Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

what do you think of them!

i like em

I use to like them but don't listen to them now as much, maybe a few songs on and off from latest album.

cant stand them

Same.....hate them.

I liked them before all of the 12 year old Bam fans Kidnapped them.

^

Originally posted by SlipknoT
I liked them before all of the 12 year old Bam fans Kidnapped them.

I like the music on one or two of their songs, the blend of acoustic and electric guitars and whatnot, but I can't stand that Valo person. His voice is OTT to say the least, and his lyrics make me wanna vomit like that guy in Team America. Lots.

I don't see why people have to worship Bam and say he's beautiful.. just because he looks overtly feminine is no reason to idolise him.

I hate Ville Valo with a passion, their instrumental isn't bad though I guess.

I mildly like two songs. Sweet 666 and Wicked Game. The rest is typical love-metal shite. I thought their albums would be as strong as those two, I was wrong, that's all they actually have, and one is a weaker cover of the original.

I like them.

H.I.M. is really good.. i cant stand how people go around say "wow bam is really good" this is for all the PREPS who like BAM... he's a copy cat off of Ville.. Ville did everything like the heart-a-gram. even though Ville and Bam are like friends that still dont make it right for bam to get the credit for what Ville Valo does.. oh yea VILLE VALO is HOTT

Ville Looks like he was Recently Embalmed...

Ville is hott and his music is great

They really arent that great

me liking them is my opinion

I really like them but you don't get much of them here. I can uderstand why others hate them, but with all music it's just a personal preference thing

they are pretty good...

Just out of curiosity, if anybody cares to elaborate why they "hate" this band so much, it would be interesting to know since I think they are one of the finest melodic rock bands of today. People are quick to label them as goth or metal but they're not straightforward anything, they have their own thing and that is why I like them.

Even so much that I can let them get away with selling their logo to Bam... eventhough I think that was the biggest mistake they've ever done careerwise.

Don't forget that they've had an enormous following in Europe since 1998/99, the kids who watch MTV and listen to them nowadays have nothing to do with what HIM are about.

i heard HIM way before Bam raped their logo.

HiM isn't great

i heard of HIM before Bam...then i found out that Ville and Bam were friends i was like wow..lol..HIM is pretty good, getting their new album soon

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
HiM isn't great

How convincing... So, no replies, ok then.

Originally posted by Pernille
Just out of curiosity, if anybody cares to elaborate why they "hate" this band so much, it would be interesting to know since I think they are one of the finest melodic rock bands of today. People are quick to label them as goth or metal but they're not straightforward anything, they have their own thing and that is why I like them.

Even so much that I can let them get away with selling their logo to Bam... eventhough I think that was the biggest mistake they've ever done careerwise.

Don't forget that they've had an enormous following in Europe since 1998/99, the kids who watch MTV and listen to them nowadays have nothing to do with what HIM are about.

I can't let them get away with the fact that they're shit. The fact that they let a useless, MTV, fame hungry, talentless and annoying f*cking waster whore their logo for more record sales just adds to it.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I can't let them get away with the fact that they're shit. The fact that they let a useless, MTV, fame hungry, talentless and annoying f*cking waster whore their logo for more record sales just adds to it.

-AC

And what if that useless, MTV, fame hungry, talentless and annoying f*cking waster whore was a very good friend of theirs, would it still not be ok?

I mean, yeah, I don't like Bam either, but that's not a reason to hate the band.

At first I didn't care much for them,but I herd a slow song they have and I realy fell in love with it (even though it was the most depressing song i've ever listened too).

Originally posted by Pernille
And what if that useless, MTV, fame hungry, talentless and annoying f*cking waster whore was a very good friend of theirs, would it still not be ok?

I mean, yeah, I don't like Bam either, but that's not a reason to hate the band.

It is, because he's a waster nobody who had nothing to do with their music and more or less stole something that they created.

They're known through him, not off their own work. The worst part is that they're cool with that.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
They're known through him, not off their own work. The worst part is that they're cool with that.

-AC
They already had a strong fan base in Europe, USA = not the world.

But of course if a band wants to have success, they're going to aim overseas. HIM are so big here that they would have eventually done it, with or without Bam.

AC is from the UK, think he knows US isn't the world.

if they'd have tried break the US on their own, i sincerly think they'd have failed... Bam margera already had fame and his own show, and so they rode his fame

Originally posted by Df02
if they'd have tried break the US on their own, i sincerly think they'd have failed...
I don't. And even if they had, their music is still the same. breaking the US doesn't mean it's better/worse music, they have different tastes there. Europe has longer roots in goth and melancholic type of music in general, it's not automatically going to be popular over there... half of the reviews they've got are like 4-5 star and the other half is typical American lack of understanding of the whole scene.


As much as I hate the fact that they gave Bam the heartagram, it's not fair to say they rode his fame. He helped them to get visibility, but in the end it's all about the music.

Originally posted by Pernille
I don't. And even if they had, their music is still the same. breaking the US doesn't mean it's better/worse music, they have different tastes there. Europe has longer roots in goth and melancholic type of music in general, it's not automatically going to be popular over there... half of the reviews they've got are like 4-5 star and the other half is typical American lack of understanding of the whole scene.

As much as I hate the fact that they gave Bam the heartagram, it's not fair to say they rode his fame. He helped them to get visibility, but in the end it's all about the music.

It's not all about the music if you're whoring it out to Bam's shows and Bam himself. They even gave Bam a spot on their DVD so it would sell.

They can't claim to be music fans and true musicians if they're also gonna sell themselves like a cheap hooker. They would have probably done well in the US on their own because Evanescence did and H.I.M are pretty much a male version of them (yes, they are). The fact that they didn't even bother to try just says that they were after the fame or that they couldn't be bothered.

You say they would have eventually done it with or without Bam, right? They chose Bam though didn't they? They chose to not make it big on their own, they chose to let a fat, loser idiot do it for them.

Not overlooking the fact that they're a God awful band anyway. Bands that try to look goth aren't cool, people should know that through Evanescence. The only band with a sort of "goth" image I guess, would be Lacuna Coil or if you wanna be technical, Nightwish. Both of which are very good bands.

-AC

I would've liked to see them try it on their "own" too (but I DON'T give credit to Bam because he has nothing to do with their music, you don't get a 5 star review by some jackass dude liking you), but I guess that if you're in that kind of position where you're already big in Europe, wouldn't mind having an audience overseas and your friend is there wanting to help you, it'd feel stupid to say no. At the end of the day.. don't all bands want to be succesful?


I'm not sure what you mean by "spot" but he's directed a string of their music videos, so I don't find it weird at all if he's mentioned/featured in their DVD.


That's what I said, but if a band has done that stuff for ten years and you have the opportunity, I don't know how many people would've really turned that chance down. It's easy to understand if a band is new, but HIM is old school in Europe.


You're prolly hating them because of those aforementioned reasons, but have you actually even listened to their music? I doubt.


So, being or looking "cool" is your definition of good music? ok...

Originally posted by Pernille
I would've liked to see them try it on their "own" too (but I DON'T give credit to Bam because he has nothing to do with their music, you don't get a 5 star review by some jackass dude liking you) but I guess that if you're in that kind of position where you're already big in Europe, wouldn't mind having an audience overseas and your friend is there wanting to help you, it'd feel stupid to say no. At the end of the day, don't all bands want to be succesful?

Hahahahaha, what naive crap. You're making excuses for them. What do you think they effects are of Bam pimping their music? Girly girls who love him (for some reason) automatically become H.I.M fans. They didn't get a little help from a friend, they let him steal their stuff and push their music out there like some idiots. Directing their videos, guesting on their DVD. As for success, no. If you're playing music to be famous, you should f*ck off and do the world a favour. H.I.M are that example.

Originally posted by Pernille
I'm not sure what you mean by "spot" but he's directed a string of their music videos, so I don't find it weird at all if he's mentioned/featured in their DVD.

Why though? Why is he? Coz they owe him for their career and he's like a dirty, stinking groupie that won't go away. Any self respecting artist wouldn't let their art get pimped by some fat nobody. They do, coz they just wanna make cash.

Originally posted by Pernille
That's what I said, but if a band has done that stuff for ten years and you have the opportunity, I don't know how many people would've really turned that chance down. It's easy to understand if a band is new, but HIM is old school in Europe.

H.I.M aren't old school here, they're just older than in the USA. H.I.M aren't veterans, lets get this correct. H.I.M got tired of playing music to a dedicated fan base so they sold their butts out to Bam Margera for the sake of gaining loads more fans. You cannot justify it. They're about the fame, not the music.

Originally posted by Pernille
You're prolly hating them because of those aforementioned reasons, but have you actually even listened to their music? I doubt.

I first heard of them way before they even released anything majorly. I still thought they were shit. Don't assume.

Originally posted by Pernille
So, being or looking "cool" is your definition of good music? ok...

You got this from where? Because all I said was what's not cool. What's not good. I never said looking good means good music.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's not all about the music if you're whoring it out to Bam's shows and Bam himself. They even gave Bam a spot on their DVD so it would sell.

