laurjohn2 Show full post »
Deathblooms
psycho_bitch wrote:

didn't like enought bands on the mayhemfest lineup to bother going. and ozzfest skipped wpb so whatever. bring on american carnage!

Skull And Crossbones wrote:

Jayman wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

Yes cause Gayhem fest with a nu metal headliner from the 90s is better.


Glam metal is a huge black eye in metal and everything that can be done should be done to act like it never exsisted. By the looks of some of these shows it looks like those who still like it are starting to get too old to go.


And nu-metal is not? Dude go back to listening to Korn and rock out to wannabe hardcore bands like Atreyu and Norma Jean.


The fact is that a lot of the first nu-metal bands didn't get into metal to get laid and make money like almost all glam metal bands did. Glam metal was based on everything metal should be against. Now I will admit I'm not the biggest fan of the Mayhem lineup but at least it is some what current with the contemprary metal scene. I mean honestly Motley Crue?


So you know what every band's motivation was for starting up?   How about they liked that kind of music and wanted to play it?  I"m not one to call this band and that band a sellout for wanting to make some money, but how can you say nu metal bands did not try to make money?  The whole point of the genre was to have a mainstream form of metal to appeal to a much wider fanbase and to appeal to fans that dont' like metal in the traditional sense.  You don't have to like glam metal, but it's certainly not a black eye on metal.  It was just a different genre of metal that had a completely different fanbase than the heavier type of metal.  And yes the majority of the base is in their 40's now but they are still coming to the shows.  40 or 50 years old is not too old to go to a concert.  I went to the m3 rockfest in MD that had all hair bands with the scorps headlining and they sold the place out with older people and younger people as well, so whether you like it or not, there's still a base for it. 


im gonna have to disagree with some of the things you said here.  1. i have no problem calling metallica sell outs because after they sued napster it was clear to me that money has a lot to do with their motivation of making more music, i dont wanna say money is the only reason, but its a big part of it in my opinion.  don't get me wrong though, i love metallica, its just they what they did was bullshit, cause first off any metal band should be playing metal for the love of the music, not money.  i mean yeah, they need money to keep the band going, but it should be more about the love of the music than making money.  and any metal band should just be happy that people are listening to their music even if they are downloading it for free, but again they do need money to keep the band going, but honestly, metallica is one of, if not THE most succesful metal band out there, do they really need more money?  the other things i disagree with are that i dont think any metal band now a days start playing metal to make money, metal is not mainstream with the exception of bands like metallica, ac/dc and the occasional nu metal band like Korn, Godsmack, or Slipknot.  maybe metal was more mainstream in the mid 80s, but not anymore.  and lastly, i was always under the impression that most metal bands play a certain style because they like the way it sounds, not because its popular.  and im not knocking glam metal here, cause i do like twisted sister, im just stating my opinion.

you almost make it sound like metal should be a hobby for rich guys in their spare time. bands gotta eat, keep a roof over their head, not to mention if they have children. your priorities change when you get older. but metallica still shouldn't have sued napster. lars and his whiney piehole


I like how people criticize Metallica for taking on piracy.  Do you not realize that digital music and piracy is the reason the music industry has progressively gone downhill and nobody is making any money with album sales anymore? 

Metallica has been horrible for many many years now, I will admit that, but taking on napster really has nothing to do with it.

::c_stare
Quote 0 0
lennyg
Why is it if Motley Crue was so bad everyone in the house were singing along to their music? Why was the whole place on their feet having a good time? Hartfords pits were weak cause you little children that attended were to busy looking for your mommies. And as far as saggy tits maybe you should have told your girlfriends to keep their shirts on. The tits all around me were perky.
Quote 0 0
Tiger479
I couldnt make either one so i"ll just sit back drink a beer and watch the shit fly 
Quote 0 0
BigHeavyThing
eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

Jayman wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

Yes cause Gayhem fest with a nu metal headliner from the 90s is better.


