HAKEN — Aquarius (review)

Album · 2010 · Progressive Metal

1/5 · 2012-07-08
Wilytank

Progressive metal seems to turn out two different ways for me. The first way produces bands like Amorphis, Devin Townsend, Opeth, Vintersorg, and Symphony X who stick with a simple enough approach without a whole lot of deviation from the genre of metal music; the other way produces bands that like to blend in weird shit (mostly jazz) and other things to challenge the definition of metal music, and it's these bands that seem to rub me the wrong way. Now, I'm usually fine with jazz in prog rock; but when the band starts getting passed off as a metal act, I find that's not a good sign especially when these bands tend to be closer to rock anyway and I support the mindset that heavy does not equal metal. Let's tie this in with Haken and 'Aquarius' by stating my general feeling for them: Haken are a boring prog rock band that accidentally convinced people that they're a metal band because they had some harsh vocals and some heavier sounding riff passages.

Unfortunately, there happened to be enough weirdos on the internet who get boners every time the word progressive is mentioned that gave 'Aquarius' a lot of praise that I just had to see what was up. Otherwise, I probably wouldn't even know this band existed and I would have been a slightly less cynical individual than I am today. I've looked for the greatness this album supposedly has; but I've come across so much inane music, so much of that annoying singer, and so much shitty lyrics that I don't believe that greatness exists here.

Let's start with the lyrics. Apparently, we've got a story of some fish girl who's abandoned in a river, gets caught by some asshole, and they eventually fall in love. What an amazing story! The material for a shitty romance novel put to musical form! Such an excellent concept for a so-called metal album! Such a great example for the children too! A classic story to tell them before they go to bed! Okay, seriously, is it just me or did Dream Theater really shit upon the idea of interesting lyrics and advised all their clones to do the same? I'm beginning to think the power metal detractors who don't like that genre for its cheese are attacking the wrong genre. Why anyone thought that this fish story is interesting is beyond me unless Haken was planning on making a preschool targeted prog rock album.

What makes the lyrics even worse is Ross Jennings, the annoying vocalist on this album. I will say something good about him though: if he was aiming for a James LaBrie style clean vocal approach, he sure nailed it. The bad news about that is that if he wanted his vocals to be good to listen to, he went the wrong way. He's got this flowery tone that isn't at all interesting to listen to, and the fact that it mixes so well with the cheese lyrics makes the whole experience even less enjoyable. What makes it worse still is he forces this terrible growl that just flat-out sucks. So now, it's like this prog "metal" for preschoolers is turning out like the Wiggles with 10% harsh vocals. Look, Mr. Jennings, I already established that you are trying to imitate James LaBrie. Trying to pull off a shitty Mikael Akerfeldt is only going to make things worse for you.

How about the music then?

I'm reluctant to call this metal for a reason. For an album that tries to call itself such, 'Aquarius' spends a lot of time on non-metal musical passages. There's shitty, giddy, sing-along sections that further drive home the preschool feeling. This is especially bad in "Streams" when partnered with wiener shit like "Oooh, now that I am free, swimming with the many fishes of the stream. Yeah, and I am welcome here, we all just connected swimmingly." When the fuck did I start listening to the soundtrack to 'The Little Mermaid'? The instrumental parts in sections like these are incredibly pop flavored and sound horrible. Meanwhile, each song seems to have this slow section to operate as a pseudo-crescendo, and every time I hear it I feel that they're borrowing more shit from Dream Theater. DT's song "One Last Time", a particularly vapid song from 'Scenes From a Memory', comes to mind every time these pseudo-crescendos come around though there are definitely more songs by them that come to mind as well. It's worse on "Aquarium" where the majority of the song plays out its bloated ten minute duration in that style with really no reason why it should be besides providing some filler to put the preschoolers to sleep for their nap time.

This would be the perfect time to stop listening, also any point on this album is a perfect time to stop listening; but for the sake of this review's integrity, I chose to keep listening and things did not get better. I will skip to the last song though.

