Written by Vombatus on 11.02.2016 at 17:12

Did anyone notice that Volahn - Aq'Ab'Al was first released in 2014? Shouldn't that make it an album for last year's awards?

That album was most definitely available to listen to in 2014, and I saw it on sale somewhere, but for some reason even Volahn considers it a 2015 release. Don't know what's going on there.

Written by Vombatus on 11.02.2016 at 17:12

Did anyone notice that Volahn - Aq'Ab'Al was first released in 2014? Shouldn't that make it an album for last year's awards?

This is what Eduardo Ramirez (Volahn) had to say on the matter.

Quote:

Talking about release of 'Aq'ab'al', wasn't it originally supposed to be released in September of 2014? It now saw its release early January 2015, what happened?
Finishing touches in mastering and design delayed the record along with live rituals, it was worth the wait to see my creation come to life how i envisioned it. During that time we had travelled to summon in Juarez, Mexico/El Paso, TX with the mighty Black Witchery and our Mexican war brothers in Nyogthaeblisz, Satanik Goat Ritual, Hellvetron, Sacrocurse, Obeisance, Nexul among others. It was an occult elite ritual of barbaric violence!!!

Hmmmm okay. Was confusing to see MA list the cassette release in September 2014. Have no idea if it's true or if it sounds the same as the IB stuff from early 2015.

Hard for me to vote on the Doom Metal albums, Mourning Beloveth released a great album but I think Undersmile and Shape Of Despair released more consistent and solid albums (whatever that means).
I think that Undersmile really outdid themselves and they deserve to be voted, a beautiful album in every aspect.

Written by Vombatus on 12.02.2016 at 03:02

Hmmmm okay. Was confusing to see MA list the cassette release in September 2014. Have no idea if it's true or if it sounds the same as the IB stuff from early 2015.

I recall it sounding the same back in 2014. If there were changes they were minor.

I know its virtually impossible to listen to every album ever made in 2015 and I am pretty sure it got a few mentions by the MS Staffers but the prog metal category surely misses this:


bandcamp

Are Dreadnought and The Gentle Storm both prog?

Written by M C Vice on 18.02.2016 at 07:40

Are Dreadnought and The Gentle Storm both prog?

Yes, they are.

It's fun trying to guess who wrote what in the album descriptions. I'm also pretty sure BitterCOld did most of the work on the introduction on this page.

Where would it fit to have Macabre Omen's Gods of War - At War and Selvans' Lupercalia?

Could see 'em in Folk though I'd definitely lean toward Melodic Black myself. Also, for shame, not nominating Lupercalia in the first place.

On the upside, lots of gold in Death, both Dooms, Black, Post and Ambient/Drone. The other categories either didn't enthuse me as much or are too narrow in scope of viable contenders.

Is the voting already done? I could have joined!

^ You still can.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 03.02.2016 at 23:27

Written by woodsmoke666 on 03.02.2016 at 23:15

No Draconian, StS or MDB?

Those just didn't make the cut. Didn't break out top 10.

Ok, let's try to stay serious for a while.
StS didn't break out the top 10....and neither Draconian.
The point is: which top 10? StS released the 2nd top voted release of 2015 and Draconian the 5th.
I know that the nominations are made by a small groups of admins (metal gurus?), but how can they go so far from the MS crowd? Is this some kind of secret intelligentia who can see what we can't?

StS could have been nominated for at least 2 different categories and please, consider that we have in the extreme doom (where SftN disc 3 belongs) a record with a 6.1 average rating and the fans of the band gave it an average 6.5 (I'm talking about Indesinence's III). Are you serious? Even who liked them is disappointed with the record but someone decided to just nominate it instead of Sts.
I'll check it out for sure, but even if I'll fall in love with the record, throwing away my whole collection to completely worship them, can a 6.1 rated album (and many like it) overrun the 2nd record of the year?!?

And this has nothing to do with my taste, but it's just about the crowd and the admins.
You say "use the write-in", but you know: the votes will probably be split among more categories and....this opens another argument that I'll keep separeted for another post.

The MS Awards nominations are picked by the MS staff, not the members. The same way The Oscars' nominees are picked by the Academy, not us. I don't see the problem.

