Fando said:
Dave may disagree, we haven't heard from him yet
Everybody seems to be getting along just fine without me.
Cheiron said:
The difference; however, between now and the 80s, and the prior metal crash, is the Internet.
I will admit that this a wild card of sorts and it will in all likelihood lessen the blow that is coming on down the line, but what I find interesting at this point are how things even at this level are being narrowed and constricted in certain channels that are part of the corporate and commercial music industry edifice.
It is a general and neutral thing at this point and I really dont have anywhere substantive to go with it at the current point but I think that it is not 5,000 miles off the mark to say that the Internet is being replaced with MySpace as far as it goes for a lot of new bands out there. That is certainly the end goal of the News Corporation.
It is somewhat of a neutral site now in the larger scheme of things, and a free implement without any strings attached to be used by bands, but plugged-in people who write for technological webzines that are way beyond my ken when it comes to these matters were openly stating that one of the primary reasons Rupert Murdoch purchased MySpace was to create a challenger to iTunes. And the MySpace music store is currently in development and all that hardware where bands post songs for free may not be free in the future and a lot of bands are just going to entirely skip releasing anything and be selling it through Murdochs company music store to people paying money that MySpace will be siphoning off and doing lord knows what with.
Like I said, I dont have anywhere to go with this and havent really gone at it in a systematic fashion, so cant comment on it at length, but it is something to be aware of.
Fando said:
more consumptive (read: simplistic) brand of metal that appeals to more people because it is less challenging and ordinary. It's a valid thing to look into, no matter what some idiot fanboy may cry back.
As has already been said, assessing the artistic validity of these bands is tangential to the article and not really something I care to engage in when I am writing in this mode. I could write up the most eloquent and effusive explanation of why these bands dont appeal to me, should not appeal to others, and why they are appealing to so many people--and I will not have changed one persons mind about the sound of a particular band. To say that something is simple therefore it is popular is also not something which holds trueespecially in metal. There are scads of bands out there playing a simple musical style or sound that have no hope in hell or chance to become popular for a whole host of reasons (lyrics, imagery, musically etc.).
People are going to walk in with whatever baggage they have on that front and walk out with it no matter what critical points I have to make. I just hope that they have something else in their suitcase to think about as they head off for wherever they are going.
Fando said:
I don't know about the print zine but the website suffers from not getting the word out on bands that are worthy or integral besides the occasional review/interview. The thread where people were complaining about complaining about demos was a prime example
You need to subscribe and read the next issue.
Fando said:
Third, like he isn't already seen as a grumpy old man after the hipster piece?
True. But some would not put it quite that mildly.
I made a conscious effort to be as temperate, even-handed and objective here as possible so that accounts for some of the points related to this statement, but it was probably a wasted effort for the most part.
Speaking of which
Zealotry said:
Amazing. It's almost as if bands are being hated on for being successful, and that's it.
If that is what you walked away with, then I just need to stop typing under this quote right about
.now.
Professor Black said:
The intended audience for a piece like this is NOT the choir that rehearses on this message board.
Exactly.