Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Deathspell Omega

Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 12:00:04 AM
I've discovered the truth: this band is Ulver Part II, meaning that they're insincere but musically adept enough to make black metal that's better than the rest, but empty as hell when listened to over a long term.

Infernal Battles: This is a blatant Gorgoroth ripoff, even down to production, and while it passes conveniently without disturbing and while being "good" in the most basic sense, it's wallpaper.

Kenose: A trend attempt that is the faux elitist black metal equivalent of ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME?.

Si Monumentum Requires Circumspice: They might as well call this "Automatic for the People" - like later REM, it's musically better than their earlier stuff, and any one moment is beautiful and even profound, but when stitched together, it's mostly aesthetic and has nothing to say.

There was some other 2-song or 3-song EP I heard, but it was complete fucking garbage. Send this band and Ulver back to Africa.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 12:46:37 AM
Quote
I've discovered the truth: this band is Ulver Part II, meaning that they're insincere but musically adept enough to make black metal that's better than the rest, but empty as hell when listened to over a long term.


I wasn't around for Ulver's "prank on black metal", so I guess I just wasted a couple seconds of your life by making this comment. I have heard Ulver though, and what I got from Nattens Madrigal and some interview statements is that they were a bunch of pretentious elitists with nothing to really be elitist about, since their music was seemingly well-composed at first, but...well, let's put it this way: the first riff of that album screams this to me: "OK. Let's create something black metal. OK. Let's do a speed picked minor-chord arpeggio. That's pretty fucking black metal. Alright...ok...what next...oh yeah, let's do a unique progression, let's progress from that speed picked minor chord arpeggio directly to a speed picked power-chord that's a 5th away from the the minor chord previously speed picked, then let's do a short little black metal melody based on the root note of this particular scale...etc."

Quote
Infernal Battles: This is a blatant Gorgoroth ripoff, even down to production, and while it passes conveniently without disturbing and while being "good" in the most basic sense, it's wallpaper.


I heard this a long time ago, and didn't form much of an opinion about it. All I remember is that the production sucked and and that the music was OK, but nothing worth remembering or wading through the production for (unlike Remains of a Dead, Ruined, Cursed Soul). I guess that's a mark against it.

Quote
Kenose: A trend attempt that is the faux elitist black metal equivalent of ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME?.


Kenose appears to me to be an extremely random collection of ideas that are indeed interesting when viewed individually, but overall, I find myself with a desire to listen to something else when I listen to this album.


Quote
Si Monumentum Requires Circumspice: They might as well call this "Automatic for the People" - like later REM, it's musically better than their earlier stuff, and any one moment is beautiful and even profound, but when stitched together, it's mostly aesthetic and has nothing to say.


I haven't heard anything by REM except what came through the mainstream radio that my parents played when I was a kid, so I can't comment on this.

Si Monumentum Requires Circumspice is an innovative album. It has a complex sense of melody that attempts to work its way through an extremely dissonant  landscape in a way that could be great.  In this way, it expresses the silly concept of "Satan being the ultimate truth of the universe" or something equally juvenile in a complex manner that just falls short of being well articulated. I would expect nothing less from such a fucking stupid ideology as "orthodox satanism". It falls short of being completely brilliant. It is, however, worth a listen or two for musicians looking for interesting musical ideas within the metal genre.


Quote
There was some other 2-song or 3-song EP I heard, but it was complete fucking garbage. Send this band and Ulver back to Africa.


I think you mean the Malicious Secrets split. It's just  like Kenose. It was basically Kenose retreaded.

Iconoclast

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 01:22:33 AM
I tried listeing to Circvmspice a few times but gave up after the first few songs.  I guess you articulated why I didn't like it.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 02:37:33 AM
Quote

I wasn't around for Ulver's "prank on black metal", so I guess I just wasted a couple seconds of your life by making this comment. I have heard Ulver though, and what I got from Nattens Madrigal and some interview statements is that they were a bunch of pretentious elitists with nothing to really be elitist about, since their music was seemingly well-composed at first, but...well, let's put it this way: the first riff of that album screams this to me: "OK. Let's create something black metal. OK. Let's do a speed picked minor-chord arpeggio. That's pretty fucking black metal. Alright...ok...what next...oh yeah, let's do a unique progression, let's progress from that speed picked minor chord arpeggio directly to a speed picked power-chord that's a 5th away from the the minor chord previously speed picked, then let's do a short little black metal melody based on the root note of this particular scale...etc."

Nattens Madrigal really isn't so good, Ulver in their early days were fantastic though, Bergtatt is one of the best early black metal album, and the demo is pretty good too. It's a shame they turned to garbage.

DSO are very overrated, I mostly agree with Prozak's review, well played black metal with nothing to say.

TC

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 12:30:23 PM
i like deathspell omega.  seems like musically they are improving, as i like the new album over si momentum, but like them both.  that being said, i rarely listen to them from beginning to end, and i have no idea what their lyrics are.  musically, they are enjoyable and i fail to see the ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? comparison, even in asthetic.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 02:44:16 PM
Disagree to an extent about Si Monumentum...; there's a level of depth here way beyond merely turning Christianity on its head. An unusually passionate and personal work of metaphysical exploration, uncovering both the beautiful and the ugly, life and death, the conflicts held in the nature of reality - not necessarily *saying* anything profound as such, but certainly reflecting something larger than the music, and provoking a bit of thought if one disregards taking it purely as a literal tribute to Satan. They have an incredible grasp of melody too, I must say.