If the awards would be picked by the members it would be the same as going to the 2016 top chart and checking the 10 top albums btw =p

Written by Zap on 23.02.2016 at 23:31

The MS Awards nominations are picked by the MS staff, not the members. The same way The Oscars' nominees are picked by the Academy, not us. I don't see the problem.

And unlike The Oscars, we don't descriminate based on gender or colour of your skin and we give credit to the lesser known acts!

Written by X-Ray Rod on 23.02.2016 at 23:42

And unlike The Oscars, we don't descriminate

Yes you do. You don't accept ns bands :

Written by Karlabos on 23.02.2016 at 23:46

Written by X-Ray Rod on 23.02.2016 at 23:42

And unlike The Oscars, we don't descriminate

Yes you do. You don't accept ns bands :

Call it "intolerance against intolerance" and it's not the same as discrimination. I won't discuss these semantics here.

I've not actively listened to metal for around 4 years now, but I am still periodically visiting this site because it has retained its quality. This year I finally decided to go through the award nominations more actively and I was quite pleasantly surprised and somewhat disappointed about what I have missed. Anopheli was a great listen from a genre I have never much enjoyed and I guess aging made me appreciate progressive metal much more, even though I used to argue for paragraphs about how it was pointless wankery. Agent Fresco, Ghost Ship Octavius and Leprous all rank so high that I can't even decide which I like more. Sunset In The 12th House and My Sleeping Karma will definitely remain in my playlist for a long time.

In summary, just wanted to drop by to show my appreciation for the ongoing hard work and what were my main favorites from this year's list.

Written by Zap on 23.02.2016 at 23:31

The MS Awards nominations are picked by the MS staff, not the members. The same way The Oscars' nominees are picked by the Academy, not us. I don't see the problem.

Of course the staff picks the nominations, but can the staff be so distant from the common taste of people. Oscars indeed nominate mainly well crafted and known movies and judge it from a critical (and commercial...but this another matter) point of view.
As long as they want to speak to people, they have to enrich and sublimate what the people is talking about. Otherwise they end up like a intellectualistic exercise.

AND the people vates and chooses the winner, so what's the point of cutting out what the people talks about?

Written by Karlabos on 23.02.2016 at 23:39

If the awards would be picked by the members it would be the same as going to the 2016 top chart and checking the 10 top albums btw =p

not at all for two main reasons: nominees bring to the attention of a larger audience high quality records by not so acclaimed bands.
I often discovered great records and bands just checking the nominees and voted for records I wouldn't be aware.

The second reason is that some records are objectively well produced and well played so they get high votes (for example who can say that "the satanist" is a "bad" death metal record? It's formally perfect), but fail to touch people's heart. This way last year Vader beated Behemoth (with 3 times the votes!!).
...and I'm not speaking my own tastes as I'm not into Vader.

Going back to point 1, the nominations must suggest a record like The Stanist to be checked out, as it's a trend maker and reference for production and performance as the high votes demonstrate.

Written by pdepmcp on 24.02.2016 at 14:10

Of course the staff picks the nominations, but can the staff be so distant from the common taste of people.

Yes.

I think we have too many genres in the awards
In 2006 we had 17 genres
In 2012 we had 22
in 2015 we have 25.
has metal spread its horizons so fast?

We currently have 28 styles in album filters that don't match the genres. Some are grouped in awards (and it's good), some are "invented" for the awards purpose only.

The situation is a bit messy!

Last year Anaal Nathrakh won the industrial/cyber/whatsoever genere, but only industrial is a style according to album filters, is not what they play according to band profile, is not what the record sounds like (according to the record page, while the previous was also tagged as industrial, even if I don't agree with that) and is not what they are globally known for. I liked the record so checked other records in the same category and found almost no contact point.
So what? I voted for a record that didn't belong there covering other valuable industrial releases and I guess a lot of Anaal Nathrakh fans did the same and we got 2 wasted genre awards (cyber Industrial with a non cyber industrial winner and black metal with Mayhem who won with less votes than Anaal Nathrakh had, but what if they were in the same genre?)

