Please read - Youtube vid comments

[The Flying Mouse]

:twisted: During the tour it's natural that footage will be taken at concerts, the footage will find it's way to youtube, and will then find it's way onto this forum.

Please remember that the footage on youtube is shot on camera phones, and camera phones are not often used by the professionals who create DVD's. :wink:

The footage is not the best quality, and very raw.

Accept it for what it is.

If you like the footage that's posted on youtube, great. Share how much you like it.

If you do not like the footage, keep in mind it's quality, and that is unfair (in the most literal sense of the word) to negatively comment on Meat's performance based entirely on what you've seen on youtube.
In fairness and out of respect, we would ask that any negative comments prompted by unofficial camera phone footage be kept off the forum.

It's something that has repeatedly annoyed Meat in the past (helping to create the red pony), and caused many arguments on the forum.

Personally I can't think of a single song that sounds better once it's been recorded on a camera phone and posted on youtube.

I can't think of a single song that sounds better uploaded to youtube and played through computer speakers rather than be played on a CD/DVD.

Meat deserves the benefit of the doubt, and the right to have his performance judged on the merit of footage that has been officially released.


Thanks.

[LucyK!]

Feel free to express an opinion respectfully

Unfortunately the "rules" laid out in the You Tube thread that's just emerged make the above impossible, and seeing as that's a closed thread I apologise for having to post that here in the show thread.

I hope everyone had a great time and there were cowboy hats a plenty for Meat's night in Texas. Stay safe on your travels everyone.

[loaferman61]

Unfortunately the "rules" laid out in the You Tube thread that's just emerged make the above impossible, and seeing as that's a closed thread I apologise for having to post that here in the show thread.


Remember and I am quoting directly:
"If you like the footage that's posted on youtube, great. Share how much you like it."
http://tinyurl.com/6sswtel

[Sarge]

I am quoting directly

... and let me quote loaferman61's signature:

"Censorship is bad, and it is wrong." Meat Loaf on "Hannity"

[The Flying Mouse]

:twisted: OK. let me try and explain myself a little more clearly.

If somebody sees a bad quality youtube vid and sees something they like, then it does nobody any harm to say that they think it is good.

If you see a bad quality youtube vid and you don't like it, it is only fair (IMHO) and respectful not too jump to any negative conclusions (and to share those conclusions on a public forum) about the state of Meat's voice.

It prevents poorly formed opinions (and all opinions, both good and bad, are poorly formed from a youtube clip) that may (will) be offensive to Meat, and cause arguments on the forum.

Is that really so much of a problem? :wtf:
I'm failing to see the 1984 in all of this. :shrug:

[LucyK!]

So, just to be clear...

If someone sees something on You Tube and they don't like it then they should give Meat the benefit of the doubt because, as you rightly pointed out, it isn't professional footage, it's been taken on cameras and phones and may not reflect the actual performance.

But if someone sees something on You Tube that they do like then they should share it, because that footage - which is taken on those same cameras and same phones - is a true reflection of the performance?

[The Flying Mouse]

:twisted: Oh, one point I meant to add, The Mona Lisa might be a world renown work of art, but try taking a picture of it through a dirty camera phone lense from 100 meters away on a dark night during a fog :wtf:

[razorball2002]

:twisted: OK. let me try and explain myself a little more clearly.

If somebody seems a bad quality youtube vid and sees something they like, then it does nobody any harm to say that they think it is good.

If you see a bad quality youtube vid and you don't like it, it is only fair (IMHO) and respectful not too jump to any negative conclusions (and to share those conclusions on a public forum) about the state of Meat's voice.

It prevents poorly formed opinions (and all opinions, both good and bad, are poorly formed from a youtube clip) that may (will) be offensive to Meat, and cause arguments on the forum.

Is that really so much of a problem? :wtf:
I'm failing to see the 1984 in all of this. :shrug:

I wasnt talking or judging the quality of a youtube video, just expressing my feelings about Meats voice at that concert (you don't need a high-rez video in order to judge it, nor a tricked official live dvd). Sorry I hurt your feelings, or because of your fears that band members might actually see this, I got deleted. It wont happen again!

[Sarge]

Is that really so much of a problem?

Yes, it is. Allowing one group of people to speak their mind but prohibiting others to do so IS censorship and unfair (pretty odd, since you demanded fairness in your original post). It also makes me wonder whether this is still a "discussion" board.

I've seen the post(s) that got deleted from the Austin thread and there was nothing "nasty" about them. One (!!!) person dared to express an opinion different from that of other members (yet in accordance with the - now obviously no longer valid :roll: - forum rules) and look what happened. :wtf: Were those posts something to be afraid of or why have you decided to suppress such comments?

Please remember that the footage on youtube is shot on camera phones, and camera phones are not often used by the professionals who create DVD's.

If this is true, how can you judge the quality of a performance at all by such a video? Not only can't you say it was bad, you can't say it was good either. So in fact you'd have to ban any comment regarding amateur videos, regardless of whether they are favorable or unfavorable.

I guess most people are able to recognize the difference between bad footage and a bad performance. Someone might even dislike a professionally shot HQ video just because the performance is not to their liking for whatever reasons. So that rule regarding YouTube videos appears like a pretext to me.

I suggest we do not talk about anything related to Meat Loaf anymore. That way we're not in danger of saying something "wrong". :roll: Or maybe any thread on this subforum should consist of only one post (which has to be 100% flattering, of course) and you can do nothing but click the "like"
button.

[The Flying Mouse]

So, just to be clear...

If someone sees something on You Tube and they don't like it then they should give Meat the benefit of the doubt because, as you rightly pointed out, it isn't professional footage, it's been taken on cameras and phones and may not reflect the actual performance.

But if someone sees something on You Tube that they do like then they should share it, because that footage - which is taken on those same cameras and same phones - is a true reflection of the performance?


It prevents poorly formed opinions (and all opinions, both good and bad, are poorly formed from a youtube clip) that may (will) be offensive to Meat, and cause arguments on the forum.


:twisted: My point is that liking something although your opinion is not based on the best media will not hurt Meat's feelings, but not liking it even though the media is not good quality will (I believe) hurt his feelings and is, in my opinion, not fair. :shrug:

[R.]

I wasnt talking or judging the quality of a youtube video, just expressing my feelings about Meats voice at that concert (you don't need a high-rez video in order to judge it, nor a tricked official live dvd). Sorry I hurt your feelings, or because of your fears that band members might actually see this, I got deleted. It wont happen again!
Your post with the 20+ years old footage got deleted because it had absolutely nothing to do with that show. There is a clear reminder on top of this forum to post on topic. And, because this post started the same old bitching, some replies were deleted too. End of story.

[The Flying Mouse]

:twisted: Thread moved here from the Tour Talk forum.

[razorball2002]

Yes, it is. Allowing one group of people to speak their mind but prohibiting others to do so IS censorship and unfair (pretty odd, since you demanded fairness in your original post). It also makes me wonder whether this is still a "discussion" board.

I've seen the post(s) that got deleted from the Austin thread and there was nothing "nasty" about them. One (!!!) person dared to express an opinion different from that of other members (yet in accordance with the - now obviously no longer valid :roll: - forum rules) and look what happened. :wtf: Were those posts something to be afraid of or why have you decided to suppress such comments?



If this is true, how can you judge the quality of a performance at all by such a video? Not only can't you say it was bad, you can't say it was good either. So in fact you'd have to ban any comment regarding amateur videos, regardless of whether they are favorable or unfavorable.

I guess most people are able to recognize the difference between bad footage and a bad performance. Someone might even dislike a professionally shot HQ video just because the performance is not to their liking for whatever reasons. So that rule regarding YouTube videos appears like a pretext to me.

I suggest we do not talk about anything related to Meat Loaf anymore. That way we're not in danger of saying something "wrong". :roll: Or maybe any thread on this subforum should consist of only one post (which has to be 100% flattering, of course) and you can do nothing but click the "like"
button.

GLAD TO SEE THERE ARE ACTUALLY PEOPLE THAT HAVE BRAINS AND COMMON SENSE. THANX SARGE. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THIS IS A FORUM FOR ML FANS, BUT ONLY ML FANS THAT CANNOT EXPRESS WHEN THEY DONT LIKE A PERFORMANCE.

[razorball2002]

EXACTLY. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, YET IT HAD EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IT. (I only wanted to show people what a good sounding Meat sounds like)

[The Flying Mouse]

GLAD TO SEE THERE ARE ACTUALLY PEOPLE THAT HAVE BRAINS AND COMMON SENSE. THANX SARGE. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THIS IS A FORUM FOR ML FANS, BUT ONLY ML FANS THAT CANNOT EXPRESS WHEN THEY DONT LIKE A PERFORMANCE.

:twisted: Thank you for proving my point :up:

You don't like the performance, yet you didn't see it.

All you have seen is some camera phone footage.

As I maintain, people who love a performance due to a badly shot clip may not be basing their opinion on the best media, but liking it is not likely to hurt Meat's feelings whereas saying his voice isn't as powerful (based on that self same badly shot clip) is something that would cause upset.

Isn't Meat worthy of that small consideration?
Really?

[Evil One]

For arguments sake what if the clip was of excellent visual and audio quality, but Meat was poor? :whistle:

[Sarge]

@ The Flying Mouse: How about introducing a rule saying that you're not allowed to complain about the fact that there are Meat Loaf songs that feature rappers. Meat Loaf could feel offended by it. Since you appear that considerate, I'm sure you like this idea. :twisted:

[The Flying Mouse]

For arguments sake what if the clip was of excellent visual and audio quality, but Meat was poor? :whistle:

:twisted: Without backtracking, i'm going to say that that is a grey area.

