ok, i think i need to adress this.
i read that kind of argument a LOT and the hypocrisy behind it is just staggering.
when in a band the guitarist writes all of the music you don't hate on the other members for playing songs they didn't write, you don't hate on actors who perform in movies/theatre that they didn't write the piece they perform, you don't hate on classical orchestras that perform music by guys already dead for hundreds of years, but somehow it is "lame" and for some not really apparent reason without "soul" when 3 teenage girls perform a series of high-energy metal-gigs all over the world?
on top of that these tracks are so wildly creative, new and fresh, but apparently only the concept of a selling-machine?
u-huh, because death-core-powermetal tracks about chocolate with reggae parts and dragonforce guitar-solos are a failproof combination for big bucks. sure thing...
i can totally understand having a disliking for the cutesy high-pitched voices, or the riddicculous genre-mish-mash that is going on, or just the tracks in general for their complexity or whatever.
but listening to those tracks it is painstakingly clear, that a LOT of creativity, thought, work and heart went into creating something truly interesting here
(and the amount of controversy they stir up is probably the most solid proof of that)
if now the second guitarist from the right is the writer of the tracks or not, how would that make any difference?