relentless

No. At most a week apart, though I remember Uroboros showing up on shelves on the same date as the Japanese release in Hot Topic.

Raped in Hatred by Vines of Thorn - Black Dahlia Murder What the hell is your grandmother going on about?

What happened in Ferguson last night was a disgrace on all sides involved. It was pathetic. It was horrendous. It was grotesque. It was fucking stupid. There was an instance where a teen (black teen as this is no doubt, the focus of the entire issue) was shot by a cop, and protests began. WHAT happened -- We do not know as there are several conflicting reports (one side says Brown was shot with his hands up, the other said the kid made a grab for an officer's gun with a friend before trying to run away). HOW did it happen -- We do not know as there are several conflicting reports (see above) With that in mind, this group (there's no beating around the bush, all Black) were angered and sought justice for what they believed happened -- so they began a peaceful protest at the sight of the shooting. Soon after, officers (some with K-9 units) entered the scene as is customary of police to do in the states. Oddly enough, though there is the freedom of speech, there are pathways you have to go through in the legal system to get approval for a rally / demonstration (were there? Not to the best of my knowledge). It just so happens that due to a larger group gathering at the scene, more officers had to be called in. With the increased violence against police, you can understand why lots of cops show up even when apprehending just one subject, let alone an entire gathering of people. Soon after police were present, SOMETHING happened. WHAT happened -- We don't know as there are conflicting reports (see above) What happened after, what we do know, gets worse. An officer beaten outside of a Taco Bell, several stores (numbered ~14) were broken into, vandalized (one set on fire), and robbed for all of their merchandise. Multiple gun shots, helicopters shot at, rocks thrown at police, etc. Afterwards, these groups kept moving through Ferguson with just a few reports of break ins happening shortly after the mob moved out at around 3 AM. This demonstration, originally built as a peaceful protest demanding justice for the kid shot, turned into a free-for-all "take everything you can" (as quoted from one member of the mob, female) that had nothing to do with Police, and had nothing to do with the kid that was shot. This becomes even more clear when a large group of the "protesters" (i.e. mob) were people coming out of town well after the riot broke out. So what does this all mean? Is this a "revolution"? Is this Blacks fighting for equality? Is this "The Man" stepping on minorities and preventing them from living free? The short answer, to all of those, is no. "Is this a revolution?" - The ignorant (yes, ignorant) seem to think so. One look on Twitter (#ferguson) reveals a whole shit load of justification for the incredibly stupid acts that transpired last night. "We are standing up for ourselves", "Only violence can end oppression", (various quotes from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.), etc. The problem though, IS WHAT PART OF A FUCKING REVOLUTION INVOLVES BREAKING INTO A LOCALLY-OWNED RIM SHOP, AND LOOTING 1 SINGLE 22" RIM FOR YOURSELF? AND IN THE PROCESS, DESTROYING ALL PROPERTY IN SAID STORE JUST TO GET THE MERCHANDISE? With the family of Mike Brown speaking out AGAINST the riots, this paints a different picture. This wasn't a "revolution", this was a mob that got out of control and decided to take matters into their own hands. "Blacks fighting for equality" - This tends to happen when a black teen is shot, or when any member of the Black community is at the mercy of a police force. Though institutionalized racism is still very much a thing, this matter is completely unrelated. This has nothing to do with workplace discrimination, or discrimination in education, or in the government offices. This has to do with a teen that was shot in an altercation with police (whatever the instance was). It pisses me off that people are so quick to make a racial divide in a matter when it isn't called for. People wanted answers to what happened. But instead of sticking around and asking the serious questions, they robbed convenience stores and walked out with handfuls of liquor and food. "The Man" - This is the most intriguing part, and one that I feel has SOME merit, even when as a whole it doesn't. This very well could be an instance where a cop was quick to gun a kid down, and IF THIS WAS THE CASE, then the peaceful protestors in Ferguson are absolutely right to want answers. An investigation (regardless) should be done, and those accountable should be held accountable. BUT, what if the police reports are true? What if (after FBI investigation and third-party investigation has finished) Mike Brown DID make a move for an officer's gun? Then what does that make of the actions of those involved (remember: many rioters were coming from out of town, NOT rioting because they were upset at police, though some were). And don't even get me started on this MLK bullshit. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a man that taught to avoid doing EXACTLY THIS. It makes me sick that people are now hiding behind his quotes to reason something he would never have stood for in the first place. What transpired the other evening was not a revolution. it wasn't right, it wasn't justified, and it sure as hell was not going to help the cause taken up by the peaceful protesters. What this did. What the rioters HOPED it would do, will have the opposite effect. People will not turn to the cause of what happened in Ferguson, of anarchy, of robbing CHICKEN PLACES, of robbing SPORTING GOODS STORES, and say "THAT IS AN IDEAL I STRIVE FOR" No. Whenever a group of people resort to barbarism, they instantly lose any credibility to their cause when there are outlets to access to bring those accountable to justice. What the Rioters (they are NOT protestors) did last night was fucking pathetic. EDIT: and perhaps the most fascinating point of all. Police did not shoot and kill one Rioter. If this was truly a "revolution" rising up against oppression, those cops would not have hesitated to shoot. Yet they didn't. Not once. Suspects were taken into custody.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanamara_Matsuri As for The Daily Show segment, it was on the July 24, 2014 show.