Why?

Because if the vid was DVD quality, i'm talking the best, and an 100% accurate representation of his performance, then it's something that speaks for itself.

BUT......... (yes,there's a but)
There's a part of me that also feels that a bootleg (and a bootleg it would be, as is any other youtube clip) is not an official release, and it's the work an artist releases that the artist wants to represent them.

Put it this way, so see what a painter is like, do you go to his studio or the bin round the back?

If it's an official release, I say that honest but respectful criticism is perfectly acceptable.

This thread seems to suggest that i'm trying to make mlukfc into a 100% palace of perfect positivity.

That, to be blunt, is crap.

I was not in love with everything about HCTB, and was quite vocal about my dislike.

I hate rap, I hate the raps on HIHB, and i've felt no hesitation in expressing how much I hate them.

So no, I don't think this place needs to be full of unicorns that eat ambrosia and shit rainbows.
But I do think that Meat deserves to be condemned by something better than a camera phone clip.


As a side note, I think it's strange that I feel I need to justify my thoughts by mentioning i'm not 100% in love with everything Meat has ever done.
That's sort of weird on a fan club :wtf:

[The Flying Mouse]

@ The Flying Mouse: How about introducing a rule saying that you're not allowed to complain about the fact that there are Meat Loaf songs that feature rappers. Meat Loaf could feel offended by it. Since you appear that considerate, I'm sure you like this idea. :twisted:

:twisted: I'm so glad I was typing the above when you posted that :mrgreen:

Meat's choice to put rappers on the record is his.
The choice to feature in a camera phone clip isn't so much in his hands.

[Wario]

this whole thing amazes me. Id say if you disagree with someone deal with it. The person being "negative" isnt a bad person, but an honest one. Ive been too many times the negative nancy being disappointed with shit everyone else seems to love cause of my overtly critical mentality. There shouldnt even be a rule to begin with. I believe trolling should be the only thing that gets penalized in this matter, not being overtly "negative".

The most interesting discussions are the ones where someone feels something below par and they discuss what they think. Its interesting. You dont need to agree with it, but this is a forum. Some of meats biggest fans who love him to death are the most critical of him. Im lying to myself if i said Id take current meat over 1988 meat, but it doesn't mean meat still kicks freaking ass.

Until Meat decides to set foot on this forum again, i wouldn't be too bothered if what you say offends him. hes a big boy and can take constructive criticism. hes gone here anyway. Its sad but true :(

Now who wants pie :))

[LisaT]

The thing is, there are low quality phones and cameras, and there are high quality phones and cameras. I saw clips on Youtube which were recorded from quite a way back and were obviously recorded on low quality equipment (you could just tell, because the whole thing wasn't great, not just Meat's vocals). I also saw a clip recorded from down at the front, on what was quite obviously a higher quality phone or camera, and the whole thing sounded great, including Meat's vocals. Comparing the two, I have come to the conclusion that the video recorded down nearer the front was the more accurate one. I think, in most cases, it is possible to tell whether it's the performance that's poor, or if it's the recording equipment that's poor.

[loaferman61]

Until Meat decides to set foot on this forum again, i wouldn't be too bothered if what you say offends him. hes a big boy and can take constructive criticism. hes gone here anyway. Its sad but true :(

Now who wants pie :))

Just what I was thinking. When you get paid the big bucks to perform in front of thousands of people nightly you have to accept that people .. even <gasp> fans are going to have reactions and not 100% will be fawning positives about rolley-coasters and cotton candy clouds. And if Meat would use the wealth of knowledge about the love of his songs on here to take some constructive points or honest feelings it can only help him. Does he really not know that sometimes he has an off-night? Hell, I do office work and some days I know my work sucked and it is open to criticism from those who employ me.

One other point a DVD is an official release as we know and has been in 99% of cases "cleaned-up", overdubbed, etc. before release. That is not a negative, a;most everybody does it. But that isn't a true representation. As some say "we have been down this road", thing is we learned nothing. Being told that if your opinion is positive share it, but if not STFU is a double standard.

[Julie in the rv mirror]

:twisted: Without backtracking, i'm going to say that that is a grey area.

Why?

Because if the vid was DVD quality, i'm talking the best, and an 100% accurate representation of his performance, then it's something that speaks for itself.

BUT......... (yes,there's a but)
There's a part of me that also feels that a bootleg (and a bootleg it would be, as is any other youtube clip) is not an official release, and it's the work an artist releases that the artist wants to represent them.

Put it this way, so see what a painter is like, do you go to his studio or the bin round the back?

If it's an official release, I say that honest but respectful criticism is perfectly acceptable.

Okay, I understand 100% where you are coming from...however, I also remember some comments (which were, IMO, honest and respectful) about a television appearance a little while ago that caused a big uproar around here- is a television appearance considered "official" and therefore "fair game"?

Or, let's say if someone actually attended a show and had something less than glowing to say? I'm going to be totally honest and say that I've not been totally honest about some of my opinions in that regard. And, I don't mean that in a "bad" way, before anyone thinks that, I just don't feel free to express my complete honest opinion.

And, if I may play Devil's Advocate for a moment, an official DVD is not always a 100% accurate depiction of a performance.

[LisaT]

hes gone here anyway. Its sad but true :(

Actually, he's been back here a couple of times over the last week, but I fear that this thread may send him running again! :roll:

[PanicLord]

Surely the point is, whatever your opinion is, try and post with some consideration and respect. I agree with the Flying Mouse - that doesn't sound like too much to ask!

[Sebastian.]

Actually, he's been back here a couple of times over the last week, but I fear that this thread may send him running again! :roll:

Indeed.

I would love to hear from him, and his thoughts on the show, such as those with the HCTB/GP shows, hopefully he'll see that he does have a lot of support from us.

[LucyK!]

Okay, I understand 100% where you are coming from...however, I also remember some comments (which were, IMO, honest and respectful) about a television appearance a little while ago that caused a big uproar around here- is a television appearance considered "official" and therefore "fair game"?

Or, let's say if someone actually attended a show and had something less than glowing to say? I'm going to be totally honest and say that I've not been totally honest about some of my opinions in that regard. And, I don't mean that in a "bad" way, before anyone thinks that, I just don't feel free to express my complete honest opinion.

And, if I may play Devil's Advocate for a moment, an official DVD is not always a 100% accurate depiction of a performance.

Completely agree Julie. The issues that have been raised today have come from people's comments about You Tube footage, but let's face it it's not the first time this issue has come up.

I fondly remember MLUKFC being a place of honest, respectful discussion, sadly it seems those days are long gone, and apparently a "negative post" is defined as anything not 100% positive.

As people are very quick to point out, Meat is human - he has good and bad days, good and bad moods and good and bad days at work just like the rest of us do, but heaven help anyone who comments on the bad days. It seems that the need to please Meat (knowing full well that he's reading the posts on here) over-rules common sense and honest discussion. Sorry guys but I don't buy into it, I'm not going to change my opinion or attack anyone else's opinion just to get in Meat's good books, no way.

[Sarge]

Put it this way, so see what a painter is like, do you go to his studio or the bin round the back?

Do you know how many students of art history have to learn something about paintings and artists by more or less good photos / reproductions? They don't have direct access to every painting that is featured in their studies. You are obviously underestimating people's ability to gain experience in evaluating, interpreting and judging things.

This thread seems to suggest that i'm trying to make mlukfc into a 100% palace of perfect positivity.

No, but you're applying double standards and have introduced one of the most contradictory, illogical and discriminatory rule this place has ever seen.

But I do think that Meat deserves to be condemned by something better than a camera phone clip.

No one has "condemned" Meat. :roll: A single member of this forum stated his opinion on a performance he had seen in a video. It just differed from that of other users, he did not judge Meat Loaf's entire work by it or something like that. Considering that the majority of the members who participated in the Austin thread LIKE the videos / Meat's performance, I don't understand why the hell you consider these videos or discussions about them such a threat.

As a side note, I think it's strange that I feel I need to justify my thoughts by mentioning i'm not 100% in love with everything Meat has ever done.
That's sort of weird on a fan club :wtf:

You take the liberty to criticize Meat Loaf yourself but try to bar others from saying something "negative" because you are allegedly that concerned about his feelings. That is weird.

[loaferman61]

Okay, I understand 100% where you are coming from...however, I also remember some comments (which were, IMO, honest and respectful) about a television appearance a little while ago that caused a big uproar around here- is a television appearance considered "official" and therefore "fair game"?

Or, let's say if someone actually attended a show and had something less than glowing to say? I'm going to be totally honest and say that I've not been totally honest about some of my opinions in that regard. And, I don't mean that in a "bad" way, before anyone thinks that, I just don't feel free to express my complete honest opinion.

And, if I may play Devil's Advocate for a moment, an official DVD is not always a 100% accurate depiction of a performance.
Brilliant post. When a board has people feeling that they can not be completely honest in giving their own opinion, where does the problem lie? Obviously a lot of people feel that there is a problem somewhere.

[Paul Richardson]

For arguments sake what if the clip was of excellent visual and audio quality, but Meat was poor? :whistle:

... or for arguments sake what if the band and Patty were excellent, but Meat was poor ? Despite the often variable quality of the clip, hardly anyone ever says the band or Patty were poor ... because they hardly ever are ... just saying ...

[Paul Richardson]

Brilliant post. When a board has people feeling that they can not be completely honest in giving their own opinion, where does the problem lie? Obviously a lot of people feel that there is a problem somewhere.

I agree. I could post my opinion of the Austin show clips, but its just not worth the hassle ... let's just say today I've been listening to an audience recording of a show Meat did in Glasgow in 1983, which has poor audio quality, but his performance is just astounding - out of this world !

