hyura

^ I don't think that's so unpopular. :'D I think quite many of us love vocalists who have no idea about singing. The difference lies between them who admit it and them who don't.
 
I admit my favorite vocalist has fucking no idea what he's doing, and you can hear it. But he's having fun alright, and that's what affects me. I think it's cute as well. And it makes them unique. Like, half of the VK artists who can sing sound exactly like some other VK artist who can sing. But those who can't sing never fail quite the same way as some other person fails. :'D

Exactly, so if I'm the only white person to bother buying something from some trashy no name indie band. I shouldn't talk about it because someone might get upset. Fuck those people and their butthurt. I know there's a difference between flaunting but I don't ever recall seeing anything like that on MH.
 
For the most part the only nasty responses I've received from people where on Last.fm and at one point good old Livejournal. MH most people aren't that bad and I'm fine with trading.
 
Basically my stance on downloading is, I do download but almost rarely these days but I still grab something here and there. I wouldn't even be a fan of the music I like today if it wasn't for downloading. However I am mature enough to know that music isn't free and I should do my part as a fan to support not just the artist but the industry as a whole. Sure label eats up a lot of the profit but that profit is usually then turn around into covering studio time, touring costs and so forth. If VK bands came to my city I would do what I do now with metal bands and just wait until they come through on a tour and buy their release then when they'll get the most back from my purchase, but since I can't do that with VK bands. At least my support helps keep the label, producers, distributors afloat so that they can sign and produce more artist.
 
With that said, my second stance on downloading is if it's a super duper poor man indies band, I don't feel comfortable sharing the material since it'll effect them the most as oppose to some major band or even successful indies artist like something from PS Company or even formerly UCP. Someone else will post that stuff anyway, so I don't bother sharing from those artists.
 
I prefer sharing music from inactive bands anyway, especially lesser known acts since their stuff is mostly long forgotten.
 
Anyway, I'm posting from the most annoying keyboard ever so if Im not clear on something, how about you try typing on this piece of shit tablet keyboard.

As long as Trombe doesn't disband, everything's fine

I just have this image of Kamijo clutching onto a vampire cape as nurses try to drag him to a mental hospital

Maybe I need to correct myself a bit.
I didn't want to point out that justin bieber or whoever actually makes quality music because I don't know. I never actually listened to the stuff I mentioned!
It's mere examples and if that guy for example really is that bad of a person on top of his music that's a reason to dislike him indeed and it was a bad example.
I just noticed that absolutely everything marketed towards female teenagers by using their 'pretty boy'-fantasies is regarded as the worst by many people and bashed in a way that's totally out of proportion. And that therefore young girls liking something already means that it's shit to many people. Or the girls are shit and not to be taken serious.
To me that's very weird.
The things are marketed towards them. They are told to like it by society. Many end up liking it for whatever reason. They are told that they suck for liking it.
That kind of mechanism.

I have another unpopular opinion. Expect rant.
 
Mainstream music marketed towards pubescent girls isn't any worse than other music you don't like.
 
There is a whole culture (especially on the internet, but also in other media and in real life) devoted to and putting lots of time and appearently research into hating on anything made for female teenagers and it highly irritates me.
I mean solo artists like Justin Bieber or boygroups like One Direction and even certain visual kei bands. Movies like twilight and many Boys love manga belong into the same category and also get the same treatment!
Things that work because 13 year old girl's romantic and/or sexual fantasies about 'pretty boys', essentially.

There is no other demographic which is nearly as bashed as them. Not even a tiny bit.
 
As I'm no 13 year old girl I find no appeal in those things either but I don't have the need to judge it's fans at all. Because of my different enviroment I never get in touch with their music taste, except for people bitching about it. I don't get this: if you don't like it, don't spend time on it. Like you do with every other genre that isn't made for you but doesn't threaten you either.
 
I'm also not interested in things marketed towards 60+ ladys or 4 year old boys and still don't think I should spend my day with hating on it and the people who enjoy it. It's also not a common thing to do. So why do it with teenage girls?
 
