It's nice that you're defending the art & (by extention) the band, and i respect that, but the visual side of a band can really help get people to listen to the music & i fear that that artwork is going to have the opposite effect. At a glance it looks to me like the kind of art you might get on a pop-punk or a late 80s HC/Crossover style record, so it doesn't even represent the contents very accurately.alien laserblast wrote: The entirety of the production was done by the band themselves. From the recording to the artwork. There are assuredly flaws throughout, but in effect it's an accurate snapshot of the band at the time the music was made. What better representation?
In short, like it or lump it!
I like the band's music, particularly on the 2nd demo, but it's a tough environment out there for young bands right now, they need to take advantage of every opportunity to sell themselves & in that way good distinctive artwork can be a great calling card.
Just ask Cirith Ungol or Iron Maiden.
Over the years i've taken a blind punt on many a record just because i liked the sleeve art enough to give it a try, and i'm sure many others here have done the same, but i really can't imagine that the artwork for the QL CD is gonna have that effect on anyone, which seems like a missed opportunity.