I think it's not a big factor indeed, and certainly not image-based. A band like Led Zeppelin would be image-based as well then.
What I'm asking is how does that picture make them image based? I can honestly say I've never viewed any "photoshoots" from any of the bands I listen to. What they look like in pictures is of no value to me. I find it kinda strange that people would base what they listen to heavily on what a band looks like. Believe it or not, your mallcore band is just as image based as kreator or whoever you want to pull out. They definitely have the mallcore look. Go look at other bands of the same genre, you'll find a common trend. "OH SHIT". IMAGE DOES NOT MATTER. If you're listening to a band due to the way they look, thats pretty sad. Edit: American hair metal held no influence on Kreator, being a german thrash band formed in the early 80's.. You would definitely care more about hair metal looks more than any thrash band, for that matter, and it is funny that you think they were influenced by crossdressing rockers for their personal appearance, yet not their music... Yeah.. ok.
What the fuck are you talking about?! You're point is totally flawed, because you're basing things on my personal choices. All I'm saying is that the 80s metal isn't as technical as Between the Buried and Me, which is a fact, and that image is a big part of 80s metal, which is also a fact. Wheather you don't take notice of the bands image is irrelevent, but the fact is that ALOT of other people do and it dictates heavily on wheather they choose to listen to it. It's also irrelevent if I listen to music based on their image. It's about commericalism and selling records to the mass media and mass public. Each genre of music has it's own image, and each image has it's own significence. My point is that BtBaM doesn't really show their music through their image, which is usually the point of having an image. It's to identify the genre without having to listen to it. Also, you are pretty shit at holding a debate. All you do is call my views shit and the band I like shit. I've not said that the bands aforementioned were shit in any way, in fact I actually appreciate them, becuase I used to be a big fan of 80s thrash metal.
I know very little about music, but I know from bouts with you elsewhere that you are a dumbass and an utter dick. This quote shows some grade A idiocy. Are you saying an entire generation wasn't technical? That's the most generalized "fact" I've ever heard. Where do you find these lame and ambiguous "facts"?
I actually meant the bands we were talking about. You just showed your idiocy by actually not contributing fuck all to the debate, other than thinking I'm a dick and a dumbass... Where else have you encountered these "bouts" then?
You really do think that btbam is technical? pathetic. btbam couldn't hope to cover a Sadus song, or Death, or most any good 80's band's songs. Don't kid yourself. Obviously you're not familar with the 80's thrash/death scene, nobody gave a damn about image, they dressed however they wanted to, since you seem to care so much about how a band looks. You are also the only person I've met who seems to listen to heavy music in general that cares how a band looks, it seems pretty retarted to me, as it doesn't have any direct effect on the sound, and it is the sound that a person would listen to music for, isnt it? I will never understand why anyone would care how an artist looks, thats a very pop-culture thing that I do not care to follow. I certainly don't agree that commercialism and mass media hold any place in the metal scene. Perhaps you're confused with pop music. You're right, I don't like mallcore. Mallcore is not technical. Care to elaborate on what is so technical about btbam? Looks like pretty simple riffing, sounds like really shitty vocals... "The point of having an image is to identify the genre without having to listen to it" - I vote this statement as the most foolish thing posted in the history of hipforums.com. Is anyone else reading this? Hahahahaha.
To be fair, you've been showing your idiocy, lack of musical culture and knowledge since the beginning of this thread.
You truly are a fucking lost cause. As with any music labels the aim is to make MONEY! Stop being so fucking naive to think that your little bands image has nothing to do with their music, because it does. You seem to think I'm giving you personal opinion, I'm not, I'm giving you FACTS, you fucking idiot! The music industry is about MONEY: FACT! The image of a band is (usually) one of the major factors of the band: FACT! Did you ever see a metal band from the 80s dressed like this: NO, you fucking didn't, because it's not cool and thus WON'T make any MONEY! Are you really this fucking stupid?! Find me a song by Sadus that is more musically technical than a BtBaM's song. For fucks sake, do you even know anything about music theory?! You call yourself a musician, but you obviously know shit.