[Adje]

If you do not like the footage, keep in mind it's quality, and that is unfair (in the most literal sense of the word) to negatively comment on Meat's performance based entirely on what you've seen on youtube.

This bothers me.

What if the band sounds good, Patti's vocals sound good but Meat sounds bad?

How unfair would it be to comment on that? Is it still the quality of the video causing this outcome?

EDIT:
... or for arguments sake what if the band and Patty were excellent, but Meat was poor ? Despite the often variable quality of the clip, hardly anyone ever says the band or Patty were poor ... because they hardly ever are ... just saying ...
Paul beat me to that


Anyway, although, I'm certain the intentions behind the original post are good, this post puts 'honest opinion' on this board in perspective.

Either you suport honest opinion or you're against it. But don't ask people to go one way. That eliminates the value on any post

[AndrewG]

Surely the point is, whatever your opinion is, try and post with some consideration and respect. I agree with the Flying Mouse - that doesn't sound like too much to ask!

"Some consideration and respect" is a totally subjective thing. If someone thinks Meat's voice isn't great it seems to me some people take that as disrespect and posting without consideration and straight away such people are branded as being wrong or listening with the wrong ears. :roll:

Tonight I saw a bit of Rihanna's tv performance at Hackney. I thought she sounded great, so naturally a lot of Rihanna fans would like to hear that. A few weeks ago I saw Paul McCartney at the Jubilee thing. I thought his vocals and performance were truly awful. So naturally a lot of Paul McCartney fans would hate my opinion. Simpels.

I think it is actually the taking opinions too personal that is the problem here, always has been.

[suzieq]

I would like to take the opportunity to applaud the Mod team for a written consideration of Meat's feelings. Especially since he has expressed his concerns of the You Tubes.

I don't think it has a lick to do about censorship....I think it has all to do with compassion. Something which is very nice to see. A much appreciated change.

[BostonAngel]

In my opinion, awesome job by the mods with this topic. I agree that it isn't about censorship, it is about respect and compassion for Meat as a man and as an artist. Well done!

[AndrewG]

The pattern of dislikes on theses posts above is just ridiculous and I feel it highlights my post perfectly. I feel that I cannot post an honest opinion on the Meat Loaf forum at all without upsetting some people. Some say post with respect? What do they mean exactly? Constantly sucking up to Meat or something else? Can someone please explain?

As Sarge said if I like a YouTube vid it is ok to say that Meat Loaf is awesome?
If I dislike a YouTube vid it is only the quality of the video I can dislike?

Actually I think the mods have done a poor job here. In my opinion it would have been better to have left the original negative comment in the Austin thread and perhaps clamping down on all the YouTube quality stuff which I do think is unrelated to Austin generally, instead of resorting to censorship and opening a can of worms between the positive vs negative YouTube opinion camps again.

Same shit, just a different day.

[LucyK!]

The pattern of dislikes on theses posts above is just ridiculous and I feel it highlights my post perfectly. I feel that I cannot post an honest opinion on the Meat Loaf forum at all without upsetting some people. Some say post with respect? What do they mean exactly? Constantly sucking up to Meat or something else? Can someone please explain?



Exactly. It's not about opinions any more, it's about posting to keep Meat happy. You say something deemed Positive and you'll get the usual lot hitting the Like button. Say something deemed Negative and no matter how well you've made your point it's branded "disrespectful" because Meat might not like it.

This is no longer a place of honest discussion and debate, it's a place to stroke Meat's ego and create a world where everything he says and does is perfect...which he, like the rest of us, is not!

Do you guys not notice how many people don't bother with MLUKFC any more? People who, over the years, have dedicated so much time to writing reviews and articles and submitting photos - not just to the forums but to the printed RVMs we used to get - and they're no longer here. And it's not because they've given up on Meat, it's because they can't be bothered with the backlash when they post something honest and people dive down their throats for being "disrespectful".

Since 1998 this fanclub has been an enormous part of my life, and it genuinely upsets me to see what it's turned into.

[stretch37]

Exactly. It's not about opinions any more, it's about posting to keep Meat happy. You say something deemed Positive and you'll get the usual lot hitting the Like button. Say something deemed Negative and no matter how well you've made your point it's branded "disrespectful" because Meat might not like it.

This is no longer a place of honest discussion and debate, it's a place to stroke Meat's ego and create a world where everything he says and does is perfect...which he, like the rest of us, is not!

Do you guys not notice how many people don't bother with MLUKFC any more? People who, over the years, have dedicated so much time to writing reviews and articles and submitting photos - not just to the forums but to the printed RVMs we used to get - and they're no longer here. And it's not because they've given up on Meat, it's because they can't be bothered with the backlash when they post something honest and people dive down their throats for being "disrespectful".

Since 1998 this fanclub has been an enormous part of my life, and it genuinely upsets me to see what it's turned into.

......this threads quickly becoming the same shit....Yes I feel the need to support Meat given his recent (2007, 2008, etc) struggles and triumps and I think some on here perpetually stroke, while I like to stroke a little and critique a little, and then there are people who mostly like to critique.

We all need to coexist. Yet we seem to be reacting more and more strongly against each others opinions.

Accept there will be all of these groups together, try to have some understanding before "reacting" to some sort of "insult" you have felt even though it was likely NOT intended. (we are all here because we love Meat)

Thoughts?

[robgomm]

Surely the point is, whatever your opinion is, try and post with some consideration and respect. I agree with the Flying Mouse - that doesn't sound like too much to ask!

Exactly! That's the bottom line.

[Sarge]

It's not about opinions any more, it's about posting to keep Meat happy. [...] This is no longer a place of honest discussion and debate, it's a place to stroke Meat's ego and create a world where everything he says and does is perfect...

Yes, and it makes spending time on this forum often an ordeal these days. I wonder why this is necessary. Why does a 60+ year old man, a "fighter" who has been in the music business for decades have to be "protected" from a fan's thoughts on something? It's naive to believe that you can, by the way. If you have confidence in yourself and your work, you shouldn't be bothered by the fact that you can't please everybody to the same degree. Why is it that hard to accept that not all people are alike? One of the things that attracted me to this forum once was the fact that this community consisted of lots of different people with different backgrounds, interests and opinions. Now we have attempts to create a "streamline" community full of "praise or shut up" fans.

You say something deemed Positive and you'll get the usual lot hitting the Like button. Say something deemed Negative and no matter how well you've made your point it's branded "disrespectful" because Meat might not like it.

Some forum member had apprehended that the use of the "(dis)like" button might become "political" and he was right.

Do you guys not notice how many people don't bother with MLUKFC any more? [...] they can't be bothered with the backlash when they post something honest and people dive down their throats for being "disrespectful". [...] Since 1998 this fanclub has been an enormous part of my life, and it genuinely upsets me to see what it's turned into.

You're right, unfortunately... There are numerous "old" fans who have left or rarely post these days. People who contributed a lot of interesting posts over the years. Just look at the state this forum is now. Only a handful of people participate in it actively and regularly (in spite of the fact that there's currently a tour) but only few of them bother to discuss Meat Loaf's work in detail. Those who do are often shouted down and ridiculed by alleged "true" fans.

And it's not because they've given up on Meat

Some actions to "defend" Meat are prone to let exactly that happen. Even long-time, supportive fans, some of who spent a small fortune on concerts and products having "Meat Loaf" printed on it, have been put in the "hater" category and were attacked in a totally unacceptable way. You don't even have to say something "negative", all it takes to be declared an enemy is someone who thinks / claims that you did. Putting off the most loyal customers for selfish reasons - from a marketing perspective, I can only shake my head in disbelief. :facepalm:

This sums it up perfectly:

I think it is actually the taking opinions too personal that is the problem here, always has been.

+++++++++++++++++++++

A few weeks ago I saw Paul McCartney at the Jubilee thing. I thought his vocals and performance were truly awful. So naturally a lot of Paul McCartney fans would hate my opinion.

I don't, although I'm a McCartney fan. ;)

[GDW]

I really dislike this whole like dislike thing. Please reply if you like or dislike.:-)

[loaferman61]

In my opinion, awesome job by the mods with this topic. I agree that it isn't about censorship, it is about respect and compassion for Meat as a man and as an artist. Well done!
Who is disrespecting Meat? How do you define disrespect? When a pre-emptive rule is made saying to comment on something if you enjoy it, but keep quiet if you don't how is that not bordering on censorship? Meat himself said in a recent interview he's a "straight-shooter". So am I. Things really became comical to me when it was said if your opinion was not positive to blame the clip. Problem is Patti sounds fantastic on those clips, not saying Meat sounds bad mind you, but should I only comment that Patti sounded great, which leaves an implication that Meat might not have?

[MarkS]

Yes, and it makes spending time on this forum often an ordeal these days. I wonder why this is necessary. Why does a 60+ year old man, a "fighter" who has been in the music business for decades have to be "protected" from a fan's thoughts on something? It's naive to believe that you can, by the way. If you have confidence in yourself and your work, you shouldn't be bothered by the fact that you can't please everybody to the same degree. Why is it that hard to accept that not all people are alike? One of the things that attracted me to this forum once was the fact that this community consisted of lots of different people with different backgrounds, interests and opinions. Now we have attempts to create a "streamline" community full of "praise or shut up" fans.

Some forum member had apprehended that the use of the "(dis)like" button might become "political" and he was right.

You're right, unfortunately... There are numerous "old" fans who have left or rarely post these days. People who contributed a lot of interesting posts over the years. Just look at the state this forum is now. Only a handful of people participate in it actively and regularly (in spite of the fact that there's currently a tour) but only few of them bother to discuss Meat Loaf's work in detail. Those who do are often shouted down and ridiculed by alleged "true" fans.
;)

My problem with this, and I am not attacking you directly, I just want to make some points based on what you said.

