<font color=lime>Absolutely!</font>

Some of their stuff (especially the stuff from the eighties, which is REALLY SAD) is hard to find in my area...so my circle of friends shares their cd's...now, the thing is, is THAT cheating them out of their money? What if we burn copies of their stuff?

Either way, Master of Puppets is my favorite...and I was born in '86! What can beat the doggone thing? Between Disposable Heroes, Leper Messiah, Welcome Home/Sanitarium, MoP itself, Battery, The Thing that should not be...GODS THEY BE!
but, strangely enough, I like Load too...maybe I am just a young un'......

Oh come on Yorick, as if I didn't have an obvious tongue in my cheek when I wrote that down. ;) Frankly I couldn't care less about Metallica, neither their old nor their new material.
Focus your anger on a different topic, like this one for instance, which I'm incidently responsible for. [img]smile.gif[/img] Let's just move this entire debate over there, so we won't derail this thread any further.

*shrugs*
In Yorick's book, even if you purchase 29 out of 30 CDs that you discover through p2p-channels, you're still a thief - and I reckon he's probably right, purely definition-wise. From that perspective I'm one myself, but regarding my evergrowing CD-collection, I'm not really burdened with a guilty conscience. ;)

[ 03-31-2004, 10:40 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

if you look at it from Yorrick's perspective then most people are thiefs. I mean most of the people I know who have internet access (and thats a fair amount) have download songs from time to time, some more than others. I would be interested Yorrick, to hear your view on the sites like Yahoo etc. Which charge a certain amount per track, what do you think of them?

Now what did I just say about not derailing the topic any further? Not that I'm much of an authority on this board, but let's not cheat the Metallica-fans out of their "is not!" "are too!" debate. ;)

[ 03-31-2004, 01:08 PM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

Are too! Are too!

Anyway...I have to wonder how how can puke on disc one of Garage Inc. ... It's awesome...it really showcases their talent as musicians, dude.

So, what your all saying, is that you all hate Metallica because you love them? I sthat kinda like "You hit her because you love her" for the bastard test? So, basically, you were all very sad, repressed teenagers, who devoted your lives to a band who were just trying to make it. and now that they have, and they try something different other than what made them billions, you call them sell-outs? That doesn't make sense! If all they wanted to continue make loads of money, they could have continued putting out stuff exactly like Mop, or Ride the Lightning, but they tried Load and Reload, instead. They're exploring new parts of their music, cut them a frickin' break, guys. Jeez!

Now what did I just say about not derailing the topic any further? Not that I'm much of an authority on this board, but let's not cheat the Metallica-fans out of their "is not!" "are too!" debate. ;) </font>[/QUOTE]lol, ok, I may bring it up in your topic, we'l see how it goes.

now thats what I been trying to say!

*toasts her mug of caffeinie goodness*
HERE HERE!!!

OOPS...I said Garage Days Revisited...I apologize, I meant Garage, Inc. Garage Days Revisited wasn't bad, but just not my cup of tea (my least favorite thing they put out in the "pre-black album" era). Garage, Inc. was hideous IMHO (I personally felt they butchered Turn the Page, among all the other remakes on that album).

And like I said, it's not so much whether they sold out or didn't sell out, but the perception of their former fans. Many of their earlier fans were extreme die-hard fans that would pretty much rip their kidneys out and send them to Lars if he needed a transplant. And their entire attitude during that time (and they reiterated it many, many times) was pretty much "up with the fans, down with the suits (record companies)". And yes, they decided to go in a new direction; like I said, it is less about the direction change but what the change was (and how they did it). They went (in their old fans' minds, at least) from throwing the middle finger at the record companies to being in their corner. If this had been a gradual change, I think people would have adapted a lot better than they did (see Rolling Stones and Aerosmith). But one minute, they are all about one thing, then the next minute they go (in their fans' minds) to the complete opposite extreme. What else would they think, other than they sold out? I'm not saying they did, I'm just saying that the perception is that they did, due to the huge, near-instant, completely radical change they went through. Kudos on them for trying something new (could you imagine what music would be like now if the Beach Boys, Beatles, etc. didn't start experimenting with their music?), but any time you change that much, that quick, you are going to alienate a good portion of your fans.

Personally, I only download at pay sites (I actually posted a thread asking which ones were good). I do this because I know which songs I want, don't want all the "fluff" that they fill the rest of the album with, and want to put together a CD with the music I want, in the order I want it. Am I a thief because I pay the $0.99 U.S. a song to get the music I want? I think the RIAA would hardly label me a thief, or come knocking on my door to extort from...oops...fine me (I don't mind them clamping down on free riders, but I don't like their tactics). Oh, and I have bought songs by "demoing" them from the site (they have a preview feature). That would be music that I would not have bought otherwise. Yorick, all that I ask is that you clarify your statements, and make the distinction between pay and no-pay downloaders.