Opeth

Perfect representation.

Hahahaha yes indeed!

Harvest is still an amazing song though. One of the few that I find truly brilliant

I've never listened to them. Recommend any songs to help get me into them?

Eh, The Funeral Portrait and Harvest are always good starts bro.

ThatNaggerGuy wrote:

I've never listened to them. Recommend any songs to help get me into them?

No, I really can't. I know that this is a pretty controversial opinion with everybody with the exception of Axe but I don't see anything that Opeth have done that Agalloch didn't do before they did, better than they did, and without the pretense of being pompous or definitive.

Orchid is a good album

The first two Opeth albums are melodeath with weird shit mixed in and terribad transitions

They aren't horrible, they certainly are not Agalloch, but they aren't that bad honestly.

No, and that's exactly the point. They aren't bad at their craft and I think anybody that has a discerning, yet fair, ear can determine that. However, their mediocrity just leaves too much to be desired for an honest listen and the fanboying makes zero sense to me. Opeth is a gateway.

Ah, you make valuable point there. My playing style does sound alot like Mikeal's sadly, and it really doesn't help I got his signature PRS....BUT, I am not a fanboy believe it or not, I rarely listen to them and I believe that they are pretty low on the totem pole when it comes to good metal haha.

trilithonian wrote:

ThatNaggerGuy wrote:

I've never listened to them. Recommend any songs to help get me into them?

No, I really can't. I know that this is a pretty controversial opinion with everybody with the exception of Axe but I don't see anything that Opeth have done that Agalloch didn't do before they did, better than they did, and without the pretense of being pompous or definitive.

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh..................

im not gonna bring up alot of things i see wrong with this post but one, as i am a fan of both, but you sir cannot call opeth pompous or definitive. and i dont even like them better then agalloch.

I'll look into them. I have to listen to "Thick as a Brick" sometime before because for some reason, I have to. I've been here a year & am still a Metal noob.

I can, I will, and I will continue to because it is so.

Mikael Akerfeldt is far from tongue-in-cheek: he's flamboyant about his own and his friends' (see Katatonia press release for Night is the New Day, their newest foray into mediocrity themselves) and he'll go distances to speak about the music more than letting it breathe. There's not a shred of modesty behind any of the pushing of their own work. Fanboys often cite Opeth and Dream Theater as the progenitors of modern progressive metal and invoke it to the point where there can be no other. Perhaps, not a fault of the band, but this is the problem that exists for Opeth and merely adds fuel to glorious fire that is their career. Just read this tripe I pulled from a 2011 interview with Lithium:

Quote :

We certainly do have fans who are not into metal, or extreme metal, if you will. We have all sorts of fans these days which I really, really like. I think if you are not open-minded, I don’t think you are going to be a fan of our music. If you only listen to Suffocation and Behemoth, then you probably won’t like Opeth that much. We have so much other stuff going on in our music. Personally, I listen to all kinds of music - everything from metal to jazz and prog. I think you’ll probably be able to appreciate our music a bit better if you are an open-minded listener. You can find stages of all kinds of music on our albums.

tl;dr: "we have millions of fans and if you do not like us, it's your fault for being closed-minded and you are wrong." You could have replaced the name with Maynard James Keenan or John Petrucci (despite how much more of utter cocks they are) and obtained the same effect. There are tons of these interviews online where he is, perhaps even rightfully so, proud of his own work.

There's pride, and then there's becoming U2.

There's a difference when Kristoffer Rygg writes an essay defining Ulver's latest work (which on my ears wasn't incredible either) because you don't know what to expect and that sort of prefacing is necessary. Opeth don't require it because it's been the same old road for years.

If he's their representative and this band isn't as defined, then he's doing a very poor job representing Opeth. Opeth are not a bad band but they're pompous and believe themselves to be definitive of modern progressive music thanks to their relatively inspired style which has been done before and replicated.

I'm trying to stay away from subjectivity here but it's difficult when you involve how "good" something is versus how "bad" it is. Feel free to bring up all the things wrong with the post. It was a challenge.