Teenage girls freak out and scream and throw their underwear (?) during some boyband concert where it doesn't bother anyone because only other teenage girls are present?  -People declare the girls hysteric and out of their mind and the band horrible.
Grown men freak out and scream and throw beerbottles after some sports event in public where outsiders will be bothered?-
People are like 'boys will be boys' and still take the sport very serious.
 
I'd even go as far as to say that when some artist has many young girls as fans it kind of devalues his work to many. This is sad!
Young girls aren't all stupid. Actually many are already more mature and educated then their male counterparts.
 
Maybe it's because of our cultures sick obsession with young girls sexuality and that it's frightening for us to see them directing it at something we don't like...?
 
Either way. I just don't get this.

Maybe I need to correct myself a bit.
I didn't want to point out that justin bieber or whoever actually makes quality music because I don't know. I never actually listened to the stuff I mentioned!
It's mere examples and if that guy for example really is that bad of a person on top of his music that's a reason to dislike him indeed and it was a bad example.
I just noticed that absolutely everything marketed towards female teenagers by using their 'pretty boy'-fantasies is regarded as the worst by many people and bashed in a way that's totally out of proportion. And that therefore young girls liking something already means that it's shit to many people. Or the girls are shit and not to be taken serious.
To me that's very weird.
The things are marketed towards them. They are told to like it by society. Many end up liking it for whatever reason. They are told that they suck for liking it.
That kind of mechanism.

I do believe there was a thread for this quite a while back, but I figured it would be better to make a new thread for it altogether.
 
So this is the thread where you can talk about and post the visual kei album covers that you find incredibly tacky, ugly, amateuristic, etc. Some elaboration is always welcome.
 
I would already like to nominate for tackiest cover of 2013:
 

 
Jupiter's CLASSICAL ELEMENT Type A cover and:
 

 
One of D's covers for their new single (like what ahaha).
 
The covers don't have to be from 2013 btw, just post any VK cover you like (VK-limited of course, because what other scene has tackier covers than VK).

I have another unpopular opinion. Expect rant.
 
Mainstream music marketed towards pubescent girls isn't any worse than other music you don't like.
 
There is a whole culture (especially on the internet, but also in other media and in real life) devoted to and putting lots of time and appearently research into hating on anything made for female teenagers and it highly irritates me.
I mean solo artists like Justin Bieber or boygroups like One Direction and even certain visual kei bands. Movies like twilight and many Boys love manga belong into the same category and also get the same treatment!
Things that work because 13 year old girl's romantic and/or sexual fantasies about 'pretty boys', essentially.

There is no other demographic which is nearly as bashed as them. Not even a tiny bit.
 
As I'm no 13 year old girl I find no appeal in those things either but I don't have the need to judge it's fans at all. Because of my different enviroment I never get in touch with their music taste, except for people bitching about it. I don't get this: if you don't like it, don't spend time on it. Like you do with every other genre that isn't made for you but doesn't threaten you either.
 
I'm also not interested in things marketed towards 60+ ladys or 4 year old boys and still don't think I should spend my day with hating on it and the people who enjoy it. It's also not a common thing to do. So why do it with teenage girls?
 
Teenage girls freak out and scream and throw their underwear (?) during some boyband concert where it doesn't bother anyone because only other teenage girls are present?  -People declare the girls hysteric and out of their mind and the band horrible.
Grown men freak out and scream and throw beerbottles after some sports event in public where outsiders will be bothered?-
People are like 'boys will be boys' and still take the sport very serious.
 
I'd even go as far as to say that when some artist has many young girls as fans it kind of devalues his work to many. This is sad!
Young girls aren't all stupid. Actually many are already more mature and educated then their male counterparts.
 
Maybe it's because of our cultures sick obsession with young girls sexuality and that it's frightening for us to see them directing it at something we don't like...?
 