They can't claim to be music fans and true musicians if they're also gonna sell themselves like a cheap hooker. They would have probably done well in the US on their own because Evanescence did and H.I.M are pretty much a male version of them (yes, they are). The fact that they didn't even bother to try just says that they were after the fame or that they couldn't be bothered.

You say they would have eventually done it with or without Bam, right? They chose Bam though didn't they? They chose to not make it big on their own, they chose to let a fat, loser idiot do it for them.

Not overlooking the fact that they're a God awful band anyway. Bands that try to look goth aren't cool, people should know that through Evanescence. The only band with a sort of "goth" image I guess, would be Lacuna Coil or if you wanna be technical, Nightwish. Both of which are very good bands.

-AC

Your dissing Him,yet praising Nightwish?

Yeah, have you got some kind of point you're trying to make?

Because I can sit here and show you why Nightwish are much more talented than H.I.M can dream of being. Technically. Musically also if you've got a couple of working brain cells.

-AC

At best,Nightwish is a novelty leftover from cheese metal.Playing technically good means nothing when it's so crappy.

Part of it is to be theatrical, to be operatic. You're obviously missing the point.

All of them are better at what they do than anyone in H.I.M.

-AC

Well, I'm sure they knew it and they took a risk but you have to do sacrifices. Bam is a punk but he gave them free promotion that I guess they wanted and I'm sure many bands would have taken it if you had that kind of opportunity. I already said that I didn't like it either, but I try to see their side of it, it must have been a great frustration for them to be on the verge of breaking it in the US, but still kind of just hanging there and not going anywhere.


For god's sake, since when was Bam in the band? They don't owe him for their career but if that's what you think, why don't you go and call every band crap who's ever had any type of promotion campaign?


A band can be famous and be about the music. The Beatles sold shitloads of records and they're considered one of the best bands in the world. I never said HIM were virtuosos, but they are very good. You can hear their influences, yet at the same time they have their own sound. There are not many bands who sound like them. I give credit for people who try to push the envelope, and HIM are one of them. I understand that if you hate a band if they're on the charts with songs that other people have written for them, but HIM's not for that. Valo writes 99% of HIM's songs. So far you haven't provided any real reason why you hate their music.


Anything majorly in Europe or the US? Because in Europe that would basically mean their first demos or EP, which I highly doubt you've heard when they were released if you're from the UK. If you have then great, but either way, the point isn't when you heard them for the first time but the fact that you can't even say why they're bad, you only bring up their image.


Nightwish don't have a goth image. And what do they have to do with HIM anyway? Their music and vocals are totally different. Nightwish plays operetic heavy metal, HIM don't. There's no point comparing the two.

Originally posted by Pernille
Well, I'm sure they knew it and they took a risk but you have to do sacrifices. Bam is a punk but he gave them free promotion that I guess they wanted and I'm sure many bands would have taken it if you had that kind of opportunity. I already said that I didn't like it either, but I try to see their side of it, it must have been a great frustration for them to be on the verge of breaking it in the US, but still kind of just hanging there and not going anywhere.

No, you're wrong. You don't have to make sacrifices with your art, what is wrong with you? You don't and SHOULDN'T sacrifice your art for fame and fortune, at all.

If they just got pissed off because they weren't satisfied with having a dedicated following and NOT being mega stars, then they suck. Because they obviously just wanted to be famous. Stop trying to make excuses for them.

Originally posted by Pernille
For god's sake, since when was Bam in the band? They don't owe him for their career but if that's what you think, why don't you go and call every band crap who's ever had any type of promotion campaign?

He plastered their logo over everything he owns, got it tattooed on him, pimped their shit on his TV shows and every TV show he was on, they put him on their DVD because they felt like they owed him after all he did (and because they wanted it to sell better, Ville said this in Kerrang). What are you not understanding? They're money-hungry, fame obsessed sellout idiots. That's fact. Fact.

Originally posted by Pernille
A band can be famous and be about the music. The Beatles sold shitloads of records and they're considered one of the best bands in the world. I never said HIM were virtuosos, but they are very good. You can hear their influences, yet at the same time they have their own sound. There are not many bands who sound like them. I give credit for people who try to push the envelope, and HIM are one of them. I understand that if you hate a band if they're on the charts with songs that other people have written for them, but HIM's not for that. Valo writes 99% of HIM's songs. So far you haven't provided any real reason why you hate their music.

Hahahahahaha. H.I.M are garbage. Shit on their instruments, shit at making music. Everything they do has been done before by some other shitty goth love band. They're like the goth Coldplay. Everything they do on every record is the same, they don't push any boundaries at all. The only record they've broke is how many titles can have the word 'love' in the song. They're lame, plain and simple.

Originally posted by Pernille
Anything majorly in Europe or the US? Because in Europe that would basically mean their first demos or EP, which I highly doubt you've heard when they were released if you're from the UK. If you have then great, but either way, the point isn't when you heard them for the first time but the fact that you can't even say why they're bad, you only bring up their image.

I've told you countless times that it's because of their ineptitude on instruments, the fact that they make shit, boring and cliched music with no personality. They're horrid live. Where shall I stop?

Originally posted by Pernille
Nightwish don't have a goth image. And what do they have to do with HIM anyway? Their music and vocals are totally different. Nightwish plays operetic heavy metal, HIM don't. There's no point comparing the two.

One band's good, one band's shit. The latter one isn't Nightwish.

-AC

Let me get one thing straight. They didn't sacrifice their art, they didn't stop writing and playing the music they want to. Sacrificing art means changing the way you create it, not the way you sell it. If they ever sacrificed anything, it was their reputation - unfortunately.

And nothing is wrong with me, thank you.


Didn't you read anything what I just said? Since when was it not allowed to have ambition? You can be famous and you can love what you do musically and artwise, they don't exclude one another. I'm sure every band on this planet wants to have some sort of success.

Bam's obsession with them is another thing but it still has nothing to do with their music. He's a flaming HIM fan and went a bit overboard, ok, but I don't see that as the worldst biggest sin, nor does it have to take anything away from HIM's music.


So that's your ground? Whatever. I strongly suggest you actually listen to their albums because they're not the same. They have their basic trademark sound which I see only as a good thing, but their music vary from hard rock to metal to goth to punk to more straightforward rock. I'm not saying they're the biggest boundary breakers ever, but their suggestion of "love metal" has already caused so much polemic so that alone tells something.


No you haven't. This reply was the first time you brought it up. And no, they're not bad musicians, if they were they would've never got a record deal in the first place. Their music is a lot fresher than most of what you hear on the radio today and I seriously can't believe you call them "music with no personality" with everything you see on MTV and charts today.

Their live performances were better back in the day, I agree, but every band has their weakest quality and HIM could improve that side.


Well how poetic... Not. Just for your convenience, I love Nightwish. They're an awesome band. As are HIM.

Originally posted by Pernille
Let me get one thing straight. They didn't sacrifice their art, they didn't stop writing and playing the music they want to. Sacrificing art means changing the way you create it, not the way you sell it. If they ever sacrificed anything, it was their reputation - unfortunately.

And nothing is wrong with me, thank you.

Exactly. In music, where the main thing you should be concerned with is being honest and respecting the art you create, don't you consider it really shit that they pretty much let Bam steal from them? Let Bam shove their music down the throats of girly girls who are just buying it coz they like Bam? H.I.M clearly don't care who buys their music as long as it's bought. They're just after money.

Originally posted by Pernille
Didn't you read anything what I just said? Since when was it not allowed to have ambition? You can be famous and you can love what you do musically and artwise, they don't exclude one another. I'm sure every band on this planet wants to have some sort of success.

It's different. Wanting to be successful is fine. Wanting to be successful at the expense of your reputation and art is another. They let Bam and MTV shit all over their music just so it sells more. They guest starred in Bam's show and such. They're scum and they're salesmen. Not artists.

Originally posted by Pernille
Bam's obsession with them is another thing but it still has nothing to do with their music. He's a flaming HIM fan and went a bit overboard, ok, but I don't see that as the worldst biggest sin, nor does it have to take anything away from HIM's music.

When they're letting their music and reputation suffer as a result, yes, it does.

Originally posted by Pernille
So that's your ground? Whatever. I strongly suggest you actually listen to their albums because they're not the same. They have their basic trademark sound which I see only as a good thing, but their music vary from hard rock to metal to goth to punk to more straightforward rock. I'm not saying they're the biggest boundary breakers ever, but their suggestion of "love metal" has already caused so much polemic so that alone tells something.

They made up another label for an already existing genre. They didn't create one. It's not love metal, it's ballad rock. Like Nickleback or some other shit. I've listened to them enough to know what I'm talking about, I don't talk about bands without being educated on them.

Originally posted by Pernille
No you haven't. This reply was the first time you brought it up. And no, they're not bad musicians, if they were they would've never got a record deal in the first place. Their music is a lot fresher than most of what you hear on the radio today and I seriously can't believe you call them "music with no personality" with everything you see on MTV and charts today.