"Celestial Elixir" is by far the worst song on this album. It starts off with some bombastic piano/synth swirl before cutting to some unnecessary polka section. Then more slow paced bullshit and a lengthy (but not interesting by any means) instrumental section. It's about four minutes before Jennings finally opens his pie hole with a boring soft rock section going on in the background. This pattern continues until the music breaks into a carnival sounding section played with the synths, piano, and guitars. Nothing surprising at this point, just another "What the shit stain?" moment in reaction to the extremely bad songwriting choices made by this band. Then just another lengthy, boring verse and an unexciting ending.

Come to think of it, the biggest reason why this song is worse than the rest is because it's so long and really doesn't need to be.

What else to comment on? The so-called metal riffs are boring as observing an icecube melt, and the fact that all the vocal sections are accompanied by either soft-rock or that pseudo-crescendo slow suck-fest is annoying. The small amount of guitar and keyboard virtuosity is undermined by the sheer amount of horrible rhythm writing was put in; and though I will say there was some interesting moments, about 8% of the music on the entire album here was comprised of it and the listener needs to sit through a long amount of totally uninteresting moments to get there, and even if they don't stop listening by then the interesting moment is quickly lost in the garbage littered sea of stale music that the rest of the album pushes in.

'Aquarius' is not an album worth anyone's sweet time. It's a piece of shit that's just as pretentious as it is bloated. I've seen a lot of people argue that this band is unique, but I've yet to see a legitimate argument that can really back that claim up. I'm seeing so much of Dream Theater in here that I'm pretty much in a bad dream where I'm at a theater watching all the 'Spy Kids' movies back to back. I guess Jennings doesn't sound exactly like LaBrie; he sounds worse. Now, I know I listen to a lot of other music in other genres that could also easily be considered unoriginal compared to other, earlier bands. The biggest distinctions here though is that 1) I do not like Dream Theater, so I would not easily like this either and 2) progressive metal seems to be a genre that prides itself on originality and uniqueness, but now I'm beginning to think that that it's because a lot of those bands in the latter category of my interpretation of prog metal stated in this review's intro just fill in so much shit that it's forgettable to the seasoned veteran of the genre who ends up loving it all the more because of it. Moreover, an album like 'Aquarius' seems contradictory to the alleged idea of musical transgression.

I really fucking hope that that asshole and fish girl get eaten by the shark from 'Jaws'. That's my idea of a happy ending to this story.

more than 2 years ago
Permalink
Report #270812

Share this review

Review Comments

Post a public comment below | Send private message to the reviewer

Please login to post a shout

siLLy puPPy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

While i feel otherwise, i totally agree that totally free expression is important. This is a hilarious review!!!! Just a word to all out there. Don't take this crap too seriously. We're all on a different musical journey and our current locations on those journeys rarely match up. Having disagreements on album ratings is definately a first world problem. Get over it! If you don't like it, there's many, many, many other albums you can hear.

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

SO MUCH RAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE

RAAAGE MOOOOOOOOOORE

HARDEEEEEEEER

dreadpirateroberts wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Yeah, I'm definitely not a fan of censorship, but I'd still argue that the purpose of a piece of literature and the purpose of a review are different and require different guidelines/approaches in order to be exemplary instances of their respective genres.

Xaxaar wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I think you have to treat this review like a piece of literature. Since I already used Huckleberry Finn, I'll use it again. Do you think it would be nearly as great as a book as it is if Mark Twain thought "Ooh...I'm sure a couple of Negroes won't appreciate this vocabulary, let's make it more PC"? 'Course not. It wouldn't have had NEARLY the amount of force it did. There's a reason for the harsh words, it's not just trash or "unnecessary." And I'm sure Mark Twain's purpose for Huckleberry Finn wasn't too create a shit storm.

As Mark Twain said,"Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it."

dreadpirateroberts wrote:

more than 2 years ago

And without reading a couple of years worth of reviews to confirm, I know this one isn't the first review (as people have pointed out already) by ANY writer on the site to do this sort of thing. If it's truly a problem, something will change. If it's not a problem, then nothing will change - but I don't think the uproar is about forcing members to conform to a single view of an album

dreadpirateroberts wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Warthur, I agree with Geoff. It's not about whether everyone needs to agree on the quality of any given album. For more than a few of us who didn't like this review, that notion is not even on the radar.

