.:.:.:.:
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 ShadowSD.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="ShadowSD:1085331"][QUOTE="ArrowHead%20Logged%20In%20....%20Or%20NOT!:1085297"]It's every fucking metal band that has stayed true to what they started with, while metallica ran off in pursuit of image, popularity, MTV, and album sales.[/QUOTE] Agreed 1000% on the overall point - although if Metallica's goal was to pursue more popularity, MTV, and album sales, it was the biggest failure of commercial strategy in the history of the music industry, given the potential wasted. Consider, Metallica's first five albums each sold more than the last, but not only that; each sold four to five times as much as the previous one, almost like clockwork. However, every album beginning with their image change/logo change in 1996 not only broke that pattern, but none ever sold anywhere close to the Black Album ever again. Load did great the first week because of all the anticipation for the first album in five years, but then went way downhill relative to Black, which stayed in the Top 200 Albums for two and a half years after its release. The band's album sales for future releases never recovered anywhere near to what they had been, nor did they recover their upward trend, and to this day it's the first five albums that still continue to sell moreso than the stuff they came out with afterwards. If their intent was to make money with the change in style, they are the biggest failures as whores ever.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.005 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][