What stupidity. They're not bad musicians or they wouldn't have got a deal? So every band with a record deal are good musicians? Evanescence? Simple Plan? Good Charlotte? Busted? Exactly. Sit down.

Secondly, they have no personality to their music. Ville is just a crummy, lame singer who tries to hard to be Ozzy Osbourne instead of quitting.

Originally posted by Pernille
Their live performances were better back in the day, I agree, but every band has their weakest quality and HIM could improve that side.

Well how poetic... Not. Just for your convenience, I love Nightwish. They're an awesome band. As are HIM.

No, H.I.M are shit. They are. Do you have any other points that you'd like me to put to an end?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Part of it is to be theatrical, to be operatic. You're obviously missing the point.

All of them are better at what they do than anyone in H.I.M.

-AC


Oh no my friend.I get the point,the problem is that band can't get it across seriously.The first time I herd them was on Alone in The Dark.I started laughing my ass off as soon as I herd them.I thought my God this can't be serious.


And then I saw the music video..........

Whwn ir comes to pushing boundries not many bands do anymore.At one time Dave Matthews Band was.Hell,they even had DMB college courses.They aren't now though which is sad.The same can be said for tool.

Lots of bands push boundaries, you just obviously don't know about them.

Nightwish don't take themselves seriously and even if they did, they're undeniably talented musicians. Anyone in H.I.M is lame. Anything to do with that band is lame, they threw away any credibility they had.

-AC

sorry offtopic:

Nightwish is a great band

No, that's not true. They do care what kind of reviews they get, they want to maintain that level in their music. But the difference here is that their goal is not to be an elitist indie band with a following of small group of music prigs, they're more down to earth than that. Valo has said this several times. And it doesn't mean it's all about money. Why else would Valo get tattoos of poets in his arms and mention his roots and the bands and the people he admires every time he gets a chance if it was just for money.


Reputation amongst prigs who can't see further from their noses, that's another thing.

And HIM are not the only band who have guest starred Bam's shows.


Wtf? For the billionth time, their MUSIC hasn't suffered in any f.cking way. As for their reputation, read my posts above.


I'm not talking about a sub genre that is love metal, I'm talking about an expression they used. I don't know were they serious of suggesting that or was is more like an informal plea to call their music like that because they're bored being labelled as what they are not.

Nickelback don't have any gothic influences in their music and they don't probably even know what Scandinavian melancholy is.


Those bands you mentioned have all that teenage band image but that doesn't mean they're all bad musicians. They're average but not bad. What separates HIM from them is the fact that their music is simply different and it has different aspects than those others. Hard to imagine a band like Good Charlotte singing "Gone With The Sin" or the original 7-minute version of "The Heartless". They don't have any emotion whatsoever to play that type of music.

And there's hardly anything similar in Ville's and Ozzy's singing styles. Listen to the frigging music and then speak.

That is not true. Tarja is a classically trained vocalist and she the most definitely takes it seriously what she does.

Originally posted by Pernille
No, that's not true. They do care what kind of reviews they get, they want to maintain that level in their music. But the difference here is that their goal is not to be an elitist indie band with a following of small group of music prigs, they're more down to earth than that. Valo has said this several times. And it doesn't mean it's all about money. Why else would Valo get tattoos of poets in his arms and mention his roots and the bands and the people he admires every time he gets a chance if it was just for money.

You just prove me right time and time again, you are so naive. EXACTLY. They care what their reviews say, they care what people think about them. That's why they try so hard to be what the fans want them to be instead of what they want to be. It's about popularity and therefore it's about fame. Ville just wants to be in a famous band at any cost.

Originally posted by Pernille
Reputation amongst prigs who can't see further from their noses, that's another thing.

And HIM are not the only band who have guest starred Bam's shows.

The thing is, H.I.M are a horrible band. They don't have to worry about "prigs" because they know that they have millions of Bam fans who like them.

H.I.M aren't the only band to perform on his show, but at least the other bands don't take revenue or pay for it. H.I.M show up for the sole purpose of getting more fans to buy their records.

Originally posted by Pernille
Wtf? For the billionth time, their MUSIC hasn't suffered in any f.cking way. As for their reputation, read my posts above.

Stop being an idiot. The music has suffered because music is about being honest. If they're "honest" in their music, then it PROVES that it's all about their money. Because they use Bam to push it. How can you take seriously what they're saying if it doesn't mean much to them?

Originally posted by Pernille
I'm not talking about a sub genre that is love metal, I'm talking about an expression they used. I don't know were they serious of suggesting that or was is more like an informal plea to call their music like that because they're bored being labelled as what they are not.

The first rule of a shit band who sound like everyone else is to claim they're not like everyone else and label themselves. Anyone knows this.

Originally posted by Pernille
Nickelback don't have any gothic influences in their music and they don't probably even know what Scandinavian melancholy is.

Scandinavian melancholy is melancholy from Scandinavia, it's not a genre. It's a phrase that you just made up.

H.I.M aren't from Scandinavia either.

Originally posted by Pernille
Those bands you mentioned have all that teenage band image but that doesn't mean they're all bad musicians. They're average but not bad. What separates HIM from them is the fact that their music is simply different and it has different aspects than those others. Hard to imagine a band like Good Charlotte singing "Gone With The Sin" or the original 7-minute version of "The Heartless". They don't have any emotion whatsoever to play that type of music.

Hahaha, stop. Just stop right now. All of the bands I mentioned are bad musicians or in Busted's case, not musicians at all. If you think otherwise, you've just invalidated your music opinion to new degrees.

H.I.M barely have enough emotion to play their own music, it's not emotion. Emotion is Jeff Buckley, Tool, Faith No More. Emotion is not H.I.M.

Originally posted by Pernille
And there's hardly anything similar in Ville's and Ozzy's singing styles. Listen to the frigging music and then speak.

So you missed Ville at the K! Show when he said he was dedicated to mimicing Ozzy Osbourne?

Apparantly. Uneducated fool.

-AC

H.I.M are from Finland for whoever mentioned the place.

Yeah I know, apparantly Pernille thinks they're Scandinavian.

-AC

No. If they wanted to be what their fans wanted them to be, they wouldn't have given Bam permission to use the heartagram.

Every band cares what reviews they get. With a few exceptions of course and "artists" like Britney Spears who REALLY only do it for money.


You obviously haven't heard what Ville has to say. He never dreamt of being a big rock star, it was only for the music for him. When he realised that he has potential for being one, hunger grew while eating.


And you know this because... you're in the band?


So, when Ville wrote Razorblade Romance in 98/99 he probably thought, "hey I'm gonna meet this skateboard dude and am gonna be in his show, so let's think what I should write!!"

No. Somebody else here is an idiot.


You just try soo damn hard to be cool and credible...

Name me one band, ONE, that sounds like HIM.


HAHAHAHAH!!! I am sorry but what a frigging idiot you are.

The Scandinavia consists of Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Iceland, and HIM are most definitely from there. I should know because I live there.

Where did I say Scandinavian melancholy is a genre? Please tell me, because I don't see that line anywhere. Scandinavian melancholy is a phrase that is commonly used in music reviews concerning every genre from rock/metal to ambient to electronic to etc. HIM are one of those bands where it's present, it's in their blood. You don't come up with a song like GWTS living in Hollywood hills.


Let me refresh your memory. I did not say they (GC, Evanescesence etc.) are good musicians, I said they are not all bad musicians. Notice the words all and bad. Not bad doesn't mean good.

Take Evanescesence for example. Oh yeah, there's another teenage goth wannabe band for kids to fall into, you might think. I am not their fan nor do I think they are that good, but considering their age and experience, their songs are quite ok built and Amy's vocals add to it. The sound in a few of their songs is positively striking, but their problem is that they have more loaned than what they have from their own. They've got 3 star reviews here from quite credible sources so I take it as that 3 out of 5 means average, not bad. So, I did and will say that they are average. I back up what I say, you on the hand haven't provided any other argument other than "they suck" and "they're shit". That's not very convincing.


Yes, Black Sabbath are absolutely their biggest influence musically ("We're on a mission from Black Sabbath" etc.), but I honestly do not find that many similarities between their singing styles. Ozzy uses more straightforward style, while Ville goes more often to falsetto and vibrato.

Originally posted by Pernille
No. If they wanted to be what their fans wanted them to be, they wouldn't have given Bam permission to use the heartagram.

They gave Bam the heartagram and let him push their music to no end because they wanted fame and fortune. They didn't wanna make it on their own.

Originally posted by Pernille
Every band cares what reviews they get. With a few exceptions of course and "artists" like Britney Spears who REALLY only do it for money.

False, completely. You obviously listen to shit musicians. Bands may very well read the reviews but no real artist/s care about what some writer thinks of his, her or their work. Because it's what THEY think of it that matters. So you're wrong. As usual.

Originally posted by Pernille
You obviously haven't heard what Ville has to say. He never dreamt of being a big rock star, it was only for the music for him. When he realised that he has potential for being one, hunger grew while eating.

Yeah and then when he realised that he wasn't as good as he thought he was, he got bored of trying and took the short, sell-out route. Why are you even debating it? It's fact.

