Resurrection by Halford

Just listened to resurrection and surprisingly I was not impressed by it even though Rob Halford sounds brilliant as ever I most likely be the lone man on this but I find the riffs really bland, poppy and monotonous and don't have the fire and energy of the two fight albums and Priest albums. The musicians in the band have that robotic feel and don't hold a candle to the musicians in Fight and Priest. Ok it's 1000 times better than Priest's worst album Nostradamaus which is almost on the same level as St Anger. The only song that really shines on that album is Locked and Loaded. But it's only the first time I have listened to this album and hopefully my opinion will change after I have listened to this album dozens of times and I'd imagine their next album Crucible will be more pleasing. Look I know I may be committing heavy metal blasphemy but at the moment I can't see anything good about the album.

It's good but not a masterpiece. It was fueled by hype and people were excited that Rob was singing metal again. And many of the songs were catchy and it was overall pretty well done.

Nothing is more generic than those guitar riffs on that first FIGHT disc. Total beginner stuff crafted by Rob himself.

I like Resurection. Totally agree what ToB said

Temple of Blood wrote:

It's good but not a masterpiece.

It was much better than that what Priest were putting out at the same time.

it was a decent album. much better than anything Judas Priest were contributing at the time.

mc666 wrote:

it was a decent album. much better than anything Judas Priest were contributing at the time.

hmmmmmmmm................

Resurrection kicks ass! 9.5/10

mc666 wrote:

it was a decent album. much better than anything Judas Priest were contributing at the time.

100% agree

I think Resurrection is fantastic, and it has little to do with hype. It's just a good album. I think it is indeed a masterpiece and ranks as on of my favorite albums by Rob Halford outside of Judas Priest. "Resurrection", "Night Fall", "Locked and Loaded" and "One You Love to Hate" all come to mind as standout tracks.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Nothing is more generic than those guitar riffs on that first FIGHT disc. Total beginner stuff crafted by Rob himself.

Complex guitar riffs don't a good song make. Actually, I quite like the simplistic riffs and songwriting of War of Words. The songs are heavy, catchy and fun, headbanging fodder. I'm not sure when metal became something that had to be complex to be good. It's not rocket science. It's rock and roll.

I also get tired of hearing people used the term "generic" for something they don't like. (And it's not just you ToB. I hear this term used a lot on discussion boards.) What exactly is "generic"? Wouldn't generic be used for any band that plays a style that isn't completely new? Ultimatum are generic because we play a style of metal that has been around for a couple decades? Temple of Blood are generic because they sound like any number of speed metal bands? Avenger of Blood are generic because they have a sound similar to Sodom and Kreator? Absolutely not! Listen to what you like and ignore the rest.

I love the 'Resurrection' CD and still thinks it is a kick ass metal album.

I love Resurrection. I remember hearing the title track one time prior to release and was blown away by it. I went out and bought it as a new release and was not disappointed in the least. Really good stuff. My favorite track is Silent Screams.

'Resurrection' is sort of like........there's your classic meat and potatoes metal that kicks like it's supposed to..(Priest or Running Wild or Manilla Road or..you know)..and then there's the same stuff, except with an empty ring to it instead...sturm & drang, but not much really going on...that's what this album feels like to me..

manny wrote:

I love the 'Resurrection' CD and still thinks it is a kick ass metal album.

Same here. Loved it when I originally bought it brand new at Tower Records and still love it today.

RESURRECTION is the best Judas Priest album that Judas Priest never made.

ghost wrote:

It was much better than that what Priest were putting out at the same time.

If you're only focusing to the vocals and excluding the guitar work then I agree.

ultmetal wrote:

I think Resurrection is fantastic, and it has little to do with hype. It's just a good album. I think it is indeed a masterpiece and ranks as on of my favorite albums by Rob Halford outside of Judas Priest. "Resurrection", "Night Fall", "Locked and Loaded" and "One You Love to Hate" all come to mind as standout tracks.

I hate "One you love to Hate" and aren't crazy about "Nightfall" either.

Quote :

Complex guitar riffs don't a good song make.

No one said they did. But heavy metal should have good riffs and this album has ones that are decent but not great. Iommi wrote simple riffs that were good. Priest did too. This album's were worse than those examples I just cited. But this whole album is FULL of them! Nothing interesting at all! No dual guitar stuff. There is soloing on the album but all of it is filler and nothing stands out.

I think it's so ridiculous that the argument gets framed as "you want all riffs to be complex". It's not like I tell everyone to throw away their BLACK SABBATH discs and only listen to MEKONG DELTA. I hate MEKONG DELTA's music. There is complex garbage and simple garbage.

Quote :

It's rock and roll.

No, it's heavy metal.

Quote :

I also get tired of hearing people used the term "generic" for something they don't like. (And it's not just you ToB. I hear

I'm not using it for something I don't like. I'm using it for something that has no outstanding individual stylistic attributes and could've been generated by a random number generator or any faceless amateur guitarist without an identity.