This year is the same again and I can go 1 step further: what the hell is melodic black metal for? We don't have the style, but we have the awards? It sounds like having an oscar for the "best blue-eyed male" actor?
The same with progressive and extreme progressive. If you mean "very progressive", maybe they should be in avantgarde (Arcturus record is labeld as avantgard in the record page, indeed), if you mean progressive with some grim/brutal touch, they are just a part of progressive metal and if they are something else with progressive elements, they should be somewhere else.

In my opinion (as a metalhead since I was a kid, 9yo MS member and MS & MS awards addicted) we need less genres with a more understandable separation (I'm aware that some record are "by design" borderline, that's not the point), because seeing the extreme progressive with only 5 nominations (1 tagged as symphonic balck metal?!?!?!) is a fail in organization. Seeing some record win the avantgarde section just because Arcturus are elsewhere lowers the value of the award itself (checkwhat I wrote above about Anaal Nathrakh and 2014 awards).

I apologize if my opinions sound rude, my only goal is to get the site (and the awards) always better!!

Written by Zap on 24.02.2016 at 14:48

Written by pdepmcp on 24.02.2016 at 14:10

Of course the staff picks the nominations, but can the staff be so distant from the common taste of people.

Yes.

Well...I see your argument: well expressed. Now I probably agree with you

Written by pdepmcp on 24.02.2016 at 14:10


Of course the staff picks the nominations, but can the staff be so distant from the common taste of people. Oscars indeed nominate mainly well crafted and known movies and judge it from a critical (and commercial...but this another matter) point of view.
As long as they want to speak to people, they have to enrich and sublimate what the people is talking about. Otherwise they end up like a intellectualistic exercise.

AND the people vates and chooses the winner, so what's the point of cutting out what the people talks about?

"we have to enrich and sublimate what the people is talking about. Otherwsie they end up like an intellectualistic exercise."

Or we could leave the "intellectualistic" exercises to you and your thesaurus and just focus on what metal we like...

Enrich and sublimate? Seriously?

I listened to 100+ albums this year, many repeatedly, and voted for the ones I liked best. i don't care if the band is big (Ahab) or small (Tort), if I liked it, i scored it high. if i didn't, i scored it mediocre or low.

every other staff member here did likewise.

if you want to perhaps challenge yourself to look behind simply the most well known acts, start clicking the links and you might see why a lot of popular acts didn't make the cut while lesser known ones did.

if you just want to focus on the popular acts winning again and again and again (see your infatuation Behemoth), feel free to mosey on over to Terrorizer where they win a handful of awards even during years where they don't release albums. You know, because popularity and "what the people is talking about" is more important than even actual music.

Adios.

Written by pdepmcp on 24.02.2016 at 15:06

what the hell is melodic black metal for? We don't have the style, but we have the awards?

Same as best metalgaze. To prevent the massive wobbly that would happen if Alcest won best black metal.

Written by M C Vice on 25.02.2016 at 10:18

Written by pdepmcp on 24.02.2016 at 15:06

what the hell is melodic black metal for? We don't have the style, but we have the awards?

Same as best metalgaze. To prevent the massive wobbly that would happen if Alcest won best black metal.

Ahahah, right. I see the point and somehow agree, but it sounds like a trick

Written by BitterCOld on 25.02.2016 at 01:47

Written by pdepmcp on 24.02.2016 at 14:10


Of course the staff picks the nominations, but can the staff be so distant from the common taste of people. Oscars indeed nominate mainly well crafted and known movies and judge it from a critical (and commercial...but this another matter) point of view.
As long as they want to speak to people, they have to enrich and sublimate what the people is talking about. Otherwise they end up like a intellectualistic exercise.

AND the people vates and chooses the winner, so what's the point of cutting out what the people talks about?

"we have to enrich and sublimate what the people is talking about. Otherwsie they end up like an intellectualistic exercise."

Or we could leave the "intellectualistic" exercises to you and your thesaurus and just focus on what metal we like...

Enrich and sublimate? Seriously?