Opeth is actually among my favorite bands and have a massive, massive influence on me, sooo yeah >_>
Agalloch and Opeth are so ridiculously different to my ears that there's no real way I can draw a comparison between the two.
In my opinion, it's kinda like comparing a band like Insomnium to Be'lakor, there's similarities there but the way the composition and music is approached is completely different.

Anyway, I recommend Still Life, Deliverance and My Arms, Your Hearse for albums for the people who want to know where to start...Most people would recommend Blackwater Park as well too, and I adore that one.
If the new song is anything to go by, Heritage is going to be a beast of an album too...

Most interviews I've seen with Mikael Akerfeldt generally come across as...well not pompous at all to be honest, but whatever. The guy seriously does what he loves with the band and it's very much his band and artistic outlet.

To me Opeth has been the farthest thing from a gateway. I didn't even like them much until a little bit before I saw them live, and then everything really clicked. It's all a matter of opinion and if nothing so far has gotten you to like Opeth, at this point, nothing will.

The question of his passion wasn't my point. Sure, he might be honestly dedicated to his work, but it doesn't excuse him from insisting that if you don't "get" Opeth, you're closed-minded and obviously too neanderthal to listen to them. It's been said on multiple occasions. Dude's a bit of a snob and he seems reluctant to let that known for the sake of image preservation. It's hush-hush Bono.

Subjectivity is as subjectivity does, but Opeth are far from gods in the pantheon of progressive music and it's depressing to see them alongside Dream Theater as "best" in their craft. It isn't so and it becomes tiring to hear every progressive outlet compared to the two of them when there exist acts like Ne Obliviscaris, who probably derive some influence from Opeth themselves, but do it right.

Ikuinen Kaamos is another band that comes to mind with obvious Opeth strains that does an incredible job, but the fascination remains completely lost to me after bothering myself to listen to Deliverance and Still Life. It wasn't bad music but it's not what it's chalked up to be at all.

Same damn album, 10 years straight.

Akerfeldt is a great musician obviously, and I really do love his vocals. But yeah being pompous about your music is a big turn off. I think they could do so much more with their talent, and it seems like they are trying to throw too many elements into their music for the sake of being "open minded" or progressive.

I appreciated his work in Katatonia's Brave Murder Day when the current vocalist at the time was going through his ills. He does all right on some other guest work that I've heard (namely Ayreon and DTP, but Arjen Anthony Lucassen has his own head up his ass, too) and I really don't have any complaints as to who he is as a musician moreover what he expects people to use as a benchmark for what is by and large a classless genre.

To expound upon my Opeth vs. Agalloch problem, it is the assumption that if you like one, you will appreciate the other because of similar elements. I agree without a shadow of a doubt that they're two very different bands that use two very different paradigms in their craft. Just because one used an acoustic guitar and also happen to be rooted in metal music does not mean the other is subject to that comparison, because if instrumentation was the definition of like bands, then we can assume that every single metal band is the same, right?

There's creativity, there's expression and then there's spontaneity. I won't debate the creative process of either band as I don't know what goes into their repertoire, but the spontaneity in Opeth's records is for the mere sake of it. Agalloch, while in their more progressive moments, are aligned in this comparison going from a very restrained introduction to a wall of sound (Bloodbirds, almost all of The Mantle). Both bands are metal. Both bands make use of progressive elements, however Agalloch are not at all spontaneous. This is where Agalloch accomplish what Opeth do not, and where the ability to compare them ends.

I have a problem with their imagery as well. Anybody know where "My Arms, Your Hearse" comes from?



I'm not an accurate critic of old folk music, but Comus sucks. If you want to understand Opeth's fascination with bizarre genres and sound for the sake of it, there you go. It's even in their discography. Before you point fingers, David Tibet is a fan of Comus but even some of his albums are atrocious (despite his otherwise incredible track record as of late) and I'm more than willing to admit that as it employs more of the same noise for the sake of it. I'd blame Steven Stapleton but I won't bother. Opeth obsess with the morose and the deathly but instead of bringing us that image, they instead choose to "surprise" the listener with their otherwise middle-ground variations, all the while calling it "progressive open-minded music."