The haters claim to be "attacked" by the "true" fans, and that they can't express their opinion. Well, first and foremost, you can look at the forum and see that they don't seem to have a real issue with expressing their opinion as they do it all the time, and I have no issue with that. But, going back to the start of this paragraph, this "attack" claim is quite hypocritical from these folks. When the "true" fans express their opinion they get lambasted for being God worshipping cretins with blinders on

Because of this, the forum is in disarray. And your right most veterans dont post here anymore and who can blame them with this crap.

Hell, even Meat himself won't post here anymore, and I am starting to see why.

As for the like/dislike thing, if you don't like it, just ignore it, it ain't that hard to do

Sent from my 4G LTE DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

[loaferman61]

I really dislike this whole like dislike thing. Please reply if you like or dislike.:-)

I like it, if you dislike a post rather than posting a response sometimes you can just hit the button. If you like a post instead of posting CHSIB or cheers you can just hit the other button.

[loaferman61]

The haters claim to be "attacked" by the "true" fans, and that they can't express their opinion.
Starting off calling people passionate about Meat Loaf "haters" is rather odd. The fact we are discussing here is that the "true" fans who have power made a rule that sought to suppress honest opinion, and went a step beyond to encourage you to comment if you thought something was great. You don't see the problem there?

[MarkS]

Starting off calling people passionate about Meat Loaf "haters" is rather odd. The fact we are discussing here is that the "true" fans who have power made a rule that sought to suppress honest opinion, and went a step beyond to encourage you to comment if you thought something was great. You don't see the problem there?

Nice attempt at trying to twist my words there, but it wont fly. At no point did I say that the "true" fans are passionate about the haters. Way to take one sentence and attempt to go in a total different direction.

If anything its the opposite of you stated. Your last statement there is attacking the mods more than anything and Mouse who made this thread has shown in the past that he can be fair to both sides, but you can take that issue up with him.

But to directly answer your question, i don't see a problem with it because you can't properly judge from a YouTube video. The quality is crap and you weren't there. The whole thing has a totally different feel and sound at the show that can't be translated through a YouTube video.

Sent from my 4G LTE DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

[CarylB]

Personally I have never referred to anyone or group as "haters" and I think the term "true fan" is also a nonsense and one I never use. I see critical fans, I see supportive fans, I see some who are both.

I have said many times, one can write negative feedback in ways which are dismissive or which take account of the feelings of the person being fed back on. I happen to agree that bootleg recordings are not a good basis on which to make judgements. Perhaps the best thing would be for this forum to not have them posted? They are bootlegs after all, and if people want to watch them they can go and find them on YT. Just a thought.

Otherwise it's the same circular discussion. However, I've never felt that freedom of speech is compromised, nor trampled on, by the basic premise that people have feelings, Meat has feelings, and that to be asked to consider them when writing on the internet is not censorship in my view. To me that's simple decency and humanity, plus a bit of respect (in this case for a man who in my view deserves it because his efforts and achievements have earned it .. again in my view). Not rainbow land or any of the other epithets people may apply to it .. just caring for another's feelings.

Caryl

[chairboys]

Are we not all fans? Thus, "true" fans.
Let's all play nicely together.


Written before seeing Caryl's post - yes "true fan" term is nonsense!

[loaferman61]

Nice attempt at trying to twist my words there, but it wont fly. At no point did I say that the "true" fans are passionate about the haters. Way to take one sentence and attempt to go in a total different direction.

If anything its the opposite of you stated. Your last statement there is attacking the mods more than anything and Mouse who made this thread has shown in the past that he can be fair to both sides, but you can take that issue up with him.

But to directly answer your question, i don't see a problem with it because you can't properly judge from a YouTube video. The quality is crap and you weren't there. The whole thing has a totally different feel and sound at the show that can't be translated through a YouTube video.

Sent from my 4G LTE DROID RAZR using Forum Runner
You twist what I said or you misunderstood but whatever. How do I attack the mods, they made the rule and I gave my thoughts on it. Simple as that. I stand by everything I said.

[MarkS]

Are we not all fans? Thus, "true" fans.
Let's all play nicely together.

Written before seeing Caryl's post - yes "true fan" term is nonsense!

Please take head of what both this person and Caryl said.

We are all here for the same reason, and that is Meat.

Let's all just be a little more considerate of each others feelings and make this place fun again

Sent from my 4G LTE DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

[The Flying Mouse]

this whole thing amazes me.

:twisted: You and me both :shock:
Why anybody should be so determined to be able to post negative posts besed on camera phone footage is beyond me.



The person being "negative" isnt a bad person, but an honest one.

You're singing from my hyme sheet Chris.
I've never said that being negative is a "bad thing".
I've said that negative opinions (as well as positive opinions) based on crappy camera phones are not properly formed ones.
This being the case, comments that can be hurtful (based on the evidence of a camera phone) shouldn't be posted on the forum.



Until Meat decides to set foot on this forum again, i wouldn't be too bothered if what you say offends him. hes a big boy and can take constructive criticism. hes gone here anyway. Its sad but true :(


He's been here a few times over the last couple of months, and was here last two days ago.

He might be a big boy who can take criticism (I don't think that's always 100% correct with some of the outbursts he's posted) but if he's going to be criticised it should be over something real, not something recorded on a mobile phone.



Just what I was thinking. When you get paid the big bucks to perform in front of thousands of people nightly you have to accept that people .. even <gasp> fans are going to have reactions and not 100% will be fawning positives about rolley-coasters and cotton candy clouds.

How many times do I have to post this?
Should I type extra slow so everyone has a chance to get the message? :bleh:

I do not have a problem with people having negative opinions about Meat Loaf or his work.

Let me say that again so hopefully it'll be the last time I have to.

I do not have a problem with people having negative opinions about Meat Loaf or his work.

I've had them myself.

What I have a problem with is posting negative comments about Meat's performance based on poorly recorded media.

I would have honestly believed that as fans (the definition of that word varies widely, but I think everyone can agree that the word "fan" indicates someone who is interested and enjoys the work of the artist in question) that when it came to poorly shot footage Meat could at least be given the benefit of the doubt rather than the negative of the doubt :wtf:

It baffles me, it really does.


And if Meat would use the wealth of knowledge about the love of his songs on here to take some constructive points or honest feelings it can only help him.

Agreed.
But how can comments on the strength of his voice, when you can't hear it clearly help him in any way?

The arrangements of the songs, perhaps (you can get a feel of the general arrangement), but his voice? You need something a little clearer to base your opinions. Both good and bad. But as i've argued (time and time again) good comments (although not well based) do not unfairly hurt someone feelings.



Hell, I do office work and some days I know my work sucked and it is open to criticism from those who employ me.


Everyone has bad days at the office, of course they do. And if you happen to be in Meat's "office" on one of his bad days, comment on it if you will. You were there and have a fully formed opinion on what you saw and heard.

Some days your work might suck but at least it's judged on it's own merit.
I can't see your boss giving your paperwork to his dog to rip up and take a shit on before judging it's quality.
Or judging how good your paperwork is by viewing CCTV footage of you writting.




One other point a DVD is an official release as we know and has been in 99% of cases "cleaned-up", overdubbed, etc. before release. That is not a negative, a;most everybody does it.

So we shouldn't comment on DVD's either then, because we are running out of things to talk about?


As some say "we have been down this road", thing is we learned nothing. Being told that if your opinion is positive share it, but if not STFU is a double standard.


Again, positive comments don't hurt, so I say share the joy :shrug:

BUT, if you want to say no negative comments and no positive comments, no comments at all, i'll get behind that :up:



Okay, I understand 100% where you are coming from...however, I also remember some comments (which were, IMO, honest and respectful) about a television appearance a little while ago that caused a big uproar around here- is a television appearance considered "official" and therefore "fair game"?


I don't have a problem with those vids.
I don't have a problem posting honest negative opinions about them.

Shite camera footage = no good place to base opinions.
Like that bloke who tried to build on sand.





Or, let's say if someone actually attended a show and had something less than glowing to say? I'm going to be totally honest and say that I've not been totally honest about some of my opinions in that regard. And, I don't mean that in a "bad" way, before anyone thinks that, I just don't feel free to express my complete honest opinion.



Cool, if you go to a show and don't enjoy it, post about it.
I've not asked anyone not to do that.

I've asked that negative opinions should not be posted when based on unsuitable evidence.

There is a very very big difference.




And, if I may play Devil's Advocate for a moment, an official DVD is not always a 100% accurate depiction of a performance.

True, but perhaps it's the closest thing we're going to get.


Completely agree Julie. The issues that have been raised today have come from people's comments about You Tube footage, but let's face it it's not the first time this issue has come up.


Which is why I wanted to try and stop it before it all starts over again :facepalm:

It seems we have the same thing every tour.
Bad quality youtube clips come on the forum, they get commented on (see again my view that forming an opinion based on a youtube clip is like building on sand) Meat gets pissed off he's being slagged off by people who were not even at the show and leaves the forum (usually insulting a member or two on his way out), this place turns to civil war (Christmas has come early this tour :facepalm: ) and a thread starts in Site Feedback (here we are) on how to fix the forum.




I fondly remember MLUKFC being a place of honest, respectful discussion, sadly it seems those days are long gone, and apparently a "negative post" is defined as anything not 100% positive.


Which is what it should be now.
I've not asked for that to change in any reasonable way.
I've asked only that negative opinions that are not well based (because the footage was filmed on a crap phone) not be posted on the forum.

