HinatAArcticA wrote:
Uhm... coming from a fake Tolkki (Ham to life topic)
I don't rally care about you...
I still think the best way of recognizing a real Tolkki is his way to spell the ' mark as ´, for example in writing the "'s" genetive, thus using a wrong character.
He still does it as far as I know...? And that capitalized I letter instead of a lower case L kind of ruins it, too, since the Tolkki with an actual L posted that Visions sample of the book and this with I appeared later(?). I can't bother to check though - I just hope I'm right...
There's nothing wrong in everyone of us being friends though, I have no problems with that.
Cannot take any internet conversation with actually unknown people seriously in personal level anyway. So maybe it's better we remain unknown to each other...
Anyway, let me add something of my views.
RazielSR wrote:Made him sing like Kakko? No, he sings like Kotipelto, like the old Kotipelto. You are making an anachronism with the Kotipelto-Kakko thing...
There are big differences in our views, because I think, let's call this "the young Kotipelto", sang very loud and easily reached some pretty darn high pitches. Nowadays him, like almost every aging singer, pretty much need to work for those results that some 10 years ago were still pretty easy. That's always been what he does in Strato, also recently he has intentionally, I believe, developed a more rough style of expression. Although this is easier to him now that his voice isn't that clear and strong as, say, in Visions time. On Gather the Faitful though, Kotipelto doesn't do that. His singing is more controlled, not based on noisy high-pitched screams that sometimes (usually) work with a good singer but sometimes might fail, especially when singer ain't that young, steady and eager anymore.
Kotipelto's volume is lower now, he produces stuff more casually, less dynamically and less tonally, thus less stressfully. His presentation is calmer and clearer, also easier to articulate that way. I made a mistake in describing him singing like Kakko though, since Kakko also does this loud high-pitched stuff, maybe mainly even. Although not in ballads, or in Jani songs! That was my point all along.
Jani made Kotipelto sing like he tend to make Kakko sing. Be it more casual, less dynamic, "the ballad style"... however you like to call it. They didn't magically make that Destinypelto goodness reappear in the studio, they just used TK's abilities wiser. Also, TK's voice, of course, hasn't changed into Kakko's or anything.
Only the way of singing.
Although for Kotipelto I have to say I think he has, if not "fill his flaws", then identify and go with the flow anyway.
Been able to convert his way of singing. His rougher singing familiar to us from Polaris and especially in Stratovarius only adds to the vocal delivery I think (especially in Stratovarius as it's darker, more rock and more psychedelic anyway).
Ragehead91 wrote:And how the fuck were Silence and Epica revolutionary?
It's time for anyone in here to understand that whenever someone states something like this, it's all about perspectives and opinions. I didn't feel the need of explaining mine in this situation as I thought that statement is pretty clear as it is, that people, whether they agree with me or not, can see why I think that way. Apparently I was wrong, and that's fine with me because I'd like to explain - I love when it comes down to this point!
This takes a little patience, though, so bear with me.
I see music as an artist's own thing, not attached to anything that tries to directionally describe it (unfortunately little). Genres actually irritate me in many ways (I can link to a discussion I once tried to start about this later if you like to see some of my points). For me, power metal is merely a rough description to tell something about this music for example Stratovarius and SA do. Somehow we don't use more accurate descriptions that can be argued about, based on our feelings. We hardly use adjectives in these kind of discussions: we don't tend to describe music as wines, for instance, which is sad, since at worst these genre classifications are merely boxes we try to fit every music possible, which, of course, strips a lot of things off from music itself and only roughly tells us what it resembles. We don't have to think about it that way, though, since the music is still there, we can still hear it, whether we have defined a genre for it or not. But what I like to state here that I see music, say, now, Sonata Arctica, far beyond genre lines (power metal).
