Post your "UNPOPULAR" music opinions!

[Sucza-san 3]

^You won't. 

As you said - it's your opinion. And in some part I have to agree with you. Tsuzuku isn't that great live, really. But I like his tone of voice. And also, the rest of the band are great instrumentalists. IMO they make good music. 

AND, I have no freaking idea about how screams are supposed to sound, but like I said Tzk's voice is fine for me.

[Ikna 1225]

Most visual kei vocalists are terrible. Apparently, that's also an unpopular opinion. I am aware of the fact, that not all visual kei singers are bad. But most really are. Especially in the indie vk sector you will find terrible vocalists who ruin the actually decent or good music. I am one of those people who like "crappy" old indie vk bands. Of course I also enjoy the "better" bands of the era, such as Luna Sea, Rouage, Laputa, Pierrot and Co. and I'd say that their vocalists are not terrible but still an aquired taste. What I like about visual rock the most are not directly the vocals (as they are often craptastic) or lyrics (as I can't understand them), but the music and overall concept and the overall atmosphere a band creates.

Though I admit that a lot bands actually get their interesting and unique sound because of their singers. I couldn't imagine Madeth gray'll being as awesome and dark as they are if Hisui would hit every note.

 

What puts me off of modern visual bands are the Metalcore influences. I have already mentioned this in the biggest crimes of japanese music thread, that I find it unbearable to listen to visual kei singers trying to growl when they have totally no clue how it's properly done. It fucking hurts to listen to and it does not make me wonder why visual kei singers suffer so often from problems with their voice or vocal chords. I know vocal training lessons are expensive and take time... but vk bands should really invest more into it if they don't want to risk their vocalits to damage their voice for ever.

Also I don't like the way most of these bands (including Mejibray) sing. I am more found of clear singing or the way old vk bands have screamed. So it's more personal taste than anything. But I agree that Tsusuku's voice isn't that well and he sounds like any other neo visual kei singer trying to growl or scream. Maybe I am not good at hearing, but for me D.I.D, Mejibray and Co. sound exactly the same (especially style-wise).

[GazeRockSnob 34]

I'll probably get shot for this, but now that there's a thread for these I'm going to give it a try anyway.

 

I simply do not understand people who claim they love MEJIBRAY for the vocals. That is mainly because in my ears the vocalist sounds awful. I know there are two kinds of awful, as in "I don't like the sound of his voice or the way he uses it but technically he can still sing" and then there's the "there are so many things wrong technically that it just sounds like shit" option. For me, MEJIBRAY's vocalist falls in the second category. His screams are awful, his regular vocals are weak and usually can't carry the music and he's out of tune about 99% of the time. Like I said, I'm probably going to get some angry replies to this but this is MY OPINION. I'm not stating it as fact, nor am I trying to shit on your favourite vocalist/band. I just can't listen to him.

 

Sai I agree with you. Tsuzuku's voice is weak (has redeeming quality) but I DONT FUCKING KNOW how people can say they love Meji for the vocals and that Mejibray is better than GazettE. LOL NO, STOP. Arithmetica was right in saying that people publicly love Mejibray because they don't want to be seen liking GazettE.

 

So many people think it's so cool to hate them bc their fans, their style changes, their label, whatever reason. The GazettE is a great band. A lot of people will disregard me bc I am a huge fan and everyone apparently hates GazeFans but it's so hypocritical to say you completely hate the GazettE after practically sobbing in joy and pissing yourself when one of their wannabes releases something new. Everyone can say that they hate what the GazettE is now and blah blah blah but do you REALLY EXPECT THEM TO STAY THE SAME? Look at Deathgaze. I love them but their sound is repetitive, they're safe since no one will hate what they produce but they will never move past the point they're at now unless they try newer things.

 

The point of music is not to produce shit that everyone likes, it's to challenge the norm and do what you want and that is especially the point in VK. And you also have to produce your music with the mindset that people are buying it and if you want to actually sell and continue making music, it has to be what people will like.

 

Idk what people expect to gain from hating on GazettE and their music as if they give a flying shit about your sorry asses. Everyone spends too much time hating on them to the point where it becomes some stupid obsession. If you don't like them fine. Dafuq you you need to let the world know for. Just go listen to your music. JFC.

 

I like Mejibray but they would never compare to GazettE for me. They aren't even in my top 5 anymore. The GazettE are just better. There's a reason they're one of the most popular bands. There's nothing wrong with loving a popular band.

 

And people in general hate on PSC bands too much. I don't like the company any more than anyone else does but sometimes people just need to shut up and leave them alone. They make good music, although  a couple of indie PSC's vo's are questionable.

 

Imo this whole "I hate that because it's so mainstream" is becoming very mainstream right now.

 

In the end though, I think that most bands will grow out of VK eventually. It's fun to start out as Visual kei but as your music improves and you reach new horizon's you'll want to change how you appear to others to become more marketable, it's all in the name of business. It's kind of sad seeing a VK band move out from vk into a more conservative style but as long as the music doesn't change to some Brittney Spears shit I don't give a rat's ass if they dress in rainbow T-Shirts and crocs.

