StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Talk about telling it like it is...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFSBWFZMyS4

Fuck yes, Dio's hardly Last In Line when it comes to the heirarchy of metal greats.

He came to Calgary on tour with Black Sabbath a few months ago. I never realized just how little Tony Iommi moves around on stage, before that...

Dio freakin' rocks! I've always been a huge fan (of all his bands).

He really nails the American music scene, though. Damn.

I really wish metal would make a comeback so I could see some of the greats go on tour again. But sadly, Dio was right, it just doesn't sell like it used to, so up and coming metal bands get the short end of the stick.

I was able to catch Van Halen a few years back, but thats about it. I'm so unfulfilled.

NeoGoomba wrote:I really wish metal would make a comeback so I could see some of the greats go on tour again. But sadly, Dio was right, it just doesn't sell like it used to, so up and coming metal bands get the short end of the stick.

I was able to catch Van Halen a few years back, but thats about it. I'm so unfulfilled.

Nowadays, you have to see them in the small venues. I saw Queensryche last October in a club here. Mindcrime I & II. It was mind-blowingly awesome. Sad that they can barely sell out the small clubs these days and singers like Hackney Spears can sell out stadiums.

I think what he said was rather telling about the music industry here, even to the point of referring to American Idol as "American Kareoke."

It makes me suspect that we here in America have begun to value style more than substance, sincerity over honesty for quite a while now. What Dio was talking about with his experiences seems to lend credence to this.

rhoenix wrote:I think what he said was rather telling about the music industry here, even to the point of referring to American Idol as "American Kareoke."

It makes me suspect that we here in America have begun to value style more than substance, sincerity over honesty for quite a while now. What Dio was talking about with his experiences seems to lend credence to this.

We have BEGUN to value style more than substance? Where have you been since 1980? I think Ronny James Deodorant is just a little miffed that he has to go to Europe to make a buck, and that America, is basically done with him. And to be mad that 13 year olds are deciding who is the current trend? Hello. Teenagers have always defined what music is "In". Maybe Dio remembers sold out arenas filled with 40 year olds and not the teenagers and twenty somethings he was banging.

I'm not a fan of power metal, but I really like Dio as an interviewee, he was awesome on the Metal: a headbanger's journey too.

havokeff wrote:

rhoenix wrote:I think what he said was rather telling about the music industry here, even to the point of referring to American Idol as "American Kareoke."

It makes me suspect that we here in America have begun to value style more than substance, sincerity over honesty for quite a while now. What Dio was talking about with his experiences seems to lend credence to this.

We have BEGUN to value style more than substance? Where have you been since 1980? I think Ronny James Deodorant is just a little miffed that he has to go to Europe to make a buck, and that America, is basically done with him. And to be mad that 13 year olds are deciding who is the current trend? Hello. Teenagers have always defined what music is "In". Maybe Dio remembers sold out arenas filled with 40 year olds and not the teenagers and twenty somethings he was banging.

How old are you, dipshit? I can remember the days before music videos, when music was judged largely for the actual music, and people were far less concerned with the appearance or dance moves of the performer. Things are NOT the same as they've always been.

My favorite thing having to do with style over substance in American music is all the outrage at Milli Vanilli over having not actually been the ones singing on their record.

I could understand being a little cheesed at going to a concert by those guys and then finding out that they were really just the salesmen put on the videos, but what I didn't get were the people who wanted their money back for the CD they bought. What, they don't like the music now that they know that it wasn't the two guys in bike shorts who sang it? Did they ever really like the music?

Milli Vanilli also had to return their Grammy. I guess the Grammies are about more than just the music as well.

I can understand that some of the outrage was because people felt they were lied to but it's not like there aren't lots of current musical performers who get away with only slightly less blatant lying. Sure Brtiney Spears sings on her albums but just how much help does she get from the recording engineer?

Then when she's doing her concerts full of dancing-n-stuff she's lip sincing to the recording that had all of that help but people are fine with it.

I wonder if Milli Vanilli would have worked if the real singers had been in the videos but they also had the two bike shorts guys doing all kinds of stuff as a sort of gimick?

===

Incidently, this Dio video ended up getting me sidetracked on a bunch of Dio stuff on YouTube.

There was a funny bit where TenaciousD was doing a warped version of one of Dio's Black Sabbath songs and Dio himself shows up while they are doing it.

Darth Wong wrote:

havokeff wrote:

rhoenix wrote:I think what he said was rather telling about the music industry here, even to the point of referring to American Idol as "American Kareoke."

