Album Rating: 4.0
i really didn't want to like this because i always lumped august burns red with scene kids and generic metalcore but dammit this is pretty good...is all their stuff like this?
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
I honestly think clean vocals would almost ruin this.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off
EverythingEvil: Nope. This is a handy step up.
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0
Good review,good band, what more do you want?^^
|
| |
Great review
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
Nice to see a positive staff review with a more realistic rating. The overall ratings may be 4 and 4.5 but it just doesn't seem near that to me. Might give it a couple more listens after I've checked out the albums at the top of my list but I doubt my rating will go up.
|
| |
we need a greer 2/5 review imo
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
You mean a 1.5/5?
|
| |
that works too
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
I have to disagree with the summary at the top...This is extremely generic to me and a big step down from Messengers which was already a step down from Thrill Seeker which was just decent in comparison to other bands anyways.
I wanted to like this. Won't push it though, average record.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
If you can honestly explain how this a step down from messengers I'll mail you a cake.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
It's a step down because all the riffs sound like rehashed messengers riffs, I'll generally always take the meal right out of the oven over tomorrow's left overs.
If you can honestly explain how this is a step up from Messengers (and I'm not really defending messengers as an amazing CD) I'll send you an ever better cake with your choice of icing.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
I don't see how you can make the argument that they're rehashing riffs at all though. Literally every single riff from Messengers I heard used the same scale in a fairly similar pattern, and most of the riffs here employ quite a few different scales, more interesting patterns, more complex time signatures, different textures, different types of harmonies...also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember any clean interludes of any sort on Messengers.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
This is extremely generic to me and a big step down from Messengers which was already a step down from Thrill Seeker
What are you on, and where did you get it?
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off
also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember any clean interludes of any sort on Messengers.
1:22 - 1:26 on "The Blinding Light" and... well, that's it.
|
| |
This review was unfortunately humbling to read; manages to be both much more and concise and eloquent than mine at the same time.
Maybe because you add extra words. 
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
pretty good. definitely better than their last one. I don't know if it deserves more than a 3 from my perspective but its a decent listen. I still wish they would mix it up more from song to song, but I guess in this style I don't know how well a band like this can really do that.
|
| |
I really need to get this. Loved their debut, never checked out Messengers though.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
I have to disagree with the summary at the top...This is extremely generic to me and a big step down from Messengers which was already a step down from Thrill Seeker which was just decent in comparison to other bands anyways.
This is such an undeniable step up from messengers, I don't understand how you could think otherwise. Even people who dislike this record agree that it's far better than their last.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
I've been listening to it more and am retracting a few of my previous statements. Still, I just don't see how this is that different from messengers. They pretty much attempted to do the exact same thing. The little interlude doesn't make this album any more expansive.
I don't know, it seems like every time they write a riff it just reminds me of all their other material.
|
| |
|
|