Opeth make no secret of the fact that their idea of progressive music is founded in disorder, and that this is only one piece of the puzzle that actively drives their music. While it sounds OK, that's all it can be. Bear in mind, you can be an excellent musician, have an inflated ego and be in an overrated band. If you don't believe that about these guys, go listen to Tool or something. Opeth are pretty much the same thing, except...



"Not all Opeth listeners are metal noobs, but all metal noobs are listeners of Opeth."

A wild fanboy appeared!

Yeah Reivas pretty much beat me to most of my points. About Mikael Akerfeldt being pompous and snobbish....honestly I have no idea where you got that from aside from that one quotation. Even then, you've kind of jumped to conclusions. He said close-minded people won't enjoy Opeth, not that people who don't enjoy them are close-minded. To be completely honest you're dissecting his words far more than they need to be. Close-minded people don't enjoy a lot of things (hey Taxer ) and the guy's just promoting his music and showing he's passionate about it.

Honestly, the Agalloch comparison is kinda ridiculous to me as both bands, aside from obvious similarities, sound completely different.

take into consideration, they are still trying to sell records. hes pretty much obligated to talk highly about their music. they're signed to roadrunner. that should explain it. i have never heard of any band thats as famous as they are that havent talked about there music in a positive manner publicly. also dont care. hes a nice guy apparently. he can say whatever he wants. smaller bands have the "luxury" of not having to suck their own dicks. And lets be serious, with titles like "In the shadow of our pale companion", and "I am the wooden doors" aggaloch isnt exactly winning the "im not trying to sound artsy and high class" award either. and i listen to them more often then opeth.

also i dont even understand the freakin comparison. they are entirely different bands. this conversation sucks. stop analyzing things too much. i hate pompousness and showyness a fuck ton as well. but i understand why it happens sometimes. people need to stop dissing on bands just because they arent aggaloch.

Roadrunner? Hah. If their label's running their own language along with their press release then I'm inclined to believe they're barely in it for creative output.

The fact that the comparison exists is due to people that don't understand the difference between them. You people do, but are failing to recognize that dumb people make this comparison all the time and it isn't at all relevant, therein the point. So far as Agalloch goes, that's been addressed already: that they do a fair job of representing their music without using the word "best" or "most," and any band is allowed their artistic representation. Opeth just fuck it up. Agalloch don't go on record saying "well, we're sort of the reason why this genre exists" despite the fact that it was a large instigator. These definitive terms are bull and misrepresenting themselves. So what if they are or if they're not?

There are plenty more interviews that I won't bother listing, but I'll kindly point that out and let you to your own investigation before I'm called "dissecting" for what is obvious showmanship.

I would be less concerned about selling records in this day and age of the file share and the torrent and more concerned about playing shows. Opeth seem to do much better at that if their sole idea is to bank roll. It wouldn't surprise me if that's what they're in it for anymore, either: what with the promise of a "new direction" every album they take. Disappointing.

your assuming too much because you hate them too much. this discussion is hardly being looked at objectively and its gonna go nowhere so im done.

No, I just hate the dominating mentality that they're the forefront of the progressive metal genre is all. It doesn't make much sense to me and I brought up points as to why they shouldn't be, but these things are by and large left to the mass that listen to them and represent their music. While objectivity is sparse, it is there. I won't deny that there's a knee-jerk reaction to them in that I find their music boring, but there are plenty of reasons to back up the point. If you don't care to read it because all you see from my posts is blind hatred (which it's been anything but), then that's cool... but then you've chosen not to argue because you don't want to, not because it isn't valid.

i read the points and chose not argue them because all the agalloch fans here will kill me. its hard to argue when you have to pull punches (suicidal punches) or know that even if you choose to use the punches that know one will listen anyway because they are blind dick gobbling agalloch fans (i would also still like point out again that im also a fan so dont hate on this either). on this forum, being on the side thats hating on opeth and glorifying agalloch is much easier then being on the side thats trying to level the playing field. it just wont happen, therefore im not continuing for dumb text wars will occur where everyones stupid and bad side will come out. DONE AND BORED

Use capital letters at the beginning of sentences.

im on the interneT. your petty rules have no power over mE.