Your 'Brain Salad Surgery' review is great, one of your best and I've read a lot of yours. But it's miles ahead of this particular review from Wilytank, especially in terms of how you present your arguments in it. Both reviews express a clear dislike of a piece of music, both have reasons, but your review has class, so I don't think it's a truly useful comparison for a discussion about whether a review falls within the guidelines/is the kind of writing MMA wants. Of course, that sort of thing is certainly not up to me.

dtguitarfan wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I don't think the problem is trashing well liked albums. The problem is with the way it was done. See Sheavy's post quoting a couple lines that are particularly problematic.

Warthur wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I think it is imperative for this site to accept that not everyone is going to agree with the orthodox site consensus on an album, and that it's perfectly acceptable for people to express this disagreement via reviews. I've recently had run-ins with people on Jazz Music Archives and Prog Archives about this very thing with rather different results - PA seems to have a reasonably healthy attitude to letting people trash well-liked albums (I wrote a review slamming Brain Salad Surgery and got more PMs of support than criticism), whereas there's some on Jazz Music Archives who seem to think the site's credibility hinges on all the reviewers sticking to the orthodox, accepted opinion on albums. Let's take the high road on this one, guys.

Xaxaar wrote:

more than 2 years ago

This whole debate reminds me a lot of the debate I had in high school about Huckleberry Finn using the "n" word. Some blacks (in this case, Haken fans) absolutely hated the content because it was offensive, as where others didn't get offended when they had an equal right to. In this case, I think if you find this offensive, it's your fault.

I heard the album, I don't quote hate it as much as Liam here, but I don't love it either. It's okay. I think the site could use more reviews like this. One thing that turns people away is the huge progressive metal bias on this site, and to see a negative review with reasons and that is also entertaining has my support. As where some people see this review as offensive trash, I think it's refreshing.

Andyman1125 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I don't see any of you attacking him for being disrespectful at Spermswamp or hell Emmure either, and his reviews of them are equally "disrespectful" although they're significantly shorter. Hell, he even gave them lower ratings than this album.

Why am I still talking? Carry on with the circlejerk...

Andyman1125 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Dammit the review is well-written and comedic to a degree. I frowned when he said any song on SFAM was vapid but god dammit we spend so much time yelling at people for not respecting other people's opinions yet when ours are injured we attack the person like they murdered a baby seal.
Grow up people. So what he gave the album one star. I had a good laugh at many of the lines - when's the last time that happened during a review? We've all been disrespectful before.
And Jeff - please don't call out disrespect when you've made your opinion of Emmure readily available...
That's just an example though. Cool it folks.

Andyman1125 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

wtf is this
I disagree with the review a helluva lot, but I still think it's a fine review. It's a rant, sure, but some reviews are rants. Say if Liam had review fans (and I'm sure he does seeing as he does so many of them) who have the same musical taste as him (brvtal black metal and whatnot) they might take stock in this. Someone who likes power metal only will probably not. That's one of the reasons I like the multiple-review-per-album thing - it allows you to find a reviewer who you agree with so their reviews have more meaning.

I didn't read half the comments so I probably missed something.

SKwid wrote:

more than 2 years ago

You just need to cause enough widespread colon-catastrophe that an award could be considered.

IMPF2112 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"Honestly, Wilytank, reviews are not your thing. You either realize it, and maybe try to get better at it, or you stick with this I know it all attitude and keep sucking at what you do."

OK, I really really really should stop commenting, but that was one of the funniest things I've read in days.

IMPF2112 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"It takes a lot for something I read on the Internet to get under my skin, but this review managed it."

I probably should stop commenting, but I would be quite doubtful that it takes a lot for something on the Internet to make you upset, if you get this butthurt over someone writing a negative review of an album you like. Either, you don't have as thick skin as you may think, or you haven't been on the Internet for a long time.

IMPF2112 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I want a Supreme Butthurt Award too :(

SKwid wrote:

more than 2 years ago

There is so much mad in here, its amazing.

Congrats willy, you have earned "SKWID'S SUPREME BUTTHURT" award for causing other people so much asspain, the drugstore ran out of hemorrhoid ointment.