Glam metal is a huge black eye in metal and everything that can be done should be done to act like it never exsisted. By the looks of some of these shows it looks like those who still like it are starting to get too old to go.


And nu-metal is not? Dude go back to listening to Korn and rock out to wannabe hardcore bands like Atreyu and Norma Jean.


The fact is that a lot of the first nu-metal bands didn't get into metal to get laid and make money like almost all glam metal bands did. Glam metal was based on everything metal should be against. Now I will admit I'm not the biggest fan of the Mayhem lineup but at least it is some what current with the contemprary metal scene. I mean honestly Motley Crue?


So you know what every band's motivation was for starting up?   How about they liked that kind of music and wanted to play it?  I"m not one to call this band and that band a sellout for wanting to make some money, but how can you say nu metal bands did not try to make money?  The whole point of the genre was to have a mainstream form of metal to appeal to a much wider fanbase and to appeal to fans that dont' like metal in the traditional sense.  You don't have to like glam metal, but it's certainly not a black eye on metal.  It was just a different genre of metal that had a completely different fanbase than the heavier type of metal.  And yes the majority of the base is in their 40's now but they are still coming to the shows.  40 or 50 years old is not too old to go to a concert.  I went to the m3 rockfest in MD that had all hair bands with the scorps headlining and they sold the place out with older people and younger people as well, so whether you like it or not, there's still a base for it.  
Yeah I'm sure Rage Against the Machine and Faith no More were thinking about mainstream money when they started making music. Even the lyrics in glam metal are about getting girls, fame, and money. Glam metal is on the same level as rap. Its about getting that radio hit and a billboard top 100 song.


Yea cause crap like Limp Bizkit or when Machine Head and Biohazard tried to cash in on the craze did not try to make money. Ok sure keep telling yourself that.
Not saying bands didn't do it. There are bands in every genre/sub-genre that change their sound to sell more records. The difference is glam metal as a entire genre, like pop music, created to make money at the sacrafice of any intristic or artistic value. Metal as a genre is built around the idea of hardcore loyal fans commited to a music form that doesn't conform to what the mainstream says it should.

Yet once again bands like Machine Head and Biohazard conformed to that style in the late 90s.  Megadeth even gave into doing radio rock. Yes glam was a trend for the 80s but there were a few good ones like Crue. Was there alot of crap glam bands? yes I will agree, but to me Crue was always one of the better bands. And as for it being a black eye on music I saw alot of people singing along with their songs of all ages, even metal heads who rock out to death metal and thrash.
Quote 0 0
stevepwn
how is lamb of god bad live?? r u on drugs
Quote 0 0
MikeGimmelli
psycho_bitch wrote:

Skull And Crossbones wrote:

psycho_bitch wrote:

didn't like enought bands on the mayhemfest lineup to bother going. and ozzfest skipped wpb so whatever. bring on american carnage!

Skull And Crossbones wrote:

Jayman wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

Yes cause Gayhem fest with a nu metal headliner from the 90s is better.


Glam metal is a huge black eye in metal and everything that can be done should be done to act like it never exsisted. By the looks of some of these shows it looks like those who still like it are starting to get too old to go.


And nu-metal is not? Dude go back to listening to Korn and rock out to wannabe hardcore bands like Atreyu and Norma Jean.


The fact is that a lot of the first nu-metal bands didn't get into metal to get laid and make money like almost all glam metal bands did. Glam metal was based on everything metal should be against. Now I will admit I'm not the biggest fan of the Mayhem lineup but at least it is some what current with the contemprary metal scene. I mean honestly Motley Crue?


