|
Post by twilightheart on Apr 6, 2004 20:00:57 GMT 2
No one in that page talk about Moonsorrow! But only on this page... therefor lots of us mentioned it in the beginning of this thread!
|
|
|
Post by Southern Troll on Apr 6, 2004 22:08:28 GMT 2
But only on this page... therefor lots of us mentioned it in the beginning of this thread! Of course the band is great! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Grimner on Apr 23, 2004 4:02:47 GMT 2
Primordial, Bathory, Skyforger, Moonsorrow, Thyrfing, Obtest, Melechesh, Menhir are all among my favorites.
|
|
|
Post by Murder By Death on Apr 23, 2004 4:12:41 GMT 2
Meh, the usual stuff I guess... Amon Amarth, Enslaved, Finntroll, Moonsorrow, Korpiklaani, Thyrfing, Skyclad, Lumsk, Asmegin, Otyg, Havayoth, Borknagar, Falkenbach, Equilibrium, and such.
|
|
|
Post by Sumire on May 20, 2004 7:53:35 GMT 2
We, my fave Folk Metal band at all is SKYCLAD!!! And I like a brazilian Folk Metal Band called Tuatha De Danann... I'd like to say that Korpiklaani is one of them, but unhappily, I don't know all songs of the band because in Brazil, I just can't find Korpiklaani CDs, so I just know the songs that I can find throught Internet... Anyway, I love all Korpiklaani songs that I know... And I like Borknagar very much... and old Amorphis too...
|
|
|
Post by Southern Troll on May 20, 2004 16:59:06 GMT 2
Er... Where are you from?
|
|
Leitilsdal
Clansman
Beer for the Skald!!
Posts: 251
|
Post by Leitilsdal on May 31, 2004 12:53:22 GMT 2
Any comments on the last works of Finntroll and Ensiferum? I think both are great!! I still like the first Ensiferum album most! But I'm sure that when I have listened to "Iron" a little more it will be one of my faves too... sometimes that happens, isn't it? The more you listen to an album, the more you like it. "Nattfodd" also sounds great!! Stay trollish!!
|
|
|
Post by Southern Troll on May 31, 2004 15:01:34 GMT 2
I don't heard all album! (Finntroll) Only two songs! They are great! No, i don't heard Ensiferum's new work!
|
|
Leitilsdal
Clansman
Beer for the Skald!!
Posts: 251
|
Post by Leitilsdal on Jun 3, 2004 18:03:13 GMT 2
I haven't listened neither to the last Einherjer's "Blot"... I like Einherjer a lot... even saw them live once when they were supporting in a Cradle Of Filth tour... almost nobody knew them then... they had just released "Odin Owns Ye All"... ahhhh it's a pity they leave the scene...
PS. This gives me an idea: what about a topic about "Best/Worst Gig I saw" or something...?
|
|
|
Post by Sethlad on Jun 3, 2004 18:55:24 GMT 2
Old Einherjer was quite good, up until Odin owns Ye All and Far Far North... Norwegian Native Art and Blot bore the hell out of me.
...O'well, it's always tough when a good band ends, but, as I always say: it's better to stop than to stagnate a keep doing the same crap over and over again. (not claiming that was the case with einhejer... just a personal view.)
|
|
Leitilsdal
Clansman
Beer for the Skald!!
Posts: 251
|
Post by Leitilsdal on Jun 7, 2004 17:37:54 GMT 2
Well, I liked "Norwegian Native Art", so if you find it as boring as "Blot", then I'll probably like "Blot" too... "Odin..." is a very good album, but I prefer the vocals in "Norwegian". I agree with the idea of 'resigning' when all the good ideas have gone or when the band finds, for one reason or another, that it's better to split. I go even further, 'cause although I think that it's ok if a band wants to change their musical direction, I've always thought that they should change their name ... for example those bands whose sound now has nothing to do with what they made in the past... I have always listened to doom metal and it's a ground where that happens a lot... Tiamat, Paradise Lost, Anathema, Pyogenesis... those bands show in lower or higher degree a distance from what they began doing to what they play now (don't know if Pyogenesis are still active). I know there must be an evolution in every band, and it's ok if a band switches from doom death to grunge, truly, but why not change the name? It's another concept, so maybe another name would fit better... or maybe not I'm not sure about it. I suppose it depends on the case, but sometimes it is clear, at least for example with Paradise Lost... What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by twilightheart on Jun 7, 2004 18:51:46 GMT 2
I agree with the idea of 'resigning' when all the good ideas have gone or when the band finds, for one reason or another, that it's better to split. I go even further, 'cause although I think that it's ok if a band wants to change their musical direction, I've always thought that they should change their name ... for example those bands whose sound now has nothing to do with what they made in the past... Interesting point! For me it`s okay, if bands change their music during developing themselves (like Bathory... I would never agree to it, if Bathory would change their name... even if the music has changed a lot). But for me ... I would love to see the band(s) changing name, if the members change (okay, maybe not the drummer or sth., but if the singer changes... or the Lead-Guitarist or sth./ as they mostly are those who are most present on stage), then I´d agree to have a different bandname. Because the PEOPLE are the band... and if I hear for instance "W.A.S.P.", then I wanna have Blackie Lawless on stage then, not any new guy.... do you understand how I mean it?