Well done sir, and keep at it.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I don't like that review for the same reasons I don't like this one.

IMPF2112 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

ugh, fucking double post

IMPF2112 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/erotic-diarrhea-fantasy--review.aspx?id=257849

you guys didn't have much of a problem with this review, even though it's just as nasty, scathing and critical as this one. i wonder why...

IMPF2112 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Considering the amount of reviews that have been posted here, the review guideline should probably just be taken down. It obviously isn't being followed...

Conor Fynes wrote:

more than 2 years ago

What the hell is this?

IMPF2112 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

>anyone who is a fan of the band just wants to do unspeakable sex acts to them

>hurts the credibility of the site

lol, what?

dtguitarfan wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I don't care who he writes the review for, if he says anyone who is a fan of the band just wants to do unspeakable sex acts to them, it's disrespectful, immature, and unnecessary, and no matter who the review is for it hurts the credibility of the site.

IMPF2112 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"This review unavoidably stirs up a controversy regarding the way it's being delivered.”
Well a negative review for a well-received album is going to be controversial no matter what. Deal with it.
"Basically you are saying it's bad because you don't like it. Kids do that, adults elaborate. "
Um, I'm not sure what review you were reading, but I'm pretty sure he elaborated quite a bit on why he disliked the album.
"Trolling a troll whose trolling backfired."
How the fuck is someone who doesn’t like the same music you do a troll?
"Saying "with all do respect..." or "I'm sorry, but..." is just sugar coating, and I see no reason for having it if I feel this strongly about something. "
Agreed 100%.
"The thing that pisses me off is that there have been plenty of reviews similar to this.”
+1. Seriously, if Wilytank had written this review for, say, a Linkin Park album, NO ONE WOULD GIVE A FUCK. It's only when someone writes a scathing review for a popular album that you all get butthurt.

Kustin wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Haken's facebook. ;-)

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

links plz

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Heh.

Kustin wrote:

more than 2 years ago

This review unavoidably stirs up a controversy regarding the way it's being delivered. One can throw tomatoes at it to get his message across and I'll be just fine with it (just as I really liked the album). Because, the fun thing about low-rating reviews is that well-written ones not only sends out a warning to curious listeners but also entertains the readers (for better or worse for familiar listeners). There's nothing wrong about having a different opinion from the masses but as the other members pointed out, the way you're involving other people's tastes to make them sound degraded compared to your level will lose you respect from certain groups of your readers. And we're not talking about political correctness, after all.
By the way, you've caught Haken's attention lately, which they called your review "entertaining". Kudos for that, mate.

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Per the below.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

That seems to be the problem, Tupan. If a review of this caliber was written for an album that seems to be generally disliked by many, it would be called a valid opinion expressed in a humorous way. However, if it was for an album that was generally adored, it's called trolling and closed-mindedness.

Tupan wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Apart all the shistorm, I must admit that I would approve if this review was written to St. Anger...

Triceratopsoil wrote:

more than 2 years ago

This is a good review of a boring album

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Now where were you when I published that Torsofuck review?

Tupan wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Shitstorm created, Wilytank. I hope you're happy now.

hawkmoon666 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

this is a bad review, not a review of a bad album. The sooner you understand the difference, the better for you as a reviewer. The guidelines here on this same site, that you have totally ignored, should already have given you a hint on how it's done.
You don't qualify as a "reviewer" just because you are a metalhead with two ears. You should actually know the stuff you are talking about, and know how to express it. And you, my dear friend, know neither.

But seriously, I'm teasing you just because it's fun. Trolling a troll whose trolling backfired. Sweet. Made my day. Please, continue.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I have elaborated. You just don't accept it because you don't agree with it.

Again, write your own review.

hawkmoon666 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

LOL I can't believe those statements for you are "insights" on why an album sucks. Basically you are saying it's bad because you don't like it. Kids do that, adults elaborate. FYI, that's what's driving people mad about your "review".
And, seriously, with your replies you ARE making it worse for yourself. "can't you fuckin read", "shut the fuck up", "you fuckin moron"... what are you, 12?