Either way. I just don't get this.

The similarities are indeed hard to ignore. D:
 
 
....
This is me as a functional part of society:

 
this is me being superduper oldschool:

I have to disagree with Arithmetica on the BABYMETAL not being metal. To me they are. Sure they may not be your typical metal band, and are on the poppy side, but they still are metal. 
 
Which brings me to my other point. Metal is metal. Djent is metal, VK is (can be) metal, progressive metal is metal, metalcore is metal, deathcore is metal,  alternative metal is metal, death metal is metal, industrial metal is metal, grindcore is metal, symphonic metal is metal, powermetal is metal, black metal is metal. Electronic-posthardcore-bleep-bloop-w/e is metal. 
 
I’m so tired of metal fans bashing other sub-genres of metal and refusing to acknowledge them as metal simply because they don’t fit their own personal description of the genre, or because they don’t like a certain band. I see people bashing any type of metal that has clean vocals as utter crap simply because the band chooses not to use BROOTAL growled vocals all the time. Likewise I see death metal gets flak for “generic,” or “indistinguishable” growled vocals. Technical/progressive metal bands with crazy instrumental and composition skills get crap for “useless instrumental wankery”, symphonic for lack of heaviness, metalcore for breakdowns/pedal point riffs, and metal fusion bands for using other genres of music that aren’t metal, electronica, post-hardcore, pop etc.
 
This type of narrow mindedness is even present in the Japanese music scene. More traditional heavy metal acts from Japan don’t consider VK bands who actually play a style of metal (usually a variation on metalcore) metal simply because said VK band may use poppy choruses or dress in colorful visually striking attire. It might not be traditional metal, but VK can certainly still be metal, as can any other sub-genre can. 
 
The numerous incarnations metal has taken is actually what I love about the genre. The crazy amount of sub-genres it has and how each sub-genre has its own awesome interpretation and take on metal. Sure there are crap bands in each scene, but that goes for any genre. More importantly, there are plenty of amazing bands from each sub-genre. And I don’t except everyone to like every sub-genre of metal there is, or every metal band out there, but to be open minded enough to respect and accept other sub-genres. 
 
I will never understand when people say “that’s not metal”, when clearly the band is, or “that’s fake/poser metal", There’s no such thing as fake metal. It’s either metal or it’s not. So yeah, that’s my opinion. Metal is metal.     

Awww, I want vol 4! The previews are short, but but so cheerful. Also, because it's instrumental I can sing along as loud as I can in my squeaky hide voice and terrify the neighbours.

Thank you for that unpopular opinion of yours. : D
I had no idea who they were but checked them out on youtube just now. For some reason (although I'm not into metall-riff based music normally) they totally work for me. The instrumental actually contrasts nicely with their idol image and voices. Also I think I have a girlcrush on all three of them now.

Awww, I want vol 4! The previews are short, but but so cheerful. Also, because it's instrumental I can sing along as loud as I can in my squeaky hide voice and terrify the neighbours.

XD I don't know why everybody always complains about hinas lyrics. I think they are great! Sleazy music needs sleazy lyrics.
Just make sure no japanese native speaker is present and you'll be fine.

Since I can't stand the Mejibray/GazettE-stanning that's taken over this topic and has gotten away from the original intent, I'm bringing it back. I'm also giving you all something new to talk about since new unpopular opinions have ceased to surface over the last page or so.

Visual kei is not a genre or an aesthetic movement. It's a paradoxical manifestation of an anomaly against the negatives of Japanese culture.

This is closely related to the problem of "what is visual kei?".

Stolen shamelessly from Wikipedia, a genre is defined as
 
 
We can stop right here. Before you start processing the definition, ask yourself "what is visual kei"? We can have a ten page discussion about that in this topic right now and still not come to a consensus. Visual kei is an open-ended, ill-defined term exploited by both us and the bands in the scene to refer to whatever we please. We agree to disagree on what the term is supposed to mean and take it at face value when someone tells us that a band is or isn't visual kei anymore.

