Untitled

I'm 34. I've listened to all of the albums on the Yea Forumscore list out there and I'm re-listening to FEAR INOCOLUM for the umpteenth time (realistically, I'd say I've listened to it at least 100 times) and I just have not found that many other albums to match it artistically. It is just so inspired throughout the entire thing. It bothers me that folks would write it off as "metal" or "hard rock" and only consider it good in those categories. I've found a LOT of "metal" and "hard rock" to be very subpar and many people in those bands let the loud volume account for what they lack in talent. TOOL is unlike any other band on the planet and their scarcity, limited material and mystery make them all the more appealing to a world that gets EVERYTHING IT WANTS RIGHT NOW (DAMNIT!). TOOL fans wait and wait for more material ... and the reason why is their existing material is so amazing - especially FEAR INOCOLUM.

I know what I am saying has been said a million times before, but it just seems like everytime I read about TOOL in a major publication they write them off as a fringe band. I know MJK does not give an F about all this ... I'm just sad they don't get the respect they deserve on those best of lists. The Yea Forumscore list is filled with awesome stuff - no denying that - but FEAR INOCOLUM deserves to be on that list.

FI>AEnima=Lateralus>10K Days>Undertow

Fuck that soi nu-male site.

Attached: TOOL-Fear-Inoculum.jpg (696x670, 40K)

"Tool are just King Crimson in Joker makeup"

Yikes, that first line of that review written by an drolegdE

Attached: 155444022747484484.jpg (808x674, 161K)

sheeeeeeeee

Attached: lmao.png (966x395, 58K)

Conde's pretty dumb but not THAT dumb, I think they realize that a paywall is essentially a death sentence on a site like Pitchfork and will make an exception or will remove it after a month or two
However, if they do end up going through with it and inevitably just sell the site i want Yea Forums to start a gofundme to buy it

>Tool are just King Crimson in Joker makeup
I can't understand how anyone would even think to make that comparison lol

This guy's writing is all smug quips and cramming as many pop culture references into the review as possible. Just go back and read his other reviews

>Tool are just King Crimson in Joker makeup. They thrive in an enormously popular world of polyrhythms and prurience; of Jungian philosophy and Bill Hicks memes; of pewter dragon statues with orbs in their mouths and guys telling you that DMT is actually a chemical in your brain. Forged in the mad-at-my-dad fires of ’90s post-grunge and nu-metal, the progressive metal quartet has sustained a decades-long career on equal parts technical precision and psychedelic bullshit. Their multi-part songs are loosely about embracing pain, grief, desire, transgression, until all your chakras are open and you know exactly why the pieces fit. They’ve been a punchline for years.

Damn, that's based.

I personally would rate it 0.6 points higher, but closely accurate I guess desu. The album is just an uninspired snoozefest compared to all the other shit they've released in the past, and it's fun watching rabid Toolfags defending their disappointment of an album by saying dumb shit like "y-you just need to l-listen to it 35 more times t-to g-get it!!".

If you geniunely love the album, then that's cool, but it makes me cringe seeing talk about the album as if its a complex piece of music that needs rigorous analysis. It's not a fucking Webern piece, let it go.

The record sucked, and forever tarnished the legacy of the band. Easy 7.9!

Attached: SK Center Won't Hold.png (1133x398, 171K)

Imagine being as pozzed and faggy as this guy. Seriously just imagine for 5 seconds

should be a 10

They just couldn't resist bringing up the sexual assault allegation could they?

I bet this reviewer had some specific person asshole guy from high school in mind

>It is hard to parse the difference between which choices here are wise (Keenan taking a back seat to showcase the interplay of the band more) and which are stale (for all the band’s rhythmic exploration, they couldn’t find one new harmonic mode to play in?). One of Tool’s problems on Fear Inoculum is that, with few exceptions, the songs feel static and brittle. They don’t have the live-wire feel of 1996’s Ænima or 2001’s Lateralus, the album that Fear Inoculum sounds most in thrall to. Songs like the opening title track feel long because they exist in protracted straight lines of mechanical riffs, as if assembled through an instruction manual. The hybridization that made Tool so popular on the radio in the late ’90s has rusted: They are part stoner metal, part prog rock, part mainstream metal, all working in ignorance and opposition to each other.

Is he right, Yea Forums?

