Royal Carnage March Madness - Round 2 (Votes Needed)

Status
Not open for further replies.
JayKeeley said:
First of all, here I am on Wednesday morning at 9:04am wondering whether people realize that I was joking about the Enslaved thing. I would have thought the 49%-51% thing and the granny underwear comment might have been enough, but oh well, back to the drawing board...
I think the fact that you were joking was pretty obvious.

JayKeeley said:
Then let me ask you this: why do Black Sabbath have 20 votes?
Because some people have bad taste in music? Seriously, I would assume that some folks base their votes on different parameters. I also think where Sabbath are legends, Megadeth is merely an elder statemen.

Zod
 
Erik said:
So is Megadeth actually supposed to be good or something? 'Cause I bought Peace Sells yesterday and I sure as hell don't hear it yet
I really don't understand how a self-proclaimed Thrash Metal Terrorist can dislike 'deth, but there's a lot of things on this earth I don't understand.
General Zod said:
I think it comes down to what gauge you use to determine this. For instance, who's the better band, Metallica or Hammers of Misfortune? If we simply take each band's top 4 dics, it's Metallica hands down. If we look at their last two CDs, it's HoM.
No matter the guage, Hammers is better. Why? Because Metallica peaked with a 9/10 album (or two, maybe 3), and Hammers have a Bonafide Masterpiece on their hands. :)
 
One Inch Man said:
No matter the guage, Hammers is better. Why? Because Metallica peaked with a 9/10 album (or two, maybe 3), and Hammers have a Bonafide Masterpiece on their hands. :)
Completely disagree.
"Ride the Lightning" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything by HoM
"Master of Puppets" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything by HoM

Sorry JK.

Zod
 
General Zod said:
Because some people have bad taste in music? Seriously, I would assume that some folks base their votes on different parameters. I also think where Sabbath are legends, Megadeth is merely an elder statemen.

Which would make Enslaved a toothless crack whore. :loco:

Joking aside, *cough*, you pretty much summed it up. Since subjectivity is lame (opinions are no fun when they can't offer debate), it's those same 'parameters' that I thought would have made sense for all voting. It just seems like the natural thing to do. People look to Black Sabbath and they [probably] vote based on the Ozzy years (and dismiss everything thereafter). I look at Megadeth and vote for their first 4 to 5 albums, and maybe their latest release (and dismiss the 2 or 3 shit albums in between).

It's a law of averages, right? Am I the only one who used that parameter? Maybe so, who knows.

Nevertheless, how else would it work? We would sum up a band's existence based on their latest release only? That makes no sense to me whatsoever. That means BAND X can release 9 shitty albums, only to make their 10th release a masterpiece, and we suddenly forgive them for the 9 pieces of crap?

Likewise, BAND Y releases 9 masterpieces, and the 10th release is shit, and all 9 good albums are suddenly dismissed from memory?

EEEEIRWDS.
 
Hm, that's a pretty interesting post, truth be told I've never considered how I actually rate a band. I think it's generally very hard to compare two artists; I like both Empyrium and Amon Amarth a lot, though on very different levels. Obviously when I'm in the mood for band X I will enjoy that one more than Y, and with moods switching there's really no firm ground for an absolute verdict to be found. I think hearing really good music is too much of an experience to be possible to compare properly, it's the same as trying to decide which of your two favourite pass-times you like the most.

But comparing two band that are just 'good' is thougher; I think I actually based my above choices on simply the moment's gut feeling, like I said previously. What does that make me? Whimsical? Perhaps. A romantic? Probably :D
 
JayKeeley said:
Which would make Enslaved a toothless crack whore. :loco:
LOL.

JayKeeley said:
Since subjectivity is lame (opinions are no fun when they can't offer debate), it's those same 'parameters' that I thought would have made sense for all voting.
Let me ask you this, say next year in Round 1, is a band that has released an absolutely mind-boggling debut. They're matched up against Sabbath. Who wins? Sabbath? Say the same thing happens, year after year, if we're all STILL posting here when we're 60. Are we still voting for Sabbath? When does it end?

The thread on the PM:X board, that I mentioned inspired this thread, is beginning to become a flame war, as the same people vote for Dream Theater year after year, after year, after year, etc.

I look at it from the perspective of who's the better band now. Out of the two bands, which band's last disc did I enjoy most, and which band's next disc am I most looking forward to?