Do you really think that that is so unreasonable?

Is it wrong, or kissing ass, to understand that a ill informed negative opinon might not be hurtful to Meat, and to feel that that's not deserved?

If you were at the show and it was crap, you know what you are talking about, but he doesn't deserve to have his vocals dismissed because of a youtube clip.





As people are very quick to point out, Meat is human - he has good and bad days, good and bad moods and good and bad days at work just like the rest of us do,

Agreed.



but heaven help anyone who comments on the bad days.

Don't need help against me if you are posting about something you saw/ heard and are therefore in a position to have an opinion that carries a little weight :shrug:


It seems that the need to please Meat (knowing full well that he's reading the posts on here) over-rules common sense and honest discussion.

How can discussion be honest when it's based on BS?
Opinions (both good and bad) based on bad quality youtube clips are not very enlightened. The difference is that positive comments are not going to unfairly upset Meat.

But as i've said before, if you want to ban positive comments as well as bad ones because they don't hold water, fine by me :up:
No double standards in that.



Sorry guys but I don't buy into it, I'm not going to change my opinion or attack anyone else's opinion just to get in Meat's good books, no way.

Me neither.
It's a subject I feel i've written a book on by now (or a Steinman song :lol: ) so i'll just say "see above" :wink:

[loaferman61]

Personally I have never referred to anyone or group as "haters" and I think the term "true fan" is also a nonsense and one I never use. I see critical fans, I see supportive fans, I see some who are both.

I have said many times, one can write negative feedback in ways which are dismissive or which take account of the feelings of the person being fed back on. I happen to agree that bootleg recordings are not a good basis on which to make judgements. Perhaps the best thing would be for this forum to not have them posted? They are bootlegs after all, and if people want to watch them they can go and find them on YT. Just a thought.

Otherwise it's the same circular discussion. However, I've never felt that freedom of speech is compromised, nor trampled on, by the basic premise that people have feelings, Meat has feelings, and that to be asked to consider them when writing on the internet is not censorship in my view. To me that's simple decency and humanity, plus a bit of respect (in this case for a man who in my view deserves it because his effor
ts and achievements have earned it .. again in my view). Not rainbow land or any of the other epithets people may apply to it .. just caring for another's feelings.

Caryl
When people in a position to inpose rules do so to say that a certain type of post is acceptable and encourage it openly, but at the same time say if you think different to keep it off the board, that is an issue. Take Meat and feelings out of it and look at the rule. People with rule making power openly endorse one thing, so how are they going to excersise that in ptactical application? This is a.slippery slope IMO.

[CarylB]

When people in a position to inpose rules do so to say that a certain type of post is acceptable and encourage it openly, but at the same time say if you think different to keep it off the board, that is an issue. Take Meat and feelings out of it and look at the rule. People with rule making power openly endorse one thing, so how are they going to excersise that in ptactical application? This is a.slippery slope IMO.

Sorry but I do not see our basic human rights being compromised or indeed on a slippery slope to some imagined perdition. Nor can I take the feelings of the man whose name is on every page here out of it.

I am supremely fortunate that I have met Meat many times, and will meet him again. Many will never do that. And my view is that for all those who will never get the opportunity to meet him, but who were thrilled when he posted here, replied to them, accepted PMs which were sometimes read, sometimes replied to, keeping him happy is worth it. His presence, on his terms, is worth what it meant and could mean to those people .. in my view.

Whatever the difficulties in what Mouse is trying to do here, I think he is reaching for the right way forward, for those fans as well as for Meat, who I think has earned the right to be kept a little happy when it comes to bootleg recordings .. he has given many of us a lot of happiness. That is my view, and no amount of freedom of speech or censorship sabre rattling will alter it I'm afraid .. just as I believe Meat has a right to be as sensitive as he may be, without girding on the hide of a rhinocerus

Caryl

[The Flying Mouse]

Do you know how many students of art history have to learn something about paintings and artists by more or less good photos / reproductions? They don't have direct access to every painting that is featured in their studies. You are obviously underestimating people's ability to gain experience in evaluating, interpreting and judging things.


:twisted: Usually the photos in books are of decent quality, and are taken with an instrument (and other equipment) specifically designed to give the best results. Not many books on art are illustrated by photos taken on a Nokia :lol: (hang on, did the Nokia have a camera? :? Never mind).




No, but you're applying double standards and have introduced one of the most contradictory, illogical and discriminatory rule this place has ever seen.


Again, i'm more than happy to go back on what I said and back the banning of positive comments as well as negative ones?
So there are no double standards.
Does that make us all happy again?





No one has "condemned" Meat. :roll: A single member of this forum stated his opinion on a performance he had seen in a video. It just differed from that of other users, he did not judge Meat Loaf's entire work by it or something like that. Considering that the majority of the members who participated in the Austin thread LIKE the videos / Meat's performance, I don't understand why the hell you consider these videos or discussions about them such a threat.


It's happened before and (give me a moment to double check my crystal ball, yep, it's tour time) it'll happen again.
This was my attempt to nip it in the bud before things got cooking again (where do good intentions lead again? :facepalm: )
It's been mentioned many times before that Meat concentrates on the minority negative comments he receives rather than the majority of positive, and I agree with that, but it doesn't stop the fact that I think that all these comments are poorly founded and that the negative ones are unfair.




You take the liberty to criticize Meat Loaf yourself but try to bar others from saying something "negative" because you are allegedly that concerned about his feelings. That is weird.

It's my sense of fair play.
Nothing more nothing less.
Meat decides what songs to use on an album and picks the style and feel. He picks the band, he is involved in the arrangement, he is the vocal.

If it is good or if it is bad is down to the bloke with his name on the cover.

He picks the set list for his shows and tells the band what he wants to do. He decides what special effects he wants to use. He decides what works and what doesn't.

Praise him for what he got right, and criticise what he got wrong.

If the show is great or the show sucks is down to the bloke with his name on the ticket.

Praise him for what he got right and criticise him for what he got wrong.




A camera phone tends to be a cheap piece of crap that is not custom made for recording live music in large venues.
How Meat sounds on it is not down to Meat.


It's not so much his feelings being hurt, it's his feelings being hurt by something he cannot be held accountable for.



... or for arguments sake what if the band and Patty were excellent, but Meat was poor ? Despite the often variable quality of the clip, hardly anyone ever says the band or Patty were poor ... because they hardly ever are ... just saying ...

You might have a point with this, but I still say take everything on youtube with a pinch of salt.



Anyway, although, I'm certain the intentions behind the original post are good, this post puts 'honest opinion' on this board in perspective.

Either you suport honest opinion or you're against it. But don't ask people to go one way. That eliminates the value on any post

I am FOR honest opinion.
But I am for informed honest opinion.

There's a world of difference.


"Some consideration and respect" is a totally subjective thing. If someone thinks Meat's voice isn't great it seems to me some people take that as disrespect and posting without consideration and straight away such people are branded as being wrong or listening with the wrong ears. :roll:


My only issue I have Andrew, is posts commenting on the strength of Meat's voice when the clip doesn't give an accurate indication.

If it's recorded by proper equipment and it sucks, so be it, but on a camera phone, who the hell can tell what it sounds like it the room?



Tonight I saw a bit of Rihanna's tv performance at Hackney.

Better you than me :p :lol:


A few weeks ago I saw Paul McCartney at the Jubilee thing. I thought his vocals and performance were truly awful. So naturally a lot of Paul McCartney fans would hate my opinion. Simpels.


The BBC (although shit at times) didn't record his performance on a mobile phone, so you got a more honest representation of what he was like.



I think it is actually the taking opinions too personal that is the problem here, always has been.

It's not surprising that Meat takes it personal (because it's all about him :lol: ) but last time we went through this he set the red pony of the apocolypse free in youtube land and it went it's merry way deleting rare songs, rare live performances, interviews, anything it could find with the name Meat Loaf on it.
Was it really worth having all that stuff lost to posterity because some folks wanted to say Meat doesn't sound so good recorded on a mobile?

I say no.
A million times no.



The pattern of dislikes on theses posts above is just ridiculous and I feel it highlights my post perfectly.

You must admit it makes a pretty pattern :lol:

I find it interesting when somebody "likes" two posts that are completly conflicting.
Interesting, but off the topic :shrug:



I feel that I cannot post an honest opinion on the Meat Loaf forum at all without upsetting some people.

I don't feel that way myself.
I feel I can disagree with someone on this thread then go serve them a pint in a virtual pub not too far from here.
It's not personal. I'm not disagreeing with everything a person thinks (or disliking them because of it) i'm just disagreeing with how they feel about this issue.



Some say post with respect? What do they mean exactly? Constantly sucking up to Meat or something else? Can someone please explain?


I don't believe you need to suck up to Meat or like everything he does.
Putting your dislikes into repectful language isn't very hard to do. And if you are doing that, in some degree at least, because you consider how Meat feels when he reads it, I don't believe it automatically makes you a kiss ass (or a suck up, or a brown nose, etc etc) I think it just might mean that you have a little compassion in your soul for a guy who (although hasn't always hit the target cenrer dead bang) has worked hard to give you a lot of pleasure over the years.




As Sarge said if I like a YouTube vid it is ok to say that Meat Loaf is awesome?
If I dislike a YouTube vid it is only the quality of the video I can dislike?


Like i've said a couple of times since I started this batch of replies, let's ban positive comments so we can all be happy then.




Actually I think the mods have done a poor job here. In my opinion it would have been better to have left the original negative comment in the Austin thread and perhaps clamping down on all the YouTube quality stuff which I do think is unrelated to Austin generally, instead of resorting to censorship and opening a can of worms between the positive vs negative YouTube opinion camps again.

