The what's going on in Thrash thread

I saw an episode of Mythbusters last night, one of the ones with the new crew who are fucking stupid and braindead, where they tested the myth about heavy music making you more likely to road rage. I couldn't hear the music properly so not sure what "thrash" they were playing but geez it was funny. Subjecting two guys with obvious problems, a middle aged lady and an 80 year old lady to road conditions that were not even likely and playing two different forms of music to see which got them angrier. The hosts were making complete idiots of themselves whenever thrash metal was mentioned and spent the entire segment talking about how aggressive music has to make people angry. Then the conclusion was that you're only likely to get angrier with metal if you already are angry and someone irritates you.

At least the original Mythbusters were both smart and entertaining, these new idiots (who have been around a few years now) are about as funny as sticking your tongue in a fan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redfly
I saw an episode of Mythbusters last night, one of the ones with the new crew who are fucking stupid and braindead, where they tested the myth about heavy music making you more likely to road rage. I couldn't hear the music properly so not sure what "thrash" they were playing but geez it was funny. Subjecting two guys with obvious problems, a middle aged lady and an 80 year old lady to road conditions that were not even likely and playing two different forms of music to see which got them angrier. The hosts were making complete idiots of themselves whenever thrash metal was mentioned and spent the entire segment talking about how aggressive music has to make people angry. Then the conclusion was that you're only likely to get angrier with metal if you already are angry and someone irritates you.

At least the original Mythbusters were both smart and entertaining, these new idiots (who have been around a few years now) are about as funny as sticking your tongue in a fan.
I liked a minute ago when I didn't know about any of that. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slammed
The numbers for streaming are fucking phenomenal.
I was reading today that Vivendi, Sony Corp, and Warner Music Group makes about $22.9 million per day from the services.
I don't see this as all bad though. Labels have always taken a large slice of the pie when it comes to revenue. Make the pie bigger and the percentage stays the same but the piece gets bigger. I understand wanting to be paid more for a song but with these streaming services it's pretty much money the bands wouldn't have at all. When piracy was at all time highs people weren't paying anything for music. Piracy is still easy yet people are choosing to pay for streams and many of those streams are paid for more than once because the streaming service pays the labels each time the song gets streamed. Sure that fee could be larger but it's larger than the nothing the bands and labels were getting. With time the money they pay the labels might go up but when you have a label taking 70% of everything you earn I see the bigger problem being greedy labels rather than paid streaming services.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redfly and Neptune
Seems we could have another reason for the delay with Anthrax recording. I either didn't know, or forgot Scott was playing with Mr. Bungle the last few months. Apparently now it appears he's recording with Mr. Bungle. Pictures on instagram from Mr. Bungle show a studio desk with Scott's name on one of the channels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redfly and Neptune
The numbers for streaming are fucking phenomenal.
I was reading today that Vivendi, Sony Corp, and Warner Music Group makes about $22.9 million per day from the services.
I don't see this as all bad though. Labels have always taken a large slice of the pie when it comes to revenue. Make the pie bigger and the percentage stays the same but the piece gets bigger. I understand wanting to be paid more for a song but with these streaming services it's pretty much money the bands wouldn't have at all. When piracy was at all time highs people weren't paying anything for music. Piracy is still easy yet people are choosing to pay for streams and many of those streams are paid for more than once because the streaming service pays the labels each time the song gets streamed. Sure that fee could be larger but it's larger than the nothing the bands and labels were getting. With time the money they pay the labels might go up but when you have a label taking 70% of everything you earn I see the bigger problem being greedy labels rather than paid streaming services.
I guess that’s the one thing that will never change............GREED!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slammed
Yeah well if you take into account that labels have always been greedy it's not surprising. I'd imagine as new deals get signed and artists representation gets better the per song streams value will go up. But when a label wants 70% or more of recorded music it's never going to be the bulk of a band's income.

Still it's better than in the 60's where bands like CCR etc singed away complete rights just to get a record deal. Then found out years later they didn't even own the rights to their songs. I know John Fogerty wasn't allowed to play many of his classic hits from the CCR days as a solo artist until the 90's because of such deals.
 
To be fair to them they do out lay a lot of money. It costs a lot of money to put a band in the studio, essentially it's an advance to say "we believe in you enough to give you a pay cheque to create something we can sell". A weekly pay cheque for the band and all it's members, including techs etc. A pay cheque for the engineers and producers. and then ad to that all the publicity a label makes and the cost of making something is very high and the label wants to make all that back with interest. Obviously the idea is to sell enough to make more than they out layed but realistically it's not that much to every other industry that outlays a sum of money for a product before it's created..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neptune