Metallica really wants you to dislike them
Do you remember Metallica? If you do, you probably remember it for hating on Napster, holding out on iTunes for too long, and generally disliking anything related to the digital revolution.
In recent months, the band has come around and allowed its music to be downloaded on iTunes and generally stayed under the radar while it recorded a new album. Of course, whether or not more than 10,000 rabid fans actually care about this new album is up for debate, but Metallica has remained relatively tight-lipped about its progress.
Until recently.
According to ArsTechnica, Metallica -- in a show of good faith -- invited some music bloggers into the studio to let them listen to six tracks off the band's new album. After listening, the critics wrote up reviews based on what they heard and did not violate any non-disclosure agreements (there weren't any), nor were any specific directions given to them regarding what they could and could not write about.
After the reviews were posted, the bloggers received word from the band's management instructing them to remove the reviews from the site or face legal action.
One blog, The Quietus, told reporters that "The Quietus kept our article up the longest and, as no non-disclosure agreement had been signed," the site's editor wrote, "[we were] not prepared to remove it merely due to the demands of Metallica's management. We only removed the article earlier today to protect the professional interests of the writer concerned."
For its part, Metallica's management claimed that the songs were rough mixes and had no place in reviews that assumed they were finished products. If that's true, why would Metallica invite critics to London to listen to "rough tracks" instead of waiting for the polished songs?
Obviously something doesn't add up.
Regardless, Metallica has once again shown that it's held in contempt all over the world for good reason. Why would we even consider buying an album from a band that continually pushes all the wrong buttons and contends that it's actually protecting the music industry in the process?
In the wide world of music, our level of distrust first begins with the RIAA, but Metallica is running a close second.
How many times are we forced to sit back and listen to Metallica drone on about its distaste for downloads, its penchant for in-store album sales at $20 a pop, and its obsession with the outdated business model before we stand up and finally tell this group of pure fools that their time is up?
Then again, I would guess that we've already done that. Did you know Metallica was releasing a new album? I certainly didn't. And while the band may have been popular more than a decade ago, today, it's nothing more than a washed up group of forty-somethings that are trying desperately to become "legends of rock."
Sorry to break it to you, boys, but unless you come up with something that can transcend the music industry and revolutionize the business, the chances of you making a comeback are practically nil.
Lest you get the wrong idea, my indictment of Metallica has nothing to do with its past mistakes. Sure, it's a band that has tried to keep the music industry back and fails to apply logic to a discussion that seems quite simple, but I can't blame them for trying to hold on to something that worked when they were popular.
Today though, time has left Metallica in its dust and the momentum of this industry is moving quickly towards a day where music downloads are the only form of distribution. And regardless of the fact that Metallica wants to bully bloggers, hate on downloaders, and ostracize its listeners, there's nothing the band can do about it.
Metallica, once again, has shown us how sad it really is. In an attempt to hold on to something it once had, the band is showing how long in the tooth it really is.
Sorry, boys. Your time has come and gone. Now if you don't mind, get out of the way.
For more on what Don is up to, follow him on Twitter by clicking here!
There are loads of blogs cropping up about this, yet not a SINGLE ONE has the facts right, instead they are all just trying to make a name for themselves by posting generic crap that they make up or borrow from someone else who made it up.
This is another poorly researched, inaccurate article written by a failed journalist.
There are loads of blogs cropping up about this, yet not a SINGLE ONE has the facts right, instead they are all just trying to make a name for themselves by posting generic crap that they make up or borrow from someone else who made it up.
This is another poorly researched, inaccurate article written by a failed journalist.
I guess no one told all these people that Metallica were washed up has-beens.
I find that this piece lacks facts of any kind, which, i imagine, is why you are a writer for PC World amongst others, where finding actual information from credible sources isn't that important.
"How many times are we forced to sit back and listen to Metallica drone on about its distaste for downloads, its penchant for in-store album sales at $20 a pop, and its obsession with the outdated business model before we stand up and finally tell this group of pure fools that their time is up?"
Erm... no one forces you to read about Metallica, so that can be marked down as zero. And, might I add, they never stated a dislike for Downloads, they didn't like their music being downloaded for free. Tell me, Don Reisinger, do you write for free?
When do we tell them that their time is up? Good question. Perhaps playing to over 50,000 fans at Rock Am Ring amongst other festivals where they have headlined this spring is a pretty good sign that the bands time is FAR from up. I have a question for you Don, how can you tell when a journalists time is up? When they start writing blogs on an internet site that is full of misquotations, lack of journalistic integrity and depth, as well as being full of subjective points of view that seem to come from someone who is sad that someone told them off for illegal file sharing.
I think my reply was more articulated and factual that your article.
Cherrio
http://www.metallica.com/index.asp?item=600942
See ya later
But did the writer look of metallica's website for research, the answer is clearly not as metallica record every live show they play and make them downloadable through their website, i know i have used the site to download them playing at Wembley Statium in London in 2007 in for over 70 000 people, clearly not a band left in the dust!
Metallica ARE still one the biggest rock/metal on earth they still headline at the major rock and metal festivals around the world, i feel that Don you need to research the band before attacking the band because this clearly not done.
By the way i am 18 in the "ipod generation" and well buy a CD and having something physical is SO much better a file on a computer.
Also Don check this out http://www.livemetallica.com/ you can download metallica shows from now back to 1982 not bad for a band generally disliking anything related to the digital revolution.
In essence, it was a mistake at Q Prime--not Metallica's fault.
Here's Metallica's side of things. Please don't act like CNN and NBC news and try to get BOTH sides of the story before you make a moron of yourself.
-
by JakeDTS
June 12, 2008 9:21 AM PDT
- the person that wrote this article is absolutely oblivious and should not even have access to a keyboard. "metallica's distaste for downloads" do you know that metallica releases every single concert they perform as a download within days sometimes hours of the actual event? yeah they charge for it but i dont work for free so i dont expect metallica to either. especially since their music back in the 80's and very early 90's affected so many people and still 20 years later those songs have the same fire they did back then. i mean there has to be some underlying tension with this writer knowing he could never reach anyone like metallica has. in fact maybe don reisinger wants you to dislike him?
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
See all 115 Comments >>