I get sick of people.....

there are some ep's that you pay like $8 the most. What I don't like is to see some albums for $20 and more, I just can't afford it. Last time I wanted to get a Jason Becker album but I costed $20.

What about buying cd's used? I do buy cd's used on a local store, and ebay. I think it is not so good either. I think you are not supporting the band directly. I saw a mortification cd before, and didn't buy it because I rather get it new to support the band. But I do have almost all of whitestake albums from that place used.

I think its okay if you download a album and if you like it you buy it and if you dont, just erase it. Before in a record shop, if you asked the seller to play the cd for you, you only bought it if you liked it. Shame not everybody download and buy when they like it.

troublezone wrote:

Metallica are greedy bastards!!! This is what i'm talking about in my post above regarding those rich a##hole's.

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=94291

With all due respect, I never in my life thought that anyone on this board would be so trendy and cliche' - That post shows that you are no different than the hordes of trendy Hot-Topic kids who have jumped on the "I hate Metallica" bandwagon - How the hell would you know what Metallica think of their fans? If you ask me, Metallica are probably one of the bands in the world that love and appreciate their fans the most - Why is it that ever since Cliff died, and Metallica released the "Black Album", people like you trash Metallica for being greedy and not care about the music at all, when all they did was accept musical differences in the band, and let Kirk and Lars experiment with something new? Sure Bob Rock had his influence, but if they really did not give a damn about the music, why didn't they just copy the succesful formula of the "Black Album"? - BECAUSE they DO care about the music, and they do it because they LOVE playing it - Metallica love their fans, and, especially James Hetfield, would not have gone through life very well, had they not had music.

Mglaffas81 wrote:

troublezone wrote:

Metallica are greedy bastards!!! This is what i'm talking about in my post above regarding those rich a##hole's.

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=94291

With all due respect, I never in my life thought that anyone on this board would be so trendy and cliche' - That post shows that you are no different than the hordes of trendy Hot-Topic kids who have jumped on the "I hate Metallica" bandwagon - How the hell would you know what Metallica think of their fans? If you ask me, Metallica are probably one of the bands in the world that love and appreciate their fans the most - Why is it that ever since Cliff died, and Metallica released the "Black Album", people like you trash Metallica for being greedy and not care about the music at all, when all they did was accept musical differences in the band, and let Kirk and Lars experiment with something new? Sure Bob Rock had his influence, but if they really did not give a damn about the music, why didn't they just copy the succesful formula of the "Black Album"? - BECAUSE they DO care about the music, and they do it because they LOVE playing it - Metallica love their fans, and, especially James Hetfield, would not have gone through life very well, had they not had music.

I think part of the reason people like to rag on Metallica and call them greedy has nothing to do with Cliff, the black album, etc. etc. However, the law suits that involved the band, fans and MP# downloading really turned a lot of people off to them. I myself and still a huge Metallica fan, but I understand where the sentiment is coming from. You can get a good idea of this sentiment from here: http://myspot.neteze.com/%7Espace/cds/metallic.htm

METALLICA was never against their fans, they were agains NAPSTER. A real METALLICA fan buy their cd´s anyway in my opinion but then, if they think that, why were they against NAPSTER????

krokus wrote:

METALLICA was never against their fans, they were agains NAPSTER. A real METALLICA fan buy their cd´s anyway in my opinion but then, if they think that, why were they against NAPSTER????

Didn't say I agreed with the sentiment. I'm just presenting the reasons why some fans started feeling the way they did. Here is one portion of a paragraph from the page I linked:

Quote :

...Not only did Metallica sue Napster plus three universities
for "illegally" distributing their music (which Lars referred to as a "commodity", what a joke)
but they then committed the unconscionable act of identifying 335,000+ INDIVIDUALS who had
distributed Metallica mp3s! Needless to say, Napster immediately cancelled those accounts,
which I can't blame *them* for, because lawsuits are a smurfing smurfette to deal with...my point
is, Metallica, once a bastion of individuality and non-conformism, has now turned against
their VERY FANS...

ultmetal wrote:

krokus wrote:

METALLICA was never against their fans, they were agains NAPSTER. A real METALLICA fan buy their cd´s anyway in my opinion but then, if they think that, why were they against NAPSTER????

Didn't say I agreed with the sentiment. I'm just presenting the reasons why some fans started feeling the way they did. Here is one portion of a paragraph from the page I linked:

i KNOW, i know, i was just saying something about it

TrogDawn wrote:

Quote :

I get sick of people.....

So do I...particularly in threads like this.

Stender wrote:

I hate downloaders. Straight up, I remember ult saying on his nolifetilmetal once that he spends a lot of money on his collection, and you should too. The only times I ever put music on my computer is samples off blastbeats or something like that to see if I like a bands style. I also always go for originals over re-issues. I dont lend out or burn my CD's for friends. The only times I will ever want to get a CDR is if I looking for a demo thats impossible to get an original of.

I do download and I still spend a lot of money of my collection The fact is, that I've discovered many bands via downloading (or tape/CD-R trading in the past), and I would've never (or maybe in 10 years, by a mistake) buy some albums if I wasn't that amazed with mp3s. However, I never was one of the "die hard" downloaders, but back in the day I didn't have many albums to listen to so it was fun I have almost completely stopped now - I download just when I want to hear something really, really bad, or in cases when I bought an album on vinyl, but would love to listen to it on my mp3 player.

As for supporting metal scene goes, I think I do my part perfectly good by buying original CDs, merchandise and visiting the concerts.

About Metallica: They paid back to all those mean dowloaders when they released St. Anger, because it was so bad that people even felt sorry for downloading it, as it was complete waste of downloading time

ultmetal wrote:

TrogDawn wrote:

Quote :

I get sick of people.....