[nullmoon 784]

^ haha the last paragraph was both hilarious and true

[chemicalpictures 1888]

Apparently you people adressed to all my unpopular opinions...

 

The VK fanbase SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS. I simply can't stand 98% of jrock fans.

 

Dir en grey sucks a lot too. Mainly because of Kyo annoying high-pitched screams and bs during their songs, I kiiiiinda like them instrumental-wise.

 

Japanese vocalists in general also tend to suck. Well, not actually suck, but they only work for a few selected listeners. A LOT of my friends actually like the song that I'm showing them, but their dislike for the vocal part is so big that they simply can't learn to really like it... Nowadays I only show people bands like Fake?, Ellegarden, coldrain... bands with a easily-digestible vocalist for the western listener. It's a shame for them and for Japan, it's the main reason that japanese music-style will never actually leave japan, I believe.

 

Their looks also tend to keep the outsider out. People see their pictures and are like "man why they're dressing like japanese cartoon shit? wtf is that Goku hair? MAAAN WHY THE FUCK IS  HE FAKING BEING A GIRL TO PLEASE HIS GIRL FANS?" And a I tend to agree with them. While it's understandable that VK is made and work for a japanese niche public, I think that's really a short-sighted vision as an artist, they could hit a broader audience with a more conservative look, and I'm glad to see that becoming more common nowadays.

[Sucza-san 3]

BUT there are many vocalists that actually can sing. Look at ASAGI or Juka. They are amazing.

[Umi_Niwa 31]

a. I honestly don't understand why some bands are famous. It's something I feel about all music genres but in Visual Kei I ask myself that twice as much.
b. It's nice to see that not all VK/Jrock artists look like models. And it pisses me off when people say "he's ugly and he needs that makeup" or stuff like that. Personally I like to see Jrockers who actually look normal every now and then. 

[JukaForever 758]

I quite liked Mejibray vocals, adds to the craziness imo

[Number Girl 48]

Oh, thank goodness I'm not the only one who's getting sick of the "let's all bash on the Gazette" trend. I'm not very fond of the Gazette either, but it's not like they are the epitome of everything that's awful and wrong with visual kei as many people make them out to be. -__- At least, I think if people do pick on them, they should have better reasons for doing so besides "the fandom is annoying," etc. 

 

And I think the whole "indie cred" shit is the most IDIOTIC concept ever. That's doesn't just go for visual kei bands either, but all music everywhere. Indie bands can be shitty too. Indie bands can be repetitive and unoriginal. I can't stand it when people just automatically flock to something because they only have a certain number of listens on Last.FM or whatever and deem it good when it actually isn't or is mediocre (this is especially true for certain non-visual J-indies fans, good god have some discretion people). I feel like worrying about how underground or unpopular the music is just defeats the purpose of listening to music in the first place - to enjoy it, to be inspired by it, etc. 

[seikun 317]

I agree with another user that Alice Nine is horrible band.

 

Also. I don't like MUCC's unstable musical style. If they want to be a more commercial band then make it clear.

[Zeus 7997]

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

 

[...] the term for any category of literature or other forms of art or entertainment, e.g. music, whether written or spoken, audial or visual, based on some set of stylistic criteria. Genres are formed by conventions that change over time as new genres are invented and the use of old ones are discontinued. Often, works fit into multiple genres by way of borrowing and recombining these conventions.

 

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".

[orangetarts 249]

 

 

 

b. It's nice to see that not all VK/Jrock artists look like models. And it pisses me off when people say "he's ugly and he needs that makeup" or stuff like that. Personally I like to see Jrockers who actually look normal every now and then. 

 

 

 

I totally agree with this.

Just because you have a pretty face doesnt mean you can sing. I mean look at 90% of oshare bands....

[Des 289]

Screaming and grunting about satan, other devils and how we'll all burn in hell at the age of 30 merely proves you're just about equal to a 15-year old One Direction fan in terms of intellect.

 

The Beatles did not revolutionize music. They took an existing concept and popularized it by milking it like one milks a cow. The evolution of pop music like they played has been going on for decades prior to Beatles-mania. A world famous boyband was just another natural step. It was bound to happen. Popularity does not equal quality or value.

'Indie' and 'singer-singwriter' are terms that get on my nerves. The irony lies in the hate that the 'commercial' artists receive from the hipster public because they're 'artificial' and 'a limited time product' while they essentially treat their beloved singer-songwriters the same: "Hey, it's another carbon copy of some sad love song played by some confused kid with an acoustic guitar using three chords. Let's all adore him for being so different and standing up against society until we just as easily exchange him for the next fella about one year later and pretend that he's our new revelation."

[bonsaijodelfisch 328]

I love you <3  marry pls?

[Umi_Niwa 31]

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".

