Originally posted by BackFire
of course I can blame metallica for people not buying their music. Who else is to blame? It's perfectly reasonable to blame the artist for poor sales. People who make bad music are soley to blame for poor sales. They just used the napster thing as an excuse for shitty sales of their crappy music.
No, you're wrong.
Metallica aren't to blame for a majority of the lazy ****s out there not bothering to buy music. If Tool released the best album ever and it had pathetic sales...yeeeeeet lots of people had it, would it equal bad music? Or would it equal lazy scum****s downloading it? Yes exactly. Your grudge aside, music that doesn't appeal to you is no excuse to download it and continually piss and moan about it like an impotent jerk.
Originally posted by BackFire
Chances are, their CD wouldn't have sold well anyways, because, yes, it was shitty. Just like I can blame a shitty film maker for people not seeing his movie, or a shitty sports team for people not going to go see them play. It's entirely their fault. The napster thing is just a theorized excuse that has no factuality behind it. (Oh, it's napster that's to blame for our bad sales!, we can't prove that, but it's true!)
How utterly ridiculous. The CD sold extremely well. That's besides the point. The point I'm trying to make is that downloading albums without supporting the band, regardless of who it is, is wrong. It's even worse if you download the album, hate it (yet inexplicably listen to it) and continue whining.
The Napster thing isn't some theoretical escape plan. Do you even know what Napster was about? Or what even happened? Some songs were leaked and everybody rushed to get them. No complaints. The reason Metallica fought was because they believed, rightly so, that it was bullshit how their music was put up for distribution without them having any kind of say in it. They are all for the music distribution on the net, they just wanted to be asked for permission first. Nothing wrong with that. "We want you to ask us before you, you know, take our music for free." "Who do you think you are?" Yeah, ridiculous when you break it down. Their music is no one elses to give but theirs.
Originally posted by BackFire
All we know for sure is that their album sold poorly, it's their fault. During this time when napster was huge, there were numerous other musicians who sold millions of albums, because people liked their music, why didn't napster destroy their sales? Because their music was good, and people liked it, as such, a lot of people purchased their music. Good music will always sell, people will always buy it, no matter what.
A) I dunno where you're getting this, coz it went number 1 in many countries.
B) Those artists were the Britney's and Justin's who have countless fans who obsess over owning ever piece of media released. In many cases the music couldn't be any less important to them.
C) Yeah, shit music will always sell too. Because there'll always be idiots.
Originally posted by BackFire
The way they bitched about it really annoyed me. it's like those pussy athletes who complain about only getting 20 million dollars a season because they want 30 million a season. They should shut up and just be happy they're getting paid at all to do what they "love". They got rich off of making music, they're the last band that should complain about people downloading their crappy music, their still making millions of dollars, people still know it's their music, and people will still see them live. Be happy you're living the dream of so many people, if you want your music to sell well, make good music.
Well firstly, you clearly got the Napster debate overly confused, they weren't "whining" about anything to do with album sales.
Second, they're not though are they? If people are stealing from them, they're not getting paid. They never fought Napster to boost record sales anyway, they fought because their music got leaked against their will and they wasn't ready for that to happen.
They were within rights to do so.
-AC
"Metallica aren't to blame for a majority of the lazy ****s out there not bothering to buy music. If Tool released the best album ever and it had pathetic sales...yeeeeeet lots of people had it, would it equal bad music? Or would it equal lazy scum****s downloading it? Yes exactly. Your grudge aside, music that doesn't appeal to you is no excuse to download it and continually piss and moan about it like an impotent jerk."
Metallica aren't to blame for people downloading their music, they ARE responsible for people not buying their music, though. There is a difference.
"The Napster thing isn't some theoretical escape plan. Do you even know what Napster was about? Or what even happened? Some songs were leaked and everybody rushed to get them. No complaints. The reason Metallica fought was because they believed, rightly so, that it was bullshit how their music was put up for distribution without them having any kind of say in it. They are all for the music distribution on the net, they just wanted to be asked for permission first. Nothing wrong with that. "We want you to ask us before you, you know, take our music for free." "Who do you think you are?" Yeah, ridiculous when you break it down. Their music is no one elses to give but theirs."
Then how did it get leaked? And how was it the fault of napster that their music was leaked before they were prepared. It's the fault of the actual person who took the music and put it up before metallica gave thier ok, it's still stupid that they bitched ABOUT napster, rather then about a person leaking their music, who happened to use napster to distribute it.
"The point I'm trying to make is that downloading albums without supporting the band, regardless of who it is, is wrong. It's even worse if you download the album, hate it (yet inexplicably listen to it) and continue whining."
And I agree, never said otherwise.
Originally posted by BackFire
Metallica aren't to blame for people downloading their music, they ARE responsible for people not buying their music, though. There is a difference.
Loads of people don't buy Tool music. Tool are responsible for that, does it make them shit? No. A Britney fan could say "If Tool didn't make such shit music, I'd buy their albums."
Originally posted by BackFire
Then how did it get leaked? And how was it the fault of napster that their music was leaked before they were prepared. It's the fault of the actual person who took the music and put it up before metallica gave thier ok, it's still stupid that they bitched ABOUT napster, rather then about a person leaking their music, who happened to use napster to distribute it.
Napster were a professional site. They should have not taken it from some lone guy without thinking and plastered it on the net. They admitted they were wrong. The person couldn't have used Napster to distribute it if Napster did the right thing and chose not to.