By definition, visual kei can't be a genre because we can only define it by what it is not, and very conservatively at that. The difference between newbies and veterans in the scene mostly comes down to context sensitivity determining band classification. What do I mean by this? Well, we can all look at a band or an idol group and very clearly say "this is not visual kei". But if we look at a visual kei band next to a band that uses theatrical make-up and aesthetic elements, we get into murky territory. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. Newbies lack the knowledge to make this distinction, and utilize only the looks to say whether or not a band is visual. Then, they get lashed upon by fans of that band who "don't want to associate this band with those bands" for getting it wrong, and they learn. Eventually they learn only to label a band as visual kei if they describe themselves as such or if someone else before them says it first. [1]

The thing is, the newbies have the right approach at first. They get into the scene, they hear that it's a genre, and seek to classify it. But before long they realize that over the span of twenty years, visual kei has birthed bands that sound very, very different. Going off of sound alone, all bands that were ever considered visual kei can't be connected short of a definition so vague it's useless. So then we turn to the costumes and theatrics and claim that as a large component of what makes a band visual. But even there, we can piece together different bands that don't look anything alike - some bands which don't look remotely visual at all - and claim they are all visual kei. Hell, lynch. has looked like a normal band for quite some time and there's still a heated debate to whether or not they're visual kei. On the first page of this very topic, one of the unpopular opinions was that "Dir en grey is still visual". Once again, you now have bands that have very little in common aesthetic wise and short of a very vague, useless definition we have nothing to go off of.

So I've basically run through this problem, haven't given a solution and haven't explained my point (or have I?). What gives?

Well as a fandom we tend to separate visual kei bands based on decades, so let's do that:

- The mysterious late 80's, which most of us like to pretend doesn't exist, full of bands that play some form of rock or metal.
- The music of the 90's, which is usually thought of as bands inspired by Victorian and goth costumes playing...well, whatever they want.
- The 00's, which was populated by lots of flashy costumes, usually subdivided into subkeis to better be able to classify and understand bands but still full of bands playing whatever they want.
- The 10's, which seems to have a preponderance of electronic elements in the music but for the most part still full of plenty of different bands playing whatever they please.

And even here we tend to simplify this as to "80s HAIR METAL, 90'S GOFF MUZIK, 00'S KEI ON KEI ACTION/RAWRCORE, 10'S WUB-WUBCORE", which illustrates the points I made above. As a fan, you get to a point where you realize that the term can't be defined and thus you stop. The working definition is "If a band wants to be visual kei, they'll be visual kei. When they don't, they're no longer visual kei". [2]  So doesn't this describe a movement, which brings together people just as different for a common cause? Let's go through all of the things that should make a movement and see if it lines up.

Well let's see:

- Coordinated group action. Well, visual kei isn't very rebellious or subversive, outside of the low barrier to entry being offensive to some people's ears and the costumes being offensive to some people's eyes. Unless there is this entire "point" they all share that we've missed for forever and a day, I believe that most bands focus on staying functional over staying Stallman-esque in their beliefs. [3] And frankly, I can't blame them. Pragmatism rules. [4]

- A common cause. But what is that cause and do all bands share it? As I said above, we really don't think of visual kei as something as much as we do as an entity against something. But even that "entity" changes over time, reflected by the different forms of visual kei. So do the bands of the late 80's and the bands of today share the same goal? Yes and no. [5]

- People from different walks of life. We can't say too much because we don't know the details of most musicians. Note however that on a macro scale most visual kei bands are Japanese and many tend to gravitate around a few cities on the mainland. We also can surmise that a lot of these musicians are poor or struggling. We also haven't seen the scene take root in any other countries with similar situations. In this sense, it represents a truly Japanese problem - disillusioned youth versus "The System". If it's a movement here, it's on a small scale.

Visual kei is too anti-classification to be a genre and too inconclusive to be a movement. So what is it?