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Why not? I learned to do so a long time ago.

dtguitarfan wrote:

more than 2 years ago

You're just making things worse for yourself. There is no way to prove any work of art is or is not good. Art is subjective. It's a hard lesson to learn, and one I'm learning myself but in talking qbout any work of art it is important to state things as opinion only: I liked or disliked and here is why. You can't insult others' opinions and expect them to listen to and respect yours.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I'm me. I know what I do and don't like. Shut the fuck up.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"open-mindedness", "only review stuff you like", "don't bash what you don't understand, you fucking moron"

Go back to living your objectivist collectivist fantasy where you think everything belongs. Popularity creates buzz which in turn creates controversy. Sometimes, shit is shit and the need arises to just stand up and say it. I know this site wants to keep a partially positive attitude in order to keep the ad money and free promos rolling in, but I don't want to compromise what I really feel about a turd. It's not a matter of "getting it". If you have a different feeling about this album, you can write your own; is that such an alien idea to you?

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Can't you fucking read?

"shitty, giddy, sing-along sections...incredibly pop flavored and sound horrible"
"flowery tone that isn't at all interesting to listen to"
"riffs are boring as observing an icecube melt"
"all the vocal sections are accompanied by either soft-rock or that pseudo-crescendo slow suck-fest"
"cheese lyrics"

hawkmoon666 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

seemed only fair considered how much effort he put in his "review". Wouldn't want it to go wasted. lol.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

And now people have seemingly joined just so they can say something. lol.

Sphericexperience wrote:

more than 2 years ago

LOL Wikytank you wanted to play cool and be a smartass but it backfired and you just looked like a douche in front of the Internet. Gotta love that. Good for your credibility.

hawkmoon666 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

One should always avoid reviewing bands of a genre he does not like - or he does not understand.
This review is a shame of a review not because of how it bashes an album that is widely recognised as extremely good but because it provides no real insights on how and why it's bad. It supposedly sucks because "it's not metal", "I don't like DT" and "there's too much weird shit (jazz) in it". Wow.
Honestly, Wilytank, reviews are not your thing. You either realize it, and maybe try to get better at it, or you stick with this I know it all attitude and keep sucking at what you do. And, trust me, you DON'T know it all, at least when it comes to progressive rock/metal.

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Stupid double post...

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

The thing that pisses me off is that there have been plenty of reviews similar to this. I bashed the fuck out of the Waking the Cadaver album and *I* got no hate for that. Why are you hating on Wilytank? Because the majority of you *like* the album.

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Nope. Reread my post. I said I hated this album too. ;)

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

How about we all shut the fuck up, leave the review as it is, stop flaming eachother with no purpose or meaning, and be good little boys and girls? How about that?

dreadpirateroberts wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Hmmm....I'd argue that your review shows hefty egotism that - as does the attitude below:

"Will you fucking can it about being respectful? In order to show respect for a band, the band needs to have earned my respect, which Haken have failed miserably to do."

Haken (or any band for that matter) don't owe you, or anyone, squat. They don't have to earn anything from you - you're just, as you say, a hyperbolic reviewer and no-one in the band or the industry will lose any sleep over your review.

Personally I've never heard a single note Haken have played but I still think your review suffers from its cheap-shots style, can't say if that's the style of all your reviews or not, as I've only read this one so far.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

If you can't see the hyperbole in there and are easily offended by stuff like this, I'm certain I'm not the one here who has to grow up. I believe what I wrote is less repulsive than the actual album. For what it's worth, I'm sorry I hurt all your feelings because I hated on one of your favorite albums, but I did not address anyone directly anywhere in my review and I still vented my annoyance for a lot of people's (not just here) eagerness to suck this band's dick given how shitty the album is, a section that doesn't even fill up a fourth of my review. Does this make me a dick? Probably. Do I give a termagant's asshole? No. I have no sympathy for music this repulsive.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

For example.

"Unfortunately, there happened to be enough weirdos on the internet who get boners every time the word progressive is mentioned..."

"but now I'm beginning to think that that it's because a lot of those bands in the latter category of my interpretation of prog metal stated in this review's intro just fill in so much shit that it's forgettable to the seasoned veteran of the genre who ends up loving it all the more because of it."

