MUSIC POLL #4: KsE vs Trivium

[Liam]

With Killswitch Engage being one of the bands to kick-start the NWOAHM craze that seemed to kick off a few years ago, and with Trivium arguably the biggest band to come out of, or at least skirt that trend, I thought these made suitable foes.

To match it up a little, I seperated Leach's KsE from Jones'. For those who don't know, Leach was on the "Alive Or Just Breathing?" album and thier debut "Killswitch Engage", and Jones took over for "The End Of Heartache", and is there current lead singer.

Edited May 4, 2006 by rvdwannabe

[Number of the Breast]

Trivium. I like KsE, but they're becoming a little too... I dunno, emo friendly? Trivium as well, but that's just because it's trendy to like them, if people actually listen to songs like "...Trepedation" or "Pull Harder..." they'd realise that Trivium are a heavy metal band. Plus, the solos are awesome. So, Trivium.

[Liam]

Personally (adding my vote earlier than most of them), I think KsE were a lot better with Leach at the helm. Jones may be a better singer, but for the most part, Jones and KsE are underwhelmingly solid, whilst Leach and KsE were a little more varied, but when they got it right, they got it right.

My Last Serenade > all other KsE songs, and all Trivium songs whilst I'm there.

[Summers]

I agree with you Liam, Leach > Jones in as far as KsE goes. I love Leach's voice, presence, etc. Whereas I just don't like Jones much at all, however, my vote goes to Trivium, who, IMO, have one hell of an amazing metal album, and are superb live. If KsE had stayed with Leach, and they continued as they started off, they might have got my vote, but Trivium get it.

[YI]

My Last Serenade > all other KsE songs, and all Trivium songs whilst I'm there.

[sirdavinator]

Only ever listened to My Last Serenade for Leach stuff, while I have a shitload more songs circa Jones. But Trivum gets my vote, becuase I have Ascendancy, but you don't see me having The End Of Heartache or Alive or Just Breathing. And, like someone else said, Trivium's solos are awesome

Oh, when you said occasional music polls, I didn't think you meant 4 in one day (it's still 4 May for me, and you started the first one at around 12am today)

Edited May 4, 2006 by sirdavinator

[Skummy]

I voted for Jones-era KsE, but only because it's the best of a bad bunch. All three selections are terrible.

Killswitch Engage are dull. They've got nothing going for them, particularly, but they're miles ahead of Trivium.

Trivium are one of my least favourite bands in the world right now. All they've done is pick and choose aspects of various moderately underground heavy metal bands and stick it altogether into a more marketable sound, so they can make money off it. Even ignoring all the plagiarism, they're just fucking terrible. The whole "metalcore" sound in general is wank. They're music is dull. It's not good metal in any way, shape or form, they're just an unappealing, terrible, terrible band. Fuck Trivium. Fuck Matt Heafey, and his stupid face, and rubbish voice.

They're only successful because they're a relative pretty-boy face to put on a genre that's generally predisposed with big, hairy aggressive men, so no one's afraid to market them on their image. They're terrible. Absolute fucking garbage. God-awful, derivative wank.

EDIT:

Oh, and if anyone wants to argue against the fact that they're consciously making their sound as marketable as possible, don't forget that they re-recorded one of their singles to remove the screaming in case it scared away the kiddies who wanted to buy their album.

Edited May 4, 2006 by Skumfrog

[fineintent]

KSE by a mile. Trivium are over-rated wank.

EDIT - Leach KSE by the way.

Edited May 4, 2006 by fineintent

[Liam]

The whole "metalcore" sound in general is wank.

I'd argue against that wholeheartedly. Over-subscribed and somewhat bordering on the cliche now? Yes, probably....but there are some great metalcore acts out there.

And I always find some of your arguments funny, Skummy, since I know you like listening to stuff like Sunn O))) and An Albatross, amongst other things. Not saying they are bad (I like them both), but when you complain about how something sounds, I'd assume that'd be the general consensus for most of those bands

Plus I wouldn't say the only reason Trivium got big was due to what you stated. I know I, for one, bought thier album without really knowing much about them, just having had them recommended to me by someone else. No gimmick, no them getting pushed down my throat, just me checking them out, which I'm sure a lot of people, in the day and age of the internet and p2p, probably do. People need to stop blaming the second any band gets big because of "marketing" or "magazines" or whatever other two bit excuse people give.