Same shit, just a different day.

My bad <-------- waves hand in the air.
What can I say, I know what's a commin' (it comes every tour) and I tried to deflect it before it hit.
Remind me where good intentions get you again? :bleh:

[LisaT]

:twisted: You and me both :shock:
Why anybody should be so determined to be able to post negative posts besed on camera phone footage is beyond me.


etc etc etc



Well, Mouse, I can see what you are trying to say here! The point you are trying to make is quite simple really, but has been blown out of all proportion as far as I can see!

[The Flying Mouse]

Exactly. It's not about opinions any more, it's about posting to keep Meat happy.

:twisted: Read my previous posts, and you'll see that I don't believe that people need to post to keep Meat happy.

I just believe in being fair to the man.





This is no longer a place of honest discussion and debate, it's a place to stroke Meat's ego and create a world where everything he says and does is perfect...which he, like the rest of us, is not!

I think it should be a place of honest discussion and debate, but (again) that discussion shuold be based on something better than a youtube clip.

I've had no problem voicing my dislike of some of his work and I don't think this forum needs to be (or should be) a place where Meat and his works are perceived to be perfect.




Do you guys not notice how many people don't bother with MLUKFC any more? People who, over the years, have dedicated so much time to writing reviews and articles and submitting photos - not just to the forums but to the printed RVMs we used to get - and they're no longer here. And it's not because they've given up on Meat, it's because they can't be bothered with the backlash when they post something honest and people dive down their throats for being "disrespectful".


And I don't agree with that kind of behaviour.

It's not what we're talking about, and it's not what i'm defending.

I'm saying that Meat should not be judged by a poor quality youtube clip filmed on something that was designed for making phone calls from.

That's it.
Period.

Does it really make me such a brown nose to think that we perhaps owe him a little more consideration than that?



Since 1998 this fanclub has been an enormous part of my life, and it genuinely upsets me to see what it's turned into.

It upsets me (bewilders me actually) that a place where we used to have a lot of love for Meat is a place that now seems to have a hard time giving him the benefit of the doubt over poor quality concert vids.



Who is disrespecting Meat? How do you define disrespect? When a pre-emptive rule is made saying to comment on something if you enjoy it, but keep quiet if you don't how is that not bordering on censorship?

Again, will banning positive comments as well as negative ones (as both are based on unreliable footage) make things better?
If so, i'm all for it.





Things really became comical to me when it was said if your opinion was not positive to blame the clip.

Who said that?
I don't think I said that (I certainly didn't mean to say that :shock: )

What I said was if you don't like the sound of it, at least accept the possibility (the doubt) that the clip is not a good indication of the performance.

There's a difference between blame and doubt, and if there wasn't a lot of innocent folks would be in jail right now.


Problem is Patti sounds fantastic on those clips, not saying Meat sounds bad mind you, but should I only comment that Patti sounded great, which leaves an implication that Meat might not have?

Ffom what i'm reading on this thread, nobody should say anything about nothing :shock:

[robgomm]

I think some of you are missing the point here (again).

Nowhere did Mouse say that you couldn't post your opinion. Meat can take criticism no problem, but it's what you say in respect of the artist viewing it. How many more times do we have to say this!

Take the Paul Mcartney thing for example, I wouldn't have said he was truly awful on his fan site if I knew he would see it because that would be deliberately upsetting someone that I allegedly admired. You could just say, good effort as always from Paul but it wasn't his best performance. That's fine in my view, Paul still wouldn't be happy about it but at least you've praised his effort.

It's just thinking about what you say. Imagine if you was in the same room as Meat and he asked you what did you think of my performance? Now imagine that it wasn't a great night night for him, what would you say? You would tell him he gave it his all, because we know he does that every time. Now as we ARE on a forum you can perhaps relax and go slightly further but not much, maybe just as far as saying like I said, great effort but wasn't his best last night. Because like it or not he does visit here, so if you're posting without even thinking about his feelings and reaction to what you post, then I don't think you're much of a person let alone a fan, because you are upsetting the person you allegedly admire and care for, like a friend wouldn't.

I don't know how many more times it can be said, just think! The fact that this thread has gotten so long is testament to it not getting into peoples heads! C'mon people, i'm sure you're more intelligent than this.

[The Flying Mouse]

Starting off calling people passionate about Meat Loaf "haters" is rather odd.

:twisted: This is my whole point.
The people of this forum are not haters.
We are here becuse (according to my deffinition of what a fan is) we are interested in Meat work, and it has brought us a great deal of pleasure.

Which makes me ask again, is it so wrong, so brown nosing, ass licking, sucking up to resist the urge to make a negative comment about the strengh of Meat's voice based on a youtube clip recorded on a phone?


The fact we are discussing here is that the "true" fans who have power made a rule that sought to suppress honest opinion, and went a step beyond to encourage you to comment if you thought something was great. You don't see the problem there?

I am not trying to suppress informed free speech (I feel like i'm at war crime trials here :wtf: ) i'm asking that where there is doubt, give Meat the benefit of it rather than saying his voice is weak when you got your intel from youtube. The evidence available is about as reliable as wikipedia.


Again, perhaps it was a mistake to say it was OK to leave a positive comment.
I'm very very sorry for that.
I think we agree that I should have asked that no comments, good or bad, should be posted.



Mouse who made this thread has shown in the past that he can be fair to both sides,

One does ones best :mrgreen:



But to directly answer your question, i don't see a problem with it because you can't properly judge from a YouTube video. The quality is crap and you weren't there. The whole thing has a totally different feel and sound at the show that can't be translated through a YouTube video.



It's took me posts longer than Steinman songs to try and make that point, but apparently i'm endangering peoples civil liberties, so good luck with that one :bleh:

Personally I have never referred to anyone or group as "haters" and I think the term "true fan" is also a nonsense and one I never use. I see critical fans, I see supportive fans, I see some who are both.


I see factions, but I wouldn't call them "haters" or "true fans" either.



Are we not all fans? Thus, "true" fans.


All except Fred :bleh:
We sould gang up on him and beat him with large sticks.
Then I can suppress his freedom of speech :mrgreen:

[loaferman61]

Meat can take criticism no problem,


Surely you jest. That is part of, if not the root of, the issue.

[The Flying Mouse]

Whatever the difficulties in what Mouse is trying to do here, I think he is reaching for the right way forward, for those fans as well as for Meat, who I think has earned the right to be kept a little happy when it comes to bootleg recordings .. he has given many of us a lot of happiness. That is my view, and no amount of freedom of speech or censorship sabre rattling will alter it I'm afraid .. just as I believe Meat has a right to be as sensitive as he may be, without girding on the hide of a rhinocerus


:twisted: Just for the record, I (personally) don't have the problem with bootleg live material that others have, but my philosophy about it is (IMHO) a fair and respectful one.
Either view/listen to the bad quality footage, accept it for what it is, and find enjoyment in there somewhere if you can, or avoid it because the quality is not good.

What I don't think you should do is go on a forum where the artist (a person I assume you have some respect for) visits and is having the bootleg material wafted under his nose (bad enough) and saying that his voice isn't strong on the strength of that.

It's not a well formed opinion, but one that can cause upset to a bloke who has done nothing to deserve it.

As i've said above, that kind of behaviour is what led to the birth of the red pony, and i'm sure that I and many other fans who don't get to see the rare material that was deleted anymore think it was a bad exchange.





Well, Mouse, I can see what you are trying to say here! The point you are trying to make is quite simple really, but has been blown out of all proportion as far as I can see!


Thank f*ck for that :lol:
Because it sounds like some people think i'm trying to measure them for orange jump suits so I can take them to a undisclosed location and open a can of whoop ass on their civil liberties :kickass:

[Sarge]

Usually the photos in books are of decent quality, and are taken with an instrument (and other equipment) specifically designed to give the best results.

Ever seen a university library? It's not always the newest and best material you find there. It's also not the case that each painting is photographed via the newest and best equipment, that's not possible for various reasons. Moreover, there are paintings that have disappeared or do no longer exist. So all you have may be old black-and-white photos of them. According to your reasoning such paintings should be ignored when evaluating an artist's work. (?)

We don't always have proper (who defines that, by the way?) sources available to base our opinions on. SO WHAT? Are we not allowed to discuss the Napoleonic Wars just because we haven't taken part in them? How do we know that books we read about them are a proper account of what happened? If you're only allowed to have an opinion about something if you have the "right" sources available, we can hardly discuss anything.

All our opinions are based on something that has already been filtered somehow, even when it comes to things we experienced ourselves. You can perceive something in a certain way today and in another way tomorrow.

Whether someone says "Meat sounds great on this" or "Meat's voice sounds weak here" is a result of various factors like perception, expectation, experience, preferences, association, situation/circumstances, context... You can't say who is "right" and who is "wrong". It doesn't have that much to do with Meat Loaf himself. That's why he shouldn't take "negative" comments that personal - because they usually aren't.

It's been mentioned many times before that Meat concentrates on the minority negative comments he receives rather than the majority of positive [...] It's my sense of fair play.

Is that OUR fault? Maybe he should at least try to understand his fans instead of (over)reacting the way he usually does. Do you think it makes fans happy to be wrongfully accused of not liking him again and again? He always expects us to be considerate towards him, so why can't he show a little consideration himself? That's my sense of fair play. Fair play should go both ways, otherwise you can't call it "fair".