Originally posted by Pernille
And you know this because... you're in the band?

No, because I'm not blinded by it. It's obvious. You're so far in denial it's not even funny. You like H.I.M, it doesn't change the fact that they're sell-outs and corporate MTV bitches.

Originally posted by Pernille
So, when Ville wrote Razorblade Romance in 98/99 he probably thought, "hey I'm gonna meet this skateboard dude and am gonna be in his show, so let's think what I should write!!" No. Somebody else here is an idiot.

As I said above, if he ever WAS about the music, he's most certainly not anymore. Because he let Bam, a fat useless nobody, take HIS music and sell it to little girls. What part of this are you not understanding? It's simple.

Originally posted by Pernille
You just try soo damn hard to be cool and credible...

Name me one band, ONE, that sounds like HIM.

I didn't say there are loads of bands that sound like them. There aren't loads of people in music who sound like The Streets, but they're still shit aren't they? Unique doesn't mean talented, unique doesn't mean good. H.I.M sound different purely because Ville has an unusual (and false) voice. They music the band play is nothing more than standard rock music, simple. It's not and that's a fact. You obviously believe that being unique actually means being good. Ville is the most original member of the band and even he rips off about 10 different vocalists.

Originally posted by Pernille
HAHAHAHAH!!! I am sorry but what a frigging idiot you are.

The Scandinavia consists of Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Iceland, and HIM are most definitely from there. I should know because I live there.

How many times have you heard H.I.M, Opeth, The Hives, Emperor etc say "We're from Scandinavia"? I've only ever heard H.I.M say that they're from Finland, Opeth and The Hives introduce themselves from Sweden. So if you're trying to brand everything that's not upbeat and happy as "Scandinavian Melancholy" you're just another genre-labelling fool who has to label shit bands to give himself an excuse to call them unique. Oh shock horror, you've already done that.

Originally posted by Pernille
Where did I say Scandinavian melancholy is a genre? Please tell me, because I don't see that line anywhere. Scandinavian melancholy is a phrase that is commonly used in music reviews concerning every genre from rock/metal to ambient to electronic to etc. HIM are one of those bands where it's present, it's in their blood. You don't come up with a song like GWTS living in Hollywood hills.

Where did I say you said it was a genre? I said it was a phrase, not a genre. A phrase you just pulled out of your ass. Scandinavian Meloncholy is used concerning every genre? It's not is it? Let's be honest with ourselves here.

Originally posted by Pernille
Let me refresh your memory. I did not say they (GC, Evanescesence etc.) are good musicians, I said they are not all bad musicians. Notice the words all and bad. Not bad doesn't mean good.

They are though, they're all wretched and shit musicians. Fact. Let's move on.

Originally posted by Pernille
Take Evanescesence for example. Oh yeah, there's another teenage goth wannabe band for kids to fall into, you might think. I am not their fan nor do I think they are that good, but considering their age and experience, their songs are quite ok built and Amy's vocals add to it. The sound in a few of their songs is positively striking, but their problem is that they have more loaned than what they have from their own. They've got 3 star reviews here from quite credible sources so I take it as that 3 out of 5 means average, not bad. So, I did and will say that they are average. I back up what I say, you on the hand haven't provided any other argument other than "they suck" and "they're shit". That's not very convincing.

Amy Lee uses pro-tools to enhance her voice to the max. She admits it openly in almost every magazine interview that comes up.

Secondly, Evanescence are not an average band. They suck for many reasons:

1) They're insincere and fake.
2) They're incredibly mediocre to shit on their instruments. NOTHING special there at all. Amy Lee is an terrible pianist.
3) You are obviously judging anyone as good if they can knock out a ballad.

You've never backed up what you've said any time. You just keep pumping out bullshit excuses to pretend that H.I.M aren't sellouts. Which they are, and that's a fact.

Originally posted by Pernille
Yes, Black Sabbath are absolutely their biggest influence musically ("We're on a mission from Black Sabbath" etc.), but I honestly do not find that many similarities between their singing styles. Ozzy uses more straightforward style, while Ville goes more often to falsetto and vibrato.

I never said they were similar did I? No. I said Ville rips him off, because he does.

Ville has a horrible live voice. He's a shit singer.

-AC

Finland 'officially' is outside of scandinavia. The official countries of Scandinavia are Sweden, Norway and Denmark. But there is a lot of argument about it. So both right in a way...

For crap.s sake, Finland is not officially outside of Scandinavia. How the hell do you think you know better? I am from Scandinavia and I know what I'm talking about.

The definition of it slightly changes depending on what you're referring to, but that Wikipedia encyclopedia thing you see when you googled is very misleading. I don't know who idiot made that up.

These days, officially, Scandinavia means all the five countries. That's a basic information you should know.


And AC, don't even think I'm finished with you yet.

I didn't look it up, that was what I remember from a school ski trip to Norway.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Cute threats and everything but I was basing my comment on what you said. When you use the phrase "Every band..." you're including every band, and I'm pretty sure you don't know every band. Needless to say, you are wrong.

Needless to say, nor do you know. Still, I am one hundred percent sure that every band on this planet rather gets a good review than a bad review. That was where I was referring to.



Yeah, and where did I say there wasn't.



No I didn't. I said I've seen many band care in that extent that it's not just "liking compliments" but pushing those reviews in people's faces. I did not say every band, I said many. Or it could be just some, but it does happen with bands who claim to be "independent".



Yet again we're in this situation which has nothing to do with the music, great. Is their decision a reason not to like them? Let me say it in this way. If I thought RR was a good album yesterday, they made the decision today, would it be a reason not to like the album tomorrow? Hell no. Their image may be different now in some people's eyes, but I don't pay much attention to it. I care only for the music.



Oh boy. I thought we were already clear on that. The facts is that you CAN have success and you CAN be famous and you CAN be about music, none of these things exclude one another. Insert here what I said about The Beatles. They had screaming teenage fans who probably knew NOTHING about music and they're still considered one of the best bands in the world.

Overall, I think you're being a major hypocrite. I doubt you hate all the "good" bands like Blur, Massive Attack, Pink Floyd, Oasis even if they had success, sold records and had advertisement campaigns. It's always been a part of the game, it's nothing new or shocking. It doesn't bother me unless they

- sell their music by sex
- have other people writing music for them
- put down other bands/fans in a way it goes overboard

None of these apply to HIM.



Shut it up already. Read above. There are bands that have sold shitloads of albums and they're still damn good bands. Grow up a little and see that it's not that black-and-white. It's very rare to have an artist or a band that don't care about sales at all if they're seriously in the business. It's not a sin to get kicks of seeing those masses loving your music and spreading good vibe through your art. Some long for it, some don't. Simple as that.



HAHAHA.. Wtf. You can't expect a non-native English speaker to speak perfect English. Your stupidity is incredible. You already proved it with your comment about HIM not being from Scandinavia. (HAHAHAH!! I'm still laughing to that one....)



You know what, you don't create those ranges with digital enhancements. His singing voice is better on albums than live, which is very common with everyone. On some songs like "Beyond Redemption" you can hear that it's not straightout his voice, but you don't create those basic vocals with computers.

Oh, and believe it or not, they have also played some pretty good live gigs.



Among Scandinavian artists, yes, it is. Of course not globally, what are you talking about?



Now listen up, you don't read anything what I write. Or then you only read it only HALF.

I said I BELIEVE IN MY OWN EARS. Yes, that's what I said, and I didn't forgot caps on.

I also said that if I had to choose between you and the critics I rather choose the one who actually know something and don't have every other word being "shit" or "crap". You can only guess who that is. Hint: it's NOT you.



I never said they were the best musicians to walk on this planet, but they are not "shit". Linde is definitely not a bad guitarist. Have you heard his side profect? And Mige's not bad either.



I'm still wondering what that has to do with anything.



You have some serious reading problems or something because I said several times that I WASN't a fan of any of those bands. It's a different thing to see the positive in something rather than point out the negative all the time. You're obviously not capable of doing that.

Wow, it's like the battle of the egos in here, or something.

Originally posted by Pernille
Needless to say, nor do you know. Still, I am one hundred percent sure that every band on this planet rather gets a good review than a bad review. That was where I was referring to.

Well you're changing what you originally said but you're still wrong. There are bands who don't care.

Originally posted by Pernille
Yeah, and where did I say there wasn't.

Nowhere, where did I say you did?

Originally posted by Pernille
No I didn't. I said I've seen many band care in that extent that it's not just "liking compliments" but pushing those reviews in people's faces. I did not say every band, I said many. Or it could be just some, but it does happen with bands who claim to be "independent".

You used the words "Every band...". Proof?

Example 1:
Originally posted by Pernille
Here I'm sure every band on this planet wants to have some sort of success.

And example 2:
Originally posted by Pernille
Every band cares what reviews they get.

Right there.

Originally posted by Pernille
Yet again we're in this situation which has nothing to do with the music, great. Is their decision a reason not to like them? Let me say it in this way. If I thought RR was a good album yesterday, they made the decision today, would it be a reason not to like the album tomorrow? Hell no. Their image may be different now in some people's eyes, but I don't pay much attention to it. I care only for the music.