For me, Silence was a very fragile, beautiful, multidimensional magnum opus of Sonata Arctica's style, the culmination of their music (that era, anyway; as of yet). Many interesting styles of songs that fit together. The music and words work in so many levels, and separately and together, and intertwine into an emotional entity very rarely heard in music. Every song takes its rightful place in this album of very many branches. I had actually never heard an album that could be interpreted in so many ways and lead to as many conclusions as to what it exactly has to say. It has many of loose concepts, and I don't think anyone has find all of them, if there ever is such as 'all' of its concepts. This is, of course, more based on inaccuracy and rhetoric than some ultimate genius of the maker (Kakko), as if he could see all the branches he composes, all the time. Anyway, you get the point now why I think it's "revolutionary" even. It's deep. Deeper an album I had ever heard before. I've heard Dream Theater, Radiohead, stuff, are good at this as well but I have never taken that close look to their works because, unfortunately, their music generally doesn't feel nearly as good to me as Sonata's, for example.
I underline that this is MY opinion. I didn't try to state "Silence is revolutionary" as a fact. I listen to music for some great moments. To me, to the company I spend time with at each time. It's hearing, feeling, experiencing. And I experienced that record being deep as heck. For me. I also don't listen to this what we call power metal because it's power metal. It's because I like many bands inside of this box that I think shouldn't exist.
I can generally say I'm kind of fond of that genre, but seriously, there are many blank presentations, or clichéd as hell, or in other ways "bad" works. Impersonal, albums nothing to say lyrically and musically.
As for Kamelot's Epica, I see it a similar album to Silence's style. It is metal music, but in calm, pleasant way, much like Gather the Faitful is, that's why the comparison in the first place. Epica, though, was the first album in this musical direction I heard with so good a concept story; it's about Faust, a play written by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. It's a loose story, so, again, there are many things you just have to figure out and/or imagine, wish for, play, interpret, whatever. Or go by the book, about literally.
It grands you freedom and is still a complex, yet appealing, grandiose, musically common thread following album with absolutely no bad tracks even and a connected soundscape. That's why I think it's something we've never before seen in music - or at least I haven't.
Gather the Faithful, on the other hand, whether hasn't grown on me still or has no such awesomeness I find in Silence or Epica whatsoever. I haven't been able to identify the most of its lyrics, and somehow I think the songs mostly mirror Sonata Arctica's sound. This I think is what makes it so great to many people in the first place, and I can understand it, and it's intentional of course: "Wow, it's Sonata with Kotipelto on the vocals! A huge combination!" Don't get me wrong: it is. It just hasn't for me worked the way it should have had. Musically it's in the waters of Kamelot / especially Sonata pretty much, and yet it can't reach their level. There is no epic structure; just song after song, I can't find a common thread. I don't think there was to be such. I just happen to generally like more of those works that have it I guess.
Also, it's funny how hardly any part of hardly any GtF song has attached to my head, although I find it based most on the foundation of being a catchy album, as it apparently has no ultimate stories to tell or new musical directions to take. It has a bit of its own style though, elegant, like an album full of My Selenes. I've seen better ones though. Or then again, it could be that demanding recording after all I only notice its brilliance, say, after two year, or can never find "it" in it.
Because this album really hasn't offered anything special to me yet, I also get bored with its straight through tranquility and serenity (that was meant to be there anyway, it seems; Sonata mainly represents the same). It ain't that metal anymore, as I've used to hear from these guys (like this Kotipelto's "forced" singing and generally more dirty, metaly sound). The idea of being metal; angsty, rough, rebel, is far off reach from this album. This is a rather stupid idea, I admit, but it just occures to me when I seek ways to describe it, as it doesn't give me much in the way it possibly was meant to give, that calm/feel/elegant/epic sector. :>
I agree with this btw:
HinatAArcticA wrote:The rest a ver avarage songs that any power metal band could do. And having Jani and Mikko, both featured on my Sonata Arctica's favorite album Silence, and Timo Kotipelto, one of my favorite singers, the album needed to be a killer and make me feel emotions - -
The expectations were just too high. Could it actually be the main reason I've yet to find this album attractive in the first place?
People are saying they grow tired of TT fooling around but I have grown reeeally tired of othe rpeople fooling around and blaming him.