Those are pretty good lines, but tying them to post-grunge and nu-metal is a low blow because they obviously came up before either of those notorious genres.

At least they learned eventually

Attached: I Get Wet - Pitchfork.jpg (1500x1386, 297K)

What does this even mean it says nothing

You are unironically fucking hallucinating. It's so incredibly disappointing that I wouldn't be able to even write a troll post about how good it is to get (you)s.

Attached: ufiTpkc.png (749x707, 961K)

>What does the third decade look like for a band whose hit singles include “Prison Sex” and “Stinkfist”? It looks like an aging quartet betting on being calculating and precise, carefully reining things in and keeping everything familiar. Fear Inoculum could have come out any time in the last 13 years, or even the last 20 years. Above all, Fear Inoculum pays homage to Tool itself, a long-delayed encore that has fans racing back to the arena. In a recent interview, Keenan said that one of the main reasons this album took 13 years to make was fear, crippling self-doubt, and constant second-guessing. There’s no joke there, just a bit of self-reflective honesty, which is the one thing that helps keeps this hulking record afloat.

Attached: Jeremy D. Larson.png (715x940, 1.47M)

You are new around here, apparently.

>"Fuck that cringe site"
>likes Eminem

Tool is shit just like all prog metal. On the other hand, pic related is the real injustice.

Attached: 1564952801966.png (1016x644, 316K)

Attached: kanye-west-akanyewest-1h-pitchfork-the-album-is-a-30-1515658.png (500x300, 18K)

Same dude that reviewed FJM and Greta Van Fleet can smell fear now

>“Invincible” builds to a climax where all the polymeter comes together in a mezzo unison that feels like “Forty Six & 2” with a mute on it. The fact that the ending of “Invincible” doesn’t try to kick you in the ribs points to the larger issue: When Tool think they are using time as a psychedelic additive, it comes off as simple riff-repetition from a band that sounds tired. The stoners of Sleep or the experimentalists of Sumac own this lane of daring, hypnotic metal songs because they bring stakes; you hear people moving in on the instruments and ripping out the notes. Save for Jones’ slide guitar solo, the 23 minutes that make up “Descending” and “Culling Voices” feel so barren and overwrought, you can practically see the band sitting on cushioned stools in the studio, quietly counting out the meter with polite head-nods.
How can one man be so based?

Wow that is fucked

Relapse is a pretty good album.

Sucker Punch is worse than Peppa Pig.

How does one end up as a music journalist?

Wow that is based

Is it copypasta or something? I indeed never come to this board.

Be a music nerd with an english degree

/pol/tard with a persecution complex answer: Be a SJW that hates wypipo.

I agree with the Mars Volta rating but Clairo should be a 5 or 6

Literally all p4k writers do besides working on their "writing" is just share their own articles with each other.

>"Wow! Great article by p4k writer! Check it out!"
>"p4k Writer Retweeted"

>the songs feel static and brittle
Can you not read?

>/pol/tard with a persecution complex answer: Be a SJW that hates wypipo

A lot of critics can only critique music based on the lyrics and sociopolitical subtext. Lame as fuck. I give no fucks about that shit

based

That's more relatable than Jacob Collier style breakdowns of all the technical aspects of a release

live in the city off your parent's money. buy drugs from people. drug dealers know other writers. you have a degree, too. you do drugs together in an apartment and listen to shitty albums. *hits joint and snorts 4 lines* "hey, wanna write something for us?"

hehe heh i agree, Jeremy!

Attached: 323299320.png (809x930, 109K)

Both are terrible for different reasons. At least technical details are related to the actual music though

lmao /r/toolband is having a bad week

>relatable
That's not good reviewing faggot. Dumb down and simplify your writing so fickle fucks can grasp the point? No you should be shot dead if you review music and your name isn't Piero Scaruffi. Yes general info and context is good in a review but if you can't talk about the music, the thing you're supposed to be analyzing to a point where you are confident to put a number on it you are fucking stupid.

oh no, the site that has never given a fair shake to a tool album didn't give a fair shake to their new album

what were you expecting?

RYM drones have read the Pitchfork review

Attached: 754748.png (1160x886, 317K)

reddit.com/r/ToolBand/comments/czuoob/i_painted_myself_like_the_character_in_fear/

Based.