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"If one really hates an album with a passion, then one should have the right to flame it so long as it's backed up with good reasons which I believe I did provide. I'm not using other people's view points because I'm not other people and they can stay the fuck out of my reviews. And frankly, I'm insulted that some of you believe I wrote out all of this just to get a rise out of people and that you believe it didn't deserve a 1/5 (18/100 on a more specific scale). My review, my scaling, my opinion, my words, end of story. I should not have to care about your feelings for this album because you are not me."

"Shouldn't you have enough self esteem anyway to the point where things like these shouldn't even faze you?"

Also its not that you think this album sucks that ticks me off and makes me think you are trying to be inflammatory. I agree with you that this album is a one star album. It's the piss takes on the people who do like this band/album that I don't like.

UMUR wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Discussing the review is fine. Just keep it civilized folks! :-)

dtguitarfan wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Doomster and Wilytank: it really doesn't faze me - obviously you are in the minority here and I am in the majority. This review came off as unnecessarily angry and hateful, and not only towards the band to towards all the fans of the band and you're not winning yourself any points this way - obviously not if you read other comments besides mine.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Shouldn't you have enough self esteem anyway to the point where things like these shouldn't even faze you?

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

dtguitarfan: Word of future advice, don't get so hurt over stuff on the internet.

'Specially if it's opinion oriented.

dtguitarfan wrote:

more than 2 years ago

You did more than flame the album, you flamed everyone who ever loved it. When I first heard this album, I did not like it - mainly because I just did not like the singer. But two very good friends of mine (who I've gone to most of the amazing concerts I've gone to with) absolutely loved it, enough to try to talk me into playing them on the radio show we've done here. I reluctantly gave the album another listen...and decided it was not so bad. Then I saw them live at ProgPowerUSA and thought it was one of the best shows I've ever seen. I bought the new album that day, and loved it so much, I had to give Aquarius another listen...and this time I loved it. Now they're one of my favorite bands and I've found much enjoyment from their albums. But this would've never happened had I dug myself into a hole like you've done here and hurt the feelings of my two best friends.

Doomster wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I was gonna say "inb4 shitstorm", but alas, it had already happened.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

If one really hates an album with a passion, then one should have the right to flame it so long as it's backed up with good reasons which I believe I did provide. I'm not using other people's view points because I'm not other people and they can stay the fuck out of my reviews. And frankly, I'm insulted that some of you believe I wrote out all of this just to get a rise out of people and that you believe it didn't deserve a 1/5 (18/100 on a more specific scale). My review, my scaling, my opinion, my words, end of story. I should not have to care about your feelings for this album because you are not me.

adg211288 wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"Let me correct my statement. I am one hundred percent sure that you are trying to stir up a shitstorm."

I nearly said the same last night when I first saw this review. It takes a lot for something I read on the Internet to get under my skin, but this review managed it. But that's been a long time coming considering the goading remarks made in regard to this band/album on the forums at seemingly every opportunity. Not to mention this isn't the only band/album it's happened for. I remember The Unforgiving, and the boast that came on the forum afterwards about how you'd dethroned it from the top of the symphonic list. Or about how it would be time for you to 'intervene' because Visions was at the top of the overall MMA list.

In my view this was the review equivalent of a baby throwing its toys out of the pram because it didn't get its own way. All I see here is a profanity fuelled rant.

J-Man wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I agree with Sheavy here, but I'll stop commenting. It's probably a waste of time.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Come now, don't be such a krabby patty. You should change this to like what you did in your review of The Black Veil Brides album.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

And continuing to debate about it is pointless because this review is not being changed or taken down by me.

J-Man wrote:

more than 2 years ago

A review doesn't have to be in violation of the guidelines to be a detriment to the site's credibility. Even if the site had zero guidelines (which it doesn't), a review still has the power to make you sound like an elitist who enjoys belittling others. If you've ever actually read the guidelines, I'd argue that this review is a violation of rules #4, #5, #6, #8, and maybe even #10 - I don't really care enough to make a big deal about that, but I am trying to say that this review probably does even violate the site's rules.