JayKeeley said:
It just seems like the natural thing to do. People look to Black Sabbath and they [probably] vote based on the Ozzy years (and dismiss everything thereafter).
I know it's heresy, but I don't like Sabbath. I can't say there's a single song by Sabbath, that I care if I ever hear again.

Zod
 
Next year? Fuck that. We should start up a new "tournament" with 64 other bands that weren't used when the first one ends.

These threads have sparked great non-argumentative debate.
 
General Zod said:
Let me ask you this, say next year in Round 1, is a band that has released an absolutely mind-boggling debut. They're matched up against Sabbath. Who wins? Sabbath? Say the same thing happens, year after year, if we're all STILL posting here when we're 60. Are we still voting for Sabbath? When does it end?

That's a damn good question. I really don't know how to answer it without feeling like it's a cop out answer. Here's two ideas:

(a) you just go with gut feel (as spaffe alluded to earlier). If your gut feel tells you that new band > old band (even though new band has lacking discography), then go with the new band.

(b) apply simple math. For example, the Sabbath v Maiden match up is awesome. Why? They have roughly the same number of great albums in their catalog (at least, *most* people would recognize that).

Age means nothing to me (except when it comes to women). If Band X has 10 great albums that were released between 1970-2004, and Band Y has 10 equally great albums that were released between 1995-2004, then the match up would still be awesome.

The thread on the PM:X board, that I mentioned inspired this thread, is beginning to become a flame war, as the same people vote for Dream Theater year after year, after year, after year, etc.

Yeah, we don't get many flame wars on RC all things considered. We provoke and tease, but otherwise life is good.

I look at it from the perspective of who's the better band now. Out of the two bands, which band's last disc did I enjoy most, and which band's next disc am I most looking forward to?

Yeah that still sounds deranged to me because I'm sticking with the law of averages. :tickled:

I know it's heresy, but I don't like Sabbath. I can't say there's a single song by Sabbath, that I care if I ever hear again.

Hey, I don't give a shit, I'm routing for Maiden. :loco: :kickass:
 
JayKeeley said:
Wow. Regardless of how old it is [which obviously has no bearing], I'm quite astounded that you don't recognize the genius of "Wake up Dead", "Peace Sells", "Devil's Island", "Good Mourning/Black Friday"...considering your general tastes. 'Tis rather odd. It's songs like those that turned them into a headline act.
You know... It just never seems to get going. Plenty of riff salad but right when I think OH RIGHT HERE COMES THE VERSE they just decide to add the 56th break of the song and descend into some stupid noodling around. I realize I might very well have to print out these words and eat them after a few more listens, but it might just be that I like my thrash thrashing, my power chords played with power and my long hair straight. :loco: I've enjoyed previous MP3's of "Holy Wars... The Punishment Due" and "Hangar 18" (TEH MTV HIT) though.
 
J. said:
Next year? Fuck that. We should start up a new "tournament" with 64 other bands that weren't used when the first one ends.

These threads have sparked great non-argumentative debate.

J - you should start a thread where people can start listing bands that didn't appear in this tournament.

There should be a simple rule though -- at minimum, people should provide bands that most people have heard. In other words, leave Obsucrity out of it.
 
(a) you just go with gut feel (as spaffe alluded to earlier). If your gut feel tells you that new band > old band (even though new band has lacking discography), then go with the new band.
Which is why I voted Drudkh over King Diamond and Mercyful Fate
 
While I have 150% been enjoying these threads (awww heck, I missed you guys! well, some of you), there's one thing that has boggled my proverbial mind:

It seems as if some of you put SO MUCH THOUGHT into how to measure a band's worth, i.e. law of averages, most recent release, etc.

Fuck it! Isn't it just which band you LIKE more? I don't know, maybe I'm getting dumber in my old age.

Also, NAD still sucks at liking music. That is all.
 
yeah, I don't even really think about it much. I simply look at the two band names and pretty much know which one I like more almost immediately.
 
J. said:
yeah, I don't even really think about it much. I simply look at the two band names and pretty much know which one I like more almost immediately.

Exactamundo. The only time I struggle is if I like both bands, i.e. Megadeth vs. Enslaved or Graveland vs. Primordial.
 
Bracket 1
Iron Maiden
Ulver
Isis
Agalloch

Bracket 2
Burzum
Graveland
Dimmu Borgir
My Dying Bride

Bracket 3
Carcass
Novembre
Enslaved
Drudkh

Bracket 4
Opeth
Death
Immortal
At the Gates
 
Status
Not open for further replies.