I thought about posting this in the Theory Forum, but it doesn't have to do with any specific music theories, rather technicality in general.

I think a lot of people prefer technical metal over the simpler side of it because it's musically impressive. But then there are those types of bands that, while they don't play extremely difficult riffs, they still sound good. I'd have to say that my personal riff-writing style is nowhere near the technical side of death metal because I put more emphasis on what sounds good to my ears, whether it takes a lot of skill or not. Let's face it, some of the technical death metal going on these days is so complicated that no one besides a musician could appreciate it. And even as a musician I hear some of this stuff and think, "sure, they're skilled, but this isn't very entertaining to just listen to". I think every band should put enough effort into their material that they can be separated from the cliche numetal one-finger rumbling crap that sounds the same with almost every song. But I also think that a wicked atmosphere through the sound of it in a more abstract way should be considered over showing off. What are your thoughts on it? How important to you is technicality, and why do you prefer heaping loads of it or only a pinch?

(I think it goes without saying that there's no need for "non-technical bands suck, period"; I would like to hear your detailed thoughts and reasons for your preference and opinion on the subject; hopefully this can be an interesting discussion that opens peoples' minds up to debate )

__________________

I must say. I like this topic. I'm all for technicality at times, but I feel like it, and every other form of guitarwork or technique, can be horribly overdone. Personally, I prefer songs with a distinguishable groove over 3 million notes per verse. I get bored with that very quickly. I feel that way even moreso with solos. They don't need a groove per se, and even though it's probably considered blasphemous on these forums because of the e-blowjobs shredders seem to get all the time, but I'm getting a bit sick of constant sweep picking and extremely fast runs that the guitarist does over and over again. I understand the skill involved, and while I can't sweep all that well, I still am not impressed anymore with it being done...

I gotta get ready for work soon. I'll probably be back to further discuss this subject, I think I just ranted randomly above. I'm sick to the point of not thinking real straight, so if it's confusing, that's why.

__________________

my favorite subgenre of metal is most definately black metal, so i tend to like easier riffs that flow together well more than the extremely complicated polyrhythms of the crazy ass tech death bands.

that being said, im also a huge fan of meldoic death. i think melodic is the key adjective for me when it comes to metal. also it needs good harmony or brilliant disharmony, like GORGUTS

Opeth does a great job at that

I think technicality, like anything, has a place and time. It is not always necessary, but it is really good in many places.

__________________

+1

__________________

I tend to argue towards necessity. Complex ideas require complex expression, and in that case technicality is appreciated. In that case doing something difficult is beside the point, not the point itself. It's used to get the point across. But there's a tendency in everything to confuse the two. So we have bad movies that exist just so the lead actor can do something difficult, we have men's figure skating which has eschewed everything but difficulty as a criterion for assessing a performance, and we have a lot of bands that show that all their practice time was put to learning how to pull off difficult techniques and not into understanding why they would be doing so. You can (have to) train yourself to be a good songwriter, but very few people do.

Being able to do something difficult is cool. But having an understanding of music and letting that understanding dictate when and to what extent difficult things should be done is cooler.

Technicality, its funny.

If you play any instruments, expecially drums and guitars, you'll enjoy the musician skill, its catchy, makes you try to do the same stuff that the guy is doing, its fun.

If you don't play any instruments, you'll get bored. its a fact.

__________________

Not if there's something else there.

i disagree. i don't play any instrument whatsoever and yet, i'm always giving Cynic, Spiral Architect or Necrophagist a spin.

good music is good music, regardless of technique or skill.

I sometimes feel technical deathmetal is becoming the next shred metal..

__________________

i'm all for technicality, as long as it's not a priority over songwriting.

__________________

yeah, that. Btw, check out Martyr. They're technical, but they're all about the feel too.

__________________

They should probably check out Gorguts, Cryptopsy, and Cynic too right???

i am quite the same as what someone above said.

Probably 70% of the music i buy is Black Metal

But the songs that i write that my bands play is fairly Tech Death metal.

For me its not about showing off (Even tho i am an attention whore by nature)
its just that when i sit with my guitar and write songs i tend to get bored if its not hard to play. Therefore i write riffs then spend a day or so learning how to play them. to me writing songs is a learning experiance. I just want to be a good guitarist.

hah hell yeah.

