Disturbed Cabinet: Howard's 2004 Review

kobexielite 𝕯𝖎𝖌𝖎𝖙𝖆𝖑 𝕸𝖊𝖉𝖎𝖆

You need 3 min read

·

Post on Jan 01, 2025

39 visitor like this post

Share

Disturbed Cabinet: A Look Back at Howard's 2004 Review

In 2004, the music world witnessed the release of Disturbed's third studio album, Believe. While the album itself generated significant discussion and remains a popular entry in their discography, one review in particular stands out: the critique penned by Jon Howard. This article delves into Howard's 2004 review of Believe, exploring its key arguments and assessing its impact on the album's reception and Disturbed's overall legacy. While we won't be able to directly quote Howard's specific review without knowing the publication, we can reconstruct a likely perspective based on typical critiques of the album from that era.

The Album: Believe and its Context

Before dissecting Howard's likely take, it's essential to understand the album itself. Believe followed Disturbed's highly successful sophomore effort, The Sickness, which catapulted them to mainstream metal stardom. The band faced the pressure of following up a massively popular album, a challenge that many artists struggle to overcome. Believe showcased a slight stylistic shift. While still firmly rooted in their signature groove metal sound, it incorporated elements of hard rock and even hinted at some alternative influences, a departure that likely fueled some of the critical discussion. Key tracks like "Stupify," "Prayer," and the title track "Believe" became staples of their live shows and radio play, but the album's overall reception was mixed.

Howard's Likely Critique: A Hypothetical Reconstruction

Given the common criticisms leveled at Believe, a hypothetical reconstruction of Howard's 2004 review might include these points:

• Shift in Sound: Howard likely addressed the perceived shift away from the raw, aggressive energy of The Sickness. Critics often felt that Believe was less intense and more commercially palatable. This might have been described as a "softening" of the band's sound or a move toward a more radio-friendly aesthetic.

• Lyrical Content: The lyrical themes on Believe also garnered attention. While The Sickness explored darker, more visceral themes, Believe tackled more introspective and emotionally complex subjects. Howard might have discussed the impact of this lyrical evolution, noting whether it enhanced or detracted from the album's overall impact.

• Production Quality: The production of Believe was frequently discussed. Some argued it was less gritty and raw than The Sickness, perhaps even a bit "polished" for a band known for its heavier sound. This aspect would likely have been a focus of Howard's review.

• Songwriting: The individual songwriting quality of the tracks on Believe would have been assessed. While some songs were lauded for their hooks and memorable riffs, others might have been criticized for being formulaic or lacking the impact of their earlier work.

The Impact of Howard's (Hypothetical) Review

Even without access to the specific review, we can speculate on its likely impact. A negative or mixed review, like the one Howard might have written, would have added to the broader conversation surrounding Believe's shift in sound and overall success. It could have contributed to the mixed reception the album received from fans and critics alike. This would have added fuel to the debate about whether Disturbed successfully navigated the challenge of following up a breakthrough album. Ultimately, how Howard framed the changes in Believe's style and sound would likely have shaped public perception of the album in the short and long term.

Conclusion: Assessing the Legacy

Today, Believe holds a firm place in Disturbed's catalog. While not as universally lauded as The Sickness, it remains a significant work, showcasing the band's evolution and continued artistic development. Jon Howard's 2004 review, regardless of its specific content, would have undoubtedly played a part in the discourse surrounding the album, contributing to the tapestry of critical opinions that helped shape its lasting legacy. Finding and reading Howard’s actual review, if possible, would provide a richer understanding of its impact and historical context.