This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Welcome to Our Community

Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.

Anyone else think that Carcass .....

Discussion in 'Carcass' started by Spod2508, Jul 31, 2003.

  1. Spod2508

    Spod2508 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2002
    Messages:
    194
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Limerick, Ireland
    .....got a lot better when Mike Amott joined?

    Personally I didn't think a lot of them beforehand, still have the albums but prefer the older stuff
     
  2. remer

    remer New Metal Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    no!!! carcass is better with the reek...album and symphony...album....pure fucking gore grind.
     
  3. Blood Fiend

    Blood Fiend Rokkiblaster!!!!

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Messages:
    514
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    espoo, finland
    Necrotism and Symphonies are the best albums and I think the only effect Mike had to Carcass was making them more professional, and some good riffs.
     
  4. timeless

    timeless Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2003
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Liverpool UK
    i think he just beefed the sound up
     
  5. toolsofthetrade

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,351
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    on Earth
    they really got more sophisticated after Necroticism.
    Heartwork is proper death metal, the way i hear Carcass best!!
     
  6. patchie

    patchie body dome light

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Liverpool UK
    I suppose it depends what you mean by "better".
    They were a "better" grind band without him, and became a "better" death metal band with him.
    When he left they got "better" at rock-ish music.

    It's all a matter of opinion :)
     
  7. Scurvy

    Scurvy The Bastard

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Agreed. They were excellent before and after he joined. Symphonies and Necroticism are my favourite albums and he joined inbetween them.
    I think Bill Steer was the main force behind Carcass and Mike Amott just gave them a little more variation.
     
  8. Humanure

    Humanure Speaking in Killing Words

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2002
    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    Assuming that they would have continued on their grind-->death-->deathrock transformation with or without ammott, then yes i do believe he made them a better band. In other words, I think necroticism and heartwork would not have been nearly as good, and swansong would have been much better...
     
  9. Niklas

    Niklas Dead By Xmas

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,673
    Likes Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Dorset,UK
    amott is a god
     
  10. BattleThrone

    BattleThrone Reek Of Putrefaction

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2004
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Dubai
    I think when Michael joined, the inspiration and music got better ...
    Heartwork is espically one of the greatest death metal albums till now
     
  11. blackseedofvengeance

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Where The Slime Live
    This is the third time I've tried to post this so it better fucking work.
    I definitely agree with you.
    Personally I think that Bill is possibly a better guitarist in a technical sense, but then Amott is pretty good too, though his solos are not as fast. Having said that they do contain a bit more emotion and melody. Like, with Arch Enemy its mainly Chris that plays the sort of 'shred' solos whereas Mike likes the slower and more heart felt ones (thats not to say that Chris doesn't put a lot of emotion into his). Ah to hell with it, I suppose both put a lot of emotion into their music, but I feel that Mike is perhaps just slightly better in terms of writing songs.

    It seems to me that what Mike brought to the band was a greater sense of melody and better song writing. He didn't make Carcass a better band, but focused them and made them tighter as a unit. He helped them to write better music is what I'll say.

    Ultimately this is obviously just my opinion, so please don't take it too seriously or whatever.
     
  12. Under a Stone

    Under a Stone Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I do think Carcass got better when Mike joined, especially considering how brilliant 'Necroticism...' and 'Heartwork' are.
     

Share This Page