Edited May 4, 2006 by rvdwannabe

[Skummy]

The whole "metalcore" sound in general is wank.

I'd argue against that wholeheartedly. Over-subscribed and somewhat bordering on the cliche now? Yes, probably....but there are some great metalcore acts out there.

And I always find some of your arguments funny, Skummy, since I know you like listening to stuff like Sunn O))) and An Albatross, amongst other things. Not saying they are bad (I like them both), but when you complain about how something sounds, I'd assume that'd be the general consensus for most of those bands

Plus I wouldn't say the only reason Trivium got big was due to what you stated. I know I, for one, bought thier album without really knowing much about them, just having had them recommended to me by someone else. No gimmick, no them getting pushed down my throat, just me checking them out, which I'm sure a lot of people, in the day and age of the internet and p2p, probably do. People need to stop blaming the second any band gets big because of "marketing" or "magazines" or whatever other two bit excuse people give.

I'm sure there are other reasons they got big, but marketing was a big reason for it, in my opinion. As important as the internet is, traditional forms of marketing and print products are still important, otherwise why would magazines like Metal Hammer and Kerrang! still have such high circulation figures? The fact that Trivium are a huge focus of those two magazines in particular hasn't hurt them surely?

As for metalcore, I just have yet to hear a band with that label attached to them that I've liked, so unless I'm proved otherwise, I'll continue to assume that it's all wank

And as for Sunn0))) and An Albatross, yeah, I'm sure most people wouldn't like them, but I do. Sunn0))) I like, largely because of my love of Doom, but also I like them for the same reasons people like chill-out music. You don't really need to pay attention it, it's just there, it's constant sound. And An Albatross I like because it's just manic. It's the same as listening to really fast punk or metal, but moreso. Yeah, they're a bit gimmicky, but they're an insanely talented band. You can listen to the same song over and over again, and notice new parts to it each time.

[YI]

And An Albatross I like because it's just manic. It's the same as listening to really fast punk or metal, but moreso. Yeah, they're a bit gimmicky, but they're an insanely talented band. You can listen to the same song over and over again, and notice new parts to it each time.

[Liam]

The whole "metalcore" sound in general is wank.

I'd argue against that wholeheartedly. Over-subscribed and somewhat bordering on the cliche now? Yes, probably....but there are some great metalcore acts out there.

And I always find some of your arguments funny, Skummy, since I know you like listening to stuff like Sunn O))) and An Albatross, amongst other things. Not saying they are bad (I like them both), but when you complain about how something sounds, I'd assume that'd be the general consensus for most of those bands

Plus I wouldn't say the only reason Trivium got big was due to what you stated. I know I, for one, bought thier album without really knowing much about them, just having had them recommended to me by someone else. No gimmick, no them getting pushed down my throat, just me checking them out, which I'm sure a lot of people, in the day and age of the internet and p2p, probably do. People need to stop blaming the second any band gets big because of "marketing" or "magazines" or whatever other two bit excuse people give.

I'm sure there are other reasons they got big, but marketing was a big reason for it, in my opinion. As important as the internet is, traditional forms of marketing and print products are still important, otherwise why would magazines like Metal Hammer and Kerrang! still have such high circulation figures? The fact that Trivium are a huge focus of those two magazines in particular hasn't hurt them surely?

As for metalcore, I just have yet to hear a band with that label attached to them that I've liked, so unless I'm proved otherwise, I'll continue to assume that it's all wank

And as for Sunn0))) and An Albatross, yeah, I'm sure most people wouldn't like them, but I do. Sunn0))) I like, largely because of my love of Doom, but also I like them for the same reasons people like chill-out music. You don't really need to pay attention it, it's just there, it's constant sound. And An Albatross I like because it's just manic. It's the same as listening to really fast punk or metal, but moreso. Yeah, they're a bit gimmicky, but they're an insanely talented band. You can listen to the same song over and over again, and notice new parts to it each time.

Magazines cover what is big, not necessarily get what they cover big, if that makes any sense. They put Trivium, Fall Out Boy, Coheed And Cambria, Tool, Metallica, any of those kinda bands on there because they sell issues. Sure, if someone then hasn't heard of them, it gets them more exposure, but thats hardly the bands fault, is it? If they sell magazines, then they sell magazines. Plus, I highly doubt, and always have, that someone would sit there and listen to something that is rubbish just for an image. It may work to get someone into a band, or to check them out, but they wouldn't consistently listen to the band.I'd also argue that people could go the other way, and like really alternative bands just because it is different rather than actually really loving thier stuff.