So you know what every band's motivation was for starting up?   How about they liked that kind of music and wanted to play it?  I"m not one to call this band and that band a sellout for wanting to make some money, but how can you say nu metal bands did not try to make money?  The whole point of the genre was to have a mainstream form of metal to appeal to a much wider fanbase and to appeal to fans that dont' like metal in the traditional sense.  You don't have to like glam metal, but it's certainly not a black eye on metal.  It was just a different genre of metal that had a completely different fanbase than the heavier type of metal.  And yes the majority of the base is in their 40's now but they are still coming to the shows.  40 or 50 years old is not too old to go to a concert.  I went to the m3 rockfest in MD that had all hair bands with the scorps headlining and they sold the place out with older people and younger people as well, so whether you like it or not, there's still a base for it. 


im gonna have to disagree with some of the things you said here.  1. i have no problem calling metallica sell outs because after they sued napster it was clear to me that money has a lot to do with their motivation of making more music, i dont wanna say money is the only reason, but its a big part of it in my opinion.  don't get me wrong though, i love metallica, its just they what they did was bullshit, cause first off any metal band should be playing metal for the love of the music, not money.  i mean yeah, they need money to keep the band going, but it should be more about the love of the music than making money.  and any metal band should just be happy that people are listening to their music even if they are downloading it for free, but again they do need money to keep the band going, but honestly, metallica is one of, if not THE most succesful metal band out there, do they really need more money?  the other things i disagree with are that i dont think any metal band now a days start playing metal to make money, metal is not mainstream with the exception of bands like metallica, ac/dc and the occasional nu metal band like Korn, Godsmack, or Slipknot.  maybe metal was more mainstream in the mid 80s, but not anymore.  and lastly, i was always under the impression that most metal bands play a certain style because they like the way it sounds, not because its popular.  and im not knocking glam metal here, cause i do like twisted sister, im just stating my opinion.

you almost make it sound like metal should be a hobby for rich guys in their spare time. bands gotta eat, keep a roof over their head, not to mention if they have children. your priorities change when you get older. but metallica still shouldn't have sued napster. lars and his whiney piehole


i dont really see how i came off as sounding like "metal should be a hobby for rich guys in their spare time", but if i did sound like that, thats not what i meant at all.  all i meant was money should not be the reason why people play metal.  they should do it because they love it, not to get rich.  i know i didnt say the exact words "they too need money to live on and support themselves and their families if they have them", but i didnt think i needed to since i said "they need money to keep the band going", i figured it would be understood that they need money to live on.  you dont need to be rich to have the necessities to live and to keep making music.

i said almost. i understand what you're saying tho.


oh ok, i wasnt sure if you understood what i was tryin' to say.
Quote 0 0
MikeGimmelli
Deathblooms wrote:

psycho_bitch wrote:

didn't like enought bands on the mayhemfest lineup to bother going. and ozzfest skipped wpb so whatever. bring on american carnage!

Skull And Crossbones wrote:

Jayman wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

Yes cause Gayhem fest with a nu metal headliner from the 90s is better.


Glam metal is a huge black eye in metal and everything that can be done should be done to act like it never exsisted. By the looks of some of these shows it looks like those who still like it are starting to get too old to go.


And nu-metal is not? Dude go back to listening to Korn and rock out to wannabe hardcore bands like Atreyu and Norma Jean.


The fact is that a lot of the first nu-metal bands didn't get into metal to get laid and make money like almost all glam metal bands did. Glam metal was based on everything metal should be against. Now I will admit I'm not the biggest fan of the Mayhem lineup but at least it is some what current with the contemprary metal scene. I mean honestly Motley Crue?