Attached: 8568568959.jpg (720x579, 62K)

OH NO NO NO NO

TOOLFAGS WE GOT TOO COCKY

>review opens with the stale, low hanging fruit we’ve beaten to death
>review makes it a point to mention sexual allegations
>7empist

Ah, classic Pitchfork. Never change.

she/her did not like that

>but if you can't talk about the music,

Who says they're not talking about the music? You can talk about it in relatable terms without going off on a tangent about how brilliant it is that the third stanza bypasses the circle of fifths and attains the natural harmonic triad of zulu

>we’ve beaten to death

There's your problem. No one cares about what a bunch of neckbeards on a cambodian coffee harvesting workshop believe.

Funny how he's criticizing their rehashed ideas by using rehashed criticisms from the past 20 years. This barely reads any different from P4k's Lateralus review.
Maybe P4k needs a new angle, it feels static and brittle, they don't have the live-wire feel of their late 90's/early 2000's reviews.

>>review makes it a point to mention sexual allegations
Imagine being this much of an absolute faggot. I know he probably doesn't actually believe it but he knows it's a great way to get more clicks on his article. This is how all of them think nowadays.

At least they make their intentions clear-cut with hyperlinks.

The one time they got it right

Attached: 875875.png (924x640, 459K)

And here’s what I’ll say. I’m a lite Tool fan. I don’t get off on any of their albums but I do admire and respect a few. Fear Inoculum is enjoyable to me but also didn’t wait on the edge of my seat for 13 years, so. I think it’s a cool album and for as basic / watered down / uninspired the reviews claim to be, I’m having a lot of fun unpacking it and appreciating the riffs and drumming especially. It was really nice participating in the hype and discussions when this album first dropped, and for once it was enjoyable to see Yea Forums circlejerk an album with concrete discussion. The tide instantly turned with that Fantano review and this will cement it further unfortunately. It was good while it lasted. Meme threads will sprout up for a bit but eventually no one will give a shit about the record and that’s cool. I’m going to keep playing it until I’m burnt out on it.

Attached: (s)tool.jpg (614x668, 114K)

she has a sextape with clairo, just saw it on twitter and a thread here had screenshots yesterday. looked legit!

gib pls

it's on p2p, i'm not celebjihad and i'm not going to jail or getting mafia hitmen for posting their property tracking my ip or the digital footprint on a file. a lot of people have the files now, obviously trying to make money off it before it's free online. it will leak soon enough, they can't stop it

there's leaks of j-law too and they're the real deal. it's a bunch of video clips from phones and some 70mm footage that look to be behind the scenes for a photo shoot but then it goes on with fucking. the guy and girl from bengalfuel have a townhouse or whatever it is in nyc and people go there and party, or stars do photo shoots. it's a mafia fuck house where you sign and go in and everybody does whatever they want. someone stole devices and drives. bengalfuel's gf said she was pursuing it legally on her insta and the leaker was shitting himself but there's probably stuff stilll in the archives aside from it being all muddied with fakes. jennifer is in videos with a lot of other stars fucking and sucking. dua lipa and emily warren. emily ratajkowski. clairo licking the bengalfuel blonde's pussy. they were posted here yesterday but the threads were deleted, even with black bars over pussy.

Based and fully agree. It’s a solid 9/10 record in my opinion. Right up there with 10,000 Days but not as good as Lateralus or Ænima

Wow they really fucked up that one, should’ve been at least 9.5

there is no worse person on the face of the earth than pop culture referencer guy. none.

pitchfork are scum. their hq needs to be bombed, if they have one.

Attached: kdbld.png (1130x329, 211K)

Even as a casual Tool fan, Æ has always been gold and well worth revisiting over the years. That album does a lot of things right even for people who can’t be fucked to bother with Fibonacci sequences and DMT.

faggots not welcome.

who even cares, did anyone expect them to like it
pitchfork has become so predictable that you can call their bnms months in advance.
alex g's gonna get one this month. empath's gonna get one whenever they release their next album. it's just friends jerking each other off.

Bmup

The paywall will probably be to read the full review, the score will always be visible

>This barely reads any different from P4k's Lateralus review.
This is only because Tool have been consistently shitty, user

What's worse, pitchfork drones or fantano drones?

lurk more, faggot

is everyone that already rated it gonna change their score now?

