I love posts like these. They explore my kind of music theory.
Ok.
Do you think "samples of songs" gives you any real basis to form an opinion? Beyond general style of the band, I mean.
By sample I mean some or most of the tracks from a particular album. I've seen a bunch of different youtube live songs performed, seen several official music videos from them, and have heard much or most of their album...but I say sample because I have not heard all of their album(s). So I was perhaps understating it, but if anyone took me to task I could always clarify.
Explain in more detail the relationship between A and B as you see it, please.
Ok. I was going from the previous comment made that was talking about how it doesn't matter really where a metal band goes, it's a lose lose situation.
They must be good, or great enough for metal bands to consider worthy to listen to, of course have fantastic production quality, YET if they start to make more money than would afford them to make peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, they suddenly find the band is over exposed, too popular, where they then become objects of their disdain.
So the bands must be good, but they really can't be because but if they're too good or too known/exposed, which allows them to have more money to use towards their craft/skills, they're bad. So no matter which way they go, whether they're good or bad, they're eventually considered bad anyway..unless of course they just break up like many prog/power metal bands do, have a major split like many prog/power metal bands do, or something dramatic happens like a major band member death happens, which then immortalizes them making them free from accusation for some reason.. In that case, would they be considered the same band, no, and would the dead member be able to reap any benefits from this/her immortality..no.
People are fickle enough, where whoever is well regarded, or popular, and are exposed LONG ENOUGH they will eventually becomes targets..but I think that happens much more quickly in the metal community no matter how virtuous or virtuosic the person may be.
Oh come on. You need to explain this in far more detail, as the correlation excites me. I want to agree with it. Convince me.
Uh ok. You're being nice so why not. I don't know that I'm going to try to convince you of anything, but I'll share with you a bit of my perspective on it as you requested. I find A-theism, Atheism, or what not to be meaningless at best, contradictory at worst. Nevermind the fake A-theistic position that states a negative towards the word pistis or word belief, that is no where to be found in the conjoined words A and theos, (a lack of BELIEF vs a lack of God) to be contrary to the nature of the word a-theos, against its historical usage, and against the definitions given by the proponents, and by major resources regarding philosophy.
The non fake historically accurate atheistic view is attempting to defend an absolute negative, which is impossible, and ends up implying the truth of what they're trying to deny. To clarify for the sake of space, by contradictory I mean its as contradictory as a square circle, a one ended stick, or a married bachelor. Changing being needs a cause, and to just line up one being that needs a cause, and another, and yet another, can only provide beings that NEED causes, but cannot provide a cause for their existence that they need but cant fullfill themselves. Just like in the case of a broke circle of friends, if all of them need money but none have any, no ones going to get any unless they get it from someone beyond their circle who actually does have it and can give it to them. Likewise if all you have are contingent beings that need to receive their existence from another, but there is no non contingent/independant being, that exists necessarily thus has existence in itself, from which they can get their existence from, none of those contingent beings would get any existence either..the only way for them to get it is to receive it from a being that has it in itself already, and doesn't need to receive it from another..but that would be to imply God exists which they don't want to admit.
Besides, with the issue of an absolute negative, stating there is no God implies omniscience which an atheist also doesn't want to admit exists. Ill leave it at that since this isnt the philosophy forum.
If someone states A and then gets taken aback by B, they're at best a hypocrite, at worst a moron. I would think most people who claim belief A would roll point B off their backs and consider it completely normal behavior.
I dont know if I quite understand what you're saying here. Whether they have tough skin has nothing to do with the fact that A is generally true, particularly if they're influenced by views that state they started off as scum/slime, and are not much different than a senseless beast...If one believes they spontaneously evolved from ooze, and are pretty much an animal, I wouldn't expect them to act any different. You don't find that heavily preached in the blues, country, or classical. Being that the case, I don't see how that provides a good motivation for musicians to produce good material or keep on producing good material if:
1) The particular people they make the music for will most likely, sooner than later, hate them and reject them and their music no matter how good it is
2) Will expect them to keep on producing great work with the least amount of people buying their albums
3) Can generally be a nasty group of unappreciative and overly critical group of people to work with or produce for.
I think theres a lot of cool people in the metal community, but generally you have a sentiment that can effect the communities reaction to a band, perhaps by peer pressure or who knows, where that band will become a target sooner in this community of listeners than in any other group of listeners. I think I could have predicted that with Dragonforce as could have any. If they have strong enough stomachs, are disciplined enough, have a tough enough skin to survive their crowds then cool, but that doesn't take away from the facts of what I've stated..as to how nonsensical and messed up it is. I think we can be more supportive, more pleasant, and more welcoming of new or old talent that is doing good work, even IF they are popular, but aren't compromising very much. Metal WAS popular in the 80s after all wasn't it?
huh. "I will say my piece and then rudely duck from any further conversation." You found the thread without a notification, you can follow up without one.
True, but sometimes I forget which one or ones I went to, if they don't get visited they go under the radar, end up being on the last page out of hundreds, and when I eventually come back to it and find it, I find that it is closed...so I can't respond at that point. I used to be better at doing that but notifications help. I've been doing forums for years (I'm not a teeny bopper anymore), from hostile sites to very hostile ones, to others that are full of relaxed people, and am therefore not trying to duck anything.
Where should they expect to go? What exactly do you think music is for?
All I'm saying is that the music business is tough enough, but in regards to our community, it may not necessarily be harder to get into than others, but I think its much harder to remain in it than others may be, without a strong grounding in what is unchangeable, to secure them under the pressure that comes at them from all sides. One wonders why else many escape with drugs and other substance abuses, without that grounding.
I don't necessarily see how the following question is related but I guess I can answer it. While many may hold that music is for a sort of getting out ones feelings/kinda like an emotional vomit for the masses, while it is expression, I don't think its mainly or only that. Without going into detail, I would contend that music is art in that it is the producing of order external to the mind. There are many purposes one could use it for, the grandest purpose one has for it will define or shape the way they see its usage for other means. Ill leave it at that. Hope that clarifies something a bit more.