Right, lets see if you can understand what I'm saying because I'll say it one more time. You only care for the music, as it should be, right? Well then when the band you like make the decision to let some idiot take their music and shove it into the throats and CD players of stupid MTV whore little teenagers, that does make the music suffer. Why? Because music is about honesty and if their not being honest now, who's to say they were then?

Originally posted by Pernille
Oh boy. I thought we were already clear on that. The facts is that you CAN have success and you CAN be famous and you CAN be about music, none of these things exclude one another. Insert here what I said about The Beatles. They had screaming teenage fans who probably knew NOTHING about music and they're still considered one of the best bands in the world.

Yeah and they're also one of the most overrated bands in history. Radiohead are famous, successful and most definately all about the music. Would they ever let someone shit on their music to get more fame? No. Would they ever let some fat nobody take their music and make kids buy it? No. They're musicians, not salesmen. Ville claimed he didn't want to be famous, didn't he? So can we see where he sold out now?

Originally posted by Pernille
Overall, I think you're being a major hypocrite. I doubt you hate all the "good" bands like Blur, Massive Attack, Pink Floyd, Oasis even if they had success, sold records and had advertisement campaigns. It's always been a part of the game, it's nothing new or shocking. It doesn't bother me unless they

- sell their music by sex
- have other people writing music for them
- put down other bands/fans in a way it goes overboard

None of these apply to HIM.

I like Blur and Massive Attack. I don't mind Pink Floyd but Oasis are shit. I don't respect salesmen, I respect artists. If you're making a point to shove your music out there for the sole purpose of selling records, you're off the list. Like H.I.M do.

You're claiming H.I.M don't use any sexual nature to promote their music? Ville is (for some reason) liked by alot of female music fans. It's a main reason why alot of girls like the band.

Originally posted by Pernille
Shut it up already. Read above. There are bands that have sold shitloads of albums and they're still damn good bands. Grow up a little and see that it's not that black-and-white. It's very rare to have an artist or a band that don't care about sales at all if they're seriously in the business. It's not a sin to get kicks of seeing those masses loving your music and spreading good vibe through your art. Some long for it, some don't. Simple as that.

Try reading what I wrote and try getting what I'm saying. You can be successful and famous and still have credibility. I'm not doubting that you cretin. I'm telling you that when your PURPOSE is to become famous and when you will do ANYTHING to get famous and to get popular, THAT'S when it becomes selling out. Now what do you suppose H.I.M did? Ville didn't wanna be famous, but oh wait....that soon changed. He was "all about the music", but he got bored with being respected, so he sold his music away to MTV and let it get pushed out to the masses of girly girls. There's nothing wrong with being famous if it just happens to come along. Ville made a point to try and become famous by forcing his music out there, becoming known through Bam.

Real bands care about sales because it pays for touring and recording. People like Ville care about sales because it pays for their next mansion. That's what it's about for him now.

Originally posted by Pernille
HAHAHA.. Wtf. You can't expect a non-native English speaker to speak perfect English. Your stupidity is incredible. You already proved it with your comment about HIM not being from Scandinavia. (HAHAHAH!! I'm still laughing to that one....)

They introduce theirselves as H.I.M from Finland, regardless of what Finland is a part of. They don't introduce themselves as H.I.M from Scandinavia do they? No. Shut up then.

I don't expect him to speak perfect English, but I've heard him speak and he speaks excellently for a man who isn't from England. When he sings, it's a fake, cheesy voice that he puts on to suit the whole image of his band, that whole romance thing they have going on.

Originally posted by Pernille
You know what, you don't create those ranges with digital enhancements. His singing voice is better on albums than live, which is very common with everyone. On some songs like "Beyond Redemption" you can hear that it's not straightout his voice, but you don't create those basic vocals with computers.

Making excuses again. The man can't sing, end of story. He can't. Live? He sounds like a broken vacuum cleaner. Smoking has damaged him quite badly because he misses notes, his voice cracks. He's awful. He relies on enhancement.

Originally posted by Pernille
Oh, and believe it or not, they have also played some pretty good live gigs.

Ville doesn't.

Originally posted by Pernille
Among Scandinavian artists, yes, it is. Of course not globally, what are you talking about?

You brought it up, not me. Either way, we're clear. You meant regionally, fine.

Originally posted by Pernille
Now listen up, you don't read anything what I write. Or then you only read it only HALF.

No, no I do read it all. Because I reply to it all. You just don't like what you see.

Originally posted by Pernille
I said I BELIEVE IN MY OWN EARS. Yes, that's what I said, and I didn't forgot caps on.

I also said that if I had to choose between you and the critics I rather choose the one who actually know something and don't have every other word being "shit" or "crap". You can only guess who that is. Hint: it's NOT you.

I'm not writing for a magazine though am I? I'm discussing a couple of bands. I used two words in lengthy and detailed descriptions of why the bands weren't good. You're so desperate for something to reply to that you're picking things out that aren't even relevant. You asked me to tell you why I thought those bands were horrible, I told you.

Originally posted by Pernille
I never said they were the best musicians to walk on this planet, but they are not "shit". Linde is definitely not a bad guitarist. Have you heard his side profect? And Mige's not bad either.

Yeah, he is a bad guitarist. None of the material he comes up with is anything special. Bland, boring, unmelodic.

If you think Evanescence are anything other than a lame band, you're just being silly now. Because they are. H.I.M at least, but Evanescence? They're worse.

Originally posted by Pernille
I'm still wondering what that has to do with anything.

The fact that you said it's subjective about them being fake and insincere might have something to do with it. Try to keep up.


Originally posted by Pernille
You have some serious reading problems or something because I said several times that I WASN't a fan of any of those bands. It's a different thing to see the positive in something rather than point out the negative all the time. You're obviously not capable of doing that.

Oh no I do see it. I see you trying endlessly to justify some kind of talent in those bands. There are none. Why should I see positivity in a band that I strongly dislike for good reason?

-AC

jeez it's a full on war in here

No it's not.

Well, if by war you mean America (me) Vs Iraq.

-AC

*sigh*

HIM = No

You're hardly even arguing about HIM anymore.

What's to argue? They're a piece of shit band made popular by some show on MTV.

Yes, I agree, but this discussion has become practically unreadable.

Trufax. It's basically a quote contest.

"There's a difference between liking compliments and being concerned about what a magazine or writer says about your band or the music they make". - you

What's the point saying this and use it as an argument if it is an obviousness.



Yes, I did, and I meant what I said. Caring is relative and you know that yourself, so DON'T twist my words.

By caring I mean that if you ARE a recording artist and if you ARE going to sell you music and not giving it for free (duh), of course you're checking out what kind of reception your art & work gets. That's what I mean by caring.

You say not all bands care. Wrong. But I think this was a misunderstanding not a disagreement. Or? Still going at it?



I still think you're being a major hypocrite. I've explained this gazillion times.



Who other band in the 60s had backward loop technology?
Who other band had so many various techniques that have become trademarks amongst many other bands?
Name another band that used song transitions as a part of their art in the era of "pop song"?
How do you duplicate what the Beatles & Martin did with Sgt. Peppers?
Name another twosome in music history as powerful, talented & productive as Lennon and McCartney?
Who other band has influenced such greats as The Who, Pink Floyd etc. and a whole generation of musicians?
Were there many if any bands doing music videos before/during The Beatles?

And think of a band like The Rolling Stones... Where would THEY be without the Beatles?

Before they hit it big in the US, they didn't have a record deal. Well they had one song kind of there but that wasn't enough. What they needed was JUST one more song and guess where did they get it? From Lennon/McCartney. So they wrote them 'I Wanna Be Your Man' and gave it to them and it was a HIT for the Stones everywhere. They NEEDED that to get the deal. So in a way they if anyone OWE something to the Beatles. The Beatles put their hands and effort to their ART - as friends - and helped them.

Then compare this situation to HIM who writes & composes & plays nearly everything and don't have Bam WRITING music for them nor having ANYTHING to do with their music whatsoever... Do you see how ridiculous that whole comparison is? Do you like the Stones? Do you hate them now? Well?

etc etc. I could go on and on and on, too bad this topic wasn't about the Beatles.



He said it (= being a rock star) wasn't his ambition until he realised that he had potential for being one. So, PLEASE, try to read what I say. It's not that hard.

HIM didn't reject their old fan base. Ville wanted more and the band wanted more, that's fine, they started to play gigs in America, they got visibility through a big network, ok, that's what happened, I can live with it, but the fact is that THEY do their music & art and nobody else. You can't go saying they owe it for someone or that somebody ELSE did it for them. No.

Radiohead are an excellent band, for that matter. They push boundaries and have my respect. I am not even going to compare the two because they are totally different genre and have different styles - one band's strength is the other band's weakness etc. I love HIM's vocals, their dark sounds & guitar riffs and enjoy Radiohead's psychedelic soundscapes. They are both mood music for me. If it touches me, it's good. Basically.



