To put it bluntly, they sound like a bunch of angry teenagers here. For better or worse.
They are a bunch of angry teenagers here.
That is precisely the album's strongest point, or at least the level at which I can appreciate it.
To put it bluntly, they sound like a bunch of angry teenagers here. For better or worse.
Justice is very much following the same trajectory as the previous two albums. It breaks away from the formula a little bit but songs like Blackened, One, and Harvester of Sorrow are par for the course for what they were doing at the time.
But apart from some very specific cases (Beach Boys? I guess), I don't like teenagers in my music, going more for a bit of maturity myself. Also, metal and naivety don't mix all that well, IMHO.
This was a very long, philosophical post and I'm sorry.![]()
How did you relate to Bad Religion? Certainly more category A-ish than B-ish isn't it? Definitely the music and the singing are not complex. The singing is executed very well, but it doesn't sound complicated. The lyrics do sound complicated, but the strength of Bad Religion is certainly the musical and vocal package the lyrics are carried in.This raises a very important point about musical intention and enjoyment, and I agree completely. I am firmly on your side of the camp, Judas. In my experience, most people really get into music during their adolescent or teenage years and those people generally get into one of two things first:
a) Music that sounds like a bunch of relatable peers doing something that you could do. It's inspiring because the music is presenting the same limited scope that you have at that time and it's immediately identifiable. Your ideas, problems, mindsets, etc. are being broadcast by these larger than life musical artists, thus validating your current state of being and making it seem like you could take on the world because someone else gets you. The music itself will mostly likely be simpler because it's easier for the mind to understand - like the many open E, quick chromatic turnaround, dun-dun-dun-dun-dun-dun riffs on Kill 'Em All A lot of metal (thrash/glam), punk, hard rock and pop fit into this category.
b) Music that sounds like a group of people doing something that you couldn't do, but can strive for. It's inspiring because the music sounds more mature, more polished, and resonates with a level of maturity that you desire or possibly identify with at a young age. The ideas and thoughts being presented either require more thought and reflection (and study) or simply give the listener a sense of escape, fictional lyrics as opposed to the non-fictional approach of Group A. The music itself will usually be more complicated, either in technicality or in density of sound layers. Most classical, metal (progressive/power/many others), jazz, and some folk fit into this category.
Kill 'Em All fits into Group A, and I've never been a person who relates to that kind of music. I can appreciate it to a certain extent, but that content has never done much for me. To me, music is larger than life and reaches behind common language and life problems to project relatable themes through melody and story rather than literally spelling them out for the listener. It's the same reason why as a teenager I would have rather watched Star Wars than some slice-of-life indie movie about an angsty teenager doing angsty things - that's not enjoyable, that's life. Same reason I'd rather read an urban fantasy novel about crime-solving wizards than an autobiography about a troubled man from Middle America. I want music to take me somewhere else, not reinforce the world I already live in. Not to hate on those who do enjoy the Group A thing (a la Kill 'Em All), but I'll always prefer songs about Cthulhu to songs about banging your head against the stage like you never did before.
This was a very long, philosophical post and I'm sorry.![]()
Also, metal and naivety don't mix all that well, IMHO.
Naivety from the listener?
It was asked in reaction to the Judas quote.
How did you relate to Bad Religion? Certainly more category A-ish than B-ish isn't it? Definitely the music and the singing are not complex. The singing is executed very well, but it doesn't sound complicated. The lyrics do sound complicated, but the strength of Bad Religion is certainly the musical and vocal package the lyrics are carried in.
For the record:
The gratifying aspect of headbanging isn't only the banging itself. It's the music and the feeling for that music that makes you do it. A riff can be so infectious that it initializes the body to move. The music takes you somewhere else (another "state" so to speak) as described in B. So the power of A shouldn't be underestimated or ridiculed. Tapping with your feet or dancing to a beat is the same process. The music makes you do it. That can happen in both A and B categories.
Speaking for myself: I can't deny that growing up with "simple" music, with feel for melody, in eighties pop-era music surely must have influenced me. From there on, more and more B happened, without decreasing or denying the strong A fundament.
I think that if people start with B they have more trouble with tolerating/enjoying A than vice versa.
When people have naive ideas about metal (don't understand it), big chance they have difficulty with liking it well (not a good mix).I realize that, but I have no idea what it is that you asked.
For Whom the Bell Tolls
The Call of Ktulu