im hundred percent sure that was taxeR only he down reps for stupid shiT


FIGHT ME

i do what i wanT

ive decided to replace periods with monocle smileys noW

LOR, stop. He was explaining why he found them boring, not trashing or flaming them. And either way, you aren't going to change anyone's opinion. There is no "playing field," there are only people with opinions. And the point of a message board is to post opinions. It's not a personal attack against you or anything of the sort, so don't start arguments because someone doesn't agree. Posts will be deleted if this discussion turns into another stupid fight

I've been listening to you this whole time. I just haven't seen you penetrate the point that their position in progressive music is to be as uncontested as it is according to the overall metal community. The argument was why they're so hyped when they've done very little outside the realm of experimentation yet get branded as one of the maverick bands in the genre. My own personal findings with the band are rough linings around the basis that Opeth aren't masters of their craft and there are plenty of others that are.

I'll gladly attest to the fact that Agalloch are bombastic. But not once do they make a misrepresentation of their music or go out of their way to glorify it, and you know what you're getting when you buy an Agalloch record. Don't pigeonhole me for a board preference when I, at least, barely listen to Agalloch as it stands anymore. If you feel people are going to trash you because they love Agalloch and hate Opeth, that's their prerogative - not mine, nor the nature of the conversation. While I respect Agalloch as musicians, they're not top dog on my list either. They've merely succeeded where Opeth have fallen short and are actual pioneers of a new direction in progressive metal. That much isn't able to be challenged, like them or hate them. That was an absolute objective.

It was also a seeming common ground that gets ridden upon day in and out when it comes to the whole "similar band" tripe, which didn't make sense to me from the beginning. I thought we found a common enemy in their comparison, as they're two completely different bands.

When you buy an Opeth record, you expect something else: a pitch in left field, perhaps not always for the better, for "experimentation." This sort of experimentation has been done to death and their prominence as progressive musicians just baffles me.

Can we at least agree to Opeth being overrated?

Axe wrote:

LOR, stop. He was explaining why he found them boring, not trashing or flaming them. And either way, you aren't going to change anyone's opinion. There is no "playing field," there are only people with opinions. And the point of a message board is to post opinions. It's not a personal attack against you or anything of the sort, so don't start arguments because someone doesn't agree. Posts will be deleted if this discussion turns into another stupid fight

i dont know what u were talking about. i just got mad cuz he down repped me because i dont use capital letters at the start of sentences. and i was also trying to end the argument. last time i checked "therefore im not continuing for dumb text wars will occur where everyones stupid and bad side will come out. DONE AND BORED" was a pretty solid statement of me saying i was done. and i was done. until you convicted me od something

trilithonian wrote:

I've been listening to you this whole time. I just haven't seen you penetrate the point that their position in progressive music is to be as uncontested as it is according to the overall metal community. The argument was why they're so hyped when they've done very little outside the realm of experimentation yet get branded as one of the maverick bands in the genre. My own personal findings with the band are rough linings around the basis that Opeth aren't masters of their craft and there are plenty of others that are.

I'll gladly attest to the fact that Agalloch are bombastic. But not once do they make a misrepresentation of their music or go out of their way to glorify it, and you know what you're getting when you buy an Agalloch record. Don't pigeonhole me for a board preference when I, at least, barely listen to Agalloch as it stands anymore. If you feel people are going to trash you because they love Agalloch and hate Opeth, that's their prerogative - not mine, nor the nature of the conversation. While I respect Agalloch as musicians, they're not top dog on my list either. They've merely succeeded where Opeth have fallen short and are actual pioneers of a new direction in progressive metal. That much isn't able to be challenged, like them or hate them. That was an absolute objective.

It was also a seeming common ground that gets ridden upon day in and out when it comes to the whole "similar band" tripe, which didn't make sense to me from the beginning. I thought we found a common enemy in their comparison, as they're two completely different bands.

When you buy an Opeth record, you expect something else: a pitch in left field, perhaps not always for the better, for "experimentation." This sort of experimentation has been done to death and their prominence as progressive musicians just baffles me.

Can we at least agree to Opeth being overrated?

works for me. i dont even listen to them.

Oh dear

I like how Me and Darkflame two of the bigger Opeth fans here have just stayed out of this.

the "fight" started between me and taxer. he said use capitols at the start of setences, i didnt, he down repped me, i declared fucking independencE then everyone thinks im still argueing with trilL good timeS

Fair enough.

