rickycal78: Madbassist1: StrangeQ: Evilsmurf: As for the "OH no Lars hates illegal downloaders" thing... I don't really five 2 farks, artists should have a right to decide if they like people stealing their money or not. And yes, illegally downloading IS stealing.

No, it's not. And let me tell you something about evil little downloaders me in particular. When Napster came out, I owned every Metallica CD they had out. I kept them in a gigantic CD binder that usually remained out in my car. And because of that, I would go onto Napster to pull down a random song that I wanted to be able to listen to on my computer without having to go out to my car and drag out the 10lb binder I'm farking lazy. When Metallica went after Napster it taught me something. It taught me that music was not about the emotions it inspired; it was about money. That was the day that I largely stopped caring about Metallica and commercialized ventures in general.

FTFY

Pretty much. When the whole Napster/Metallica feud happened there was plenty of software available for ripping CD's onto your computer. All dude would have had to do is bring his big ass folder in for a weekend or more and start ripping all his shiat.

that is what I did. then sold all my cd's to Hasting's for around 600 bucks. Paid the rent.

/regret selling them NOW. I had SO MUCH obscure metal.
//meh, I have most of it in FLAC on my server so meh.

StrangeQ:
No, it's not. And let me tell you something about evil little downloaders. When Napster came out, I owned every Metallica CD they had out. I kept them in a gigantic CD binder that usually remained out in my car. And because of that, I would go onto Napster to pull down a random song that I wanted to be able to listen to on my computer without having to go out to my car and drag out the 10lb binder. When Metallica went after Napster it taught me something. It taught me that music was not about the emotions it inspired; it was about money. That was the day that I largely stopped caring about Metallica and commercialized ventures in general.

Yes, Metallica removed your capacity to maybe just grab one or two discs rather than lugging that oh-so-weighty 10 lb binder in. They also kept you from realizing that you could burn those cd's for use on the computer to begin with. And because of that, you are entitled to all forms of entertainment for free. I mean, who should dare to expect any form of compensation for their work?

Stunning logic you have there.

Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired: In all fairness The Black Album had some REALLY great songs on it. It's just too bad that those songs weren't the ones released as singles. With the exception of My Friend of Misery, which I consider to be Metallica's last GREAT song.

Strange that you would mention that. Or maybe coincidental is a better word.

On any given summer afternoon 20 years ago, I probably listened to the "black album" twice. But I'm pretty sure I haven't heard it start to finish twice in the past ten years.

For all the biatching here about Metallica's transgressions - some of which I agree with, others I can't bring myself to care about - mostly what this thread makes me want to do is listen to the black album. And it was "My Friend of Misery" that came to mind immediately.

kab: StrangeQ:
No, it's not. And let me tell you something about evil little downloaders. When Napster came out, I owned every Metallica CD they had out. I kept them in a gigantic CD binder that usually remained out in my car. And because of that, I would go onto Napster to pull down a random song that I wanted to be able to listen to on my computer without having to go out to my car and drag out the 10lb binder. When Metallica went after Napster it taught me something. It taught me that music was not about the emotions it inspired; it was about money. That was the day that I largely stopped caring about Metallica and commercialized ventures in general.

Yes, Metallica removed your capacity to maybe just grab one or two discs rather than lugging that oh-so-weighty 10 lb binder in. They also kept you from realizing that you could burn those cd's for use on the computer to begin with. And because of that, you are entitled to all forms of entertainment for free. I mean, who should dare to expect any form of compensation for their work?

Stunning logic you have there.

Seriously. It must have been hell taking 10 pounds from the car to the house. That's like a bag and a half of groceries or something.

And why shouldn't we expect all our entertainment for free. It's not like the bands spent hundreds of thousands of dollars recording it. They should just be happy their stuff gets heard, right?

browntimmy: nteresting, because after jazz or classical, I'd say metal probably has more technically and musically proficient musicians per capita than any other genre. And while I do hate the majority of metal bands, saying a band like Modest Mouse is on another level is just laughable to me. They're a bunch of average musicians that occasionally get lucky coming up with simple hooks.

I always get confused when people bring out this argument. Technical proficiency does not indicate good music. Music is entertaining, so the difficulty of composing a piece is not really impressive unless the outcome is equally impressive.

It reminds me of when someone was going off about how technically impressive Dave Matthew's drummer is (I have no idea the voracity of this statement since, like most entertainment, I am not too terribly concerned with how something is made but rather the pleasure in consuming it), as if that made up for the fact that it was Dave Matthews Band...

As for Modest Mouse? No clue how their ability lies, but their 4 albums (the two hipsters like and the two the hipsters hate because they became too popular) are all superior to Metallica's various dreck. Is Johnny Marr considered a good guitarist?

lilplatinum: As for Modest Mouse? No clue how their ability lies, but their 4 albums (the two hipsters like and the two the hipsters hate because they became too popular) are all superior to Metallica's various dreck.



Also, how in the hell can anyone find Modest Mouse entertaining? They're about as bland as a Kenny G album.

>says voracity instead of veracity
>makes a stupid statement like "all 4 albums by band x are superior to band y"

We have a real winner here.

lilplatinum: browntimmy: nteresting, because after jazz or classical, I'd say metal probably has more technically and musically proficient musicians per capita than any other genre. And while I do hate the majority of metal bands, saying a band like Modest Mouse is on another level is just laughable to me. They're a bunch of average musicians that occasionally get lucky coming up with simple hooks.

I always get confused when people bring out this argument. Technical proficiency does not indicate good music. Music is entertaining, so the difficulty of composing a piece is not really impressive unless the outcome is equally impressive.

It reminds me of when someone was going off about how technically impressive Dave Matthew's drummer is (I have no idea the voracity of this statement since, like most entertainment, I am not too terribly concerned with how something is made but rather the pleasure in consuming it), as if that made up for the fact that it was Dave Matthews Band...

As for Modest Mouse? No clue how their ability lies, but their 4 albums (the two hipsters like and the two the hipsters hate because they became too popular) are all superior to Metallica's various dreck. Is Johnny Marr considered a good guitarist?

Let's take Iron Maiden. The singer has a crazy powerful voice that allows him to hit notes many singers can't, their guitarists play harmonizing leads that sound like ear candy, their drummer and bassist also occasionaly have cool and interesting parts, they write songs that build to epic crescendos. Now let's take Modest Mouse. Um... I guess you could tap your foot to a few of their songs.

Playing devil's advocate here, but most harmonizing (vocals and guitar) in Metal songs isn't that impressive. It might be hard to play/sing, but musical theory gives a cheatsheet of what will sound good harmonized. Take Kirk Hammett for example - he's got some finger speed but most of his solos (especially his improv live stuff) is just running up and down scales. There's more 'art' in playing something simpler that doesn't directly conform to music theory. Doesn't mean the technical stuff can't sound good though.

harm dealer: Playing devil's advocate here, but most harmonizing (vocals and guitar) in Metal songs isn't that impressive. It might be hard to play/sing, but musical theory gives a cheatsheet of what will sound good harmonized. Take Kirk Hammett for example - he's got some finger speed but most of his solos (especially his improv live stuff) is just running up and down scales. There's more 'art' in playing something simpler that doesn't directly conform to music theory. Doesn't mean the technical stuff can't sound good though.

Right. I definitely agree less can be more. Those songs have a place. I just don't think they compare to a song that, like I was saying, builds to a huge crescendo that leaves you going "Holy shiat."

lilplatinum: As for Modest Mouse? No clue how their ability lies, but their 4 albums (the two hipsters like and the two the hipsters hate because they became too popular) are all superior to Metallica's various dreck. Is Johnny Marr considered a good guitarist?

Metallica's Master of Puppets is one of if not THE greatest metal albums of all time. Even people that don't usually like metal need to hear it.

Your argument is invalid.

browntimmy: Let's take Iron Maiden. The singer has a crazy powerful voice that allows him to hit notes many singers can't, their guitarists play harmonizing leads that sound like ear candy, their drummer and bassist also occasionaly have cool and interesting parts, they write songs that build to epic crescendos. Now let's take Modest Mouse. Um... I guess you could tap your foot to a few of their songs.

It sounds like shiat, the value of music isn't to the extent to which you can headbang to...

frepnog: Metallica's Master of Puppets is one of if not THE greatest metal albums of all time. Even people that don't usually like metal need to hear it.

And it is an awful album, which kind of reinforces the point that Metal farking sucks. And its not like anyone who grew up in the 80s hasn't heard it...

lilplatinum: frepnog: Metallica's Master of Puppets is one of if not THE greatest metal albums of all time. Even people that don't usually like metal need to hear it.

And it is an awful album, which kind of reinforces the point that Metal farking sucks. And its not like anyone who grew up in the 80s hasn't heard it...

yer funny. i like you.

put Master of Puppets on against damn near ANYTHING else released in the 80's. It destroys pretty much everything and still sounds like it could have been released yesterday. Ah, great metal - the music that doesn't age.

as an aside - as much as I love Iron Maiden, in 1986 they released Somewhere in Time, the album that left many fans scratching their heads. Metallica released Master of Puppets and then began pretty much blowing Ozzy off the stage every night on tour. Ozzy had a hard time following Metallica... on HIS tour...and they were still on the whole considered "unknown".

Madbassist1: browntimmy: Let's take Iron Maiden. The singer has a crazy powerful voice that allows him to hit notes many singers can't, their guitarists play harmonizing leads that sound like ear candy, their drummer and bassist also occasionally have cool and interesting parts, they write songs that build to epic crescendos. Now let's take Modest Mouse. Um... I guess you could tap your foot to a few of their songs.

[WTF am I reading?.jpg]

Also Somewhere in Time was maidens last good album, not the headscratcher. That's 'Seventh Son'

Not really. Somewhere was the first Maiden album to have synth. Tons of fans didn't like it at the time and it was their first disappointing album. Hell, they canned ALL of Bruce's ideas for the album. Seventh Son... they just went overboard with synth and finally just turned people off.

Madbassist1: frepnog: Not really. Somewhere was the first Maiden album to have synth. Tons of fans didn't like it at the time and it was their first disappointing album. Hell, they canned ALL of Bruce's ideas for the album. Seventh Son... they just went overboard with synth and finally just turned people off.

Yes. Really. Also, it holds up. I still listen to it.

My opinion is the correct one.

;)

lol. dont get me wrong. I love the album. But it IS in fact the first one with synth, and it is the first one that fans really were like "WHAT IS THIS I DONT EVEN". Great cover, great songs, but they needed to not use synth. At least yet. In 86 fans weren't ready.

lilplatinum:
It sounds like shiat, the value of music isn't to the extent to which you can headbang to...

The value of music is whatever the listener decides it is. For some, it's how heavy it is. For others, whether it makes them feel like dancing. And for others, it's how Pitchfork-approved their iTunes collection is.

kab: lilplatinum:
It sounds like shiat, the value of music isn't to the extent to which you can headbang to...

The value of music is whatever the listener decides it is. For some, it's how heavy it is. For others, whether it makes them feel like dancing. And for others, it's how Pitchfork-approved their iTunes collection is.

kab: lilplatinum:
It sounds like shiat, the value of music isn't to the extent to which you can headbang to...

The value of music is whatever the listener decides it is. For some, it's how heavy it is. For others, whether it makes them feel like dancing. And for others, it's how Pitchfork-approved their iTunes collection is.



WELL ISN'T THAT SPECIAL?

lilplatinum: browntimmy: Let's take Iron Maiden. The singer has a crazy powerful voice that allows him to hit notes many singers can't, their guitarists play harmonizing leads that sound like ear candy, their drummer and bassist also occasionaly have cool and interesting parts, they write songs that build to epic crescendos. Now let's take Modest Mouse. Um... I guess you could tap your foot to a few of their songs.

