Talk:A Sense of Purpose

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did a couple things with the page[edit]

Not a lot of stuff, just kind of a clean up if u will. If you notice anything wrong with the page, let me know.

RaikiriChidori (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Album cover[edit]

Looks almost like a perfect photocopy out of Where the Wild Things Are... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.150.112 (talk) 04:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

STOPPED THE GENRE CHANGING[edit]

If you have any reliable sources as to a genre for what they are, please consult the musical style section. Place a genre and the reliable reference it matches with in that section. DO NOT ERASE. RaikiriChidori (talk)

And as a side note, think about their musical style this way:

•they have alt-metal-style song structures
•they use melodeath-style instruments (double-bass drums to incorporate blastbeats, for example)
•they utilize metalcore-style vocals

Leak[edit]

The album is leaked on torrent sites. I have verified it is real. I don't know what the format is for mentioning this or citation or anything so if someone wants to fix that up it would be good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh.oosterman (talk • contribs) 08:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That kind of information should be left out (see: WP:ALBUM#LEAK) unless the band, label or magazine mentions a leak it can be cited, otherwise you can add this kind of information for every release (which I wouldn't suggest you doing). −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ kaiden 16:35, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genre[edit]

Who the f*ck changed the genre to metalcore? in another albums like come clarity it is even understandable, but this one is influenced by old metal like iron maiden 189.26.86.137 (talk) 17:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Melodic death metal[edit]

I have changed genre to melodic metal,I dont see(hear) any reason as to why this album should be classified as MDM59.95.8.57 (talk) 18:45, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This album is definately not melodeath, but neither is it "alternative metal" or "metalcore".--SilverOrion (talk) 08:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This album is very similar to Clayman in all aspects, except perhaps it have a softer approach. So why don't leave just melodeath and hard rock Haxxiy (talk) 18:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FOR THE LAST TIME, this album cant be considered melodeath. common heavy metal and alternative rock are the most fitting genres to it. 189.58.57.147 (talk) 18:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know that maybe this is a little off the limb but what about progressive metal? You can tell they have some jazz influence and a solid approach on classic metal from Iron Maiden. I'm not saying on all their albums; I mean just their most recent one. And on the Iron Maiden-influenced note, why not thrash?

"The Chosen Pessimist" is surely prog-rock/metal. But I would not say the same about the other songs. Haxxiy (talk) 17:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, listening to "Tilt" I'm tempted to think of them as melodic metalcore. What the vocalist is doing there isn't death growling, it's more of like....a cross between singing aggressively and growling, and just flat-out singing. That melodeath does not make. I'll be comparing this album to other melocore bands like "In this moment" to try to get a better idea if they are melocore or not. Zaruyache (talk) 22:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother. Without meaning to sound harsh, your opinion does not matter in the least, it is what the sources say that counts. If a source can be found describing this album as metalcore, it can be added. If not, leave it as it is. I don't get why so many people are intent on proving In Flames are not melodeath anymore, there are clearly sources still out there who are saying they are and that is what counts. James25402 (talk) 23:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so f'in sick of all the people out there that can't describe how In Flames sounds and then just go the safe way and say "melodic death metal". The only similarity with melodic death metal is well... Melodies. There is no death metal in there, and far too much modern alternative stuff going on. I know that legions of fans that know what they are talking about don't mean shit when it comes to wikipedia, because one single guy that have never heard of In Flames calls Come Clarity a thrash metal record... And then it surely is, right? Why don't we just call it "metal" and get over with it. Because calling it melodic death metal is just confusing and incorrect. And we want to be correct here at Wikipedia, right?--85.224.80.59 (talk) 10:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, legions of fans DON'T know what they are talking about. You are saying that only because these supposed "legions" agree with your opinion. There are just as many people out there who think In Flames are melodic death metal as there are people who think they're not anymore. However, it just so happens that the "reliable sources" are claiming In Flames are a melodic death metal band and few are claiming otherwise. When it comes to wikipedia, the only information which can be considered "correct" is verified information. Fans' opinions can only be considered correct if they are supported by valid sources. As a large number of sources are claiming this album to be melodic death metal, anybody claiming it isn't is, by wikipedia terms, incorrect. So no, calling this album "melodic death metal" is not incorrect nor confusing. It is correct because it can be verified by valid sources and it is not confusing because the process of citing information is fairly simple to understand. James25402 (talk) 13:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeahyeahyeah, sources and crap, reliabe, whatever... But still, listening to the sounds the music make kinda kills that argument. I'm now going out on an epic quest to find 20 reliable sources that says that In Flames are nu metal/alternative/metalcore/modern/pop/whatever.--85.224.80.59 (talk) 10:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Flames founded melodic death metal, and therefore it seems that In Flames is not dependent on the nature of melodic death metal, but the nature of melodic death metal is dependent on In Flames. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.23.36 (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Flames is one of the founders of MeloDeath, but this album doesn't really sound melodeath to me at all. Come Clarity was more melodeath than A Sense of Purpose by far...I don't know what to call this really. I don't listen to anything else that sounds like this album. --Deathwish238 (talk) 02:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just because they inveted melodeath doesn't mean they still are melodeath. Sure, they created it, but they definitely don't still play it. They've progressed into a more alternative sound, incorporating traits of metalcore, alternative metal, and even still melodic death metal, buth they don't play melodeath exclusively any more. Zaruyache (talk) 02:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But the first 4 or 5 tracks sound just like melodeath on "Reroute to Remain", they're just not the conventional '90s sytle. The drums and bass are, but the vocals do have a bit of metalcore. A lot of alternative though. Would it be okay to put metalcore, alternative metal, and melodeath up there? 'The Chosen Pessimist' is defintely prog, so we can't put all four up there. Yes, it's not exclusively melodeath, but still enough to label the album as melodeath. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MetalKommandant (talk • contribs) 00:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, leaving it as "heavy metal" would be more worse than leaving melodeath, alternative metal (hell, even metalcore). This album is mainly alternative metal vocally, but the instrumentals are still melodeath. It should just be melodic death metal, alternative metal, and progressive metal. What's wrong with that? It describes the album very affluently. I see influence of metalcore, but it's not a genre of this album. -MetalKommandant (talk) 18:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to call this album "Melodic Metalcore", since there is no death metal in there, just a few growls. My opinion:) --Count Zar (talk) 18:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool story, bro. =) -MetalKommandant (talk) 23:26, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

U wellkomm:)Count Zar (talk) 22:35, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it has nothing to do with melodic deathmetal, no matter how you lay it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.33.246.216 (talk) 18:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have decided to take the genre descriptions away from the infobox and introduction. I find genre geuding as overly maximizing something so ultimately trivial and unimportant. Genres should be present to give a basic clue as to what music is, and not for petty arguments to be spawned concerning such description. Approximately 32 of the last 50 edits (before mine eliminating the genres, that is) have concerned the genre of this album. Genre feuding consists largely of POV-pushing and original research a lot of the time, and this is no exception. I hope that my deletion of the genres lets the fighting simmer down. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 02:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Professional reviews[edit]

I've removed all unreliable professional reviews according to WP:ALBUM. Please feel free to add reliable professional reviews according to the list in the article. Haxxiy (talk) 16:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on A Sense of Purpose. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:09, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on A Sense of Purpose. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:08, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on A Sense of Purpose. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:57, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on A Sense of Purpose. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:21, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:A_Sense_of_Purpose&oldid=1197187785"