The big point alluded to is not just the repression of sexuality in Japan, it's the repression on Female Sexuality that is the issue. There was an entertaining bit on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart that covered how any bit of displayed female sexuality is heavily suppressed (and in cases some people face jail time), where as men have festivals dedicated to blowing up gigantic balloon penises and celebrating their triumph over a demonic vagina with teeth. Also, totally off topic but I had to mention this: Lolita is in no way about the "sexualisation of a minor". Whether you consider it to be an allegorical tale about totalitarianism or not, the ultimate focus is placed on the main character Humbert Humbert and his personal struggles, and not just about his sexual adventures with a minor, though many have been lead to interpret it this way. Kind of like how Kafka's Metamorphosis isn't just a story about a guy who wakes up one day and realizes he's a bug.

Boris, sort of. I saw them the other night and hearing their new album live made me appreciate it a lot more than I had previously. It's safe to say that the album will be getting quite a few more listens over the next weeks. Other than that, the usual binging on Classical.

You're supposed to listen to it upside-down.

You must be familiar with the girls in BABYMETAL being in porn. Well, to each their own.

Fascinating. The one thing I took note of was some of the members (the author mentioned some of which are 12) have appeared in adult magazines in Japan. I have no idea what the differences are, if any, between adult magazines in the States and Japan; but if that is true, then it does appear to be more based around sexual exploitation than anything else. Though it makes me wonder: If Japan wasn't so collectively sexually frustrated, would this still be a problem?

Huh. A big announcement in preparation for the big announcement.

Good: Food, and beautiful landscapes Bad: Their government, the general fear of other cultures / religions and at the same time assimilating the imagery of those cultures into their own.

That's part of the charm, isn't it? What pushed BABYMETAL into such a debated status was because of their gimmick: J-Pop vocals and dance choreography performed over different "genres" of extreme metal. Some people may enjoy the metal aspects, some may enjoy the J-Pop vocals, or others may just be listening to them BECAUSE they're ridiculous. The review posted in the BABYMETAL thread (or the BABYMETAL tour thread, can't remember) touched on it that there were all of these different kinds of people with different interests in music coming together to experience BABYMETAL. That's a large part of the charm, the experience of witnessing something so novel. Now, this isn't to say they lack talent overall, their musicians are excellent; but the one thing that tends to be a constant in fan's appreciation is the recognition of the gimmick and the experience of seeing them live. The band Ghost (or, in the States, Ghost B.C.) is in a similar light where their popularity soared because of their live production, and people began latching on from there when more and more began to appreciate their music and not just the novelty of seeing dudes dressed as Satan Worshippers. Whether this craze is going to last or not is something else entirely, though.

I guess it depends on the show and the crowd. On one hand you have hardcore shows where the focus is the pit, and on the other you have VK / Dir en grey shows where the crowd reacts in HORROR at the sign of a mosh pit. At VK and mainly the Dir en grey shows I have witnessed, people are there to get as close to the band as they can, want as little movement as they can, and want to focus on what the members are doing on stage. I have seen a few mosh pits at Dir en grey shows in years past; but they're either extremely small, or have people that don't know how to mosh in the first place (one guy was throwing punches at people and hit several in the face). At hardcore shows, there is more often than not a big crowd up front climbing over each other and screaming while a huge wall of death goes on behind them. They're two very different atmospheres that I feel have to be gauged accordingly. I won't mosh at a hardcore show for the reason that there's a bit too much chaos for my liking. There's a venue nearby that is in a basement, and features a balcony that hangs over the floor. Well, during high energy shows, not only will people crowd surf; but people will launch themselves from the balcony onto the crowd below. It's a total joy to watch; but it can be rough being apart of it when you don't know what to expect. I'm fine with moshing, and will take part in it; but it has to be the right show for it, has to have the right crowd for it, and you have to be in the right mood for it. Sometimes I want to hang by the bar and enjoy a band's set, other times I want to dive head first into the assault and see what happens.

The first wall of death I ever experienced was in some grimey basement hardcore show. Never again.