I listened to 100+ albums this year, many repeatedly, and voted for the ones I liked best. i don't care if the band is big (Ahab) or small (Tort), if I liked it, i scored it high. if i didn't, i scored it mediocre or low.

every other staff member here did likewise.

if you want to perhaps challenge yourself to look behind simply the most well known acts, start clicking the links and you might see why a lot of popular acts didn't make the cut while lesser known ones did.

if you just want to focus on the popular acts winning again and again and again (see your infatuation Behemoth), feel free to mosey on over to Terrorizer where they win a handful of awards even during years where they don't release albums. You know, because popularity and "what the people is talking about" is more important than even actual music.

Adios.

I'm sorry if you got offended by what I said, it wasn't my goal.
I don't even want to get in a race with you (or the staff) to see who listen to more music: that would be a useless point wherever it brings us.

I meant that you (the staff) have a more "insight" and "critical" point of view, just because you are involved in this (I don't know if it's a work or a hobby, but it's irrelevant).
The main reason because I follow the awards is to listen to the nominations and discover new worthy records, even because I don't have anymore the time to dig in the underground as I did up to a few years ago.
So I'm happy and grateful that the staff picks underground gems and nominate them for the awards. That's not the point.
If it was the staff pick, the discussion may end up here: you pick whatever you like, being it a masterpiece or pure crap.

I'm not saying that you should nominate only the top bands or whatever, but take this example just to have a real case: Indesinence - III
The record is not that bad (I listened to it yesterday twice, just because it was nominated). It simply is a ordinary record in his genre and even the fans or the staff are not into it (according to the actual votes). Why is it there? I just looks...nonsense, while other well known acts released records of at least the same value.

What I meant with enrich and sublimate IS NOT "we give you what you want so you are happy with your ego", but is to add artistic inputs to listener (Enrich means to add grater value, not to say what you're supposed to say)! But IMHO it has to stay in touch with people taste.

To sublimate means to redirect the energy of people (who sometimes listens to what is sold and not what is worthy) to more reasonable directions (actual great records, not well known ones). But this pass through putting them side by side: the well known versus the beautiful one.

Just to speak about me (and you): we are about the same years old and both long time members. We both have quite a various taste for music, well known and underground. In the last 3 years other issues are keeping me away from digging music like I did in the past 20 (and more) years. The point with my post is not that I'm infatuated with Behemoth (and I'm not), but I'm able to distinguish between form, marketing and substance: The Satanist is a well marketed and formally perfect record without a solid substance (I'm almost sure I didn't vote for that...)
I do think that StS released the opus of the year, but it's just my own taste (and according to it I vote-in)

Written by pdepmcp on 25.02.2016 at 23:27

Indesinence - III
It simply is a ordinary record in his genre and even the fans or the staff are not into it (according to the actual votes). Why is it there? I just looks...nonsense

The only staff who rated it was R'Vannith, and yet he gave it a 6 (not a bad score by any means). Also, the album's overall rating is downgraded by one vote abuser in the guise of Mrjwashere. Why didn't you notice that?

Your theory is nothing but bullshit.

Written by Paz on 26.02.2016 at 00:05

Written by pdepmcp on 25.02.2016 at 23:27

Indesinence - III
It simply is a ordinary record in his genre and even the fans or the staff are not into it (according to the actual votes). Why is it there? I just looks...nonsense

The only staff who rated it was R'Vannith, and yet he gave it a 6 (not a bad score by any means). Also, the album's overall rating is downgraded by one vote abuser in the guise of Mrjwashere. Why didn't you notice that?

Your theory is nothing but bullshit.

I'll answer with the same tone you answered me.

Maybe you're not fluent with english but 6 is "average" (check the label if you don't trust me) so average is not a bad score but is not a good one either...I'd say ordinary. Uh I actually wrote "ordinary" now that I notice that.
And maybe you're not familiar with mathematics as well so I'll do the calculations for you: without the fake 1 the average would be 6.46 that rounds to 6, which is...average. Ordinary? Did you say that?

I didn't want to be rude, really, but if you say that a sentence you don't agree with is bullshit, you're voulgar, and referred to other people's mind that's an offence (I specify it because I guess you're not familiar with english).

So, to return "polite" (and I think that's how we should remain), how can an average record be "award worthy"?