Exactly! Most people tend to build walls around their cherished beliefs, and hide themselves behind the notion that its not possible to discuss them in an objective way. It seems everything is categorized as subjective these days, and therefore not debatable. Better is no religion.
Anyone remember that young earth creationist that came here trying to prove that earth is 6,000 years old with "science"? That was hilarious.
I'd like to know what do you think about the split between Tate and the rest of Qryche,seems that they were arguing and not seeing eye to eye since 2007,I wonder why they didn't split first and I 'm asking if i HAVE TO BELIEVE IN tate or band's version of all the events,expecially of what happened during a gig in april in brazil with Fates Warning.
I dunno, I say Scientology is dumb. Not "subjectively" - it's just dumb. That wasn't so hard, was it?
Yeah, I have to agree with you maybe a whole album of covers is not a good idea. Well, it seems metal is not very popular around here.
Metal/Heavy CAN be good; it's just that most people trying to be metal come off as immature musicians. They desperately try to be cool, but end up failing on a massive level. I have nothing against heavy music. I have a lot against shitty, shallow, closed-minded music.
Too vague. Could you, please, eleaborate on your comment? What do you mean by "immature musicians"? Why do they fail? What is "shallow, closed-minded music"?
^Seems pretty obvious to me. "Immature musicians" as in musically immature (although sometimes personal immaturity is present and reflected in the material). Trained musicians usually know what that term means, though you don't have to be one to find out. "Shallow" as in lacks any real depth, inspiration and creativity. This is typical of mainstream commercial music that tries to be catchy and cool only on the surface in a way that is meant to appeal to a wider consumer base (and therefore labels). "Close-minded" as in has a very narrow view of what is musically possible, choosing to remain within self-imposed boundaries either for lack of skill (e.g. bands who simply don't know how to write/play anything else and don't feel like musically evolving), lack of inspiration (e.g. older bands who are no longer at their creative peak), fear of driving away an already established fan base, and so on.
Thanks for your opinion. But... Is the album Kill'em All by Metallica immature or innovative? Does Adrenaline Mob fit the definition above? How about Blues? Is the current Iron Maiden an example of that? Are you the same person who wrote this? So better is a question of opinion, but musical maturity, shallowness and close-mindedness are not? Schizophrenic. Differently from you, I don't own the truth, so I'm interested in listening to other persons' opinion.
both, and only very slightly innovative, with the exception of anesthesia yes no, but undoubtedly some blues musicians yes hope this helps, i'm dishing out wisdom all week
watching marillion tonight fortified their current #1 spot in my book. hogarth even had a cold and they slightly messed up a bit in the invisible man (which they opened with). still a top performance with a damn impressive execution of Ocean Cloud (!), which was their ending encore.