Self-imposed standards, huh? I'm not the one going into a band appreciation thread and raving about how bad their music is. This was a good discussion though, take care.

There are quite a few problems here: 1. "This is a broad description, but it brings with it serious doubts about anything I said being entirely wrong" - This does not logically follow in regards to your previous comment. Now you're arguing about the Japanese Idol Culture and its existence, where as previously you were making arguments about "sincere", "authentic", and "famewhoring" artists (buzzwords that have 0 meaning when in consideration of their musical context -- i.e. the music they're making). I can see what you're trying to do; but it doesn't follow because there is a disconnect between the two points you're trying to tie together. Being an Idol =/= someone isn't sincere about what they're doing (remember: The Music Industry is a business at the end of the day, and these are people that WANT to get into this business, regardless of its musical merits, or lack thereof). "Sincerity" is not only a buzzword in this context; but it involves someone's motives which you have no clue of. Thus, that can't be argued. Second, notice the lack of citation in the long description regarding Japanese Idol Culture. Are we to accept a source for its lack of citation? To do so would be fallacious, but what's worse is: 2. "You can also take the numerous scandal reports into account..." No, you can't, because said information is incredibly suspect, and based off of internet rumors that (I'm guessing) are found on Tumblr, MH, and various other sites where gossip on this topic is readily available. Do we have certainty that ALL of this is true? No. We don't even have a guarantee that half of it is true. The problem with making assertions from such sources, is that they tend not to hold up. Though, I'm not willing to go to the extreme to disregard ALL of it, because that oddly enough, supports what I said from the start: 3. You're making arguments based on an image, and not based on the merits of the music itself. I find it appalling that someone who stresses "authentic" music and artists is so hung-up on the image a band portrays, and not the very music that they make. You're upset that it infringes on your belief of what "true" metal is, when you don't even bother to talk about the music and what "true metal" is in the first place. Instead, you glossed over it in one sentence and called it "fine" -- if I recall correctly. This is the part of your argument you're failing to unite. You are trying to discredit BABYMETAL as artists without touching their music. Instead, you are critiquing their image based on what you think you know from Internet Articles and rumors, and trying to draw it into a musical context of "well, this is bad Metal, because it's not AUTHENTIC". If we are to even BEGIN talking about something being "authentic" or not, then you will have to develop heavily-scrutinized criteria to begin the conversation. If you can define this, we can perhaps go from there. Sadly, when discussing music and its merits, the music needs to be discussed, not the "image" and stage gimmick of a band. But, you are unable to do so, so you attempt to make this idealized (and heavily Romanticized) argument that there is this magical (yet to be defined by you) difference between a "true" artist and an "inauthentic" one. Are Japanese Idols as skilled as someone who is a professional Opera singer? No (as the Wiki page mentions these are inexperienced kids being signed); but the lack of experience =/= a lack of authenticity, or a lack of sincerity. After all, Japanese Idols fall under their own niche of appreciation. 4. "As to your pop music description..gosh you're a smartass. Creating an issue where there isn't one." You seem to have missed the point I was making. You are arguing that BABYMETAL are not authentic because of the whole list of buzzwords you have mentioned up to this point. The problem is, by your logic, if you take those words ("famewhoring, pop idol machinery, sincere, authentic artists, puppets, sellout, and fabricated") you can just as easily slap that onto Metal, another Popular genre, that revolves around Marketability, and the music industry (i.e. labels) for distribution, to make a similar point that it's not "authentic" music when in consideration of Art Music. The reason why I refuse to do so, is because not only is that argument just as baseless; but it doesn't logically follow. tl;dr: Attaching your problem with an image of a band to their music is detrimental, and irrational, because it says nothing about the music even though it's trying to make a critique on it as a whole. You have Romanticized ideals as to what music "should" be (though music should never be anything other than "art for art's sake"), and are unable to discuss the merits of the music to unite and better define your argument. Don't like the band? Fine, I don't either; but don't let your terrible idea as to what makes music "authentic" try to make comments on the music that you are unable to argue against (based on your inability to write a Pop composition). "there is more in music than famewhoring and pure instrumentals...." JS Bach would be rolling in his grave right now.