Unearth are good and metalcore IIRC.

[Steeb]

Trivium are one of my least favourite bands in the world right now. All they've done is pick and choose aspects of various moderately underground heavy metal bands and stick it altogether into a more marketable sound, so they can make money off it. Even ignoring all the plagiarism, they're just fucking terrible. The whole "metalcore" sound in general is wank. They're music is dull. It's not good metal in any way, shape or form, they're just an unappealing, terrible, terrible band. Fuck Trivium. Fuck Matt Heafey, and his stupid face, and rubbish voice.

They're only successful because they're a relative pretty-boy face to put on a genre that's generally predisposed with big, hairy aggressive men, so no one's afraid to market them on their image. They're terrible. Absolute fucking garbage. God-awful, derivative wank.

[Summers]

Fuck you guys, the re-recorded version of Dying In Your Arms is fucking awesome.

[Liam]

Since when has something being catchy/marketable been necessarily a bad thing anyway?

There are loads of "commericial" metal/rock bands who remix or re-record thier singles when they release them to different versions than the album versions...doesn't really bother me. If I think it sounds good, it sounds good, I'm not going to hate it just because they re-did it.

[Skummy]

Since when has something being catchy/marketable been necessarily a bad thing anyway?

There are loads of "commericial" metal/rock bands who remix or re-record thier singles when they release them to different versions than the album versions...doesn't really bother me. If I think it sounds good, it sounds good, I'm not going to hate it just because they re-did it.

I don't like the idea of being marketable for the sake of selling albums, for a number of reasons. As a "musician" of sorts myself, the bands I'm in aren't marketable in the slightest, and as long as I enjoy making music like that, I don't want to change it so that more people like it. I think it's really negating your work as an "artist" if you pander to the masses.

Furthermore, although this is more relating to my own work than to anyone else's, the idea of being marketable means that more people are buying my albums, which makes it more likely that one of those people who buys it, I won't agree it. Say, if a Neo-Nazi buys one of my albums; I don't want to be associated with that. That's an extreme example, but that's what I mean. The more marketable my product, the more likely it is to be associated with something I disagree with.

On a wider level, though, I don't think there's anything at all wrong with marketability, but there is when it's curtailing your creativity and you just make what people want to hear, rather than what you want to make, or alter your image in order to sell more of your product, that's a bad thing.

And as for people not buying music based on an image: look at HIM. Less so, but I used to know plenty of girls who liked HIM and, when asked why, would say "because Ville's fit". It's always an aspect of it.

[K]

Trivium are phenominal.

I've been meaning to get into KSE, they're definately on my list of bands to get into... unfortunately it's a really big list.

[Liam]

So if the fact that the music Matt Heafy wants to write is marketable, album selling music, whats the big deal on that front? Nothing says he is somehow curtailing his desire to form an ambient morris dancing/jazz fusion group by "selling out", he just does the music he seemingly wants to do. If there was a huge leap from one album to the next, I could see that, but otherwise, I don't buy it.

And I'm not saying people don't buy due to image...I'm saying people don't stay purely because of image. Sure, an image will get you more recognition, but there has to be something there, because otherwise someone will realise you are just a gimmick or image and then stop listening.

[Summers]

Besides.

Trivium own you all. As dragsy, Keith & I proved by killing little Southampton kids in mosh pits. Then Keith & I proved again by owning the entire Academy in Islington. >_>

[Skummy]

So if the fact that the music Matt Heafy wants to write is marketable, album selling music, whats the big deal on that front? Nothing says he is somehow curtailing his desire to form an ambient morris dancing/jazz fusion group by "selling out", he just does the music he seemingly wants to do. If there was a huge leap from one album to the next, I could see that, but otherwise, I don't buy it.

I'm not saying he's drastically altering his music, but the fact that he's altered a song to get it more airplay sounds like he's more concerned about selling albums than he is about making music. It just seems to be that he's consciously picked and chose the most marketable elements of underground metal to make it more palatable and easier to sell to the masses.

But even without all that, if Trivium's music was entirely their own and completely original, I still wouldn't like them, because Heafy's voice irritates me, and I find the music dull.