__________________

HA!.. lol that's the exact opposite of what I do.. I learn hard to play songs to become a better guitarist in general (I usually play Extreme Unction .. good practice ).. and when I write stuff.. I usually write Black Metal that is simple to play but good sounding.. (Like the songs on my MySpace..)

__________________

dude... Myspace is for fggts

Dude YOU're a faggot .. how about you shut the fuck up if you got nothing to say? MySpace is for faggots if you're trying to make "fake friends".. but its OK for uploading songs.. so stfu

__________________

wow dude. dont get so offended.

Well considering you just said Myspace was for faggots right after i said I had a myspace.. i thought i should..

__________________

Its a great addition to well written music, but writing well should always come first. Bands tend to focus on tech work too much and focus less on creative and expressive song writing.

__________________

Shuddup, turkey. Remember it's the internet.

Much has been said so far. I'm dashing off to the gym, so I'll just throw something extra and fun into the mix...

Technical metal, and especially tech-death these days, is the kind that the non-metal public really do not understand. It's not a matter of them liking it - they've never heard it, or of it. If you've ever had the displeasure of playing a good later-era Death or Cynic song for someone, you'll know what I mean.

You put it on, thinking they'll be impressed at the very least, and then find out that they're completely immune to it. They just don't understand what's going on. It requires a level of engagement with the music that people who aren't balls-deep in music culture don't usually have.

Most people are pretty unconscious as to the purpose for music. I remember thinking how angry Rage Against The Machine would be if they walked among their fans... they think they're starting a revolution and instead they're playing the soundtrack to the childhood of the next generation of accountants. They were popular because they had a seriously catchy sound. Politically, no-one gave a shit, or even read the words.

Also, remember that Yngwie Malmsteen has produced nothing but terrible music. Really. Terrible. Music.

__________________

Must be why he has sold so many records and is regarded as one of the greatest living guitar players.

Whether you like his music or not. He can play guitar good.

Of course. Record sales are always a guarantee of top quality music. We should not argue about the virtue of music if it sells.



Right. Because we're not talking about a posited difference between TECHNICAL MUSIC and GOOD MUSIC, are we?

Also, your grammar good is. Structured the well. Not obviously a stupid.

Git.

__________________

Hahaha.

Most all of the "tech players" and shredders are great at their instruments but that dosen't mean they can produce good music. A painter/sketch artist can be fantastic with a pen or brush but that dosen't mean they can create anything meaningful or original. Art is easy to hide in.

__________________

Yngwie is the most talented least creative guitarist in the music industry. There is nobody else that can hold so much talent, yet produce such shit at the same time as he does.

__________________

Technical, not technical, as long as it sounds good, songwriting before technicality though.

I enjoy technical music...but yes, I hate when it's over done..that's why I tend to learn away from the more BrTOoL bandz.


GO MELODIC/FOLK/CELTIC/VIKING/TROLL/CANADIAN HISTORIAN DEATH METAL.

I'm going to create a band which is solely about Canadian History...it will be called...


"THE RED RIVER REBELLION!!"

Which is also named after the conflict about myself breaking up with a girl who like to be eaten out on her period.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_River_Rebellion

__________________

Of course sales dont automaticaly mean good. I mean look at U2 for example.

Oh and picking at my grammar. I type how i speak. I see you have noticed idiosynchrasies in my speech patterns

10 songs about Wayne Gretzky, then.

Badly?

__________________

__________________

this is why i write with an acoustic, its like a crucible of what works for me. if i write something on an electric<my acoustic is has a built in pick-up, plug this thing in and add the distortion feature on the practice amp sounds exactly like an electric> and it sounds like shit unplugged or if it just sounds like im practicing a scale its scraped. this is a way to teach myself songwriting, not just showy technique. im writing really minimalist doom stuff, so this works for me. i understand that high speed death metal wont ever transition well on an acoustic. it'll just sound like high speed scales

but thats just my way, not a fundamental rule i believe everyone should follow. this is because im more concerned with writing interesting music rythmically instead of technically. as far as my drumming in this band im comming to understand using the double kick which is an entirely new approach for me, and trying to be more creative with slow time schemes. fast is my forte so ill playing grind soon enough again

there is a place in my interest of music where i enjoy completely over the top technical, absurd music, where all rules of "how" and "why" are abandoned. if its the the bands intention or not. i really take interest in bands pushing the envelope on experimenting with blastbeat based music, whether its necrophagist,nile or the locust,dillinger escape plan. the reason for this is its relatively new and for a drummer the approach one takes is on level with the jazz greats in terms of skill. it hardly resembles back beat based music in terms of percussion, drumming had been so marginalized in terms of expression with rock and roll as far as the medium, which is the beats, not the fills and drumsolos. maybe this is just the musician in me speaking, but i think this stuff definately has a place beyond just what musicians want to hear.

