#31
Misanthropologist (d) wrote:
ALL MVC’s, everywhere. Except for the one in Bognor. I’ve not yet checked that one.
Posted on Tue, 17 May 2005 at 16:13
#32
JSar666 wrote:
You checked the two in London?
Posted on Tue, 17 May 2005 at 16:15
#33
Misanthropologist (d) wrote:
I checked ALL the MVC’s. Except the one in Bognor. Pay attention. :P
Posted on Tue, 17 May 2005 at 16:22
#34
JSar666 wrote:
IS THAT A YES OR A NO THEN?
Honestly, some people…
:p
Anyway, let’s get back on topic. This thread could have done with a poll…
Posted on Tue, 17 May 2005 at 16:23
#35
Misanthropologist (d) wrote:
I’m assuming that it was a trick question, and that London has more than two MVC’s…
Posted on Tue, 17 May 2005 at 16:25
#36
Superstick Dude wrote:
My MVC (Hull) has NANE, but no card for it. It a T card then loads of bands beginning with T and then the cards start with some shit like Taking Back Sunday.
Posted on Tue, 17 May 2005 at 16:29
#37
JSar666 wrote:
Nah, it’s only got two. It’s not that big a chain here.
Posted on Tue, 17 May 2005 at 16:30
#38
McKekS wrote:
endless classification debates.
can somebody tell me what are the criterias for metal, punk, hardcore? How to decide whether the band is metal, punk or hardcore? :rolleyes:
Posted on Wed, 18 May 2005 at 15:38
#39
soul doubt (an) wrote:
everything with heavy guitars that sucks… metal, fast punk and the rest hardcore? ;)
Posted on Wed, 18 May 2005 at 15:51
#40
JSar666 wrote:
No, heavy guitars that are oversimplified and suck is hardcore (or the modern definition of it anyway), fast and simple is punk and complex with solos is metal.
Posted on Wed, 18 May 2005 at 16:12
#41
McKekS wrote:
JSar666 wrote:
No, heavy guitars that are oversimplified and suck is hardcore (or the modern definition of it anyway),
hardcore sucks? but what about HELMET. i always considered them to be a hardcore band, at least i was told so.
but even if they are not, i still like them!
Posted on Wed, 18 May 2005 at 16:16
#42
soul doubt (an) wrote:
JSar666 wrote:
No, heavy guitars that are oversimplified and suck is hardcore (or the modern definition of it anyway), fast and simple is punk and complex with solos is metal.
:mad:
Posted on Wed, 18 May 2005 at 16:17
#43
JSar666 wrote:
I consider Helmet hardcore, but they’re not your bog-standard not-good-enough-to-play-metal with cookie-monster vocals hardcore band. In fact Page is a genius. It’s just most “hardcore” bands just … suck. If you’re going to put illegible vocals on a record I demand interesting riffs and drum patterns, solos and variety to make up for it.
Posted on Wed, 18 May 2005 at 17:38
#44
stoon wrote:
McKekS wrote:
endless classification debates.
can somebody tell me what are the criterias for metal, punk, hardcore? How to decide whether the band is metal, punk or hardcore? :rolleyes:
Well, I agree with you about classification debates. Actually my original post asked if most of the Therapy? FANS were metal or indie fans or whatever. I was just idly wondering what type of music fan frequented this messageboard. I never actually asked what type of music people thought Therapy? were. Much like Jesus, my message has been twisted out of all recognition.
I’m not really bothered though.
Posted on Wed, 18 May 2005 at 18:26
#45
JSar666 wrote:
I think we all agree that Therapy? are quite fucking brilliant though.
Posted on Thu, 19 May 2005 at 13:02
#46
oxygala (Daghan) wrote:
I think what defines T? the best is the fact that it’s impossible to define them referring to something else (tiring sentence it is). They are them and it’s quite cool if you ask me.
Posted on Thu, 19 May 2005 at 15:55