If someone had intentionally insulted Meat Loaf, I'd agree that the mods should take action but banning posts in which someone simply reflects on what they see/hear is wrong. As I said, even a high-quality recording does not ensure that the listener/viewer will like what they hear/see. Fans talk about what they like and also about what they dislike. That's what they do, especially on internet forums (that's what they are usually created for). It's what keeps fan communities alive. The most active and interesting forums are usually those on which you're not told which opinion is "right" and which is "wrong". (Mind you, I'm not talking about the usual forum rules regarding the tone and wording of posts.)

In spite of going for a hunt for posts that could contain the slightest trace of criticism, Meat Loaf should pay attention to all the positive stuff as well and be glad that there are people who are that much interested in his work, even if not all of it is to everybody's liking.

But I have the feeling that discussing with you is in vain. You are obviously convinced that you did the right thing and are defending your baby (the new "rule") with fangs and claws and are immune to counter-arguments. If you want to be mod on a boring forum that conveys an atmosphere and is full of silly restrictions that prevent honest, diverse, interesting discussions so be it.

I understand your motivation but I don't think that you're doing the community and Meat Loaf any favors with that rule.

[chairboys]

All our opinions are based on something that has already been filtered somehow, even when it comes to things we experienced ourselves. You can perceive something in a certain way today and in another way tomorrow.



That's it. I'm giving up thinking.

[wolfy35]

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe the point of this thread could have been explained a little better.

If you see a vid on YT & like what you see then great Meat strives to give his best for his fans, Feel free to discuss this and tell others why you liked it.

If however you see a vid on YT instead of going off on a bender and criticising Meat instead stop for a second and think about what you are actually seeing. Any vid posted on YT so far will be either from a camera phone or at best a small videocamera and filmed from a distance with poor settings and sound. In these cases instead of criticising Meat and saying his performance was poor instead the chances are it was just a poor video or recording.

Or at least thats the way I see things

[chairboys]

If you want to be mod on a boring forum

Come on, Sarge.
This is not a boring forum. If it is then we are ALL just a bunch of bores.
Since joining last year, I haven't laughed so much at all the comments posted on here. Because they can be honest, subtle, rude, funny, controversial or whatever. But, don't call it boring!!!
And, secondly, who would want to control the crowd on here?
Hats off to the Mods!!

[Sarge]

This is not a boring forum.

It isn't yet but it is in serious danger of becoming one.


Since joining last year, I haven't laughed so much at all the comments posted on here.

Too bad you didn't join earlier. ;)

[TheDoode]

I'm sorry, I just can't buy into this camera phone idea. I love Meat and that's why I'm here, but you CAN judge a performance based on most youtube clips, and that goes for most artists. If it's a bassy, distorted clip with little there on the upper end of the spectrum, and you can hardly hear the vocals, then no. But with 90% of clips, yes, you can hear enough to make your own mind up. Check out recent stuff by Sammy Hagar, Edguy, Iron Maiden, Van Halen, etc. There's so much camera-phone material of gigs over the past few months and some of these bands sound great, and some don't. On other nights, they might sound a bit better. Some sound worse. The point is, you CAN hear it, and you CAN tell the difference between the performance (basically), and the medium it was captured on.

[CarylB]

:twisted: Just for the record, I (personally) don't have the problem with bootleg live material that others have ....

I do mainly because it's generally poor quality and to me often doesn't do the performer justice .. but that's my choice to make. And I agree wholeheartedly with this:

... but my philosophy about it is (IMHO) a fair and respectful one.
Either view/listen to the bad quality footage, accept it for what it is, and find enjoyment in there somewhere if you can, or avoid it because the quality is not good.

Entirely fair and reasonable in my view too.

What I don't think you should do is go on a forum where the artist (a person I assume you have some respect for) visits and is having the bootleg material wafted under his nose (bad enough) and saying that his voice isn't strong on the strength of that.

It's not a well formed opinion, but one that can cause upset to a bloke who has done nothing to deserve it.

I really cannot see why this is being argued with, or considered "censorship", or some "slippery slope". It seems reasonable, decent and fair. Virtually every ticket I have bought says on the reverse that videotaping is prohibited. If the artist doesn't want it done, if it doesn't give an accurate reflection of the performance he has put such care and effort into, why should he have it waved in his face as purported evidence that he hasn't done a good job, or his performance is lacking in some way?

And if you insist on doing that, why should he think you like or respect him, as a person or a performer?

And some people may well be able to consider they can judge a performance from a distorted video .. some may even be able to. Some in my view cannot. I have been to shows where Meat has sounded great, and seen bootlegs in which you could barely hear him, or were so distorted his voice sounded woolly or cracked .. but I know it was not, because I was there. And I know his voice is not always perfect, he occasionally fluffs a note, is not quite on pitch for a moment or two. As of course does he, without any added help from me. I simply don't spend time concentrating on that, but rather on the vast majority of his performance which was without fault. Those who hear it live and want to concentrate on or highlight the few imperfections, that's their choice.

But I have seen those same clips which do NOT reflect his performance with any accuracy at all being used to support critical comment that his voice was not up to par. It happens, it has happened. And I agree with Mouse. It's not a well formed opinion, and can rightly cause upset to a man who has done nothing to deserve it.

Caryl

[The Flying Mouse]

Ever seen a university library? It's not always the newest and best material you find there. It's also not the case that each painting is photographed via the newest and best equipment, that's not possible for various reasons. Moreover, there are paintings that have disappeared or do no longer exist. So all you have may be old black-and-white photos of them. According to your reasoning such paintings should be ignored when evaluating an artist's work. (?)

:twisted: If you do not have a good representation of the work you cannot know if your opinion is accurate. :wtf:

You might see a grainy black and white photo of the Sistine Chapel and see enough in it to move you, but could you, without seeing what it is really like, feel qualified to dismiss it and say Michelangelo was having a bad day at the office? :wtf:

It's all about the benefit of the doubt.

If you are looking at a grainy black and white photo how can you comment on Michelangelo’s use of colour?




We don't always have proper (who defines that, by the way?) sources available to base our opinions on. SO WHAT? Are we not allowed to discuss the Napoleonic Wars just because we haven't taken part in them? How do we know that books we read about them are a proper account of what happened? If you're only allowed to have an opinion about something if you have the "right" sources available, we can hardly discuss anything.



Last time I looked, Napoleon wasn't on any forums, and none of his fans told him that Austerlitz sucked :wtf:

After a battle I had not taken part in, I wouldn't have walked up to Napoleon after hearing some muffled cannon shots in the distance, and said "dude, you should have done like this......".

If I was in a pub talking about Waterloo, and Napoleon walked in and started correcting me, I might believe he's a little biased, but i'd also think he knew more on the subject than me.

I'll leave Napoleon alone now :lol:




All our opinions are based on something that has already been filtered somehow, even when it comes to things we experienced ourselves. You can perceive something in a certain way today and in another way tomorrow.


Just for the record, i'm talking about opinions formed from crap youtube vids, nothing more :bleh:




Whether someone says "Meat sounds great on this" or "Meat's voice sounds weak here" is a result of various factors like perception, expectation, experience, preferences, association, situation/circumstances, context... You can't say who is "right" and who is "wrong". It doesn't have that much to do with Meat Loaf himself. That's why he shouldn't take "negative" comments that personal - because they usually aren't.


It's a result of a flawed media clip.
Again, I believe that to criticise Meat and the strength of his voice when you can't hear it clearly is ludicrous.

As for being personal, to Meat, they are.
An example I have used before is if a baker were to stumble on a forum dedicated to every loaf, pie, cake, and bun he had ever made.
How would that baker feel?






Is that OUR fault? Maybe he should at least try to understand his fans instead of (over)reacting the way he usually does. Do you think it makes fans happy to be wrongfully accused of not liking him again and again? He always expects us to be considerate towards him, so why can't he show a little consideration himself? That's my sense of fair play. Fair play should go both ways, otherwise you can't call it "fair".


Did I say it was our fault? :shrug:

It's Meat's fault.
I've said it before, i'm saying it now, I dare say i'll say it again at some point.
It's just one more way that I have shown criticism towards Meat, which makes claims that I want this to be a yes forum all the more hard to understand :S

I think Meat should show a little more consideration at times (I walked into Meats firing line once when he was huffing and puffing, and it wasn't nice) but two wrongs rarely make a right.

But we're trying to make a bigger picture out of a stamp here.
My point was that Meat shouldn't be judged on crap footage. That it was not fair to do that.
That's what i'm saying, that's the point i'm making, nothing more.





If someone had intentionally insulted Meat Loaf, I'd agree that the mods should take action but banning posts in which someone simply reflects on what they see/hear is wrong.

I have tried, and failed to stop the same old arguments before they happen.

They usually start because there are negative comments towards Meat based on bad phone footage.


Last time we had the argument the red pony was born and took all the vids away.
Perhaps when a few more thoughtless posts have been made the red pony will ride again trashing good Meat Loaf vids wherever it sets it's hoof.

Not good for Meat. Not good for the fans. (Not good for Wario who will probably have another account full of stuff deleted).




As I said, even a high-quality recording does not ensure that the listener/viewer will like what they hear/see. Fans talk about what they like and also about what they dislike. That's what they do, especially on internet forums (that's what they are usually created for). It's what keeps fan communities alive. The most active and interesting forums are usually those on which you're not told which opinion is "right" and which is "wrong". (Mind you, I'm not talking about the usual forum rules regarding the tone and wording of posts.)



What port of "crap youtube vids recorded on mobile phones" are you not understanding? :wtf:

There is no such thing as a correct opinion on a a music forum, and there is no such thing as an informed opinion where camera phone vids are involved.

Let me pay you the compliment of saying I don't believe that you are misunderstanding me by accident here :?
I really don't think I need to explain what my point is this many times for you to understand the difference between an honest opinion and an uninformed one.
I don't think I need to post this many times that I have no problem with informed criticism of Meat and his work.




