Re: BWBK review - I found it!
- I couldn't agree with you more. Even Iced Earth is now banning BWBK
from attending any of their shows because of the inaccurate stuff
that BWBK prints. Like Iced Earth says "the magazine needs the band
to sell magazines but the band doesn't need the magazine to sell cds"
Tim and his followers are all goofs.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Elaine" <tangelaine2000@y...>
> By...Henderson? Well, I've read it and he repeats just .... whatthe
> other stupidities that I've read. He doesn't talk about anythingof
> positive, like the guitars and the melody. But.....he seems too
> concerned about Viagra, HA!! How can you pretend to be the "boss"
> a magazine when you don't even listen to the music but only readthe
> lyrics? How can you take seriously a magazine that announced "Leerock
> Aaron give birth to a baby girl" when she doesn't even make any
> n roll songs... Did he listen to what she makes now...she's notDiana
> Krall, ha? What is the point "the baby girl" with the music? It was
> in the NEWS! Henderson should continue to take his Viagra, have a
> good fuck and shut up or ... a five knuckle shuffle!
- At the risk of sounding unpopular. I like the BW&BK mag. As for the
reviews. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I hate loits of CDs
that I'm sure others love. It's all a matter of persoanl taste.
I love BTB...
As for the Iced Earth thing. I think Jon is being a goof. I think he
overreacted to the interview. I don't like Bush and Jon seems to be
his biggest fan. But that's politics. Jon being a warmonger doesn't
make him any less talented of a musician.
--- In email@example.com, thehelion <no_reply@y...>
> I couldn't agree with you more. Even Iced Earth is now banning BWBKcds"
> from attending any of their shows because of the inaccurate stuff
> that BWBK prints. Like Iced Earth says "the magazine needs the band
> to sell magazines but the band doesn't need the magazine to sell
> Tim and his followers are all goofs.
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, tgalloca <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> At the risk of sounding unpopular. I like the BW&BK mag. As forthe
> reviews.You don't sound unpopular at all. We all know you and you're always
frank. You built your site in a very honnest and rational way. Good
and bad reviews, you show all. The links for every bars and every
bands that are on the front page...we always know that you don't hide
anything. You are logical.
The difference between you and Henderson is that you don't publish
some articles or some reviews that could influence the "sales".
Don't you look at the reviews before to buy an album? I'm not talking
about Anvil...If it's just a personal point of view that they
publish, why people refer to this magazine to buy an albums?
If someone wants to know all the story of Anvil, the best site is
yours because it tells absolutely all. When a magazine is only
negative about an album that other reviewers liked a lot "months ago"
(it's listed on your site), I just think it's not correct and
unhonnest. From there, I can't figure out how they can be a good
magazine. Is it logical for a redactor to make a very bad review to
Anvil (it looked personal), and to publish that Lee Aaron had a baby
when it's a magazine about rock music? Would you set on your front
page "Official now: a TRIUMPH reunion!" ?.
Your site is about Anvil...you set only things that are about Anvil.
Do Bw&Bk publishes only about rock music....the topics are they
always about music? Rolling Stone Magazine is only made of adds
now...There's nothing interesting to read. When I want to know about
music now, I go on the web. Rory Gallagher, The Sweet, etc...because
at least I don't waste my money....and the "Google Bar" blocks the
popups. I would prefer to read all the BTB's reviews listed on your
site before to make my mind! Moreover, it saves the trees...You're
not unpopular, you're transparent which is not the case with some
magazine's redactor...and President!