|
|
Leitilsdal
Clansman
Beer for the Skald!!
Posts: 251
|
Post by Leitilsdal on Jun 8, 2004 14:22:24 GMT 2
I get your point, Twilightheart, and agree... There are bands in which you can say there is clearly an 'alma mater'... it may be any member of the band, although it tends to be the singer or the guitar player. After one of such members leave a band, sometimes we feel that the band should continue using the name although it has lost a lot of its 'personality'. We all know what has happened these years with bands like Iron Maiden, Judas Priest or even Anthrax to mention some. Every fan of the bands, I think, was sorry for Bruce Dickinson, Rob Halford or Joey Belladona leaving, being more or less satisfied with the substitute. But in those cases, the band's name was already so big that maybe it was justified to continue using it. Maybe it has also to do with the degree in which you like a band. Although I like the previous I mentioned, it's true I am not a 'super fan'. But what Twilight said about W.A.S.P. is just true... I can't neither imagine the band without Blackie Lawless, just because he is truly the 'soul' of the band. One could say that in Judas, Maiden or so, the 'soul' was more 'spread' between all the members of the band... (I hope you get my idea). That's why I felt Skyclad were over when Martin Walkyier declared he was leaving the band. The lyrics and concepts of Martin Walkyier just was the soul of Skyclad. If they continue without him, I feel they should change the name. That's why I like Phil Anselmo from Pantera. He has never doubted to start new bands (I suppose he has around a hundred ) whenever he wanted to do something new. What would have been the point in making Down, Necromantia (think that's the name) or Superjoint Ritual music under the Pantera monicker? Musical evolution in a band is just logical. But when you do something completely different or when a very charismatic member leaves, time comes to think seriously in changing the name...
|
|
|
Post by Southern Troll on Jun 8, 2004 14:47:35 GMT 2
Iron Maiden's soul is not only Bruce, but Steve Harris wrote the most famous band's songs!
I'm a stranger cause i love Blaze Bayley's works in Iron Maiden! And his solo band is very very good too! Cause he have freedom to create songs for his voice!
Harris did most of songs in Iron Maiden and this songs are for Bruce's voice!
And about Evolution i can talk about Moonspell, one band that most of you don't like but have a lots of experiments and now reach the good album! I saw them live and i can say that this portugueses are very good!
I don't know much about Viking or Folk Metal, cause i'm newbie in that style, of course that i love the little thing that i know about this!
I wanna know more about!
|
|
|
Post by Sethlad on Jun 8, 2004 15:15:43 GMT 2
I think it's hard to generalize, each case is a case.
When it comes to Skyclad... Martinless Skyclad is just pointless. The music is still good, but the vox and lyrical concepts are completely different. They should definately taken up a different name.
In Iron Maiden, that would be impossible.
I think it really depends on each band, the importance of the leaving musician and the impact that causes in the band's music and everything. And there are just abnormal cases.
For example Ulver, they don't have a single album alike.
When themes from william blake's marriage of heaven and hell was released I liked the album but defended they should've changed the name.
Nowadays I completely changed my opinion, cause it's that feeling um mutability of constant evolution that is the true essence of Ulver - never do the same thing twice. So, I reiterate, each case is a case.
I just don't like washed-up forgotten bands dragging themselves across the scene with one or two original members just to earn a few more bucks... better to burn out than to fade away.
And Silvio: Moonspell was pretty good up until Irreligeous... after that: no patience! And I'm portuguese... I should be favourably biased.
|
|