Yaaaah. They were used as an example. Don't think I didn't know what the other Gallagher did to promote their album n' ish but I didn't go and throw my copy of WTSMG to wastebasket just because one of them behaves like a jerk. That's just rabid. Sick. Over-reacting.



Lol wtf. What if we just drop this whole thing right now, ok?

Selling music by sex means MATERIALIZING people, 99.9% of these people are women, black women bumbing their asses and showing their titties to the camera to music that is 99.9% hip hop crap. Well make that 100%.



By all means, they did not do anything. I gave you a list with three things I consider "anything" and you don't see HIM there.



Let's say, If I said I didn't want to become a writer when I was ten, have I done something irreversibly and terribly wrong, if I ten years later disprove that statement?

Opinions change, views change, goals change.



He is still about the music. It's not like you have to be so damn serious all the time.. He's said that composing an album is like vacation to him. He enjoys what he does. To me that's being about music.



Elvis had girly girls, the Beatles had, the Stones had...



They already had a huge fan base in Europe. And you're going to say "no but usa", but really, think of it yourself. The Beatles sort of helped the Stones to get there, and I'm SURE it's not the only example in the history of music. You just don't know the histories of all bands. You "only" know HIM because they're your generation. (Well that's what one could assume by reading your posts.)



You are so frigging wrong its not funny anymore. Did HE force it to bam? Or did Bam ASK to use it? Hmmm.



Wake up! There are 100000000 bands out there with big cash and mansions yet you're acting like it's OMGG because it's HIM. It's you who are making excuses. LAME ones.



What the heck, man... It's BASIC KNOWLEDGE to know what Scandinavia is, especially when it's EUROPE, you live there too, hello?? I'm not even talking about HIM anymore, I'm talking about your lack of intellect. Damn...



If his lyrics and compositions comprise themes of love and relationships, you don't expect him to screech like Brian Johnson.

And trust me, it's not easy to speak and sing with the same accent if you're not a native speaker.



Nope, I am not making excuses. LOL Take someone like.... Well you can only GUESS how much "enhancement" they've done to Britney's vocals and she still sounds like she's the crappiest & forced-to-be-trendy & most unoriginal thing ever.

Ville sounds incredible on albums. Beautiful, deep, husky, charming, frisky... Even deaf can hear it's not relying on enhancement.



HA! If that's your definition of detailed & lengthy I'm Santa. Your every other word was "shit", "crap", "horrible". Quite subjective, if I may say so.



Oh boy. Do you know what this band is being known for? They're known for their MELODIES. You're quite a fool if you say with a straight face that they don't have any melodies in their songs or their guitars. Have you heard Razorblade Kiss? Probably not.

Originally posted by Pernille
What's the point saying this and use it as an argument if it is an obviousness.

I never claimed you said any of that though, I was just stating it.

Originally posted by Pernille
Yes, I did, and I meant what I said. Caring is relative and you know that yourself, so DON'T twist my words. By caring I mean that if you ARE a recording artist and if you ARE going to sell you music and not giving it for free (duh), of course you're checking out what kind of reception your art & work gets. That's what I mean by caring.

Well you're weaseling out of the fact that you claimed every band CARES what reviews say about them, not that they possibly check them out. Anyway, you've retracted the comment and changed it.

Originally posted by Pernille
You say not all bands care. Wrong. But I think this was a misunderstanding not a disagreement. Or? Still going at it?

No I'm not wrong am I? Because not ALL band ever and today, care about their reviews.

Originally posted by Pernille
I still think you're being a major hypocrite. I've explained this gazillion times.

Yeah and I've proved you wrong a gazillion times. So let's move on.

Originally posted by Pernille
Then compare this situation to HIM who writes & composes & plays nearly everything and don't have Bam WRITING music for them nor having ANYTHING to do with their music whatsoever... Do you see how ridiculous that whole comparison is? Do you like the Stones? Do you hate them now? Well?

Hooray! We're back. Stones don't have people writing all their music for them, first of all. Second of all, H.I.M could write all their own music and play all their own instruments. It doesn't erase the point that they're making really bad music on their own and playing their instruments poorly. Avril Lavigne could write all her own songs, it doesn't mean they're not shit.

Originally posted by Pernille
"etc etc. I could go on and on and on, too bad this topic wasn't about the Beatles.

You did go on and on. Don't say "too bad" because I've already dealt with someone saying exactly the same things as you in another thread.

Originally posted by Pernille
He said it (= being a rock star) wasn't his ambition until he realised that he had potential for being one. So, PLEASE, try to read what I say. It's not that hard.

Exactly. He had the potential to be famous. He may very well have been about the music for a while but when he got bored of being respected, he didn't try to gain worldwide success through continual trying, he took the short and easy road of selling his music to a scumbag.

Originally posted by Pernille
HIM didn't reject their old fan base. Ville wanted more and the band wanted more, that's fine, they started to play gigs in America, they got visibility through a big network, ok, that's what happened, I can live with it, but the fact is that THEY do their music & art and nobody else. You can't go saying they owe it for someone or that somebody ELSE did it for them. No.

They wanted more, you're proving me right. They're a bunch of greedy, fame-hungry, celebrities. They didn't try to get more by being themselves and working hard, did they? No, they didn't. They sold theirselves to MTV and let Bam push the music. It's a fact that this happened.

Originally posted by Pernille
Selling music by sex means MATERIALIZING people, 99.9% of these people are women, black women bumbing their asses and showing their titties to the camera to music that is 99.9% hip hop crap. Well make that 100%.

I'm not claiming that they sell it in that way, but Ville doesn't exactly do anything to dissuade the women obsessed with his looks, to not pay attention to that.

Originally posted by Pernille
"By all means, they did not do anything. I gave you a list with three things I consider "anything" and you don't see HIM there.

You just basically admitted above that they gave themselves to network television and badly wanted more exposure. They sold out, in the ONE OF the truest definitions of the term.

Originally posted by Pernille
Let's say, If I said I didn't want to become a writer when I was ten, have I done something irreversibly and terribly wrong, if I ten years later disprove that statement?

If you started writing for your own self and nobody else, and didn't push your work for the sheer purpose of sales, exposure or money (like H.I.M did), then you would still be considered an artist with integrity.

Originally posted by Pernille
"Opinions change, views change, goals change.

Yeah, H.I.M decided that their goal wasn't to be respected and admired, it was to get as many fans as possible, as quick and easily as they could even if it meant giving themselves to MTV. Their goal became to be famous at any cost.

Originally posted by Pernille
He is still about the music. It's not like you have to be so damn serious all the time.. He's said that composing an album is like vacation to him. He enjoys what he does. To me that's being about music.

See the past 5 or so quotes.

-AC

Originally posted by Pernille
They already had a huge fan base in Europe. And you're going to say "no but usa", but really, think of it yourself. The Beatles sort of helped the Stones to get there, and I'm SURE it's not the only example in the history of music. You just don't know the histories of all bands. You "only" know HIM because they're your generation. (Well that's what one could assume by reading your posts.)

I have extensive knowledge across all eras and generations of music, I make it my business to know because I'm not some passive music fan.

Secondly, H.I.M had a following in Europe, I know that, I live here. That wasn't enough for H.I.M, they wanted more. And that, in many ways, is fine. If they had gone to the US and worked their asses of, I wouldn't have had a problem. They didn't though, they sold themselves to network TV, plastered their logo all over Bam and let him tell kids to buy their music.

Originally posted by Pernille
You are so frigging wrong its not funny anymore. Did HE force it to bam? Or did Bam ASK to use it? Hmmm.

Did Bam force THEM? No. They obviously thought it was ok.

Originally posted by Pernille
Wake up! There are 100000000 bands out there with big cash and mansions yet you're acting like it's OMGG because it's HIM. It's you who are making excuses. LAME ones.

You're missing the point I made. Yeah there are loads of bands who are millionaires with mansions etc, but that doesn't fuel the greatest bands to make more music. You think Thom Yorke makes music with Radiohead because he wants a ferrari? No. H.I.M and Ville in general have proven that it's about the fame for them and that they don't care how they get it. I'm not disputing that they might love making music, I'm saying that it's obviously not more important than becoming really famous.

Originally posted by Pernille
What the heck, man... It's BASIC KNOWLEDGE to know what Scandinavia is, especially when it's EUROPE, you live there too, hello?? I'm not even talking about HIM anymore, I'm talking about your lack of intellect. Damn...

Lack of intellect? It's taken me multiple posts to show you why H.I.M factually sold out. So let's not dip into that sugar bowl.

I'm talking about where they class themselves as hailing from. Which is Finland, correct? Yes.

Originally posted by Pernille
If his lyrics and compositions comprise themes of love and relationships, you don't expect him to screech like Brian Johnson. And trust me, it's not easy to speak and sing with the same accent if you're not a native speaker.

Maybe because he's faking the voice, as I said.

Originally posted by Pernille
Nope, I am not making excuses. LOL Take someone like.... Well you can only GUESS how much "enhancement" they've done to Britney's vocals and she still sounds like she's the crappiest & forced-to-be-trendy & most unoriginal thing ever.

