Impressive...

I always confuse these guys with another band that I can't think of right now. Seems like it's time to start digging into this one though.

Written by Zap on 31.08.2016 at 19:42

I always confuse these guys with another band that I can't think of right now. Seems like it's time to start digging into this one though.

Guys? I would say gals.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 31.08.2016 at 20:33

Written by Zap on 31.08.2016 at 19:42

I always confuse these guys with another band that I can't think of right now. Seems like it's time to start digging into this one though.

Guys? I would say gals.

It's 3 women and 2 men. In most western languages we use the masculine term for a mixed gender group of people. Take your issue up with language.

Written by Susan on 31.08.2016 at 20:41

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 31.08.2016 at 20:33

Written by Zap on 31.08.2016 at 19:42

I always confuse these guys with another band that I can't think of right now. Seems like it's time to start digging into this one though.

Guys? I would say gals.

It's 3 women and 2 men. In most western languages we use the masculine term for a mixed gender group of people. Take your issue up with language.

If it's more women than men it is friggingly sexist and demeaning to women to say guys. Call me a feminist if you want. I have Always thought so since I was a wee young lad back in the early Seventies.

Btw it is about time language should be changed in that sense. And it is changing like that all over the world nowadays thank God.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 31.08.2016 at 20:51

Written by Susan on 31.08.2016 at 20:41

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 31.08.2016 at 20:33

Written by Zap on 31.08.2016 at 19:42

I always confuse these guys with another band that I can't think of right now. Seems like it's time to start digging into this one though.

Guys? I would say gals.

It's 3 women and 2 men. In most western languages we use the masculine term for a mixed gender group of people. Take your issue up with language.

If it's more women than men it is friggingly sexist and demeaning to women to say guys. Call me a feminist if you want. I have Always thought so since I was a wee young lad back in the early Seventies.

You're preaching to the choir. I'm 100% with you. I just don't like to miss any opportunity to correct you, dear. They're so rare!

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 31.08.2016 at 20:52

Btw it is about time language should be changed in that sense. And it is changing like that all over the world nowadays thank God.

When there's groups of 1234 men and 1315 women it would be hard to know in advance the correct pronoum to use though... What would people do? Count everybody before saying? That's why they stick to a default pronoum instead of doing so based on numbers.
I myself think all'd be fixed just with a couple neutral pronouns and that's it. But to be honest it's not that important... It's just the way the language is constructed, it doesn't really mean anything sexist

Su-fucking-perb. A high average rating out of the gate that actually deserves it, for once

Written by Auntie Sahar on 31.08.2016 at 23:06

high average rating

Now that you mention it I noticed they reached 2k16 top 1st... Prepare for the incoming red grades I guess

Written by Karlabos on 31.08.2016 at 23:21

Now that you mention it I noticed they reached 2k16 top 1st... Prepare for the incoming red grades I guess

Yep, I don't think it'll be competing with the likes of Vektor and Be'lakor for long

Written by Karlabos on 31.08.2016 at 21:19

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 31.08.2016 at 20:52

Btw it is about time language should be changed in that sense. And it is changing like that all over the world nowadays thank God.

When there's groups of 1234 men and 1315 women it would be hard to know in advance the correct pronoum to use though... What would people do? Count everybody before saying? That's why they stick to a default pronoum instead of doing so based on numbers.
I myself think all'd be fixed just with a couple neutral pronouns and that's it. But to be honest it's not that important... It's just the way the language is constructed, it doesn't really mean anything sexist

Better yet, what if you don't even know the sex of the individuals of the group?

We can't even say praises to people without being labeled as an insensitive asshole because we didn't know about their sex/race/religion/orientation nowadays.

Goddamn this album is good

Written by Karlabos on 31.08.2016 at 21:19

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 31.08.2016 at 20:52

Btw it is about time language should be changed in that sense. And it is changing like that all over the world nowadays thank God.

When there's groups of 1234 men and 1315 women it would be hard to know in advance the correct pronoum to use though... What would people do? Count everybody before saying? That's why they stick to a default pronoum instead of doing so based on numbers.
I myself think all'd be fixed just with a couple neutral pronouns and that's it. But to be honest it's not that important... It's just the way the language is constructed, it doesn't really mean anything sexist

Your example with a massive group of people is simply invalid as most people would refer to it as a crowd i.e. an uniform mass of people.
One might not mean anything but it doesn't take away the fact that most languages ARE constructed from a male perspective. What you say isn't sexist obviously... But the way the language is constructed is sexist.
In swedish for example there is only a femenine form of the word "nurse" and only one form of the word "fireman" (in this case, the same applies in english).This is rooted in the fact that these professions where thought only for those genders.... Which is hella sexist.

Written by [user id=126528] on 01.09.2016 at 02:30
We can't even say praises to people without being labeled as an insensitive asshole because we didn't know about their sex/race/religion/orientation nowadays.

Did someone call you an insensitive asshole or are you just overreacting? I'm gonna go for the later.

Subrosa members right now: "We made a great album, but people are discussing language instead... For THIS We Fought The Battle Of Ages? FOR THIS???"

Anyway, I have yet to listen to this, but based on the comments here, am really REALLY looking forward to hearing it for the first time.

Written by X-Ray Rod on 01.09.2016 at 19:46

Written by [user id=126528] on 01.09.2016 at 02:30
We can't even say praises to people without being labeled as an insensitive asshole because we didn't know about their sex/race/religion/orientation nowadays.

Did someone call you an insensitive asshole or are you just overreacting? I'm gonna go for the later.

There was a push earlier in the year for gender specific pronouns to be banned from Australian workplaces 'cause they're not inclusive.


