Talk:Cries of the Past

Not Black Metal?

CRIES OF THE PAST IS NOT BLACK METAL

Of course not, because this is a CHRISTIAN album, and Black Metal is supposed to be anti-christian.

How about sining your posts? Anyways I removed this review off the page because even if it was cited reviews dont belong on an encyclopedic page. if you wann read it that bad its right here: Review Much in the vein of Underoath's heralded debut "Act Of Depression", "Cries Of The Past" firmly sits in the Underoath discography as one of the band's heaviest outings. And compared to their prior release, this is really when Underoath became something special. Now to put aside all the constant bickering which older fans and newer fans engage in (most of which is childish) and concentrate on the album for what it's worth, this is probably one of the best Christian metal or hardcore cds that's come out in the last 6 years or so. It's no wonder that Underoath is rightfully one of the biggest band in the huge Christian metal/hardcore movement that's sweeping the nation; listen to any of their recordings and it's easy to see why. "Cries of the Past" is where UO really took off, and from here they would only go up.

Much like Underoath's debut album, at first glance "Cries Of The Past" looks like a typical EP. Only five songs. However upon examinining the run time, you quickly learn that this is basically a full length. Clocking in at 42:51, COTP definitely shows the gifted song-writing ability the band was already displaying at a young age. All the songs are 7+ minutes long, and are excellent musical compositions in and of themselves. The tracks are extremely progressive in that there's no repeated parts or hooks, and the band trys more to capture your attention rather than saturating their music with catchy choruses. The aquisition of Chris Dudley on keyboards and Matt Clark on bass (Octavio Fernandez moving to full time second guitarist) is what really makes a difference between this and the last cd though. Dudley's keyboards are the perfect accent for the often blistering atmosphere the band creates with one another, and now all the songs have a certain sonic feel to them, which gives Underoath a sound all their own. With Matt Clark on bass, Octavio and lead guitarist Corey Steger are free to trade off licks, and put together some of the most intense riffs the band has ever written on pieces like "Giving Up Hurts The Most" and the title track. Aaron's drumming also shines as it is far more technical and engaging (lots of creative fills and plenty of double bass) than it seems to be now. Dallas of course fronts the band in stellar fashion and his voice is relentless. He can shriek with the best of them, and he can also turn out some devilish growls that hold up next to any other singer out there. In fact this is the best his vocals sound on any Underoath recording he appeared on. Their raw and passionate and are just as cutting as the music.

The biggest thing that makes this cd such a gratifying listen though is that every song is so engaging. "Giving Up Hurts The Most" and "Cries Of The Past" are two of the heaviest tracks the band has produced to date, and is a good representation of where Underoath was at the time. The first and third tracks, "The Last" and "Walking Away" are both stone-cold classics, and deserve a place at any Underoath live show, although that probably isn't going to happen ever. And the album epic "And I Dreamt of You", which runs well over the 11 minute mark (11:23 to be exact) is nothing short of amazing. One listen to any of these tracks and anyone who is an unbeliever about these guys will be instantly converted. Even if this isn't what they sound like anymore. Nothing can take away from the sheer technicality and craft that was used to write any of these songs. There's breakdowns all over the place, a vocalist that commands your attention, guitar riffs that are melodic, yet heavy and technical at the same time, and drumming that is on the level of any band in the same field. What more could you ask for?

"Cries Of The Past" is in all rights probably Underoath's best recording. Now that will of course depend on your own opinion, and what kind of music your into, so take that with a grain of salt. Even though it's far different from the band's style today, they're still making great music, so I won't complain. If you're a fan of Underoath, old or new, I'd recommend checking into this release immediately. Downloading is probably your best bet, since these are pretty scarce. Those which are available are running for $188 or so, which is quite ridiculous. Don't let yourself get taken advantage of. Overall one of the best Christian metal/hardcore albums that money can buy, and probably the band's best release. Definitely a must for completists and casual fans alike.

I cant believe someone would think you can right an opinion piece like this and expect it stay for long Avenged Evanfold 06:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't that be called "white metal" Can'thinkofscreename (talk) 20:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The actual term is called "unblack metal". White metal is a term used to describe Christian metal in general. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:13, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

low grunts

sometimes low grunts happen at the same time as the high screams, so how could that be the same guy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 (talk) 15:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC) Hello? Loop recording. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.199.23.231 (talk) 22:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC) This made me lol really hard. I'm so proud of the newer, intelligent Underoath fan base (I like both old and new). Momo Hemo (talk) 15:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Melodic Death Metal???