Ville sounds incredible on albums. Beautiful, deep, husky, charming, frisky... Even deaf can hear it's not relying on enhancement.

Why are you continually using the "He's incredible on albums" remark as some kind of back up? To me he doesn't sound good on albums but the POINT here, is that if you compare his live voice (aka his real, unchanged voice) to his studio voice, they're completely different. He is a horrible, horrible live singer. In the studio, where they make everything sound clean and crisp, he sounds "incredible". Do you not see what's going on?

Originally posted by Pernille
"HA! If that's your definition of detailed & lengthy I'm Santa. Your every other word was "shit", "crap", "horrible". Quite subjective, if I may say so.

I can't hear the music for you and make you agree with me. You're a H.I.M fanatic, you're literally denying factual evidence of what they've done wrong so why would I go into lengthy detail for you to say "Nah."?

I included reasons why. Also, stop focusing on the words I use when you've done NOTHING but repeat yourself.

Originally posted by Pernille
"Oh boy. Do you know what this band is being known for? They're known for their MELODIES. You're quite a fool if you say with a straight face that they don't have any melodies in their songs or their guitars. Have you heard Razorblade Kiss? Probably not.

Yes I have heard it. Way to make an assumptuon . You're making yourself look rather silly by doing that.

Melodies is a technique. All band have "melodies" somewhere. H.I.M just don't do a very good job.

Now, if you're gonna reply, do so about H.I.M. I've already dealt with a deluded Beatles fan.

-AC

Bam and Ville Valo are really good friends and Bam loves his band, is it so wrong to show support for them? no...Bam just wants them to do well!

Try reading the posts before making an ill informed and wrong comment please.

Thanks.

-AC

Lets think of it this way -

H.I.M are only popular because of Bam. They wouldn't last five minutes without his endorsement.

By endorsement, I obviously mean anal activity.

Is it really that simple? Yes, yes it is. Barrage the impressionable youths with any old crap, and as long as someone says "these guys are cool" they'll follow. Tis the way the world works. The world is brimming with wrongability.

If Bam said eating shit was fun, millions of 'sk8ers' (complete with tie and angst) would begin to dine on their pet canines fecal matter within minutes.

i did read most of it..but i just wanted to say theat

and heaps of ppl i know including me knew bout HIM way before Bam

Dont kid yourself.

what's that meant to mean?

what do you think it means?

Alright, because this shit is going nowhere, this is a sum up of what I'm trying to say here. And probably my last reply on this thread.

AC:

First of all, I never claimed that Stones have people writing all their music for them. (hello... They're the Stones!?)

What I was doing I was merely pointing out the fact that when it comes to working your ass off & not letting ANYONE else do the work for you, it's not that simple because it HAPPENS, you know, a LOT (people helping you), and so that was just an example of it. It was a friendly gesture from Paul & John to use their hard earned free time to go and compose a track for them, that was it and nobody complains about it as they shouldn't. You say it's alllll ok if the Beatles crack a song for the Stones that just happens to be one of the songs that helped them to get signed & delivered to America to perform on Ed Sullivan etc. yet you're pretending like it's OMG if a dedicated fan of a band wants to let people know about that band that probably not many had heard before in the States and helps them get visibility. It's not a sin if you have friends having your back if it's still YOU who do the work, the music, it's a different thing to have all those zillions of songwriters and composers do the music FOR you.

What really boggles me is the fact that Blur, Massive Attack and all the other bands I mentioned have had airtime on MTV (yes, the biggest & corrupted sellout network) yet you say NOTHING about it. Why? Because you're a HYPOCRITE. Every reply you make is storming about how "wrong" it is to let yourself be shown on MTV/sacrificing your art and be ok with it, yet all these other bands have done exactly the same thing and you don't even realize it. These bands do NOTHING to avoid that channel, they're probably glad & thrilled to have their music videos up there pushing in the faces of 13-15 year olds, the same age group that probably watches the Bam show. An average MTV viewer is prob almost the same as a person who watches Viva la Bam (or whatever the hell it's called, I do not know because I have never watched one single episode of that in my life), so your excuse of that HIM are the only ones pushing their stuff in throats of teenage girls is the lamest I've ever heard.

If you are a 100% indie supporter, then I could understand it. Maybe. But you're not, you're a hypocrite.

You said you liked Blur? Well, then you probably know that Damon Albarn's side project is basically BASED ON music videos that run on MTV. The whole Gorillaz idea is based on visuality & trendy music and it's MOST definitely targeted to viewers of MTV. But, boy, oh boy, you say NOTHING about it. Why? Because you know what you are. You claim to be all educated & wise, but guess what, you're not.

Am I wrong or making excuses? No I am not. You are.

Even if I have said that I never liked the unfortunate Bam/MTV episode in HIM's career, for me (or for anyone who supports ANY acts in that channel) it's not a real reason to hate the band. I don't hate Blur if they're on MTV, I don't hate Metallica if they were nominated and awarded for MTV Icon, an "icon" of something that represents the Downward of Music. It's a shame but no can do. I can only guess how many "music fans" hate HIM and claim they're "sell out" yet blast their copies of Master Of Puppets in their CD players. If that's not being FAKE and HYPOCRITE I don't know what is.

I will say it now and I will say it again, I do not think HIM are the best band in the world, let's keep it real, okay, but this topic happens to be about them so don't go there babbling and shitting about my music taste of which you know nothing about.

HIM are a great band in what they do, Ville is a good singer & songwriter and the reason I entered this thread was because I'm personally sick of people throwing their shit on them BECAUSE some skateboarder dude who has nothing to do with their music and just happens to be a fan of them and good friends with Ville is now a reason to label them as a sellout teenage band. If you don't like their music that's fine, let's ONLY talk about the music then, but this thread has once again proved that people are not capable of doing that. NOT.

Am I still not making sense? Am I still making excuses?

Ok. If we ARE talking about the music/vocals then, you're whining about that Ville's voice is fake. Try to get over yourself and get the fact that it's NOT the same to sing and talk in English if it's not your first language. Ville does pretty damn good job anyhow. His voice is naturally "husky" he doesn't fake that. And I have given you examples after examples that what you hear on their records, it's not all relying on some f.cking enhancement. You're deaf if you don't hear that. Many, and I mean MANY critics, music fans and listeners agree with me (that's not an excuse it's a fact) that Ville has good and varied voice, it's not something I came up with. Some singers like Celine Dion, who is perfect in EVERY note she lets out from her mouth both in records and live, many would agree that she is still boring and unoriginal. She's basically a walking version of singing lesson, but being different and unique she is not. Ville is not the best example of totally perfect live singing, but he's got at least a voice you don't hear from every guy next door. His live vs. album vocals still don't mean it's all technical enhancement if a person sings better on albums. Consider it's a different situation, atmosphere and so on and so on.



Originally posted by Red Superfly
If Bam said eating shit was fun, millions of 'sk8ers' (complete with tie and angst) would begin to dine on their pet canines fecal matter within minutes.

If Curt Cobain said having a greasy gross shit hair and looking like a homeless drunkard was fun, the next day the kids would be walking copies of him.

If Elvis said f.cking a fourteen year old was fun, the world would say it's allll ok.

So... Your point was?

Originally posted by Pernille
What I was doing I was merely pointing out the fact that when it comes to working your ass off & not letting ANYONE else do the work for you, it's not that simple because it HAPPENS, you know, a LOT (people helping you), and so that was just an example of it. It was a friendly gesture from Paul & John to use their hard earned free time to go and compose a track for them, that was it and nobody complains about it as they shouldn't.

What happened after they composed the track? There was no more to be said. It was a one off, one song. Look, I'm not against industry friendships at all, by any stretch. My point is that if Ville wanted to be successful on a large scale JUST because he loved his music (which would have been fine) he should have worked and worked and worked at it. He didn't though, he took the short, easy and cash-rewarding road. He sold out. That, is fact.

Originally posted by Pernille
You say it's alllll ok if the Beatles crack a song for the Stones that just happens to be one of the songs that helped them to get signed & delivered to America to perform on Ed Sullivan etc. yet you're pretending like it's OMG if a dedicated fan of a band wants to let people know about that band that probably not many had heard before in the States. It's not a sin if you have friends having your back if it's still YOU who do the work, the music, it's a different thing to have all those zillions of songwriters and composers do the music FOR you.

Listen to me, for the last time.

If it was a one off directed video, or a one of production with no pushed media press, I could understand. Friends favours. It wasn't though was it? Bam directed the Sacrement video for them, fine. It should have stopped there OR if they DID want him to work with them, they could have at most just had him direct the videos.

They didn't. Ville realised that he didn't want to work to be successful. He gave up trying, he gave up the effort and he allowed Bam to push the music, push the image and push the work. He gave an ENTIRE disc on their Love Metal DVD to Bam. Why? Because he wanted it to sell lots so that he could make lots of money. He didn't do it on his own, he did it because of Bam.

Originally posted by Pernille
What really boggles me is the fact that Blur, Massive Attack and all the other bands I mentioned have had airtime on MTV (yes, the biggest & corrupted sellout network) yet you say NOTHING about it. Why? Because you're a HYPOCRITE. Every reply you make is storming about how "wrong" it is to let yourself be shown on MTV/sacrificing your art and be ok with it, yet all these other bands have done exactly the same thing and you don't even realize it.