It makes me suspect that we here in America have begun to value style more than substance, sincerity over honesty for quite a while now. What Dio was talking about with his experiences seems to lend credence to this.

We have BEGUN to value style more than substance? Where have you been since 1980? I think Ronny James Deodorant is just a little miffed that he has to go to Europe to make a buck, and that America, is basically done with him. And to be mad that 13 year olds are deciding who is the current trend? Hello. Teenagers have always defined what music is "In". Maybe Dio remembers sold out arenas filled with 40 year olds and not the teenagers and twenty somethings he was banging.

How old are you, dipshit? I can remember the days before music videos, when music was judged largely for the actual music, and people were far less concerned with the appearance or dance moves of the performer. Things are NOT the same as they've always been.

Yeah, well I'm 30, and I can't. By 1981, when MTV launched, it marked a decided shift in style vs substance and by the end of the 80's substance had pretty much been pounded to a pulp. No, things are NOT the way they always have been, but for rhoenix to say America has BEGUN, now at this time, to value style over substance is just silly, since it has practicaly been a religion for almost 30 years. Did you read my post wrong or was it poorly written, because we seem to have the same view on this.

Tsyroc wrote:Milli Vanilli also had to return their Grammy. I guess the Grammies are about more than just the music as well.

I think this was just taking it away from the guys lyp syncing, not neccisarily a style over substance issue. IIRC there was an issue where they wanted to give the Grammy to the actual singers. I'll see if I can find a source on that.

I do really miss the days when you had an actual BAND playing actual INSTRUMENTS.

havokeff wrote:Yeah, well I'm 30, and I can't. By 1981, when MTV launched, it marked a decided shift in style vs substance and by the end of the 80's substance had pretty much been pounded to a pulp. No, things are NOT the way they always have been, but for rhoenix to say America has BEGUN, now at this time, to value style over substance is just silly, since it has practicaly been a religion for almost 30 years. Did you read my post wrong or was it poorly written, because we seem to have the same view on this.

The change was not instantaneous. You make it sound as if the clock ticked midnight on 1980 and the music scene transformed. The fact is that it took a while, and there has been a gradual increase in the importance of non-music factors in the popularity of music. Like many social movements, it takes a certain "critical mass" before it becomes blatant.

What you're doing is like pointing out that fundamentalism has been around for a long time in order to refute someone saying that the fundies have recently gotten really bad.

Darth Wong wrote:

havokeff wrote:Yeah, well I'm 30, and I can't. By 1981, when MTV launched, it marked a decided shift in style vs substance and by the end of the 80's substance had pretty much been pounded to a pulp. No, things are NOT the way they always have been, but for rhoenix to say America has BEGUN, now at this time, to value style over substance is just silly, since it has practicaly been a religion for almost 30 years. Did you read my post wrong or was it poorly written, because we seem to have the same view on this.

The change was not instantaneous. You make it sound as if the clock ticked midnight on 1980 and the music scene transformed. The fact is that it took a while, and there has been a gradual increase in the importance of non-music factors in the popularity of music. Like many social movements, it takes a certain "critical mass" before it becomes blatant.

What you're doing is like pointing out that fundamentalism has been around for a long time in order to refute someone saying that the fundies have recently gotten really bad.

Oh yeah, I see that. Thanks. Duh. I should have known the post was poorly written.

Darth Wong wrote: The change was not instantaneous. You make it sound as if the clock ticked midnight on 1980 and the music scene transformed. The fact is that it took a while, and there has been a gradual increase in the importance of non-music factors in the popularity of music. Like many social movements, it takes a certain "critical mass" before it becomes blatant.

I would certainly agree. The 80s and MTV started the trend, but I think it was the mid-90s before that change was more or less complete. It is very gradual. But as much as I like a lot that came out of the 80s, it wasn't very kind to music. All you have to do is compare Rock from the 70s and the 80s. Scary.

Insert Username Here wrote:

Darth Wong wrote: The change was not instantaneous. You make it sound as if the clock ticked midnight on 1980 and the music scene transformed. The fact is that it took a while, and there has been a gradual increase in the importance of non-music factors in the popularity of music. Like many social movements, it takes a certain "critical mass" before it becomes blatant.

I would certainly agree. The 80s and MTV started the trend, but I think it was the mid-90s before that change was more or less complete. It is very gradual. But as much as I like a lot that came out of the 80s, it wasn't very kind to music. All you have to do is compare Rock from the 70s and the 80s. Scary.

