I agree with some of your arguments, but i think you're being too harsh on the "rating breakdown". This genre isn't supposed to be "original", it's supposed to be traditional heavy metal. Would you give a 3 to Iron Maiden? It's a trademark sound, and it's supposed to sound dated. Personally when i approach this kind of albums i judge it for the quality/ catchiness of the songs, because i know beforehanded that it won't be a modern sound album. And i'm fine with it because it's exactly what i'm expecting.

Calling Grim Reaper an Eighties gioant is a bit of a stretch. Back in the Eighties they were bever regarded as such. Were always a second to third tier band. Somehow 'See You In Hell' and 'Fear No Evil' started to get a cult following some twenty yeras down the line.

As for originality, yeah, they aren't original and never were, but then again that is to be expected of the music they play. So, I agree on the 3 there. What I, however, cannot fathom, is why you would give just as an unoriginal band such as Sabaton an 8 for originality on their latest. That should be along the lines of this one, I'd say.

Written by [user id=104220] on 18.03.2017 at 14:32

I agree with some of your arguments, but i think you're being too harsh on the "rating breakdown". This genre isn't supposed to be "original", it's supposed to be traditional heavy metal. Would you give a 3 to Iron Maiden? It's a trademark sound, and it's supposed to sound dated. Personally when i approach this kind of albums i judge it for the quality/ catchiness of the songs, because i know beforehanded that it won't be a modern sound album. And i'm fine with it because it's exactly what i'm expecting.

I don't entirely disagree with you; the band is obviously trying to replicate a certain, very popular sound and they've done so. The sound was, however, original once, and it becomes steadily less original the more it is replicated, so 2016 Grim Reaper necessarily must receive a lower score than 1985 Grim Reaper, which must necessarily receive a lower score than 1976 Judas Priest, etc. Grim Reaper wasn't terribly original when they first arrived, and the intervening decades have drastically decreased how unique their first albums sound, but at the very least, they had the two outstanding factors of Steve Grimmett's voice and Nick Bowcott's guitar to set them apart somewhat. Now, Nick Bowcott is out of the band and Steve's voice has lost some of its flair, so in terms of their sound, they are just another aging traditional metal band, and while that in itself doesn't preclude them from producing good material, the two main things I liked about the band are gone and they have less to distinguish them, so they take a hit in terms of both quality and originality.

A poor originality score isn't necessarily a bad thing, though. Sabaton is one of my favorite bands, and once you get past the fact that they have a unique sound that recognizably belongs to them and no one else, they're not terribly original in terms of their songwriting, which is rather cannibalistic. In my review of The Faceless's Autotheism, which I gave a perfect 10, I only gave it a 7 for originality because it was so obviously indebted to other artists, even though it's one of my favorite albums. It is unusual to see a red 3 next to several higher numbers and not be expected to view that as a criticism, and lack of originality can be a huge criticism that I levy often, but it's not necessarily a bad thing, even if it warrants a bad score.

In other words, I could give something a severe originality score and come up with an overall score that was very different, because I do, as you say, tend to judge things based on the quality of the songs. This album simply contains no interesting or worthwhile songs. Grim Reaper saved me the trouble of having to parse out how to judge originality, because they are unoriginal on all fronts: this album is unoriginal compared to the band's older material, it is unoriginal compared to other bands, the songs are all unoriginal, and none of it is especially good.

As for your last point, I was expecting not much more from this album than what I got, but that doesn't really ameliorate the album's standing in my eyes. I don't hate it, I'm just not impressed, and I think this review reflects that, more or less.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 18.03.2017 at 16:39

Calling Grim Reaper an Eighties gioant is a bit of a stretch. Back in the Eighties they were bever regarded as such. Were always a second to third tier band. Somehow 'See You In Hell' and 'Fear No Evil' started to get a cult following some twenty yeras down the line.

As for originality, yeah, they aren't original and never were, but then again that is to be expected of the music they play. So, I agree on the 3 there. What I, however, cannot fathom, is why you would give just as an unoriginal band such as Sabaton an 8 for originality on their latest. That should be along the lines of this one, I'd say.

"Giant" is a bit generous, I grant you. Not having lived through the 1980s, I know Grim Reaper only as a band that has amassed some recognition in the years since; that was a poor choice of descriptor.

As far as originality goes, I had started my response to Enemy of Reality's comment with Sabaton as a counterexample before you posted your comment, and you also make a valid point. When I handed out an 8 to Sabaton, I was considering the fact that they do have a sound that is recognizably theirs, with a rather unique vocalist, if nothing else, and as somebody who knows their albums fairly by heart, I could detect a world of difference between their previous efforts and The Last Stand, which was, by comparison, quite a new and unusual sort of album for them. When I gave Grim Reaper a 3, I was considering the factors I mentioned above: they never were particularly original, but the things that made them at all original are now gone, along with any inspiration that went into the songwriting. My standards for judging originality were slightly inconsistent, but then, the rating system is quite flaky and doesn't lay out criteria with which we should judge, and in any case an album's originality doesn't often factor into my enjoyment of it.

In 80's band has 2 hit songs, 2 videos what was more about, I think 80's band value Is huger now as then, from NWOBHM fan boys, as it was then. It was one of million bands, but it somehow did not change but did, this album don't sound as NWOBHM , it has some heaviness. Sad that he lost his leg, might be last album ;(