Opeth rocks and I'd suck the dude's cock for making such a great band.

VacuousReality wrote:

Opeth rocks and I'd suck the dude's cock for making such a great band.

Quoted before you decide to edit it.

You realize I can edit your post or just delete your post if I really wanted to. I have nothing to hide here though...if I had any edits to make I would have made them earlier.

VacuousReality wrote:

You realize I can edit your post or just delete your post if I really wanted to. I have nothing to hide here though...if I had any edits to make I would have made them earlier.

u jelly?

Wow that one I actually do want to fix. =/

No i told you to stop starting a fight with trilithonian. Because you were arguing against his opinion and honestly it was going to escalate if you continued. We don't moderate much here but I'm not going to let a fight start over something so stupid

He had a point I wanted to hear, so forgive me if it looks like I was baiting anybody. I really want to know why people think this is the paragon of the genre, and if LOR doesn't believe they are, then is there anybody here that thinks differently? I'm under the impression a lot of people are but aren't too willing to speak about it because they're afraid of hurting peoples' feelings.

This isn't about personal opinions more than it is about the status of bands and their hype. Opeth get way too much credit for their merely passable work.

I definitely agree. Just keep the discussion civil. Although I'll just say obviously they are viewed as the patron saint of the genre because they are among the most accessible. The question isn't whether or not they have a good sound, because I think we can all agree to that, the question is really whether or not their music has the depth to be revered like they are

The discussion is being kept civil.

As an Opeth fan I really can't say if they are or are not the paragon of the genre based on the fact that I really don't like many of the other bands they are compared with. I love Opeth's music simply based on taste I'm not a theory head and just enjoy the way their music flows. I can't really say much more than that.

Axe wrote:

No i told you to stop starting a fight with trilithonian. Because you were arguing against his opinion and honestly it was going to escalate if you continued. We don't moderate much here but I'm not going to let a fight start over something so stupid

you need to read my posts better haha. i tried AVOIDING a fight with trill. and thanks trill for not putting any blame on me. cheers

Fine, carry on

blackstar wrote:

As an Opeth fan I really can't say if they are or are not the paragon of the genre based on the fact that I really don't like many of the other bands they are compared with. I love Opeth's music simply based on taste I'm not a theory head and just enjoy the way their music flows. I can't really say much more than that.

This sort of opinion is what the band lacks: a gathering of fans by and large that agree that Opeth is a favorite due to personal preference versus it being the god of prog. Anywhere else, you'll find stammering fools insisting without a shadow of a doubt that it isn't arguable and that it's a fact.

Shit, go look at their last.fm shoutbox. Tons of gems from hopeless zealots in there.

to be honest, i havent met anyone who think they are a paragon of the genre. that may be because not many of my friends like metal but i find dream theater still wins that popularity contest.

blackstar wrote:

I like how Me and Darkflame two of the bigger Opeth fans here have just stayed out of this.

To be honest that's cos I was away. I would fight someone to the death over Opeth.

Yeah like, blackstar said, I like them because I love listening to their music, not because I think they're pioneers or anything. They do have pretty considerable influence, but I do agree with your statement that they are slightly overrated at times. That doesn't take anything away from the outstanding quality (in my opinion) of their music.

I have to continue to strongly disagree with your issues with the way Mikael promotes their music, though. I still think it's needless nitpicking but that argument seems to have gone now and I'm not wanting to start it up again.

Nitpicking? The dude's basically sleeping with the Tool guy. I think if I had a few rounds in the sack with Maynard, I'd come off pretentious and unimpressive too. For the record, I expect this joke to be used against me sometime in the future.

Read Kerrang! There are plenty of opportunities (especially recently) where he'll shed this for the conveniently cautious behavior he's displaying concerning the recent Heritage (and Opeth's descent into becoming Porcupine Tree's doppelgangers), but the man barks much louder than he bites.

Honestly though, I care very minutely for the presentation of the band other than making it a point that he's done nothing to help cull the rabid fan base they tend to attract and craft their opinions like adults rather than "yes, I am your God."

Somewhat related: