And you see nothing absolutely immature about that statement? It is possible for people to like Clayman, you know. Like me, I honestly enjoyed Clayman and I think In Flames are awsome. I suppose that makes me a poser akin to new Metallica fans, huh?
how can you say that In Flames stuff is really that different from their old stuff?? If by different, you mean better production... but I forgot... the popular belief on this board is that better production=less talent
Originally posted by Trapped
Fuck you, in the ear. TWICE.
Originally posted by Trapped
Fuck you, in the ear. TWICE.
Dude, i have worked in a recording studio as an engineer for over three years, so i think i'd know a bit more than you about 'better production', and i would say that Whoracle has a much more fitting production for in flames. When have I EVER said that "better production=less talent" huh? Dipshit.
Are you deaf you little motherfucker??I even went as far as to POST some of the 'changes' in In Flames music, and you still defend them with your life. I don't care if you like them, that's good for you mate, but when you say stupid things like 'In Flames new stuff is no different to the old stuff', I just want to ram your own cock down your throat...
there has been a lot of bitching nowadays about bands getting worse over the years: metallica, in flames, dark T, katatonia and even opeth
however, there is rarely anyone focusing on bands which have improved over the years...i know that Trapped is going to say something about Death's progression to have been awesome...so why don't we all stop this negative attitude and concentrate on bands which are getting better over time
Originally posted by Trapped
I wasn't attacking you belial, i respect the fact that you enjoy In Flames. I was simply defending MYSELF after i was unjustly used as a reference point. Generally, i agree with and i'm on your side, so i won't destroy you over this post.
and yes, I am one of those people that think BWP is sub-standard for OPETH after Still Life...!