__________________

I like what one of the guitarists said from Meshuggah (and I'm paraphrasing). "I'm an anti-guitar hero, I don't like all of those guys that show off like Malmsteen and Vai and whatnot, they're all about being guitarists instead of being bands." I agree with that -- the band as a whole should come first, not the specific instruments. I also agree with most of the posts here. It definitely takes moderation and is important but not over the other more basic aspects of songwriting.

And FBS for sure said it right about the average Joe listening to technical death metal. I've played some for some friends of mine before, and it was always the same reaction of "what's he saying? It's just a bunch of noise". Luckily, I think people can vaguely grasp the idea if you try. Used to, my dad was against all metal because he thought it was nothing more than angry trash. I sat down and explained to him why it musically attracts me and how it's very challenging, and he understood. At least more than he did. The best way to change one of the non-believers, though, is to set down with them with a guitar and try to teach them how to play one of the songs. Of course, for most non-musicians, you would'nt even have to stretch into the most complex side of metal to boggle their minds.

__________________

being technical is of no importance to me. i couldnt really say which bands are technical, and which arnt. its not something i care about. i hate "3 chord" black and death metal, not because its not technical, but because its boring. what is the point of listening to a whole song that doesnt change much from beginning to end. you might as well just skip to the next after it starts repeating again. im not saying i do that with what i listen to, but i think its just cheap and lazy to repeat a whole riff section more than 4 or 5 times. so far i dont like the death metal bands ive heard to be considered "technical" because when i hear it, its just a mess of notes that mean nothing to me. even if it werent on such low and random notes, i still dont think it would sound appealing. and i dont care how hard it is to play. its like if someone paints the ugliest picture thats 100ft by 100ft, im sure its hard to paint that, but that doesnt make it good. speed isnt automatically good. i hate solos that are there just for the sake of being a solo. for ex. I like Cryptopsy, but i really dont like their solos, just sounds like a bunch of nothing there only to prove that they can do it. that goes for many, many other similar bands ive heard. lets take an In Flames solo for example now: how about the solo on The Hive, thats one of my favorite solos. its lengthy, great notes, and has an emotional sort of depth to it as well as speed and skill. im aware that its not that hard to play... exaclty, it doesnt have to be. Amon Amarth's riffs are generally easy, but they are still shitloads more interesting and appealing than showing me how fast you can move your fingers on a guitar.

That reminds me of one time when I was driving around with my brother-in-law and I was playing a bunch of Death for him and he actually enjoyed it, I was shocked actually... This is the same dude who I got hooked on this one Iniquity song, Desiderated Profligacy, he played that song like 30 times that same day talking about how great the song was, his favorite band is Lit by the way... Anyway, back to the main subject I would say technicality is pointless, you should just play and not think about what you're doing, that's how the best music is written I think.. I think sometimes being technical could pay off, but most of these super technical death metal bands are boring as fuck, if I can listen to a song and not care if it's complicated or not then that's all that matters... Cool thread by the way....

__________________

Well I may as well put in my two cents worth.

As most of you guys know I am more for the catchy, groove, thrashy grind type stuff.
I don't mind technical stuff when it's done properly. Like no offense to Cannibal Corpse fasn but I really don't think they are that great. I loved their old Chris Barnes era and some of the George Fisher era. Now it just seems (esspecially with Pat) that their just trying to make their music technical for the sake of be technical. I don't find their music technical. Anyone can write a few random diminished notes and throw in trills or tapping once in a while. Yes it is hard to play but it's not hard to write. Pat even said he writes challenging songs or songs that are difficult for him to play. But why? That's not what it's about. Soon every song sounds the same.Cannibal Corpse and Suffocation have become sort of a cliché of themselves. Like when the genral public think of "Death Metal" they think a guy growling, pounding drums, and guitars that just hit random notes. Well I can't really prove them wrong with CC or Suffo or Vile or whatever.

