.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to retzam.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="retzam:421152"]immortal13 said:[QUOTE]What do you expect from Revolver? It's all for the money. I gaurantee that if half those bands weren't there, someone would write hate mail and shit and they'd lose money. Most of the bands one the list are bullshit. Slipknot? Led Zepplin? AC/DC? On the same list as Napalm Death, Death, and Strapping Young Lad? it's just stupid the fact that they make it obvious they listen to some heavy bands, and decide to put some of that shit on the list anyway. Fucking media.[/QUOTE] Well, it's tough, because, just as hoser said jokingly, heavy could mean so many things. I straight up don't agree with Slipknot or AC/DC, but Led Zeppelin had a really heavy drum sound, so maybe someone thought fit to put them on there. And Jimmy Page's guitar was pretty fucking distorted for the time period. It's so relative, and "heavy" is such a vague word that it's pretty much senseless to make such a list. Maybe "Heaviest Death Metal Bands" or "Heaviest Classic Rock Bands" would be more sensible lists, but still, if your doing, say, death metal, someone's gonna think heavy means how much distortion, someone's gonna think heavy means how low the guitars are tuned and how fast the double bass is, some people are gonna define it by how evil the riffs sound. It's just a matter that could go around in circles forever.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.004 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][