My admittedly semantic description of visual kei is that of a paradoxical anomaly. It exists, full of people perpetuating it unaware of it's purpose, fighting against an issue that plagues the Japanese society whilst embodying almost every characteristic of that society. What is that issue? Well, I believe the issue lies in the extreme conformity and deference to authority found in the society, coupled with high expectations placed upon every member of that society, along with a thirty year recession that has stagnated the Japanese economy and makes it hard to achieve the life every Japanese person feels it is their duty to obtain.

A strictly Japanese problem. [6]

Visual kei exists as an antagonist to everything in that society, even definition, because it refuses to conform. It's piloted by people who know full they may never see success but toil anyway as a gigantic "FUCK YOU" to their society. It's also mostly populated by young people with the drive and ambition to change their surroundings but no means to achieve that change (and older people who exploit these young people for the cash they'll never see, bringing the entire scene into territory so meta it hurts). When those kids grow up and lose their drive, as after years of fighting against this nebulous problem they watch it shift into something new but no less harmful, they give up, slip into the routine, and become working salary men that can't be identified. It's an anomaly that just is, and that anomaly happens to make noise that we like to listen to.

To pigeonhole visual kei into anything else misses the political and cultural significance that caused it's birth.

tl;dr - Visual kei is the Japanese "hippie culture" of the 60's, with no Vietnam War in sight to bring it to an end. [7]

Notes:

Here I extrapolate on points that I wanted to make above and didn't because I didn't want to go on a tangent and not come back.

[1] This is my personal belief behind why revival bands like Grieva and Ru:natic will never see a resurgence. The forms that visual kei took in the 90's was in resistance to the culture and expectations of the 90's. The world is an irreversibly different place and thus visual kei must change along with it. This is also why I believe that visual kei is not an aesthetic - the fashion world moves in cycles much shorter than 30 years. Visual kei hasn't repeated a phase to date. That's why I believe it supersedes such a definition.

[2] Not only does this loose definition work but it reflects a lot of what I get into later in my argument. Most importantly, that it gives an element of control back to the band. I've read in multiple places that the Japanese populace don't feel like they have much choice - they must succeed in school, get into better schools, succeed there, get a good job, start a family, etc. - and then must face a wall of depression when they realize that most can't get to the head of the pack and they didn't. By sticking to this definition, bands can have a say in a core element which defines them.

[3] Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU Project. Read up on him to see what ideals unbounded by pragmatism really is. Hint: it sounds like crazy.

[4] When bands have no motivation or have run out of reasons to continue they sometimes disband for no reason. On the other side of that coin, some bands are so tight knit that they feel as if they can't function if a member leaves. But at the heart of it all, many bands don't put ideals and beliefs over success. Those that have them use them alongside the visuals and their music - and even then if it becomes too hard they quit or if they become successful they tone it down or cut it out completely. See, NoGoD.

[5] Even more interestingly, visual kei itself tends to conform in ways, which subverts the point of the whole thing. It's like a military group led by a dictator attacking a dictatorial government for its evils. This is why I refrain from calling it a movement, because it itself embodies the very principles it seeks to combat.

[6] Which is why "overseas visual kei" will never take off. The societal conditions are not right for it to spawn. YOHIO and Seremedy are second-order simulacra.

[7] After WWII, Japan isn't allowed to have a real standing army so it isn't in it's best interest to get into conflicts. I meant it literally. In another sense, you could say that the counterculture of the 60's was against "The System" but manifested itself through the War. Once the War ended, the culture had little reason to exist. Since visual kei doesn't have such a clear cut enemy, it will continue on for much longer. This is also why visual kei can't "die".

