.

Now you're pretending as if I don't understand the rating system. I do understand the system, mind, I was just doubting it...

Quote:
Baz says it's a 6. it's mediocre. well produced mediocrity by guys who know their instruments... which doesn't really make it any better than mediocrity put out by guys who are mediocre with their instruments.

OK, tell me what's unoriginal about such an overkill of narrations on a metal album? That's actually the only thing I'm sure about when it comes to this album, so I can't tell about the rest yet. Anyway, this review is a good example of the fact that the reviewer's opinion is a major factor. (not saying that's a bad thing)

There are samples on Amazon and it sounds exactly as I expected. Nothing more, nothing less.
Sounds like a mix between ToA and TFoA, oriented mainly on symphonies and narration which isn't that bad in fact.

It's like they ripped off all the orchestrations and narration that could have been on TFoA and made an EP out of it.
And hey, it's Rhapsody, we all know they had to do something like that one day or another.

Is the dude who speaks on the last track Sean Connery? Cause that is awesome!

Finally, I have it and I think this is an excellent EP.
Act III is an especially impressive song.

I like the fact that they kept that new prog approach and also the screams vocals, they're still there.

I'm saying this as a metalhead, not as a Rhapsody fanboy, I love the band, and as a fan I even recognize their mistakes and let me tell you that, at least in my humble opinion, this EP is not one of them, sooo I'll try to be brief in this post.

After listening this EP many times (because actually I really enjoyed it), I can say that even if your review is well done, it doesn't get to the point, even if you expressed your opinion about the album, I think that your review doesn't express very well what the hell is this album about, still I think that it can stand alone because when we are talking about this band we all know what to expect, but I can say that maybe this review will give a wrong impression not only to everyone.

The EP is really well done, they could have released something of only 20 minutes long, but they had the balls to do what they really wanted, narrations, orchestrations, and stuff, something to remember, not another simple EP with a couple of songs.

Something compared this with "A Nightfall In The Middle-Earth" by Blind Guardian, and I can say that this two albums are completely different; while the aforementioned has mindless fillers and boring songs, this EP goes straight to the point, the "fillers" actually have something to say.

Finally, someone said that this band is an example of what gives a bad impression about metal... Really? C'mon, even if Luca Turilli (someone who I deeply respect) takes himself veeery seriously, there are other guys who take their ridiculous bullshit more seriously than him, people who really give a wrong impression about metal than the whole Rhapsody crew. Examples? Oh c'mon, don't get me started, let's say... Varg Vikernes (Burzum), Jon Nödtveidt (Dissection), Nergal (Behemoth), Dead (Mayhem), and so on...

^^^^ fanboy alert... lol Though I will agree with you about Varg, Jon and Nergal giving a much worse name than Luca ever did/does. Good point.

On the other hand I completely agree with the review, out of the whole album I only remember and re-listen to one song, Act III, and even then that song is as you said, unnecessarily long.

I thought this album was a great concept but when it came down to it, it just turned out to be boring. I guess there's a reason we demand Metal accompanied by Orchestration and not Orchestration accompanied by Metal; at the end of the day we aren't Bach or Mozart fanboys, were Metalheads.

Going to check them out when I get a chance.