It sounds like shiat, the value of music isn't to the extent to which you can headbang to...

I don't see anything about heaviness or headbanging in my post. I guess arguing is a lot simpler when you just pull stuff out of our ass.

elev8meL8r: Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired: In all fairness The Black Album had some REALLY great songs on it. It's just too bad that those songs weren't the ones released as singles. With the exception of My Friend of Misery, which I consider to be Metallica's last GREAT song.

Strange that you would mention that. Or maybe coincidental is a better word.

On any given summer afternoon 20 years ago, I probably listened to the "black album" twice. But I'm pretty sure I haven't heard it start to finish twice in the past ten years.

For all the biatching here about Metallica's transgressions - some of which I agree with, others I can't bring myself to care about - mostly what this thread makes me want to do is listen to the black album. And it was "My Friend of Misery" that came to mind immediately.

That's because it's a great song. Far too few people give it the props it deserves.

frepnog: put Master of Puppets on against damn near ANYTHING else released in the 80's.

Well considering the music released in the 80s, that isn't exactly saying a lot.

browntimmy: I don't see anything about heaviness or headbanging in my post. I guess arguing is a lot simpler when you just pull stuff out of our ass.

Your reference about only being able to tap a foot to a few songs seems to imply that you value music on your ability to move around with it, being metal I just brought that to its logical conclusion in a snarky way..


kab: The value of music is whatever the listener decides it is. For some, it's how heavy it is. For others, whether it makes them feel like dancing. And for others, it's how Pitchfork-approved their iTunes collection is.

People still use iTunes?

Anyways, I don't fundamentally disagree, I just feel like there needs to be a counterpoint to all the douchenozzels who come into any thread that isn't about metal or hip hop and start going "lol hipster" as if that word even has any farking meaning on Fark anymore..

Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired: elev8meL8r: Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired: In all fairness The Black Album had some REALLY great songs on it. It's just too bad that those songs weren't the ones released as singles. With the exception of My Friend of Misery, which I consider to be Metallica's last GREAT song.

Strange that you would mention that. Or maybe coincidental is a better word.

On any given summer afternoon 20 years ago, I probably listened to the "black album" twice. But I'm pretty sure I haven't heard it start to finish twice in the past ten years.

For all the biatching here about Metallica's transgressions - some of which I agree with, others I can't bring myself to care about - mostly what this thread makes me want to do is listen to the black album. And it was "My Friend of Misery" that came to mind immediately.

That's because it's a great song. Far too few people give it the props it deserves.

"The Black Album" Should have been called "Metal for the Masses".
Which, at the time, was not a bad thing.

lilplatinum: frepnog: put Master of Puppets on against damn near ANYTHING else released in the 80's.

Well considering the music released in the 80s, that isn't exactly saying a lot. (To a degree, you are correct. However, some of the best metal ever made was released in the 80's - Slayer's Reign in Blood, Megadeth's Peace Sells, Anthrax's Among the Living, and of course Metallica's best records. That does say a bit about metal... that there has been nothing released in the last 20 years that is better than those records.)

browntimmy: I don't see anything about heaviness or headbanging in my post. I guess arguing is a lot simpler when you just pull stuff out of our ass.

Your reference about only being able to tap a foot to a few songs seems to imply that you value music on your ability to move around with it, being metal I just brought that to its logical conclusion in a snarky way..


kab: The value of music is whatever the listener decides it is. For some, it's how heavy it is. For others, whether it makes them feel like dancing. And for others, it's how Pitchfork-approved their iTunes collection is.

People still use iTunes? (well, of course. it IS the most popular music service and it IS the best jukebox type software you can use.)

Anyways, I don't fundamentally disagree, I just feel like there needs to be a counterpoint to all the douchenozzels who come into any thread that isn't about metal or hip hop and start going "lol hipster" as if that word even has any farking meaning on Fark anymore..