1. I never asserted such a thing. I recognized that some people may dislike that J-pop singers are fronting a metal band with their singing and dance choreography, which is a complaint that I understand. Though what I disagree with, is this "Metal Purity" argument you keep trying to push: "If they were sincere, authentic artists..." (You can't argue the level of "sincerity" that an artist has. This is another buzzword thrown around for weak justification for not liking a band, artist, etc.) "But as such, as mere puppets to a pop idol industry..." (you also can't argue this because you have no clue on the inner workings of BABYMETAL. The only thing we can definitively state, is that the singers did not know what Metal was until the band formed. But =/= they are "mere puppets to a pop idol industry". This is another phrase thrown around without anything backing it up. Facts would be nice.) 2. Your argument is based off of baseless assumptions that can not be definitively argued because you, nor I, have the resources to do so. If you want to be irrational and are trying to justify your dislike for them, there's nothing I can do about that, and I don't inherently care; but trying to make an argument out of it is entirely foolish. You don't know what goes on with the band, and you are relying on terms that have 0 meaning when actually inspected ("puppets", "authentic artists", "famewhoring", etc.). Further, your lack of musical understanding (in regards to Pop: something that even "idiots" can write -- which are your words), discredits everything you've said up to this point. And just to make things a bit clearer, for clarification purposes, there is an umbrella term called "Popular Music" (i.e., Pop) which Metal falls under, and is not exempt from reliance on Marketability that the "famewhores" and "puppets" supposedly latch onto: "Popular music belongs to any of a number of musical genres "having wide appeal"[1][2] and is typically distributed to large audiences through the music industry. It stands in contrast to both art music[3][4][5] and traditional music, which are typically disseminated academically or orally to smaller, local audiences."

Please, explain.

With the exception of not liking pop singers fronting a metal band, none of your complaints have anything to do with the merits of the compositions and are criticizing: image, how metal "should" be, how metal "shouldn't" be, and the same excuse about "sell outs" and "fabricatiing" that is only brought up as a means to try and discredit a band. It's fine not to like them because they're fronted by young pop singers; but stop trying to draw it into some greater argument that revolves around "Metal Purity" when Metal thrives off of marketability and gimmicks in the first place (in addition to the "oh so serious" bands). Also, in regards to: "Every little idiot nowadays is able to write catchy melodies. Especially in pop genre, which it basically is" If you can, I would like you to write a Pop composition that follows all of the conventions of a pop song that has a "catchy" verse, chorus, and bridge. Afterwards, post it here so we can assess how good of a composition it is.

This can be said about the vast majority of Popular Music. And trying to quantify the amount of "soul" in a piece of music is just a useless buzzword. There's this Romantic ideal by many that music has to be produced by these struggling artists who put their very feelings into a work. Well, that's just not true.

I don't think I've heard anyone use "gangsta" since mid-2000's. Glad to see Sadie is as progressive as ever.

Yeah, that ties into his virtuosity in a way because everything is just a showcase for his talents. It's similar to the ""we get it, you can play guitar"" thing that jduv86 mentioned. People consider the playing great; but there's not a whole lot of creativity involved outside of his shredding. It's kinda similar to Paganini and how people look back at his music.

Don't guitar solos (or a solo passage from practically any instrument) have their roots in virtuosity, and a means of "showing off"? If that is to be considered "trying too hard", then nearly every solo can be said to be "trying too hard". The difficulty with something like this, is that there is this massive grey area for what people can consider a "good" or "show off-y" solo. On one hand you have someone like Malmsteen who gets a ton of shit for his virtuosity, and on the other Kurt Cobain who rarely ventured outside of the C major scale, was technically subpar, yet a simple passage from Smells Like Teen Spirit gets praise for "the emotions, maaaannn". This problem becomes even more difficult if you're looking at VK - a movement of music that is varied in sound and skill, yet also driven mainly by presentation. God, there is so much that I would like to say; but I am forcing myself to boil this down as much as I can for the sake of any readers. If we are to assess what solos are "trying too hard" and which aren't, I feel like the key is to determine the placement in the given song, and look at ALL other solos by that band/composer to determine their placement and their affect. If a band has a solo in the same place in every single song, then maybe we can consider that "trying too hard"; but that risks attempting to discredit virtuosity as its own art form. Virtuosity deserves just as much appreciation as other aspects of music; but too often it can be dismissed as someone trying "too hard" (or another bullshit argument such as "lack of creativity").

When Dir en grey first started touring in support of DSS, I felt like the sound on the record did not transfer well into live performances (the first set of festival performances for the album seemed to prove this). The "DSS sound" had such a strong emphasis on bass that on CD and under the right production, it was pretty cool; but these problems are still plaguing the band. Whatever it is they're going for, it can be extremely hit-or-miss. This could be what people are referring to when they speak of the bad production in these previews, and I would have to agree. After listening to Decayed Crow, it leaves me baffled as to why they would continue to push this sound when it has sounded like a mess from the start.

It would be interesting to see if that's a trend that continues over the next few weeks or not. Reducing the Moscow show to an 800 person venue isn't terrible; but it's unfortunate (especially with the apparent cult status of Dir en grey, and mainly Kyo).