Attached: 1566260031664.png (300x300, 104K)

Ngl, I had more fun reading this bait than listening to that shit ass album

Arguably the worst review of all time.

I gave it an 8 but dropped it to a 4 after the Fantano review. Pitchfork made some good points about Invincible being the best track so I raised my score to a 5.

>Arguably

How often does Fantano lowball Pitchfork?

Kek

>the character

the reviewer actually praises the album on that review, he just baited everyone by "giving" it a bad score

Doesn't he imply that it's garbage for teenagers

That reviewer is either joking or an imbecyle, can't tell since I don't know much about pitchfork in general, so I don't know what to expect

You fucking people make me sick

>Forged in the mad-at-my-dad fires of ’90s post-grunge and nu-metal

lmao

>RYM score already tanking thanks to bald faggot and p4k
lmao mindless drones

It has honestly helped to remind me that RYM scores are not to be taken seriously.

Wouldn't be a real Tool album if Pitchfork gave it a good review. It's fucking tradition

Is this legit

>reading reviews that aren't sputnikmusic
the horror

what exactly makes maynards lyrics "gamer intellectualism"?

Based

he said "nigger" once

>reading reviews

flavor of the year bad person for liberals. just a derogatory epitaph

that's not a real thing, pitchfork are retarded.

Cos p4k are woke and maynard fake woke

shhh
i dont want more people its fine as is

they had to save up their points for Amnesiac that came out a few weeks after.

Here is the review guy, say something nice about him

Attached: jeremy+larson+photo+of+him.jpg (500x750, 199K)

what a fucking nerd. dopey cunt.

>fake woke
nah he's an edgy boomer

Attached: boomer J Keenan.jpg (1424x2010, 1.01M)

Cringe but redpilled

One of the things that drew me to Tool in the early 2000's was them not being attention whores.
Sad that he became such a tool over the last decade.

Yea Forums drones

>it's perfectly understandable and ok that Nine Inch Nails never made another The Downward Spiral or The Fragile
>it's perfectly understandable and ok that Marilyn Manson never made another Antichrist Superstar on Mechanical Animals
>it's perfectly understandable and ok that Rammstein never made another Sehnsucht or Mutter
>it's perfectly understandable and ok that The Prodigy never made another Music for the Jilted Generation or The Fat of the Land
>hurr Tool sucks soooooooooooooo much because they never managed to make another Aenima or Lateralus reeeeeeeeee

>The Prodigy
I liked No Tourists, and I came to this opinion before Keith necked himself

this is my first time reading about pitchfork and they seem like your typical hate click driven retards

looks like a yid

admittedly they were clickbait faggots before it was cool

Why are Tool fans so fucking obnoxious?

Attached: 1563047713120.jpg (463x828, 136K)

Attached: 1567381369219.gif (480x270, 3.59M)

I'm a huge tool fan, I saw them live multiple times, I even have a Lateralus tattoo on my back, but this album is crap.

The paragraph you are replying to literally complains that the new album is in thrall to Lateralus but inferior in execution.

bruh

kek

They reacted to a fake interlude thinking it was real. Top tier cringe. Glad they enjoyed the rest of the album though.

>They reacted to a fake interlude thinking it was real.
? any details on that?

youtube.com/watch?v=Jfwz5V7pAWQ

32:12

The score is literally just bait. If a Yea Forumstard is actually interested in hearing out some critic's opinion they should read their writeup. Number scores are a total meme for autists who NEED to sort stuff.

Incorrect

you guys finding high school alright so far?

Based

Idiots

Not even close. Check out the review for Kate Bush "The Dreaming" they put out last year, they gave it a 7 bcs "muh cultural appropriation" (the aussie accent) and queer theory, even if it's the less "sexual" or even romantic KB album ever

Absolutely embarrassing

Attached: 2021E7EA-461B-4151-84C6-9ACE8A5CC57E.png (1136x640, 465K)

yikes or bait

form your own opinions

I really don't understand how they're currently making money for Conde Nast, if labels aren't paying for positive reviews. They have two ads on the whole site, and I just can't imagine they get as many clicks. Clicks aren't even a thing anymore; blogs aren't a thing anymore. And the site isn't even interactive.

Accurate scores

You are illiterate. Read more.

They should make the bad scores in red and the good ones in black.

This record should have been released 13 years ago. It sounds so fucking dated, especially those cheesy synths. Fucking awful. 5.4 is extremely generous.