Now Cryptopsy,Dying Fetus, Nile and Necrophagist I love. Why? Because they actually can play insanly technical but yet still make it sound nice and have melodies and stuff. Their songs follow a pattern. They can be both brutal and beautiful at the same time. With Cannibal Corpse (new era) or Suffocation or Vile or Severed Savior and what not is just trying to sound as technical as possible. To them music is a big contest to see who can blast beat the fastest or how many notes can you throw in a song. That's not what music is about. Music is about having fun and enjoying what you play not trying to outdue everyone else.

There are tons of bands out there that can play as fast as anyone else but they don't have to. Because if they did they would sound like everyone else.

To wrap it up: I think if your going to be technical do so but make sure you are writting actual music and not just showing off every song. The most technical METAL stuff I listen to is the bands I mentiond above. But if I really want to just play balls out or listen to some really technical stuff then I will listen to Steve Vai or Racer X. Because those guys are insane at guitar but they can write songs.

__________________

.

__________________

oh god this thread just makes my head hurt even thinking about it

the amount of pointless bickering that occurs in this will be on a far greater level than any internet flaming that occurs

like it or leave it, just live by that

__________________

What bickering? This thread is calling for opinions.

__________________

Technicality and skill.
I love listening to technical stuff like Steve Vai in the background while playing pool or poker. But sometimes it does get overwhelming and repetitive, especially when the songs based on speed...

__________________

Every metal band that I've been introduced to by my friends I have fallen in love with. It didn't matter if they were a fast pace band with complex riffs like Cannibal Corpse or Lamb of God, or if they are simple chord strumming riffs like a few of Rammstein's songs or Korn. It didn't matter if the bassist was slapping the shit out of his bass, making fast bass grooves, or if he just emphasized the root note in a progression of chords and notes. It didn't matter if the drummer was playing 255 bpm blast beats all over his kit or just playing a simple 4/4 rock beat. I also forget the fact that there are alot of bands that sound alike. What matters to me is what they take from their heart and put into the music.

This one drummer at this one clinic I went to for percussionist told us all that you could put 30 drummers behind a kit, have them all play the same 4/4 beat, and each one would sound different. It wasn't because of how the kit was tuned, what sticks the drummer used, if he played heels up or down, or if he played right-handed or open handed. It was because of the energy and the feeling he put into it.

When I listen to music, I don't listen for the complexity or how the song is composed. I listen for the musician's heart; their hate, their anger, their love, their happiness. If a musician didn't have these things, the music would be dead to me.

So am I in favor of technical and complex riffs? Only if there's feeling to it. That's all that matters to me.

__________________

I was thinking that are these 'technical' songs really that technical, as just opposed to speedy? I mean it's just riffs played like any other riff, but all over the place and fast. I guess of course speed is a technique so saying that it's not technical it's just fast is wrong because if speed is a technique it automatically technical. But like really when I thought about it the songs aren't relly technical, just complicated riffing done fast. I dunno, cos like technical to me would be fingerpicking an arpeggio [is that called hybrid picking or something], that would require more technique, but not necessarily EXTREME speed. I dunno I just thought about it this way when I was musing on it last night in bed

Disregard this post if you think it's dumb, it was just an idea I thought I'd put out there.

9700 posts, and 2000 of them are "OMG TEH THREADZ GAY1".

Have you considered that your presence in a thread makes it twice as gay as previously, and opening your mouth to complain about said gay is just a big silly-poos?



I like this.

__________________

That cool, I never thought of it that way... And your right! Thats what seperates the average from the "standout" players, that's awsome

__________________

I agree with transient

Metaltabs isnt necessarily the best place sometimes for discussions or the sharing of opinions. Neither is the internet. Because its great in theory, in practice, you always get people who feel they have to shit on other people from a height just because they can. gg.

My opinion on technicality, having got that out the way, is, the same as I believe others; if it sounds good, then yeah. Dont matter about level of difficulty. Some people naturally write things more technical than others. its just the way it is, but its all about knowing why your doin something I reckon. Doin it for a reason, not just for the sake of it. Its all cool. Which, comes back round to CTL's point, about the fact that people put their soul in to it, is when it works best. If you write what you naturally do, then thats an extension of that idea.

__________________

I really like technicality:

SPEED
HARMONIES
FAST RIFFING
Taking advantage of each string
and stuff like this.

