dmiller458

I always thought that metalheads were supposed to be badasses. I always thought that metalheads are supposed to reject society's bullshit. Is this a forum for metalheads or for emo poseurs? (I've already had two warnings. I'm wondering if that will get me banned now.) Should every metal band be out there grandstanding in front of every camera and microphone talking about how noble they are because they support this charity or that? IF that's the case, why do I need metal when I can just listen to U2. Bono can tell me all about how to reduce my carbon footprint while he's flying around the world on private jets. You're welcome.

"I'm not doing this for the fame or for the money or for the women! I'm doing this for the art, man!" said the internationally-famous multi-millionaire rock star who happens to be dating a supermodel. You can't ever truly know anyone's motivations. In theory, it sounds great. But don't try to tell me that the idea of free publicity and good press never enters into their minds. "I bought We Are the World. I called the 800 number and made a donation when I was watching the Live Aid concerts on MTV. But you're trying to tell me that children in Africa are still starving? How can that be?"

A: "Dude, I just started band!" B: "What's it called, man?" A: "The Beatles" C: "Please don't make me hurt you."

Wasn't there two Saxons for a while as well? Charity is supposed to given out of the goodness of one's heart. Not for all the free publicity and good press they'll receive for giving a charity concert.

And isn't (wasn't) there two versions of Saxon as well?

I believe people call that virtue signaling nowadays. If they want to give to charity, they don't have to do in front of a camera and a microphone. They can do it privately and anonymously.

Are they touring as Death or are they touring as a Death tribute? The groups I mentioned earlier sometimes had four and five different line-ups out there calling themselves the Drifters or the Platters.

But I didn't say that they'd be out touring as a Black Sabbath tribute band. I said calling themselves Black Sabbath. And donating the profits to charity? How noble. Using the sports team analogy, bands would be eventually be like these J-pop idol groups where every member is interchangeable.

We've got these doo-wop and R&B vocal groups out touring the oldies circuit. Often the groups have none of the original members. In more and more cases, none of the original members are even alive. Iommi, Ozzy, Geezer, and Ward will eventually all pass away. Would it then be acceptable (IYO) for some four random guys to be out touring and calling themselves Black Sabbath?

Is a band nothing more than a corporate logo? IF it's just a brand, then Hamm and Christy need to reform Death. They need to put out an album and tour behind it.

I've never referred to them or any band as having majesty and unique excellence. So yes, I was.

Death was really a solo project with a band name. Did Schuldiner ever work with the same people for more than two albums?

Every five-ten years the Spurs will have a completely new line-up. Is a band nothing more than a corporate logo? Or is it a musical ensemble with specific members? You get enough personnel changes and they're no longer the same band despite their brand.

When a band changes their sound that radically, sometimes a name change is in order. I might have been more receptive to their change in direction if they weren't still calling themselves In Flames. Majesty and unique excellence? Were you able to type that with a straight face?

I was looking for a little something more than "I don't like 'em."