Idk how Pitchfork get these things. I've seen very skeptical critics and others too condescending. It's like they don't even check the reviews before uploading them.
The last week I searched the 1975 just to make fun of their scores, surprisingly their last album got around 8 when the previous ones didn't even reach 7.

So basically, I think Pitchfork has no consistency on the critics.

Attached: images (3).jpg (640x480, 31K)

they don't base their reviews on the music.

It's over tool bros

Easily the worst review in Pitchfork's history. I don't know how someone can be so wrong about something. I just love the fact that they drastically change the score just to appease people and it definitely wasn't caving to pressure. Like I would respect them more if they stuck to their guns with the 0.6 even if I disagree greatly considering I Get Wet is one of my favorite albums ever.

But literally no one reads the review

They were always edgelords just like the rest of their peers in the ‘90s. Of course, they can’t stand the sanctimonious SJW shaming that reminds them of their abusive religious childhoods.
SJWs are exactly the same stock as fundamentalist Christians. It’s literally secular Christianity

what are your thoughts on pitchfork?

pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/aphex-twin-selected-ambient-works-volume-ii/

I mean, that album is a 10 so I guess they can get something right

Friendly reminder.

Attached: absolute state of pitchfork.jpg (576x552, 36K)

>A song on their second album Ænima dramatically recited the recipe for weed cookies in German,
Why does no one get Die Eier von Satan. The pun relates to the fact that Eier is a double entendre meaning both "eggs" and "balls" (as in testicles) in German. They're making a recipe with no eggs, which is related to the Jungian Anima projection of constructing a female image of oneself. He refers to it as "Satan" because the Anima projection is often related to the Shadow, which is an amalgam of all things repressed and considered evil.

Yet people just gloss over this track as a joke, every time

lol the assault on rock music continues and fatano is too much of a brainlet with his flea attention span due to all the hip hop he consumes

tools best album got a 1.9 from pitchfork though

If they gave this a 5.4 they best revisit Lateralus at some point, even if it ends up being a 6 or smth

nigga that's john zorn

they shit on the first two Mars Volta albums (aka their best two), therefore everything they’ve said after 2005 is irrelevant and wrong by default

please spell the title correctly the next time you spam this shitpost

Attached: D6154CC5-24A9-48CE-84CA-5777EF1FA124.jpg (384x384, 26K)

>This guy's writing is all smug quips and cramming as many pop culture references into the review as possible
welcome to p4k

>is he right?
no, obviously not. he works for pitchfork

CN obviously wants to kill Pitchfork off

disgusting and shameful desu

5.4/5 sounds right

As poet once said:

The more I listen to Tool - and this album in particular - the more they seem less like an 'intelligent' band and more like a band that seems 'intelligent' to people of average intelligence. I'm not saying that to put anybody down -- I like plenty of dumb as shit music, and it's no secret that I'm not exactly a Rocket Surgeon. But the whole Tool package, with its unnecessary and ineffectual little musical changes every few seconds, the unceasingly 'serious' mood tied to simplistic riffs, the lyrics that tackle insightful issues in a hamfisted high school philosophy manner - man, I'm dumb as shit and even I'm not dumb enough to fall for this. It just reeks of 'the uncreative preaching to the easily impressed.' And maybe they're smarter than Soundgarden or Britney Spears or something, but how much is that really saying?

The worst one is review for Fat of the Land where they gave it 6 and called it proto incel core

it’s funny because if anyone felt this way in Tool is was probably Maynard because he’s gay, so they’re basically shitting on a gay man mad at growing up in the closet

Has shitfork even given a good rating to any prog or metal album recently?
I can't think of a bigger hipster kryptonite than prog metal

>former trump supporter here...

Why the fuck is intelligence and deepness always a topic that is brought up whenever tool is mentioned. The fanbase and the anti-tool fanbase are bizarre.

I literaly think Tool are popular because dumb people think their music is inteligent.