I was gonna say:- 'Their cover of Baby Got Back wasn't bad though!' But then realised that was covered by Throwdown. My mate likes Atreyu but they do nothing for me.
Fucking just read through the entirety of this thread and oh, once again the topic has been completely changed to a debate on bands which have fuck all to do with the band that's in the title.. How do you think the poor original poster of this feels, to see that a Canadian and a Welshie have jacked his fuckin thread? Not only his thread, but as he posted earlier, the only thread about Atreyu on the forum? Whether Atreyu are worth commenting on or not, poor bastard, eh? Go on Matthews lad.
You truly must be no more than 12 years old. Of course the aim of a record label is to make money, there's no disputing that, but a band's image doesnt mean shit if the music sucks. You can't try to tell me that a METAL band would put more weight on an appearance than a song itself. If without good music, a band would fail, this says that appearance means SHIT ALL. Do you wish for me to believe that a band's appearance means just as much as the music itself? I fucking hope not, surely not one man could be so retarded. It would take the combined stupidity of 1000 men to weigh that one out. You're not giving any facts, just saying that does not make it so. If you have such facts, show sources, as surely any fact should have a reliable source to make it legitimate. Of course, you can't provide such things as bullshit generally won't be found at the hands of a decent source. I like how you're starting to throw in (usually) when talking about a band's image being important. Its not "usually" important, its hardly ever important. If a band makes good music, it will sell and they will be successful to the extent their sound will let them. You may fail to understand this, but, as they say, you can lead a horse to water ... As to your picture, if a band did dress like that, and made music that didn't suck, it would most definitely sell, but, why would a metal band dress as such? Do you suppose that is how people dressed in the 80's? Are you so uninformed? Believe it or not, those guys weren't for the most part dressing up for the performance. The way people dress isn't always connected to the music they play, or like, for that matter. You have a very misled view on this whole "industry" as you put it, and will at some point realize your stupidity, but this won't happen before you actually think about the stupid shit you're saying. No, I don't have a great grasp on theory. Why don't you elaborate as to what theory can be applied in this particular matter? As for songs that are more complex than that of a btbam song, I could easily point out most songs by any of the aforementioned artists. For Watchtower, see Instruments of Random Murder, or any song really, all their solos and structures are far, far greater than that any mallcore band. For Sadus, try any of the basslines, or check out Arise. For Kreator, who are clearly heavier than any metalcore band could dream of, see the Coma of Souls album.
Well, I can't agree with you here. Some metalbands do think their image matter, look at black metal for instance. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as we don't buy their records because we like their corpsepaint so much. They think it adds something to their music and sometimes I do agree. Bands like Cradle of filth or nowadays Dimmu Borgir have gone totally over the top, their image seems to be more important than their music. Kreator, however, stays a bad example for an image-based band.
Black metal would be an exeption, but, even still, regardless of how they look, it would be the music that is the determining factor of whether they're a great band or not. I can't even imagine someone seriously saying "this is the best song i've ever heard, but I can't listen to them, they're wearing face paint"
For fucks sake, I've had enough of talking about this shit. Just read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music There's a section entirely on the use of image within Heavy Metal. In the music industry it means shit wheather a band is shit, because it's what SELLS that matters. Ever heard of Mortiis, Bezerker, or Gwar? They are all shit as fuck bands, but their work sells because of their image.
Indeed, I heard some people say stuff like that. About Mortiis, he has indeed quite a laugable image created and I agree his industrial stuff sucks ass. I like Stargate though, and his early stuff is pretty nice in my opinion. I even think Crypt of the wizard is ok, although there is some extreme cheesy synthesizer sound on it.
which is precisely why i don't consider the music idustry, in ANY genre, and all its horshit worth wasting my time on. just look for the websites of bands/musicians you like and buy directly off of them or through the links they give you. screw the music industry. this is precisely why it deserves to be screwed. and the worship of little green pieces of paper it rode in on too. =^^= .../\...
The music industry isn't just the record labels and production...It's the exchanging of money in any circumstances.
