Whatever happened to Trivium

It's not important though.

One of the primary rules of marketing is that you don't target everybody. You have a specific target that you market to. You're not going to please everyone, so why waste time trying?

Not to speak for them, but true metallers probably aren't Trivium's target. If some of the trve kvlt guys like em, cool. But that's not who they're marketing towards. You aren't in Trivium's target market. So no, it really doesn't matter.
 
Nobody's getting visibly worked up aside from you, dude.

I mean, I already said I don't even like Trivium.

This is no different from you going on and on in a 600+ post thread about a band you've never even heard before.
 
Cool, then if that is the case, why are you guys getting so worked up over it?

music-notes-tissue-box.jpg
 
they're not "true Metal"


I've seen this many times on this forum from many people and I still don't get what this is let alone why it matters.

It's music. Do we need to be such snobs that we care about only bands with certain origins and intentions? Does any of that matter if you like the music? Should it?

Edit:
Just for clarification, the quote was taken out of context. It was just a good sample quote of this recurring comment.
 
And for further clarification, I wasn't making that statement, I was just stating the views of others. I, for one, like Trivium.

Yep I know you weren't. I was trying to add a disclaimer to my post to that effect.

Funny. I actually like them too. They were fun live when I saw them though I was there more for Protest the Hero (The Sword was also on the bill).
 
How is that any different from any other professionally done promo photo? It's a promo shoot. Labels give them money for clothes and makeup. That's what they're SUPPOSED TO DO.

I mean is Trivium really the first band in the world to get new clothes for a photo session?

I, for one, can no longer fit into my 1986 Black Flag t-shirt.

I blame British Ale and discovering that women dig guys who can cook.

And maybe Matt has spent all of his time listening to MCR's latest album, so he really isn't motivated to do any original stuff. Just a thought.

God, that cover was REALLY bad, wasn't it?
 
That's understandable. I know I can't fit into my 1988 Voivod, Anthrax, Exodus, or Slayer shirts, my 1988 7 Seconds shirt or my 1990 Poison Idea shirt, though I wish I could!

At least my 7 year old son looks pretty tough wearing the concert shirts that have survived the ravages of time.

Not too many kids in his class have a 1983 "Born in the USA" tour shirt.
 
I've seen this many times on this forum from many people and I still don't get what this is let alone why it matters.

It's music. Do we need to be such snobs that we care about only bands with certain origins and intentions? Does any of that matter if you like the music? Should it?

Edit:
Just for clarification, the quote was taken out of context. It was just a good sample quote of this recurring comment.

The better question, is that why does it matter if a band isn't true metal? Why do you have to take that to offense? Closet metal nerd-elitism perhaps? :lol:

I use the phrase "true metal" all the time. I also listen to more non-metal than I do metal. Something not being true metal doesn't have to have a negative connotation.