>DiCrescenzo
P4K historian here, he's both a joker and an imbecile. Him and Nick Sylvester are the worst writers Golden Age Pitchfork ever had

never forget

Attached: COJzFEQVAAAkIGD.jpg (516x464, 94K)

so Tool is literally progressive metal for boomers that ate some mushrooms back in the day?
glad to know the music is shit then, don't even need to listen to it

Pitchfork is literally Polygon and Kotaku of music

Attached: polygon_logo_black-1050.0_standard_520.0.png (520x346, 26K)

Awful cosplay.
Not enough eyes.

based

b a s e d

i mean they have some retarded opinions, but they are no where near that bad

kek

They are worse than Kotaku and polygon, which is hard to do, but they managed it. If they kept it all about news and updates they would be fine, but reviewers and critics are a weird concept when it comes to this stuff, especially music.

tool is unlistenable, their a shitty dadrock band that makes shit and music and using psychedelic imagery to market their shit music because nobody would even want to listen to it otherwise

Their "reviews" literally aren't even about music

You wouldnt get it, too low iq, sorry dude
>Their

Lmao im just kidding fren, your opinion on tool is just as valid as mine (they are godtier)

>Jerk-Off
>Swamp Song
>Hooker with a Penis
>Ticks & Leeches
>"""dadrock"""

you need to have a beard to wear a cowboy hat in order to not out yourself as a homosexual, wine making is probably a comfy hobby tho

Attached: ....png (2876x1390, 1.41M)

Ahaha holy shit look at this faggot. Isn't he one of the actual guys in those cuck collages.

Attached: jeremy larson.jpg (1200x1200, 188K)

Why yes I hate TOOL how did you know?

Attached: Jeremy at the gloryhole.jpg (960x960, 79K)

Kek. This guy can definitely relate and appreciate songs like invincible and CCT(CCT is about being based). Cool guy

4.7
Sucks. Total shit show, worse than Pink Floyd's The Final Cut.

They don't make melancholy white girl music for hipsters who pretend they were born in the 60's, of course Pitchfork doesn't like them.

Attached: lana-del-rey.jpg (300x200, 13K)

damn what a turbocuck, at least he's correct about hating (s)tool

You're looking in a mirror, lad

>Omg tool sucks so bad, their dadrock fascist
scum is so unbereable to listen
>Now let me hear some indie melancholical experimental kanye west inspired dreampop

Attached: 73667b129a478499979dbea2bd3b026c6649060da20798aef5b84f7306780c07.jpg (665x800, 157K)

based
cringe

>Pitchfork gives it a shit review
>Fantano gives it a shit review

Not surprised but who gives a fuck? One named a Cardi B song the track of the year, and the other gives high ratings to garbage like Ariana Grande. Imagine thinking their opinions on music are worthwhile.

Prog rock/metal is one of the least nu-male genre (Tool is included in this category of course)
Söys, Yea Forumstards and pitchforkfags are so effeminate that they hate their dads for having a semblance of masculinity and since prog rock/metal is every dad's favorite genre, they hate prog rock/metal.

Even more generous than Fantano

I’d give it a 7/10, the more I listen to it the more I like it. Pneuma, Descending, Invincible and 7empest are all great. It’s just a shame that Maynard doesn’t go all-out with his vocals at all on this album.

There's nothing I hate more than reaction videos.

Don't call them out for the one time that they're right user

Based

based

Tony hawk?

Accurate, this album sounded a dated on release. It would be like if Korn came out with a nu metal album this ye-...oh wait.

Milo wrote this under a pseudonym.
Also if you're here Milo, fuck you, you white honky. Get off my board

Nice digits user
Can you rephrase this in a way that people can understand?

Here is a list of 2010s guitar bands/artists that released a better album than this overlong, chugga chugga, no variety, outdated piece of shit:
>Swans
>Gravetemple
>Oxbow
>Nazoranai
>Anna von Hausswolff
>Ishraqiyun
>Zs
>Oren Ambarchi
>Death Blues
>Stabscotch
>Föllakzoid
>Beak>
>Liars
>Scott Walker
>The Young Gods
>Lost Crowns
>Pyrrhon
>Alameda 5
Even fucking NIN released better things than this bullshit.
You're welcome. Lurk more Tool plebs and stop listening to a musical equivalent of Hot Pockets.

>No you should be shot dead if you review music and your name isn't Piero Scaruffi

Attached: maxresdefault47.jpg (1280x720, 100K)

>chugga chugga
>2010's Scott Walker
>2010's Swans

please fuck off fantano drone

oof

I’d say they’re more like The Verge.

I don't know why they hate prog so much, I mean there's a lot of cool stuff in that genre.