The similarities are indeed hard to ignore. D:
 
 
....
This is me as a functional part of society:

 
this is me being superduper oldschool:

Visual kei gets a bad reputation because visual kei fans can't talk music
Elaboration is the cornerstone of great conversation and great writing. Talking about music and bands is an exercise in persuasive writing. You're giving your audience - anyone that took the time to read what you have to write - very good reasons to consider why your position is correct. Now let's say I just left this topic with that one sentence in bold. I may have a good point. If I explain, I very well may change your view. But since I don't, you won't take me seriously. If I do this over and over again very soon I'm going to build up a reputation as someone not worth listening to because I don't explain the "why's" behind my beliefs.
Expand this out to the entire visual kei scene.
One of our largest problems isn't that we don't have a lot to say about our favorite artists. We do. We just never get around to ever saying it. This extends out beyond Monochrome Heaven. I find I can't take people's opinions or reviews seriously because they'll just say something is great or something is shit and leave it at that. Most of the time I'm convinced that subsequent people just parrot the first person to say something different, and it continues in that direction from there. There is hardly ever details and when there is it is at the most basic level possible. As fans, we should continue to promote our favorite bands and our favorite releases, but then couple that with reasons. Why do I like this album? Why don't I like this band?
And let's keep it strictly about the music, because believe it or not saying "the vocals are good and the guitars are awesome!" tells a potential interested reader nothing. What exactly does awesome sound like? Right...
Now if you are not confident in your writing and explanation abilities, don't let it stop you. Read up on professional reviews on other websites. Take tips from them. Continue to work on it. You can't become better at reviewing if you never try. But if we all begin to discuss the actual music behind visual kei when we make our claims, I believe that people in other scenes will stop dismissing us outright as wankers who only listen for the pretty boys.

It seems like that opinion isn't as unpopular as I thought but I hate VK bands playing Metal.
It's not even that I dislike Metal as a genre or influence but the fact that every band does it just destroys most things I like about VK.
It takes aways the simplicity and elegance of the genre.
The heavy chords eat up the prominent basslines.
The dark growls take away that 'vullnerable' feel many VK singers voices have.
The SPEED and SKILLZ factor kills the punky garageband-feeling and most of all:
The cheesiness and poseritis of visual kei bands isn't properly balanced by the bitter and 'unskilled' post-punk sound anymore.
Metal as a music genre is just as cheesy and poseurish as VK as a style and together it's too much pathos.
Almost like a fantasy RPG.
 
Also there are more than enough 'real' metal bands out there who do it properly and have singers that actually manage the screaming and growling, there is simply no need for so many VK bands suddenly trying it.

oh the hurt :c lol 
 
Anyway I'm the vocalist and i agree we suck but gotta start somewhere! in my case from the very bottom but what can i do? its me! At least i have the courage to try and i will continue to do so.   

My my, it's the question of the decade. The holy grail to answering all of life's dilemmas.
 
The answer to your question is inconclusive because you've already decided your stance on the issue. No matter what anyone says or how anyone approaches your question, you will not concede defeat or agree to disagree. You came to pick a fight on a forum of visual kei fans knowing everyone will react, hoping to incite a flame war. Maybe you like having your jimmies rustled. Maybe you just like sowing discord. Maybe I'm completely wrong and your brusque attitude is just masking a wish to truly understand. But in order to avoid pages full of drama with no concrete resolution, I had to lock this topic. I will not allow the users of Monochrome Heaven to fall to the stereotype of the average Japanese weeaboo. We are better than that.

But I will answer your question, because I feel compelled to leave you with something to think about no matter what your reasons for coming here was.
 
It is clear to you that visual kei does not offer you what you are looking for. Not all genres of music are for everyone. If you feel that you don't need Japanese men in frilly dresses playing obnoxious power metal, good on you. Continue to listen to whatever floats your boat.

But judging visual kei on the merits of a few bands causes you to miss the larger picture. You can never understand a genre by trying out just a few artists. I'd venture to say that you'll never completely understand a genre if you listen to it for as long as you live. What changes is your perception of what's there - how things you've hated you've come to enjoy and vice versa. Growth and maturity is at the heart of listening to music no matter what it is.
 