And I'm not saying the riffs on FIGHT were "bad". They just weren't great and they lacked identity and having a whole album full of that stuff makes for a really bland disc. They needed a real guitar player to write that stuff. Good guitar riffs are essential for good metal.

Quote :

Temple of Blood are generic because they sound like any number of speed metal bands?

No we don't. In the same ballpark but that's about it.

Quote :

Listen to what you like and ignore the rest.

I'm not sure what this statement has to do with anything or who you think isn't following it.

Fat Freddy wrote:

RESURRECTION is the best Judas Priest album that Judas Priest never made.

I'll drink to that!

Halford's "Resurrection" is on my short list of top albums of the decade. It's a cohesive and focused heavy metal album featuring great heavy metal songs. I love it. Frankly, when "Crucible" was released I was hoping for "Ressurection" part II. I was initially disappointed with the direction of their sophomore effort, but I like it more now. However, I still prefer "Resurrection".

[quote="Temple of Blood"]

ultmetal wrote:

Quote :

It's rock and roll.

No, it's heavy metal.

It's all just a form of rock and roll.

Temple of Blood wrote:

heavy metal should have good riffs and this album has ones that are decent but not great. Iommi wrote simple riffs that were good. Priest did too. This album's were worse than those examples I just cited. But this whole album is FULL of them! Nothing interesting at all!

And who is to say the riffs are good, mediocre or bad? I know you don't believe that this is all opinion, but it is. I don't find that album to be "nothing interesting at all". As a matter of fact, I revisit that album regularly. The simplistic nature of the music, the hooks, etc. are all something I enjoy.

Temple of Blood wrote:

ultmetal wrote:

I also get tired of hearing people used the term "generic" for something they don't like. (And it's not just you ToB. I hear

I'm not using it for something I don't like. I'm using it for something that has no outstanding individual stylistic attributes and could've been generated by a random number generator or any faceless amateur guitarist without an identity.

And I'm not saying the riffs on FIGHT were "bad". They just weren't great and they lacked identity and having a whole album full of that stuff makes for a really bland disc. They needed a real guitar player to write that stuff. Good guitar riffs are essential for good metal.

See, I don't think you know the difference between opinion and fact. You don't think the riffs are "good", therefor you think that the music is bland. I disagree with you. Does that make me wrong? I don't think so, thus my comment, "listen to what you like, ignore the rest."

Yes, you are using the term "generic" for something you don't like. You don't find anything interesting about Fight, so you say it's generic.

I've actually heard people call Ultimatum, Avenger of Blood and Temple of Blood "generic" on various boards, thus the reason I used them as examples. Obviously you don't think ToB is generic and you don't think you sound like every other 80's speed metal band, but others do. Obviously I don't think Ultimatum is generic or I wouldn't still be in this band after so many years. It's all opinions.

Temple of Blood wrote:

ultmetal wrote:

Temple of Blood are generic because they sound like any number of speed metal bands?

No we don't. In the same ballpark but that's about it.

I agree. I said the same thing.

Temple of Blood wrote:

ultmetal wrote:

Listen to what you like and ignore the rest.

I'm not sure what this statement has to do with anything or who you think isn't following it.

Just a general statement that I make quite a bit when it comes to opinions on music. I don't think you follow it. Unfortunately, you are known as one of the pickiest, most pompous, arrogant people on the board. In general, you chime in 10x more if you have something negative to say about a band or album, and usually it comes off as pompous. If I don't like a band, I might say so, but I consciously try not to be offensive about it. I don't pretend that the things that I like are superior to the music that others like. You come off as very offensive and rude about your opinion. Like it or not, that's how people see you. You come off as "music is about good songwriting and bad songwriting, good riffs and bad riffs. I know the difference and the rest of you don't." Basically, you come off as a pompous jerk. Whether you know it or not, it also affects how people view your band. Your attitude on the boards taints people's opinion of your band.

Forgive my candor and bluntness, but basically that's how I see it. (And now I'm the jerk!)

I like it. I think Crucible is better though.

Just kidding.

I might need to look into this album. Sounds good.

Rex wrote:

I like it. I think Crucible is better though.

ditto. i also liked Fight's Small Deadly Space better than War of Words. the second albums just seem more creative. they were all great albums though.

Rex wrote:

I like it. I think Crucible is better though.

Same here, both good, but I think I like Crucible just a hair better. I like them both better than the Fight albums although they've grown on me as well over time.

Meh, Resurrection is ahead of Crucible for me but both are great listens. Of course, i'm so easy I like what JP was doing at the time.

TheNazgul wrote:

Meh, Resurrection is ahead of Crucible for me but both are great listens. Of course, i'm so easy I like what JP was doing at the time.

Cathedral Spires and Bullet Train are two outstanding songs from that period IMO. Would love to hear those two songs re-recorded with Halford behind the mic.