Shouldnt the genre be Melodeath also???? I mean the first band that In Flames's album Lunar Strain made me think of was Old Underoath. Also, how would it be deathcore, if there is very rarely breakdowns. Suffocation uses breakdowns and they arent deathcore. I think Suffocation uses even more breakdowns than on this album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.199.151.95 (talk) 04:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? This album is filled with breakdowns. Emo777 (talk) 08:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

this album is not deathcore. it has no metalcore elements, and no breakdowns in a deathcore sense. the album has a liberal usage of death metal elements, as well as melodic heavy metal. that makes it melodic death metal 76.220.195.8 (talk) 04:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Genre

Unless you have a source that supports your claim, leave it as "metal". --SilverOrion (talk) 04:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, the HM source sounds dubious... does anyone have a copy of this that they could scan and upload somewhere, as it doesn't appear to be available online? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 11:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Black metal

Two WP:RS describe the genre as Black metal. Please see the refs. Blackmetalbaz has reverted this several times without a source. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:14, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Which sources precisely? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Particularly, as despite a previous request, no one has actually provided the HM source. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:34, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

HM magazine is a metal source. The Encyclopaedia of Contemporary Christian Music is a valid source. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:42, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The first has yet to be actually provided. The second... exactly what does it say? Can we have a block quote please? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:55, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't happen to have the November / December 2000 edition of HM Magazine so I can't give you a quote from that, and being at work, don't have my copy of EofCCM here, so it will have to wait. I'm surprised that you're reverting sources you don't have access to simply because you don't have access to them. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:02, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Not at all. My confusion is arising from the addition of "unblack metal" to the genrebox (and deathcore for that matter), when even the brief snippets of sources quoted don't mention either term. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 20:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I put unblack metal there since the source indicated that it was black metal, but I recognize the objection to that as is noted above. It's not inappropriate to change the genre to the more correct term, but can change it to black metal if that is more reliable to what you think it should be. As for deathcore, I didn't add it so I can't be asked to defend the addition.

Knowing how EofCCM was compiled, Powell likely relied heavily on HM magazine for genre information as he did with other hard bands. He relied heavily on CCM Magazine for the pop and rock acts. The editor doesn't cite his sources for each entry so it's impossible to know for sure. Going on memory alone, Underoath's entry is no more than two paragraphs (they were relatively unknown at the time it went to press and it only has entries for a demo and two studio albums). Every entry also has a discography and brief introduction. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

From EoCCM: "On their follow-up album, Cries of the Past, Underoath amplifies the black metal accents with keyboards, double bass, and blistering guitar riffs.". --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Unblack Metal

If Black Metal is going to be listed as the genre of this ablum wouldn't it make more sense to use Unblack Metal instead? Since Underoath is Christian I think it's a much better idea. NoremacDaGangsta (talk) 19:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I fully agree. However, not all of the editors agree with that. Unblack metal is black metal with a Christian theme. The term wasn't coined at the time of the release of this album. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Or more correctly, wasn't commonly used during that period. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I would think the decision would be based on common sense. NoremacDaGangsta (talk) 21:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

The decision is based on reliable sources, not what any given editor regards as "common sense". Blackmetalbaz (talk) 22:02, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Genre wars

I think it's best to just remove the genre completely. Or if you're going to have it, just list the genre as "extreme metal" or something generic that can't apply or continue with more wars. The type of music that this and Underoath's very first album features is hard to deceipher. In my personal opinion; these albums are deathcore, long before it was popularized by Suicide Silence, Whitechapel and Carnifex. Although it is quite obvious that Underoath play nothing remotely close to this sound anymore, this write-up is already mentioned in the article. Even in the title track and several other songs off of these first two records, you hear crazy trembolo picking that Underoath doesn't even do anymore. Yes, UØ are a metal band and always have been, but this is distinctly a different crafting of metal that is just best left dropped because every kid that comes to this page is going to have a different opinion wherein they once again mess with the genre(s). • GunMetal Angel 04:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Either suggestion (blanking or extreme metal) is a good solution. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I support blanking, for the record. "Extreme metal" is unsourced. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 23:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

If source is the case, blanking is also un-sourced. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Not at all. Blanking would be a sensible measure in a case where editors cannot reach consensus, or if there is a paucity of sources. A blank field (and in fact it has been suggested we totally remove the genre box precisely because of such edit warring) does not suggest that the band has "no genre". I am actually genuinely confused by your comment. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

but blanking would also removed sourced information. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:51, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Not if the material is kept within a "stylistic influence" section or whatever. The lack of consensus appears to indicate that a bald genre box statement is inappropriate. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 20:22, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Or, the lack of consensus could mean that it's not a clearly defined genre with influences from several. Or it could mean that anonymous editors think they know what they're talking about, or they come to this relatively obscure album to see what they can get away with, or .... I hate assumptions. Stick to WP:V sources. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:40, 29 November 2010 (UTC)