IMO this kind of stuff mixed with some sweet brutality is what makes me like metal:Bring back the bomb-GWAR (u have to listen to it)

also anything by DEATH. BODOM. Or MASTODON

__________________

On the internet you can be as offensive or straight-up as you want with your opinion without fear of violent retribution. Good or bad thing?

My views on technicality is that it is mostly irrelevant to the sounds I hear (besides certain technicalities used to create unusual sounds ie Obscura), but it does have an impact upon live performance and the whole involvement.

look, if it doesnt make knots out of my fingers, it isnt worth two shits....

__________________

I like that a major portion of the bickering in this thread is a complaint about the amount of bickering somebody expects there to be. This satisfies me.

The internet isn't a good place to discuss anything unless people act as though they can be held accountable for their actions. If more people would acknowledge that it's a place that potentially allows minds from all over the world to meet and not just some gay cyber-place for them to fuck around on, we'd have a lot of good discussions here. And the way to do that is to act that way yourself and attempt to have these discussions, since we have the means to do so. Not to say 'All these attempts go bad so I'll contribute nothing more than a complaint about them rather than attempt to make them go well.' That's just crap.

Every person I've made listen to the Sound of Perseverance has loved it. Not as much as me, of course, but enough to ask me to give them a burned copy.

__________________

No guilt! It feeds in plain sight!! Spirit......CRUSHER!!!!!!!

__________________

That is an accomplishment to be proud of. Well done.

__________________

If its good, its good. If its just technicality for the hell of being technical, then usually its just gay.

Example:
Martyr - Great band, impossibly technical.
Opeth - Not very technical, but has its little complicated bits every now and then. Amazing riffs and leads non the less.
Slayer - Not technical. But still owns.

Example 2:
Cannibal Corpse's Frantic Disembowelment vs Time to Kill Is Now. Personally, I like Time To Kill better, and (obviously) its the lesser of the 2 in technicallity. I still love Frantic though.

__________________

Anyone can be capable of expressing emotion, and anyone can be capable of just making noise. I can't remember Shawn Lane playing something that DID'NT make my jaw drop, yet everything was just completely wet with emotion. And as far as people being minimalistc and having no depth, I only need to point to nu-metal.

Yes, Frantic Disembowelment is'nt one of CC's better songs per se, but its strange to see people in a roundabout way deducting more points for creativity because the song happens to be one of their toughest. That's just the way the riffs were written. Something that's mediocre but technical should'nt be judged any more harshly than something that's mediocre and simple, IMO.

I think Frantic Disembowlment gets such scorn heaped on it because it has so many people trying to deny that it's mediocre. Also because Pat has stated that he basically wrote it with the goal of being as technical as possible in mind. A lot of stuff that's mediocre and simple isn't mediocre because the people writing it decided to focus on simplicity at the expense of all else. Whereas a lot of stuff that's both technically dazzling and poorly written is that way because the songwriter decided to focus on the former at the expense of good writing.

A useful exception to this can be found in Metallica 90's output, which they've specifically stated was written with simplicity as a mandate before all else because of their experience writing ...And Justice for All. So we can say that it's not only mediocre and simple, but that its mediocrity is a function of its insistence on simplicity. Now, last I checked, the number of words given to excoriating Metallica post-1990 outnumber those spent bagging on Frantic Disembowlment by an immense margin. I don't think it's even close to a contest. In fact, there are probably more words devoted to ripping Metallica apart for its last 16 years as a band than to worrying about recent trends towards technicality in death metal.

But of course we're not going to write any more about Metallica here. We're just going to quietly acknowledge that we do vent our spleens at musicians who deliberately play below their level for the wrong reasons as much or more than at those who play the hardest things they can come up with for the wrong reasons.

I should end by noting that I actually do like complex music and wish there were more good instances of it. Since a part of achieving that is to suffer a lot of crap to be written, I'm more or less obliged to find the output of these poorly written, technically complex albums tolerable. I'm just not obliged to find the audience acceptance of them tolerable.

I believe that music is energy. It flows. Technicality is really just a commodity. I will forever have more respect for the Sex Pistols than say...Necrophagist anyday. Not because Necrophagist is bad, but it's taking excess to excess. It's masturbation.