So you know what every band's motivation was for starting up?   How about they liked that kind of music and wanted to play it?  I"m not one to call this band and that band a sellout for wanting to make some money, but how can you say nu metal bands did not try to make money?  The whole point of the genre was to have a mainstream form of metal to appeal to a much wider fanbase and to appeal to fans that dont' like metal in the traditional sense.  You don't have to like glam metal, but it's certainly not a black eye on metal.  It was just a different genre of metal that had a completely different fanbase than the heavier type of metal.  And yes the majority of the base is in their 40's now but they are still coming to the shows.  40 or 50 years old is not too old to go to a concert.  I went to the m3 rockfest in MD that had all hair bands with the scorps headlining and they sold the place out with older people and younger people as well, so whether you like it or not, there's still a base for it. 


im gonna have to disagree with some of the things you said here.  1. i have no problem calling metallica sell outs because after they sued napster it was clear to me that money has a lot to do with their motivation of making more music, i dont wanna say money is the only reason, but its a big part of it in my opinion.  don't get me wrong though, i love metallica, its just they what they did was bullshit, cause first off any metal band should be playing metal for the love of the music, not money.  i mean yeah, they need money to keep the band going, but it should be more about the love of the music than making money.  and any metal band should just be happy that people are listening to their music even if they are downloading it for free, but again they do need money to keep the band going, but honestly, metallica is one of, if not THE most succesful metal band out there, do they really need more money?  the other things i disagree with are that i dont think any metal band now a days start playing metal to make money, metal is not mainstream with the exception of bands like metallica, ac/dc and the occasional nu metal band like Korn, Godsmack, or Slipknot.  maybe metal was more mainstream in the mid 80s, but not anymore.  and lastly, i was always under the impression that most metal bands play a certain style because they like the way it sounds, not because its popular.  and im not knocking glam metal here, cause i do like twisted sister, im just stating my opinion.

you almost make it sound like metal should be a hobby for rich guys in their spare time. bands gotta eat, keep a roof over their head, not to mention if they have children. your priorities change when you get older. but metallica still shouldn't have sued napster. lars and his whiney piehole


I like how people criticize Metallica for taking on piracy.  Do you not realize that digital music and piracy is the reason the music industry has progressively gone downhill and nobody is making any money with album sales anymore?   

Metallica has been horrible for many many years now, I will admit that, but taking on napster really has nothing to do with it.


i always buy albums rather than download them for free and burn a copy for a few reasons, i like to have the actual CD in a case with the artwork on the cover and the booklet, its hit and miss sometimes with the quality of the songs, it can be really difficult finding songs from an underground band sometimes, i like to support the bands to help keep them going.  i also buy band shirts occasionally.  i will be honest though, i do download music for free only to have the songs on my computer so when im on the computer i can just play whatever song i want.
Quote 0 0
Deathblooms
Skull And Crossbones wrote:

Deathblooms wrote:

psycho_bitch wrote:

didn't like enought bands on the mayhemfest lineup to bother going. and ozzfest skipped wpb so whatever. bring on american carnage!

Skull And Crossbones wrote:

Jayman wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

Yes cause Gayhem fest with a nu metal headliner from the 90s is better.


Glam metal is a huge black eye in metal and everything that can be done should be done to act like it never exsisted. By the looks of some of these shows it looks like those who still like it are starting to get too old to go.


And nu-metal is not? Dude go back to listening to Korn and rock out to wannabe hardcore bands like Atreyu and Norma Jean.


The fact is that a lot of the first nu-metal bands didn't get into metal to get laid and make money like almost all glam metal bands did. Glam metal was based on everything metal should be against. Now I will admit I'm not the biggest fan of the Mayhem lineup but at least it is some what current with the contemprary metal scene. I mean honestly Motley Crue?


So you know what every band's motivation was for starting up?   How about they liked that kind of music and wanted to play it?  I"m not one to call this band and that band a sellout for wanting to make some money, but how can you say nu metal bands did not try to make money?  The whole point of the genre was to have a mainstream form of metal to appeal to a much wider fanbase and to appeal to fans that dont' like metal in the traditional sense.  You don't have to like glam metal, but it's certainly not a black eye on metal.  It was just a different genre of metal that had a completely different fanbase than the heavier type of metal.  And yes the majority of the base is in their 40's now but they are still coming to the shows.  40 or 50 years old is not too old to go to a concert.  I went to the m3 rockfest in MD that had all hair bands with the scorps headlining and they sold the place out with older people and younger people as well, so whether you like it or not, there's still a base for it. 