Would I be the only one here who felt let down by this album, then? I thought it wasn't as good as the last 2. Only heard it once, waiting for my copy to arrive from Amazon.

Urgh, I did not know this existed or was upcoming. Reading this drooling praise makes me all giddy and shaky.

And lest the truth be forgotten, I was the first MSer to jump on the SubRosa bandwagon in 2011 (apart from Marcel in 2008)! Not that it matters or is necessarily even true, but I am so happy with how this band turned out over the past 5 years and the positive reception they've received that I'll hold onto those bragging rights.

Written by IronAngel on 02.09.2016 at 16:18

The positive reception they've received that I'll hold onto those bragging rights.

Not necessarily Subrosa would have got appreciation had they released a shoddy album and by that, braggers could have been attacked and tormented from head to toe.

You lucky they delivered a record which is been praised on MS & outside MS. Wish for yourself that next time they really don't disappoint us. Our weapon is feeling little bit uneasy to be in a cupboard.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 31.08.2016 at 20:33

Guys? I would say gals.

Wasn't even aware of that until I listened to them just now, sorry Listened to to a few songs from one of their earlier albums and it sounded like something I should check out for sure.

Written by IronAngel on 02.09.2016 at 16:18

Urgh, I did not know this existed or was upcoming. Reading this drooling praise makes me all giddy and shaky.

And lest the truth be forgotten, I was the first MSer to jump on the SubRosa bandwagon in 2011 (apart from Marcel in 2008)! Not that it matters or is necessarily even true, but I am so happy with how this band turned out over the past 5 years and the positive reception they've received that I'll hold onto those bragging rights.

I thought I was, when I staff picked No Help For The Mighty Ones way back when =P Pretty sure Marcel has never liked SubRosa so not sure he even counts. He went on and on about how this band wasn't special back in the thread for the sophomore album, a notion which has been shattered time and time again ever since.

[edit] - Oh yeah, I see your post now. Beat me by quite a few months.

The opening track put me to absolute sleep. Don't know if I will ever finish this.

Written by [user id=4365] on 02.09.2016 at 18:59

[edit] - Oh yeah, I see your post now. Beat me by quite a few months.

You even answered my original post, happy that you discovered them! (Yes, I did a forum search just for kicks. >_> )

Marcel doesn't count anyway, or else nobody else would have any fun.

Having now listened to this, yesssss. They're still doing more or less the same thing so it's hard to say which is my favorite at this point, but I think they've perfected their sound this time around. A little softer, a little more rounded, with the violins blending better with the rest (although I do like how they stand out, raw and surprising, in No Help). They remind me as much of some 90s (or 90s inspired) fuzzy/shoegazey slowcore as sludge. There are parts that might as well be slightly heavier Codeine, Lisa Germano or early Low, or even more clearly True Widow. The first part of Wound of the Warden, for one. Really good dynamic that works a lot smoother than the typical post-metal quiet-loud cycle (Isis et al.).

Written by IronAngel on 02.09.2016 at 21:42

Written by [user id=4365] on 02.09.2016 at 18:59

[edit] - Oh yeah, I see your post now. Beat me by quite a few months.

You even answered my original post, happy that you discovered them! (Yes, I did a forum search just for kicks. >_> )

Marcel doesn't count anyway, or else nobody else would have any fun.

Having now listened to this, yesssss. They're still doing more or less the same thing so it's hard to say which is my favorite at this point, but I think they've perfected their sound this time around. A little softer, a little more rounded, with the violins blending better with the rest (although I do like how they stand out, raw and surprising, in No Help). They remind me as much of some 90s (or 90s inspired) fuzzy/shoegazey slowcore as sludge. There are parts that might as well be slightly heavier Codeine, Lisa Germano or early Low, or even more clearly True Widow. The first part of Wound of the Warden, for one. Really good dynamic that works a lot smoother than the typical post-metal quiet-loud cycle (Isis et al.).

Totally agree!!! Every fuckin word you said!!!

NHftMO was good, but I was not blown away by it like the others. Previously, their violin and guitar sounds were a bit detached from each other, and vocals also were not good enough IMO.

By now I should dub the band: "Never-Disappointing-Music"

Written by angel. on 08.10.2016 at 12:05

By now I should dub the band: "Never-Disappointing-Music"

This release was a bit too harmonic, too balanced and perfect - it didnt dissapoint. At first I would have liked it a bit more raw and unpolished, not so perfect. But now I am quite sure that this is a solid 10, despite its perfectness. The first three songs from this album are probably the best songs of the year. So this is already a massively underrated album here. Probably because it had some weeks when it got exposed to the hearing-impaired noobs who follows the top 20 list slavishly.

Have been revisiting MCTTG and that album is as good as this. A bit different, a bit heavier, both great albums.

Written by [user id=157444] on 17.10.2016 at 14:08

This release was a bit too harmonic, too balanced and perfect - it didnt dissapoint. At first I would have liked it a bit more raw and unpolished, not so perfect. But now I am quite sure that this is a solid 10, despite its perfectness. The first three songs from this album are probably the best songs of the year. So this is already a massively underrated album here. Probably because it had some weeks when it got exposed to the hearing-impaired noobs who follows the top 20 list slavishly.

Have been revisiting MCTTG and that album is as good as this. A bit different, a bit heavier, both great albums.

errm... sorry but I can't see why did you feel the urge to quote to write this. :/

And this is number 28 on bandcamp's albums of 2016 list.
https://daily.bandcamp.com/2016/12/08/the-best-albums-of-2016-40-21/

Im surprised how good this album is. maybe too slow and soft at some moments but overall sound and execution is amazing. theres a video for troubled cells

I miss Subrosa =(