So do I...particularly in threads like this.

Count me in, brother.

iTunes is now the #1 Music Retailer in the country.

Creative Commons Licensing for music (look it up) is the future.

"Ringtone Music" will always exist, and iTunes will make a mint off of it. It will also become "free" with the purchase of other goods.

Underground music (like Metal) will surrive in the future with "pay what you will" downloads and limited edition CD releases (for the die-hards) in small quanities.

Mark my words...I am a psychic.

I'm with you Krokus: I am 100% against music downloading. I see people's point about sampling music before purchasing albums, but with cd sites (which give 30-40 second snippets), Myspace, youtube, radio, and the ever-present music video (granted many most obscure bands don't enjoy this type of exposure), is it really necessary to download music appetizers?

I think that music downloaders don't realize just what they're doing. Financial losses aside, there are major consequences to music creativity, the art of it ("art?", they say). It wouldn't be such a big deal if downloads were limited to whole albums, but since users can pick and choose songs, the album, as we know it, has become irrelevant; now that songs can be put up for quick download, (many) record labels are pressuring their artists into quickly dishing out tunes that are likely to yield easy return (Metallica or Megadeth fans know this all too well). The thing is, the lack of time being put into the music has diminished the quality of the industry. If you listen to a modern radio station, the bands are becoming harder to differentiate from each other. This is especially true of modern rock stations. The album then becomes more of a collection of songs than a piece of focussed effort that reflects the artist. Also, without the tangible elements that have always been part of music (artwork, inserts with pictures and lyrics, not to mention the actual phyiscal presence of the album in your hand), the music is being stripped of its context and aesthetique. How many people, aside from devoted music enthusiasts, sit down to listen to an entire album? The world has become far too fast-paced. It's all about on-the-go.

Music is becoming more of a short-term service than a long-term artform.

Quote :

Music is becoming more of a short-term service than a long-term artform.

The people that make music as art will always do it. Art cannot be killed. Artists will find a way to get their art out to people.

Your quote has more to do with what I call "Ringtone Music" than real artistic output.

Quote :

Music is becoming more of a short-term service than a long-term artform.

That's nothing new though. Think of all the novelty records, one-hit wonders, and long-dead musical fads (Disco! The Macarena!) that have come and gone over the years. To the big corporate labels that have controlled most of the music biz for decades, the word "music" has always equalled "product," not "art."

Fat Freddy wrote:

Quote :

Music is becoming more of a short-term service than a long-term artform.

That's nothing new though. Think of all the novelty records, one-hit wonders, and long-dead musical fads (Disco! The Macarena!) that have come and gone over the years. To the big corporate labels that have controlled most of the music biz for decades, the word "music" has always equalled "product," not "art."

Exactly...they may as well be selling keychains as far as they're concerned.

That's why I say that art cannot be killed. Metal & other underground music has continued to live in spite of major label product being spewed to the dumbed down masses.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Metal & other underground music has continued to live in spite of major label product being spewed to the dumbed down masses.

Preach it brotha!!

Fat Freddy wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Metal & other underground music has continued to live in spite of major label product being spewed to the dumbed down masses.

Preach it brotha!!

CANNAH GETTAH AY-MAYUN-AHHH!!!!

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Fat Freddy wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Metal & other underground music has continued to live in spite of major label product being spewed to the dumbed down masses.

Preach it brotha!!

CANNAH GETTAH AY-MAYUN-AHHH!!!!

CAN AH GIT A HALLAY-LOO-YUH?

CAN AH GIT A JALAPENO?

DallasBlack wrote:

(i.e. an Iron Maiden cover of Bohemien Rhapsody).

wat?

AchrisK wrote:

DallasBlack wrote:

(i.e. an Iron Maiden cover of Bohemien Rhapsody).

wat?

It was a strange piece for Maiden to be doing for sure. I can't find it anymore but I really didn't give it too many listens (If I remember, it wasn't that impressive-Bruce and Freddy are too different).

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Fat Freddy wrote:

Quote :

Music is becoming more of a short-term service than a long-term artform.

That's nothing new though. Think of all the novelty records, one-hit wonders, and long-dead musical fads (Disco! The Macarena!) that have come and gone over the years. To the big corporate labels that have controlled most of the music biz for decades, the word "music" has always equalled "product," not "art."

Exactly...they may as well be selling keychains as far as they're concerned.

That's why I say that art cannot be killed. Metal & other underground music has continued to live in spite of major label product being spewed to the dumbed down masses.

I'm not saying that isn't true, but what's happening is it's (artisticly lacking radio friendly music) becoming much more prevalent in the music industry. There will always be artists who stay true to themselves. However, more and more are finding themselves ceding to the suits so that they can make a buck. Not to dwell on it, but, didn't Metallica, perhaps the most innovative metal band of 80s, claim they would never make an MTV video? How about Zeppelin, the masters of rock art: after decades of refusing to license their catalogue for marketing purposes, they allowed a car company to use one of their songs.

Keep in mind that a lot of groups get into the business for fame and fortune; it's pretty difficult to attain that on an underground level. And, so, they branch out to the internet for exposure.

get_the_firehouse wrote:

However, more and more are finding themselves ceding to the suits so that they can make a buck.

get_the_firehouse wrote:

Keep in mind that a lot of groups get into the business for fame and fortune

And therein lies the problem.

Metallica's biggest problem is not suiing its own fans - its putting out lousy music.

I agree that people who distribute stuff without the bands/labels ok should be sued. I think if you work hard (and we can debate that later in metallicas case) you should be able to earn money off what you make if people like it enough to consume it.

Alex

ART OR DIE!!!!