-AC
"Loads of people don't buy Tool music. Tool are responsible for that, does it make them shit? No. A Britney fan could say "If Tool didn't make such shit music, I'd buy their albums.""
Nah, because tools music is good, unique, and refreshing, Metallicas is now shitty, redundant and boring. Someone needs to bring on the sandman and put their spiralling career to sleep.
Napster was professional at the time? News to me.
Too be honest I don't remember much about it, never really cared about it at the time. I just remember lars cunting off about napster in an annoying and bitchy manner, left a bad taste in my mouth hearing his annoying voice whining like that. Just something about a rockstar bitching like a little girl, no matter what it's about, was pathetic. One of the main reasons I don't like metallica, other then their craptastic music.
Originally posted by BackFire
Nah, because tools music is good, unique, and refreshing, Metallicas is now shitty, redundant and boring. Someone needs to bring on the sandman and put their spiralling career to sleep.Napster was professional at the time? News to me.
Yeah but in the Britney fan's opinion, Tool's music is shitty, hence why she isn't buying it. Tool are responsible for that. It doesn't mean their music is shit. Your opinion is that Metallica is shitty, they're responsible for you thinking that. It doesn't mean their music is shit.
Originally posted by BackFire
Too be honest I don't remember much about it, never really cared about it at the time. I just remember lars cunting off about napster in an annoying and bitchy manner, left a bad taste in my mouth hearing his annoying voice whining like that. Just something about a rockstar bitching like a little girl, no matter what it's about, was pathetic. One of the main reasons I don't like metallica, other then their craptastic music.
Yeah. I like to let my personal feelings block actuality and rationale too.
Oh wait, no I don't.
-AC
"Yeah but in the Britney fan's opinion, Tool's music is shitty, hence why she isn't buying it. Tool are responsible for that. It doesn't mean their music is shit. Your opinion is that Metallica is shitty, they're responsible for you thinking that. It doesn't mean their music is shit."
As far as I'm concerned, it does. Britney fans have no validity because they like britney spears, seeing as I like good music from bands that have some skill, and something unique about them, I do. Plus, who listens to britney spear fans?
"Yeah. I like to let my personal feelings block actuality and rationale too.
Oh wait, no I don't."
Yeah, neither do I, never said any irrational. My whole argument is that metallica is whiney pussies who make shitty music, you disproved none of that, all you proved is that their bitching and whining was just, which I never denied, the fact is, they still bitched and whined, their music is still generic and no longer carry anything significantly different in the genre. all they do now is play generic metal, if they weren't "metallica" no one would buy their shit. They're a name, nothing more.
Originally posted by BackFire
As far as I'm concerned, it does. Britney fans have no validity because they like britney spears, seeing as I like good music from bands that have some skill, and something unique about them, I do. Plus, who listens to britney spear fans?
Well yeah, obviously you have a credible music opinion. Never questioned that. I'm saying that on the subject of a band like Metallica, it's not exactly clean and jerk when it comes to Shit/Good. Because I like St. Anger, you don't.
Originally posted by BackFire
My whole argument is that metallica is whiney pussies who make shitty music, you disproved none of that, all you proved is that their bitching and whining was just, which I never denied, the fact is, they still bitched and whined, their music is still generic and no longer carry anything significantly different in the genre. all they do now is play generic metal, if they weren't "metallica" no one would buy their shit. They're a name, nothing more.
Well I can't disprove that you think they make shitty music, you do and that's that. I don't.
Secondly, this isn't the thread for that arguement. Like I said, letting your personal feelings toward the band block you from topic.
If that last line wasn't a vastly generalised opinion, I'd swear you were trying to claim it as fact.
-AC
Yes, because I totally said it was fact.
This thread is a comparison between Metallica vs megadeth, in fact, we've been off topic for the duration of our little discussion, both you and I, saying my feelings about metallica is completely on topic, because putting down metallica and not megadeth shows how I feel about the topic.
Re: Metallica VS Megadeth
Originally posted by HydrokronicMaybe, but megadeth has dave mustaine singing for them, that's not a good thing.
Who would win in a battle of the bands competition, I think Megadeth would win cause they for 1 sound a lot better,
and 2 metallica are sell outs, all they wanna do is become famous and sound like shit, all they care about is the money not the true meaning to playing music,Explain to me how metallica are sellouts and megadeth arent.
megadeth should be #1 and those sell outs metallica should be in hell,Then why shouldn't the sellouts megadeth be in hell?
not to mention the original singer who started metallica got kicked out of his own band in the first place,Uh, the original singer for metallica is still in the band.
metallica are nothing without megadeth.Is that a joke? You do know metallica released TWO albums before megadeth even released ONE, right? I wonder exactly how megadeth caused metallica to be the biggest metal band ever. By your logic, if megadeth caused metallica's success, shouldn't megadeth be bigger?
Originally posted by loseribReally? Because the only difference is mecanix is faster and the leads are sloppier....not exactly supporting your argument that megadeth are better musicians.
i know its the same song and its the perfect example of why megadeth smashes all over metallica listen to them back to back and you can tell what bands has the better musicains
Originally posted by StaticnzFoolish child. His DOES stand, no matter how much more detail you put into your OPINION. He didn't have to break everything down to give an opinion, and his is just as valid as yours.
[B]No, yours does not stand, cos your post has nothing more to it. I said more than just that and you choose to ignore that fact.
Originally posted by BackFire
you know as well as I do, people are lazy, they won't go buy a cd then return it just because it's the right thing to do
For a while now there have been little stations at the music stores where you can sample music before you buy. And some artists have streaming listening parties for their new cds.