How drastically ill informed you are dear boy. How sad.

Radiohead get featured rarely on MTV, Foo Fighters, Metallica even. It doesn't mean they're sell outs. It happens BECAUSE they are such huge bands. Radiohead don't TRY to get on MTV, it happens. They don't PUSH the image, the music or the videos onto MTV. H.I.M appearing on MTV once in a while doesn't make them sell outs, nor would I ever say it did. It happens and sometimes, no matter what, it's unavoidable. However, there comes a time when a line is crossed.

The Darkness for example. Their goal was always to play good, honest music to millions of people. They love the music and they wanted to be a band, like Queen, that everyone loved. No problem. If H.I.M wanted the same, that's fine. The Darkness wanted that goal but ONLY on their terms. They were never going to sell themselves out to get there. They either got there through trying, or they didn't wanna get there at all. The Darkness tried to break America, did FAIRLY well, but not as well as they hoped. They kept trying and kept trying and eventually got a rather dedicated fan base. At any point they could have let MTV mould them or let a TV show sell their music to make it easier, but they didn't. H.I.M did, to the worst possible person, Bam Margera. So before you try to debate what is and what isn't selling out, learn what the term means before throwing it about. It applies to H.I.M. Because they made a compromise in exchange for fame and fortune. They didn't get the fame and fortune on their own hard work.

Originally posted by Pernille
These bands do NOTHING to avoid that channel, they're probably glad & thrilled to have their music videos up there pushing in the faces of 13-15 year olds, the same age group that probably watches the Bam show.

Doing nothing to avoid it and doing everything to be on it are two different things. MTV, love or hate, are the biggest network of music coverage on Earth, most probably. It's hard to avoid them, like it or not. Massive Attack don't go knocking on MTV's door saying "Play our stuff." H.I.M clearly do and have done. So stop pulling shit out of thin air to try and validate your arguement.

Originally posted by Pernille
An average MTV viewer is prob almost the same as a person who watches Viva la Bam (or whatever the hell it's called, I do not know because I have never watched one single episode of that in my life)

I smell a hefty whiff of bullcrap here, but ok.

Originally posted by Pernille
So your excuse of that HIM are the only ones pushing their stuff in the throats of teenage girls is the lamest I've ever heard.

When did I say H.I.M are the only ones pushing their stuff in the throats of teenage girls? They're not the only band doing it. Doesn't make it any more right. They're still sellouts, because they made a COMPROMISE. Not because they happened to get their videos on MTV. Because they made a compromise for more fame and fortune. What are you not getting?

Originally posted by Pernille
If you are a 100% indie supporter, then I could understand it. Maybe. But you're not, you're a hypocrite.

No, you just don't know why I'm calling them sell outs. You think it's because they got their videos played on MTV. That's not why I'm calling them sellouts.

Originally posted by Pernille
You said you liked Blur? Well, then you probably know that Damon Albarn's side project is basically BASED ON music videos that run on MTV. The whole Gorillaz idea is based on visuality & trendy music and it's MOST definitely targeted to viewers of MTV. But, boy, oh boy, you say NOTHING about it. Why? Because you know what you are. You claim to be all educated & wise, but guess what, you're not.

Well despite the fact that yes, I am educated on music, I'll deal with your Gorillaz point.

Where is your evidence for that? Because let's be clear and true to our own consciences here, you made that up on the spot didn't you? If anything, Gorillaz are a prime example of what I'm talking about. Damon Albarn and Dan the Automator don't go on MTV saying "Buy Gorillaz albums". They don't get Johnny Knoxville to pimp their music. They don't even appear in their own videos. So think before you make stuff up.

Originally posted by Pernille
Am I wrong or making excuses? No I am not. You are.

Nice comeback, Mr O' Reilly. Did Woody Allen give you that one? Or did you come up with it on your own.

You're making excuses and blatantly misunderstanding my points because you know you're wrong and just don't know when to cut your losses. Clinging to your feeble lies and invalid points like a dying soldier.

-AC

Originally posted by Pernille
Even if I have said that I never liked the unfortunate Bam/MTV episode in HIM's career, for me (or for anyone who supports ANY acts in that channel) it's not a real reason to hate the band. I don't hate Blur if they're on MTV, I don't hate Metallica if they were nominated and awarded for MTV Icon, an "icon" of something that represents the Downward of Music. It's a shame but no can do. I can only guess how many "music fans" hate HIM and claim they're "sell out" yet blast their copies of Master Of Puppets in their CD players. If that's not being FAKE and HYPOCRITE I don't know what is.

Funny that, so unbelievably funny. I don't hate Blur coz they're on MTV now and then. Nor do I hate Metallica for it. Nor do I hate H.I.M for it. You have continued to misunderstand and purposefully blur my points because you know you're wrong.

I'm saying this for the 3rd time in my post: H.I.M aren't sell outs because their videos are played on MTV. They're sellouts because instead of working hard to reach their goal, they took the easy road out and took popularity and money over respect and effort. THAT is why I believe they are sellouts only you were too stupid to stop and read my posts.

Originally posted by Pernille
I will say it now and I will say it again, I do not think HIM are the best band in the world, let's keep it real, okay, but this topic happens to be about them so don't go there babbling and shitting about my music taste of which you know nothing about.

So it's ok for you to assume I've not heard any of their music but it's not ok for me to assume about your music taste? Hypocrite?

Originally posted by Pernille
HIM are a great band in what they do, Ville is a good singer & songwriter and the reason I entered this thread was because I'm personally sick of people throwing their shit on them BECAUSE some skateboarder dude who has nothing to do with their music and just happens to be a fan of them and good friends with Ville is now a reason to label them as a sellout teenage band. If you don't like their music that's fine, let's ONLY talk about the music then, but this thread has once again proved that people are not capable of doing that. NOT.

A) Stop calling Ville a good singer. Outside of a studio, he cannot sing AT ALL. He cannot.

B) I don't care who they're friends with. If they were friends with Bam but they weren't involved with him, I would just dislike their music and not say anything. The fact that they (this is the 4th time) took the cheap way out, is what makes them sellouts.

Originally posted by Pernille
Am I still not making sense? Am I still making excuses?

Yes, yes. Try reading my posts.

Originally posted by Pernille
Ok. If we ARE talking about the music/vocals then, you're whining about that Ville's voice is fake. Try to get over yourself and get the fact that it's NOT the same to sing and talk in English if it's not your first language. Ville does pretty damn good job anyhow. His voice is naturally "husky" he doesn't fake that. And I have given you examples after examples that what you hear on their records, it's not all relying on some f.cking enhancement. You're deaf if you don't hear that.

Oh god, this is actually headache inducing levels of naivity here. Why do you keep saying it's not enhancement, but using STUDIO examples to show how "great" his voice is? LIVE, he is terrible. He cannot sing outside of a studio. Did you HEAR him at Download 2005? The man could barely sing and just before the show he had claimed that he thought his voice was in the best shape it's ever been.

Originally posted by Pernille
Many, and I mean MANY critics, music fans and listeners agree with me (that's not an excuse it's a fact) that Ville has good and varied voice, it's not something I came up with. Some singers like Celine Dion, who is perfect in EVERY note she lets out from her mouth both in records and live, many would agree that she is still boring and unoriginal.

Many many music fans and listeners would agree that Avril Lavigne is good. She's not though is she? Just like Ville is not a good live singer.

Originally posted by Pernille
She's basically a walking version of singing lesson, but being different and unique she is not. Ville is not the best example of totally perfect live singing, but he's got at least a voice you don't hear from every guy next door. His live vs. album vocals still don't mean it's all technical enhancement if a person sings better on albums.

I agree that being better in studio doesn't mean it's all enhancement. However, Ville's voice is SO different and SO poorly sounding when live, that it's obvious why it sounds better in the studio. It doesn't sound like "Oh that guy from H.I.M is singing live." It sounds like a different person.

Originally posted by Pernille
If Curt Cobain said having a greasy gross shit hair and looking like a homeless drunkard was fun, the next day the kids would be walking copies of him.

If Elvis said f.cking a fourteen year old was fun, the world would say it's allll ok.

So... Your point was?

You just said "Many many music listeners agree with me". Most of those are the same people that Red Superfly was referring to.

-AC

him rules

good people...very good people!! I love HIM!

bumo.solitary man is a awesome cover

i only like a couple of there songs but i dont think there that good.

melinda was mine till in time that i found her lovin jim and holding him

Him droolio

Excellent band

Originally posted by ))TrAuMa((
what do you think of them!
Got about 6 of their songs. They are awesome.

Originally posted by bardock
melinda was mine till in time that i found her lovin jim and holding him

You do realise that song was written by Neil Diamond do you?

Originally posted by Otaku
You do realise that song was written by Neil Diamond do you?

yes i do. and it was also covered by the man in black johnny cash. all of which rule

im going to their concert soon,i cant wait