But, alas, the review has been posted and it's not the end of the world. I'm just not a fan of the snobby elitist attitude exhibited here.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I know you could have written this review in such a way as to not be inflammatory.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Alright never mind about there being zero guidelines, but really the only reason you think this review's purpose is to be inflammatory is because you're letting it bother you guys. Just let it go.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Oh, also there are review guidelines here. http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&title=reviews-guidelines

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Let me correct my statement. I am one hundred percent sure that you are trying to stir up a shitstorm. This isn't like any of your other one star/two star reviews, at least that I've seen here, and I've tended to like your reviews until this one.

Also you can state your opinion without sounding like an elitist asshole.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

And I don't need objectivity when I'm expressing MY opinion. Am I going to let OTHER PEOPLE decide MY opinion or does everyone need to have multiple personalities within them to argue their opinion? And it does jack shit to this site's credibility since there are zero review guidelines here including zero obligation to actually put forth effort to write out any reviews.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"And personnaly I get the feeling that your just trying to stir up needless arguments (and hatred) with people who do like this." Oh fuck, it's so awkward when people make these kind of assertions, especially when it's impossible to prove. It's about as legitimate if I argued that people who wrote positive reviews only did so to make me mad, which would be ridiculous.

J-Man wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"J-Man, a review is more to advise others who have not listened to it than to convince those who have already heard it numerous times and have their opinion set."

I understand that, Liam, but in your previous comment, you said that the album is not worth MY time. I responded by saying that it IS worth my time. Can you please try and refrain from constructing straw man arguments?

I'm inclined to agree with Sheavy here. I get the impression that this review was just to create a shitstorm - the entire review reads as though your opinion is superior to everyone else's, you ruthlessly insult people throughout the review, and you entirely chuck objectivity out the window. I guess you're free to do so, but I think something like this really kills the site's credibility.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

And personnaly I get the feeling that your just trying to stir up needless arguments (and hatred) with people who do like this.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Sounds rather immature to me.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

J-Man, a review is more to advise others who have not listened to it than to convince those who have already heard it numerous times and have their opinion set.

And, acknowledging that there's phenomenal musicianship? That defeats the purpose of a negative review. I won't acknowledge such because I'd be lying if I did. I think the musicianship is either boring, irritating, unnecessary, or all of these at the same time. And as I've said in the review, only 8% of the album contains interesting music; but the fact that one must sit through the other 92% tarnishes its value. I do not give a flying fuck about how the band members feel. Saying "with all do respect..." or "I'm sorry, but..." is just sugar coating, and I see no reason for having it if I feel this strongly about something. Call that disrespect, I don't not give a goat's asshole. I've called it as I've seen it, I've spoken my mind, and I am 100% unrepentant.

J-Man wrote:

more than 2 years ago

There's a big difference between expressing that a band hasn't earned your respect musically and being disrespectful, rude, and downright mean to the PEOPLE in the band. There are plenty of ways to express your distaste for the album while still acknowledging that the musicianship is phenomenal and many listeners actually do find it worth their time.

But, of course, you're right - you know what's worth MY time more than I do.

Sheavy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

That isn't an excuse for being disrespectful.

Wilytank wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Will you fucking can it about being respectful? In order to show respect for a band, the band needs to have earned my respect, which Haken have failed miserably to do. What am I supposed to say? "You get an A for effort?" This isn't kindergarten.

And I know YOU think it's worth your time. I'm just saying it isn't.

J-Man wrote:

more than 2 years ago

This is the exact opposite of a diplomatic and respectful review IMO... I understand your distaste for the album, and I typically enjoy reading perspectives opposite mine, but this review just does not strike me as helpful in any way.

Lines like this...

"Aquarius is not an album worth anyone's sweet time. It's a piece of shit that's just as pretentious as it is bloated."

...are just not even remotely necessary. Considering that most write-ups I've read have been overwhelmingly positive, there clearly are people who think it is worth their time. I'm not doing the whole "fanboy must defend at all costs" thing that some folks try and do, but I don't think anybody can objectively argue that this album fits the 1-star criteria. Sorry.