You make interesting points there. But now I can't help feeling more confused. 

And it's contributed by the fact that it's kinda hard to judge the bands' "ideology" on the context level given the fact that not all of us understand Japanese, and some bands making it even harder to understand what they actually sing about with all the word play they do. So it's all pretty much given to interpretation.  

[madygrain 515]

I have plenty of stupid sounding things to say.

 

1.People that consider themselves "Visual Kei experts" hate on Nightmare because they consider them a "band for Noobs". Since many people gets into VK through anime and Death Note was one of the most popular series during the VK explosion, Nightmare was many people first VK band. I think people that pretendo to know a lot about VK and like to look over their shoulder to other fans just choose to dislike this band because they don't want to be associated with "those ignorant noobs" regardless of Nightmare's musical production and how good or bad it is.

 

2.Sharaku Kobayashi is one of the best VK vocalists. His voice is not really suited to sing, but he know how to, and that makes him unique and good. He also knows how to produce and arrange compelling vocal programing. 

 

3.Versailles could have been better if they were not limited by their theme, costumes and general VK stupidness. If they dropped VK after Jubilee the band would had make more interesting music.

 

4.Visual Kei fans are generally shit and don't care about music. Most of them are stupid girls that live on a semi justin-beiber-believer state over their belovend band or band member.

 

5.Baroque's Sug Life is disgustingly bad and there is no song that is remotely interesting, Ryo's vocals can barely called so when he spends most of the album wispering and just plain talking. Post 2003 baroque becames a hipsterous circlejerk of the bandmen wanting to be ikkemen and the fans getting some wet panties. Boogieman was the first time Akira and Bansaku made authentic music in years.

 

6.XA-VAT and Cuckoo were a great loss specially considering how bad new Cali Gari has been.

[Miasma 162]

why are you always so fucking whiny and bitter because no one ~appreciates boogieman and nightmare~ like you do?

 

[madygrain 515]

why are you always so fucking whiny and bitter because no one ~appreciates boogieman and nightmare~ like you do?

 

The question itself provides the answer. Also I am a really whiny and I enjoy it. 

 

Now I ask: why do you act so interested in this? You seem really annoyed. Remember that opinions in this post are suposed to be unpopular, why moan?

[Miasma 162]

tell me why I was expecting this half-assed response... and yeah I am annoyed because EVERY post of you make is about how much boogieman's disbandment was a tragedy to the vk scene.

[seikun 317]

I have plenty of stupid sounding things to say.

 

3.Versailles could have been better if they were not limited by their theme, costumes and general VK stupidness. If they dropped VK after Jubilee the band would had make more interesting music.

I don't think Visual Kei limited their musical style at all. Actually Metal tends to be monotonous after a time.

 

Visual Kei is very broad. I am one of those who think Visual Kei does have a musical style or features that characterise it (specially the sound of the late 90's). In Visual Kei you can play with rythms, speed, styles, etc.

 

I don't care if people agree with me on Visual Kei musically speaking. It is just music, not life.

[Number Girl 48]

I actually enjoy Dynamite Tommy's voice.

 

It's so bad, it's almost refreshing.

 

Other visual kei vocalists are bad too, but they're a conventional bad. His voice on the other hand is . . . a fascinating bad. 

 

I also kinda like him as a person, which I guess is unpopular as a lot of X/Extasy/old Diru stans think he's Satan or something. 

[orangetarts 249]

I really actually enjoy Taa of LuLu's vocals?

A lot of people really dislike his vocals because of their ~different~ sound but i really enjoy them.

[Guest mitsubana]

I really actually enjoy Taa of LuLu's vocals?

A lot of people really dislike his vocals because of their ~different~ sound but i really enjoy them.

 

I agree~ And ya, there are bad VK vocalists... But it's a matter of opinion too...

[orangetarts 249]

I agree~ And ya, there are bad VK vocalists... But it's a matter of opinion too...

There are SO many terrible VK vocalists that just make my ears bleed tbh,

lol but then there are the ones that are really super under appreciated too....

Eiji from CODOMO A has really good solid vocals imo, but again opinion.

[TheBistroButcher666 228]

I don't think Visual Kei limited their musical style at all. Actually Metal tends to be monotonous after a time.

Visual Kei is very broad. I am one of those who think Visual Kei does have a musical style or features that characterise it (specially the sound of the late 90's). In Visual Kei you can play with rythms, speed, styles, etc.

I don't care if people agree with me on Visual Kei musically speaking. It is just music, not life.

I think what they mean is that Versailles trapped themselves in the frilly aristocratic vampire theme. Not so much VK itself limiting them but the specific theme that Versailles set themselves up as.

With that in mind but I think a positive look on VK is that it will oftentimes allow bands to experiment in an environment that will let them survive. Shit like Da'vidノ使徒:aL, CODOMO A and Missalina Rei would probably fizzle out and die over night if they tried to play as a non visual band.