Van Halen, AC/DC, Slayer, Metallica, Guns N Roses, Anthrax, Danzig, Springsting, Black Flag, The Dead Kennedys... I would put these rock bands up against any from the 70's, well, except for Zeppelin. They are on a whole other level.

havokeff wrote:Van Halen, AC/DC, Slayer, Metallica, Guns N Roses, Anthrax, Danzig, Springsting, Black Flag, The Dead Kennedys... I would put these rock bands up against any from the 70's, well, except for Zeppelin. They are on a whole other level.

And Black Sabbath.

But then, some of those bands ARE 70s bands. Van Halen and AC/DC as examples. But yeah, the 80s had some quality stuff. But take the popular rock from the 80s (like the hair bands) and pit them against the popular stuff from the 70s...I know which decade I'd choose. Exceptions always, of course.

havokeff wrote:
Van Halen, AC/DC, Slayer, Metallica, Guns N Roses, Anthrax, Danzig, Springsting, Black Flag, The Dead Kennedys... I would put these rock bands up against any from the 70's, well, except for Zeppelin. They are on a whole other level.

What kind of useless fuckhead are you? AC/DC did most of their best work in the 70's. BON SCOTT died in fucking FEBRUARY OF 1980. Van Halen's debut album was in '78, Springsteen signed his first record deal in 1972, Black Flag was formed in 1976, and The Dead Kennedys in 1978.

thank you Marina, I'm older I grew up with those bands.

As an older dude and sometime musician I too have been lamenting the death of the band and the rise of the manufacturer. Time was that being artificial got you howls of derision, since you couldn't play or write your own stuff. Now the public rejoices in the process, picking numbnuts who can sing a bit to be flavour of the month before being dropped like the souless wretch they are for the next flavour. The only winner is that turd Simon Cowall.

Boy bands and Girl Bands? They should be made to call them choirs because they certainly dont qualify as bands. They dont write it, they dont play it, they're a bunch of strangers who come together occasionally to just sing someone else's words to someone else's musical backing, which makes them a choir.

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:

havokeff wrote:
Van Halen, AC/DC, Slayer, Metallica, Guns N Roses, Anthrax, Danzig, Springsting, Black Flag, The Dead Kennedys... I would put these rock bands up against any from the 70's, well, except for Zeppelin. They are on a whole other level.

What kind of useless fuckhead are you? AC/DC did most of their best work in the 70's. BON SCOTT died in fucking FEBRUARY OF 1980. Van Halen's debut album was in '78, Springsteen signed his first record deal in 1972, Black Flag was formed in 1976, and The Dead Kennedys in 1978.

Springsteen and AC/DC I'll concede as 70s bands, although AC/DC's best album, Back in Black, out sold every other album they had up until then by like 100 million fucking copies and that was in the 1980. And Bon Scott wasn't even their first singer. Just because you like him more than Brian Johnson means what? 100 and 40 something million people obviously like him better that Scott.

Black Flag and the Kennedys are NOT 70's bands. Black Flag wasn't even called Black Flag until 79 and DK released their first single in early or mid 79 IIRC. Van Halen released their first album in 78 and 2nd in 79, but calling any of the above 70s bands is like calling Zeppelin, who formed and released their first album in 69 a 60s band. They had no influence on the 60s just as VH, BF and DK had no influence on the 70s.

To you then, Black Sabbath is a 60s band, the Beatles are a 50s band and Nirvana and Green Day are 80s bands because they formed in one way or another in those decades even though their influence and prominence was entirely in the decade following.

havokeff wrote:Maybe Dio remembers sold out arenas filled with 40 year olds and not the teenagers and twenty somethings he was banging.

Consider reading up on Dio's marital history before you stick your foot in your mouth like that again; RJD has been faithfully married since 1980 to his wife Wendy and enjoys a strong professional relationship with her as well, considering she's his manager and also manages his pet charity Children Of The Night.

TithonusSyndrome wrote:Consider reading up on Dio's marital history before you stick your foot in your mouth like that again; RJD has been faithfully married since 1980 to his wife Wendy and enjoys a strong professional relationship with her as well, considering she's his manager and also manages his pet charity Children Of The Night.

I recall Dio taking his fellow hair bands to task for not contributing to his "Hear n Aid" fundraiser as well. He was pretty pissed about the apathy.