Considering it's supposed to be the first part of a series too unless I'm mistaken, it might be a good idea to withhold judgment of its purpose as a whole until a later date.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 04:44:32 PM
It isn't really all that critically important that it's "part of a larger work" - if the other two portions of this trilogy will be or were substantially more advanced or evolved conceptually, maybe there would be a point to paying attention to them.

The only parts which I enjoy in Si Monumentum were the "prayer" interludes every three songs; even then, they still have a bit of hokeyness to them. The main songs themselves are somewhat predictable, but otherwise well played, as far as following the aesthetic demands of "typical" black metal.

Overall, I find that if I approach DSO as an ambient music project, I don't get as bored since I don't invest the same amount of attention into actively listening to them. In that regard, they're great.

Dynamics are a big problem here again. The only place on the aforementioned album I particularly liked was the introductory track. It's a great tension builder and has an awesome atmosphere, but when it follows through into the first song "proper", it loses all the intensity they had just created.

In short, I like them, but not because they are doing anything relevant. I've heard this same stuff before, and if they could get over their image and what they think it takes to maintain such, they could go far, IF they stopped limiting themselves to black metal.

TC

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 04:50:49 PM
Quote
Overall, I find that if I approach DSO as an ambient music project, I don't get as bored since I don't invest the same amount of attention into actively listening to them. In that regard, they're great.  

that's exactly how i see them, especially with their latest effort.  which is great with me.  maybe that's why i don't see the problem with them.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 05:04:57 PM
Well, there again is another problem: I don't think they necessarily want to be seen as that. Thus, I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I find I'm able to do so less and less, UNLESS I revert back to them as an ambient band.

I also think the ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? argument might have come up as having something to do with the reason behind Far Beyond Driven's creation: ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? realized they were becoming cloned by every new band on the scene, so they tried to be "different" in order to distance themselves from their potential imitators, mainly by making the most "extreme" ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? album they could possibly make.

Of course, I'm not the admin, so he can tell you for certain.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 05:07:23 PM
I should add to the above: they made it "extreme" in form only; as far as the content was concerned, it said nothing more than Power Metal did.

Know whut i mean?

TC

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 05:10:22 PM
not really, as i never listened to ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME?, but having heard some of the songs from those albums and having been around ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? fans, i think i can relate.  that just implies that DSO "try" too hard, which i don't think is the case.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 07:39:40 PM
Quote
Well, there again is another problem: I don't think they necessarily want to be seen as that. Thus, I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I find I'm able to do so less and less, UNLESS I revert back to them as an ambient band.

I also think the ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? argument might have come up as having something to do with the reason behind Far Beyond Driven's creation: ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? realized they were becoming cloned by every new band on the scene, so they tried to be "different" in order to distance themselves from their potential imitators, mainly by making the most "extreme" ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? album they could possibly make.

Of course, I'm not the admin, so he can tell you for certain.

SMR,C wasn't really being cloned per se; SMR,C (aside from the three "prayers") was a blatant rip-off of what about half of the Swedish scene had been doing for a few years (see Watain, Funeral Mist, Ondskapt, Malign, Svartsyn, Ofermod, etc.)  Thus, Cantus Bestae and the like are no more a clones of DSO than some random Burzum rip-off is cloning Weakling (as they're really cloning Burzum).

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 08:51:00 PM
Quote
not really, as i never listened to ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME?, but having heard some of the songs from those albums and having been around ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? fans, i think i can relate. áthat just implies that DSO "try" too hard, which i don't think is the case.

That isn't my strict implication, but in any event, don't worry too much about having not heard any ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME?. You're probably much more spiritually healthier than I because of it, so I'm sure that means you win this discussion by default. ;)

Quote
SMR,C wasn't really being cloned per se; SMR,C (aside from the three "prayers") was a blatant rip-off of what about half of the Swedish scene had been doing for a few years (see Watain, Funeral Mist, Ondskapt, Malign, Svartsyn, Ofermod, etc.)  Thus, Cantus Bestae and the like are no more a clones of DSO than some random Burzum rip-off is cloning Weakling (as they're really cloning Burzum).

I meant it more in terms of the intent behind DSO. They're trying to bring BM into some realm it's apparently never been into before, and well, I'm afraid that I just don't feel they made it. That's opinion and all, but realistically, I haven't heard anything new come out of the DSO camp that I haven't heard from third-rate death metal bands or from the outtakes of Under A Funeral Moon.

Basically, their intent speaks much louder than their finished product, and it doesn't measure up, despite the good effort they put into the attempt.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 09:07:07 PM
I think you misunderstood me (either that, or I really misunderstood your last post); I'm hardly defending them.  Quite the opposite in fact; my argument is that the push to bring BM "into some realm it's apparently never been into before" isn't even there, despite how much they claim that it is in interviews.  I honestly don't hear what aspect of them hasn't been done in the bands I've mentioned (again, not that I'm even defending the bands they ripped off)- musically, lyrically- fuck, from the pictures I've seen (I don't own any of their stuff), even the layout of the booklet of SMRC was a rip-off of Funeral Mist's "Salvation".

It seems to me that there is little to no effort put in- they just follow the trends.  They did "raw" BM until the Necromorbus sound started catching on, then they jumped on that trend, and now that Blut Ass Nord has come along and given the world AIDS with their meaningless constant dissonance in the name of being "progressive", they've jumped on that trend with Kenose.

Re: Deathspell Omega
January 17, 2006, 09:29:55 PM
Ah, I didn't think you were defending them at all, merely pointing out the chronology of bands which occurred before DSO arose on the scene.

I just said what I said in the last reply based on the ARE YOU TALKIN TO ME? comparison which has been brought up.

THORRY FOR THE CONFUSION