im gonna have to disagree with some of the things you said here.  1. i have no problem calling metallica sell outs because after they sued napster it was clear to me that money has a lot to do with their motivation of making more music, i dont wanna say money is the only reason, but its a big part of it in my opinion.  don't get me wrong though, i love metallica, its just they what they did was bullshit, cause first off any metal band should be playing metal for the love of the music, not money.  i mean yeah, they need money to keep the band going, but it should be more about the love of the music than making money.  and any metal band should just be happy that people are listening to their music even if they are downloading it for free, but again they do need money to keep the band going, but honestly, metallica is one of, if not THE most succesful metal band out there, do they really need more money?  the other things i disagree with are that i dont think any metal band now a days start playing metal to make money, metal is not mainstream with the exception of bands like metallica, ac/dc and the occasional nu metal band like Korn, Godsmack, or Slipknot.  maybe metal was more mainstream in the mid 80s, but not anymore.  and lastly, i was always under the impression that most metal bands play a certain style because they like the way it sounds, not because its popular.  and im not knocking glam metal here, cause i do like twisted sister, im just stating my opinion.

you almost make it sound like metal should be a hobby for rich guys in their spare time. bands gotta eat, keep a roof over their head, not to mention if they have children. your priorities change when you get older. but metallica still shouldn't have sued napster. lars and his whiney piehole


I like how people criticize Metallica for taking on piracy.  Do you not realize that digital music and piracy is the reason the music industry has progressively gone downhill and nobody is making any money with album sales anymore?   

Metallica has been horrible for many many years now, I will admit that, but taking on napster really has nothing to do with it.


i always buy albums rather than download them for free and burn a copy for a few reasons, i like to have the actual CD in a case with the artwork on the cover and the booklet, its hit and miss sometimes with the quality of the songs, it can be really difficult finding songs from an underground band sometimes, i like to support the bands to help keep them going.  i also buy band shirts occasionally.  i will be honest though, i do download music for free only to have the songs on my computer so when im on the computer i can just play whatever song i want.


I don't disagree with you that metallica sold out lol they certainly did.  Yea I buy cds when I can but even legal digital downloads have ruined album sales because people buy that 1 song they like instead of actually buying the album. 

::c_stare
Quote 0 0
MikeGimmelli
Deathblooms wrote:

Skull And Crossbones wrote:

Deathblooms wrote:

psycho_bitch wrote:

didn't like enought bands on the mayhemfest lineup to bother going. and ozzfest skipped wpb so whatever. bring on american carnage!

Skull And Crossbones wrote:

Jayman wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

eXile72 wrote:

BigHeavyThing wrote:

Yes cause Gayhem fest with a nu metal headliner from the 90s is better.


Glam metal is a huge black eye in metal and everything that can be done should be done to act like it never exsisted. By the looks of some of these shows it looks like those who still like it are starting to get too old to go.


And nu-metal is not? Dude go back to listening to Korn and rock out to wannabe hardcore bands like Atreyu and Norma Jean.


The fact is that a lot of the first nu-metal bands didn't get into metal to get laid and make money like almost all glam metal bands did. Glam metal was based on everything metal should be against. Now I will admit I'm not the biggest fan of the Mayhem lineup but at least it is some what current with the contemprary metal scene. I mean honestly Motley Crue?