That is why Monochrome Heaven, the center of visual kei and Japanese rock on the internet, can be home to so many people with completely different music tastes from completely different walks of life. We see and accept each others differences even if we can't understand why others like what they do.
 
But of course you would not know this. I would not expect you to.
 
Now no one's twisted your arm into coming here and sampling what we have. No one is forcing you to listen to the music that we like to listen to. If you don't like visual kei, you don't like visual kei. We won't hold that against you here. If you have come here to open your mind, or at least try something new before you make a decision, you are more than welcome here. But if you have come to this forum to get off over drama stemming from contrived differences in musical opinions, I can tell you that you'll be better off saving face and leaving. I don't take kindly to people that exist to cause problems.

It seems like that opinion isn't as unpopular as I thought but I hate VK bands playing Metal.
It's not even that I dislike Metal as a genre or influence but the fact that every band does it just destroys most things I like about VK.
It takes aways the simplicity and elegance of the genre.
The heavy chords eat up the prominent basslines.
The dark growls take away that 'vullnerable' feel many VK singers voices have.
The SPEED and SKILLZ factor kills the punky garageband-feeling and most of all:
The cheesiness and poseritis of visual kei bands isn't properly balanced by the bitter and 'unskilled' post-punk sound anymore.
Metal as a music genre is just as cheesy and poseurish as VK as a style and together it's too much pathos.
Almost like a fantasy RPG.
 
Also there are more than enough 'real' metal bands out there who do it properly and have singers that actually manage the screaming and growling, there is simply no need for so many VK bands suddenly trying it.

em that's the point it's more about entertainment .
today's visual kei is more about who is the best entertainer and not who is the better musician/artist .
the one who has the most success is the best entertainer. not artist .
i mean entertainers have talend too and are needed but just know what is going on.
 
 
first of all i am a fan of new bands. saying that .
although i am not sure at all because i wasn't there lol.  it seems old school vk looks have different purpose than today's visual kei looks as ideology.
i mean maybe then it was more about looking disobedient or unconventional.
today is more about who is the most good looking or acting with sole emphasis on  profit  and not so much about the shock factor.
and that makes old bands have more artistic value.

what do you thing about it??
 
ok they were always crappy bands that coppy each other with same sound but of course the first bands were going to be be respected more just because they were the first/foundational? no matter how crappy.they started the scene.
people tend to have a feeling of respect of  their roots even if  themselves are better.because without them they wouldn't exist.
also most important some of them were pioneers and avant-garde and radical at that time .something that now is difficult to exist. i dare to say doesn't exist in visual kei now.

Well. The part about the blood is from the directors blog, so yes.
Whether the person was alive or dead and which scene it was (also whether they even used the scene) is unknown.
 
But yes, it seems they appearently did pretty extreme stuff back then. XD In the bio it says that VISUAL TRAP was founded when the members (two or three people) were still in university so I assume they were just as young and stupid as the bands they were working with if that explains anything.

He did! Seems like I didn't include him because I didn't have a 'portrait'-style picture like for the others. XD
 

 
I didn't even know the white-streak of hair was still going on tbh. Thanks everyone for posting!
 
 
And yes. Pink haired guitarists.
 
Hide (X Japan)
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1dunoltuAiI/Tb8LmZVOJuI/AAAAAAAAAGU/aGMElDLCYkk/s1600/hide0908.jpg
 
Sugizo (Luna Sea)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/Sugizo_in_S%C3%A3o_Paulo%2C_Brazil_2011-11-09.jpg/399px-Sugizo_in_S%C3%A3o_Paulo%2C_Brazil_2011-11-09.jpg
 
Kaoru (Dir en grey)
http://www.freewebs.com/dirufansite/kaoru26a.jpg
 
Jun (Phantasmagoria)
http://www.jame-world.com/_pic/pic/2330-a.jpg
 
Aoi (The Gazette)
http://www.jref.com/forum/images/imported/2010/12/16659447968817554318270-1.jpg