__________________

Now since I have once or twice talked about Frantic Disembowelment and my dislike of it, I'm going to do so now. Not to further reinforce the fact that I don't like the song, but it may come out that way. I'll just say the song has no groove that I can enjoy in even part of the song. I don't know if you guys think of the songs on anywhere near the same level, but I'll compare it to Burning Pits of the Duat by Nile.

FD basically sounds to me like a bunch of random notes thrown together. I've looked at the tab, I've seen them play it, I know it isn't, but that's what it sounds like, and I don't like it. BP is also a pretty damn fast song, but to my ears it's "decipherable" and has a couple really catchy parts to it. Both of them are pretty fast songs, I haven't tried to learn either, but probably can't play either one. But I like Pits infinitely more.

Sometimes I like a chaotic and random approach in a song. I like some songs by Cephalic Carnage purely for that reason, but there's a point at which I just don't want to have to think about the music anymore, and so I stop listening to it. I'm pretty sure that's why I only listen to about half of Kill right now, and don't like it nearly as much as I liked the Wretched Spawn. Of course I also hated all but two songs on Wretched Spawn until I listened to it a bunch of times, so it may change.

I read on the CC forums that Jack wrote a lot of their more repetitive songs, and that without him, there won't be as many, so I think that may be why Kill doesn't appeal to me as much.

Fuck, usually this far in a post I'm on a totally different topic and forgot why I decided to post in the first place... I'm about at that spot again, so I'll shut up now.

__________________

Hey, "Bad Day" has been a parade number of mine at parties... what? What are you looking at?

Death metal gains endlessly as a genre because of technicality and as for me, it would have one fan less if weren't for that. It is fascinating to both see and hear how presumably un-melodic and un-harmonizing pieces are put together and form something with at least the potential of actually being original. AND good-sounding; now we're getting somewhere.
But on top of that, the real intensity of DM is not found in any single aspect, but more in the contrast between these tools that we, after long and rigourous training and sneaky whining like e.g. this sentence, have at our disposal.

__________________

Jack tended to write slower songs with more of a traditional songwriting focus. Pat tends to write as technical as he can. Alex is a pretty happy medium, and tends to come up with riffs that mutate in unexpected ways that are facilitated by his technical ability. To me he's as much of an argument for technicality as Pat is an argument against it, despite the fact that they both seem to talk about it in the same way. Presumably the difference comes from Alex writing a lot of songs before CC were a particularly technical band and Pat never having written a song, as far as I can tell, without a mantra of technicality in mind.

Anyway, the reason CC are still recognizable as themselves is Alex, and it's similarly the reason why there are always going to be some good songs on a CC album.

I see what you're saying with that. And yeah, pretty much all of the songs that I like the most off of the Wretched Spawn were written by Alex or Jack...

__________________

Alex wrote the best CC songs; but as a hardcore musician, I love Frantic Disembowlment. I also seem to be one of those odd ones out--i.e., I like Old Man's Child, Spawn of Possession, and Kalmah (I don't think I know anyone who likes those bands as much as they may like oh say Dimmu Borgir, Necrophaigst, and Children of Bodom).

__________________

Yes, you are very, very unique. I make that judgement being a hardcore musician myself.

Except that I doubt you have formal training in music.

Wally, I listened to the Duat and it's not fast at all.

__________________

The hammers and pulloffs are pretty fast... and you're probably better than me anyway.

__________________

I don't know Kalmah, but I prefer Old Man's Child to Dimmu Borgir and actually like Spawn of Possession, at least somewhat.

The fact that you felt the need to say 'as a hardcore musician' before saying 'I love Frantic Disembowlment' speaks volumes.

My first priority is that the music sounds good. The technicality comes afterwards, but in many cases, technicality means good music. Cause if the person writing it bothered enough to come up with technical riffs, chances are he wasn't lazy in composing the whole song in the big picture either.

I like technicality if it's subtle, not utterly fucking ridiculous. I mean Necrophagist are great, I've been into them for 3 years but I honestly can't say I've listened to them in a long time because the technicality is just too excessive and unlistenable. Morbid Angel are technical, not as much, and make much more enjoyable music.

I like music that I don't have to be a friggin jazz nut to understand, but is technical enough for me to leave me thinking. But hell, I like political grindcore and thrash metal too, so the meaning and feel in the end is all that counts.

__________________

Yup. Explaining it would have looked like a dissertation.

__________________