So you know what every band's motivation was for starting up?   How about they liked that kind of music and wanted to play it?  I"m not one to call this band and that band a sellout for wanting to make some money, but how can you say nu metal bands did not try to make money?  The whole point of the genre was to have a mainstream form of metal to appeal to a much wider fanbase and to appeal to fans that dont' like metal in the traditional sense.  You don't have to like glam metal, but it's certainly not a black eye on metal.  It was just a different genre of metal that had a completely different fanbase than the heavier type of metal.  And yes the majority of the base is in their 40's now but they are still coming to the shows.  40 or 50 years old is not too old to go to a concert.  I went to the m3 rockfest in MD that had all hair bands with the scorps headlining and they sold the place out with older people and younger people as well, so whether you like it or not, there's still a base for it. 


im gonna have to disagree with some of the things you said here.  1. i have no problem calling metallica sell outs because after they sued napster it was clear to me that money has a lot to do with their motivation of making more music, i dont wanna say money is the only reason, but its a big part of it in my opinion.  don't get me wrong though, i love metallica, its just they what they did was bullshit, cause first off any metal band should be playing metal for the love of the music, not money.  i mean yeah, they need money to keep the band going, but it should be more about the love of the music than making money.  and any metal band should just be happy that people are listening to their music even if they are downloading it for free, but again they do need money to keep the band going, but honestly, metallica is one of, if not THE most succesful metal band out there, do they really need more money?  the other things i disagree with are that i dont think any metal band now a days start playing metal to make money, metal is not mainstream with the exception of bands like metallica, ac/dc and the occasional nu metal band like Korn, Godsmack, or Slipknot.  maybe metal was more mainstream in the mid 80s, but not anymore.  and lastly, i was always under the impression that most metal bands play a certain style because they like the way it sounds, not because its popular.  and im not knocking glam metal here, cause i do like twisted sister, im just stating my opinion.

you almost make it sound like metal should be a hobby for rich guys in their spare time. bands gotta eat, keep a roof over their head, not to mention if they have children. your priorities change when you get older. but metallica still shouldn't have sued napster. lars and his whiney piehole


I like how people criticize Metallica for taking on piracy.  Do you not realize that digital music and piracy is the reason the music industry has progressively gone downhill and nobody is making any money with album sales anymore?   

Metallica has been horrible for many many years now, I will admit that, but taking on napster really has nothing to do with it.


i always buy albums rather than download them for free and burn a copy for a few reasons, i like to have the actual CD in a case with the artwork on the cover and the booklet, its hit and miss sometimes with the quality of the songs, it can be really difficult finding songs from an underground band sometimes, i like to support the bands to help keep them going.  i also buy band shirts occasionally.  i will be honest though, i do download music for free only to have the songs on my computer so when im on the computer i can just play whatever song i want.


I don't disagree with you that metallica sold out lol they certainly did.  Yea I buy cds when I can but even legal digital downloads have ruined album sales because people buy that 1 song they like instead of actually buying the album. 


oh yeah, i honestly never even thought about people just buying one song (no sarcasm), you're right.  and mudvayne kicks ass by the way.  Dig is one of the best songs i've ever heard.
Quote 0 0
dilutedpsycho
lennyg wrote:

Why is it if Motley Crue was so bad everyone in the house were singing along to their music? Why was the whole place on their feet having a good time? Hartfords pits were weak cause you little children that attended were to busy looking for your mommies. And as far as saggy tits maybe you should have told your girlfriends to keep their shirts on. The tits all around me were perky.


I never said Motley Crue were bad. i said they played well, but I hate their music anyway so I didnt enjoy it. And youre so right. I was certainly looking for my mommy the whole show. No, actually I was on the rail the whole day. And explain to me how the pits at mayhem were insane, when the crowd was much younger there if we all look for our mommies all day? If thats the case, then there shouldnt have been any pits at mayhem in hartford.  And i guess you lucked out with where u were standing being near perky tits. I saw 2-4 nice pairs. I literally saw one lady who was 240 pounds, about 45 years old, wearing black sweatpants that went up to her bellybutton walking around without her shirt on. Her tits sagged lower than her bellybutton. THats not even an exaggeration. Thats serious. I almost threw up. And if you saw a 20 year old girl with saggy tits, it certainly wasnt my girlfriend. Way to go dude. An older guy who comes off like a jackass on the internet. Youre so cool. I hope I grow up to be like you.
Quote 0 0