In spite of going for a hunt for posts that could contain the slightest trace of criticism, Meat Loaf should pay attention to all the positive stuff as well and be glad that there are people who are that much interested in his work, even if not all of it is to everybody's liking.


I agree.
I agree 100%.
There are many more things said on the forum that are positive than negative, and Meat should appreciate that.
But I still think the negative posts THAT ARE BASED ON CRAP YOUTUBE VIDS are not well informed and therefore unfairly critical.

Negative posts about an album from someone who has heard the album, or about concerts from someone who was at the concerts cannot be said to be unfairly critical because the poster knows what they are talking about.

That's the difference.



But I have the feeling that discussing with you is in vain.

Only because I have to keep saying I have no problems with negative comments, as long as they have some basis in reality.

I keep saying it, and it keeps not being heard, so I think it really is in vain.




You are obviously convinced that you did the right thing and are defending your baby (the new "rule") with fangs and claws and are immune to counter-arguments.

Not true.
I've already agreed (several times) that as positive comments only is something of a double standard, we shouldn't have any youtube discussion here.

I'm not unyielding to counter argument, as long as it's a convincing one.





I understand your motivation but I don't think that you're doing the community and Meat Loaf any favours with that rule.

I think a little FAIR consideration in relation to bad youtube footage would do Meat good.
It would do the fans good because he wouldn't feel the need to nuke youtube.
I also think the community would get on better without the rows caused by footage that gives little insight and big headaches all round.

[The Flying Mouse]

And, secondly, who would want to control the crowd on here?


:twisted: That would be me :bleh: :lol:

[loaferman61]

:
But I still think the negative posts THAT ARE BASED ON CRAP YOUTUBE VIDS are not well informed and therefore unfairly critical.



Yet the rule says "If you like the footage that's posted on youtube, great. Share how much you like it." What is the difference?

[The Flying Mouse]

Yet the rule says "If you like the footage that's posted on youtube, great. Share how much you like it." What is the difference?

:twisted: Would you like to go through the posts i've posted since then and count how many times i've agreed that both good comments and bad comments are equally uninformed so, in the spirit of equality, should be both left off the forum :bleh:

[Sarge]

I think some of you are missing the point here (again).

Nowhere did Mouse say that you couldn't post your opinion.

Speaking of "missing the point": The rule states that you must not post your opinion on a YouTube video unless it's favorable.

As for the room thing - bad comparison. This is a website on which fans discuss Meat Loaf. It's neither his "room" nor one in which he's permanently present. It's a community he decided to become a member of. I'm also surprised that you favor lying to people, especially since it comes to someone you adore. Flattery only makes sense if it's honest flattery, otherwise it's deception.

[The Flying Mouse]

:twisted: Would you like to go through the posts i've posted since then and count how many times i've agreed that both good comments and bad comments are equally uninformed so, in the spirit of equality, should be both left off the forum :bleh:

:twisted: The answer is 7.

And I might have even missed one or two.

[loaferman61]

:twisted: Would you like to go through the posts i've posted since then and count how many times i've agreed that both good comments and bad comments are equally uninformed so, in the spirit of equality, should be both left off the forum :bleh:
I have seen them but have not seen the rule retracted. So you are agreeing the rule was a bad one?

[The Flying Mouse]

Speaking of "missing the point": The rule states that you must not post your opinion on a YouTube video unless it's favorable.

As for the room thing - bad comparison. This is a website on which fans discuss Meat Loaf. It's neither his "room" nor one in which he's permanently present. It's a community he decided to become a member of. I'm also surprised that you favor lying to people, especially since it comes to someone you adore. Flattery only makes sense if it's honest flattery, otherwise it's deception.

:twisted: See the 7 comment in the post above.

[The Flying Mouse]

I have seen them but have not seen the rule retracted. So you are agreeing the rule was a bad one?

:twisted: Let's just say that we are looking at what our future youtube policy should be.

[Wario]

:twisted: Let's just say that we are looking at what our future youtube policy should be.

Might i suggest it still would allow some rarities to be posted when myself or others come across them ...... audience shot or not some footage is fantastic to post here given teh correct era :yep:

By era I mean: I cant stand horrible audience shot meat loaf videos from current tours cause HD and 1080p is so freaking common.Unless its the only glimpse at a new song available. Footage from lets say 1988 or 1996 is more understandable and fascinating regardless the quality.

What we have is a quality issue.

Unless its a song not posted before, if its terrible quality dont post it if its post 2008. THAT will lead to some disagreements. In fact anything post 2005, pre 2008 gets removed rather quickly anyway regardless.

Personally im the type of person that would drive around listening to Meat live at The Chance in my car. (Meat loaf live recording experts just gasped) Thats how little quality matters to me when it comes to the vintage material.

If its a current performance, lets keep to sharing current quality standards. Unless of course a mobile video of OL&OS pops up... since no footage has surfaced yet!

[Sarge]

@ Mouse:

Just an example why I think that your rule is silly and patronizing (sorry, I just can't find anything positive about it):

When HCTB came out, a forum member criticized Meat's vocals (in a thread dealing with production, as far as remember). The statement was based on a song someone had uploaded to YouTube. Other forum members pointed out that it was obviously sped up and didn't sound like the original recording, thus it wasn't an appropriate source for judging the vocals. What I'm trying to say is: You can well clarify something and void unjust statements in the course of a discussion, you don't need the kind of censorship that you have just introduced. We're adults, not ignorant kids in a kindergarten.

Sorry for not responding to your post(s) in detail. My reply would probably become equally long, trigger another long replay from you and so on - to no avail. This discussion is running in circles.

[The Flying Mouse]

Might i suggest it still would allow me rarities to be posted when myself or others come across them ...... audience shot or not some footage is fantastic to post here :yep:


:twisted: Personally, I like the footage being posted here.
I don't often watch it, but I like the fact the fans can have easy access to it on the forum.

It would be a shame to get rid of the youtube vids.

What i've posted though seems to be unacceptable to some forum members, so we'll have to see what happens :shrug:

[The Flying Mouse]

This discussion is running in circles.

:twisted: Agreed.

[Wario]

:twisted: Personally, I like the footage being posted here.
I don't often watch it, but I like the fact the fans can have easy access to it on the forum.

It would be a shame to get rid of the youtube vids.

What i've posted though seems to be unacceptable to some forum members, so we'll have to see what happens :shrug:

ehh its not unacceptable. I think people are overreading what youve said or read it wrong.

in fact.... id say if anyone who wasa offended by your post reads through this thread theyll understand each side and let it pass.

Be done. you cant be positive without someone being negative. thats how life works.

Now lets are get pizza and debate which tour was better: The Bat 2 tour, The Born To rock Tour, The BBIS Tour, The Hang Cool Tour, or The 1988 LB&GG Tour. :))

[Sarge]

Missed that post:

:twisted: See the 7 comment in the post above.

See my suggestion not to discuss Meat Loaf related topics at all anymore. So there's no possibility of his feelings getting hurt.

in the spirit of equality, should be both left off the forum

I'm taken aback by how smart that proposal is. One step further on the road of depriving fans of topics they can talk about. :roll: Interesting concept of "equality", by the way. :facepalm:

Seriously, you can always find a reason why one shouldn't comment on something, regardless of what it is. What's next? Does this forum still serve a purpose? If yes, what is it?

[Evil One]

Personally im the type of person that would drive around listening to Meat live at The Chance in my car. (Meat loaf live recording experts just gasped)More people probably gasped that someone has allowed you to drive. :shock:

[Julie in the rv mirror]

And some people may well be able to consider they can judge a performance from a distorted video .. some may even be able to. Some in my view cannot. I have been to shows where Meat has sounded great, and seen bootlegs in which you could barely hear him, or were so distorted his voice sounded woolly or cracked .. but I know it was not, because I was there.

I will grant you that there are some poor quality recordings out there, but there are also some that are good enough, and I like to think that I'm able to separate quality of a recording versus performance. There are some people on another board which I frequent who have argued that you can NOT in fact judge a performance totally fairly when you are there because of the emotion involved and the experience of being there. I'm not saying I agree totally, because I mostly don't, but I think there is some amount of merit in it.

And I know his voice is not always perfect, he occasionally fluffs a note, is not quite on pitch for a moment or two. As of course does he, without any added help from me. I simply don't spend time concentrating on that, but rather on the vast majority of his performance which was without fault. Those who hear it live and want to concentrate on or highlight the few imperfections, that's their choice.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't stand there at a show with a scorecard either, and frankly, I'm a little insulted that you think some of us are that shallow. I tend to go with my overall impressions and gut feelings, and even those I don't feel free to share, because honestly, I think some people here really don't want to read them, no matter how well-intentioned or carefully I word them.

[stretch37]

:twisted:
Accept it for what it is.

If you like the footage that's posted on youtube, great. Share how much you like it.

If you do not like the footage, keep in mind it's quality, and that is unfair (in the most literal sense of the word) to negatively comment on Meat's performance based entirely on what you've seen on youtube.
In fairness and out of respect, we would ask that any negative comments prompted by unofficial camera phone footage be kept off the forum.

It's something that has repeatedly annoyed Meat in the past (helping to create the red pony), and caused many arguments on the forum.



Forgot to say I do agree with this, only because it will help keep the videos up there, and it helps me feel better as a fan seeing a healthy discussion rather than it travelling down the "my favorite artist's voice sucks today" route.....which really pisses me off! If you don't like him then why the ~~~~ are you here.

[CarylB]

I will grant you that there are some poor quality recordings out there, but there are also some that are good enough, and I like to think that I'm able to separate quality of a recording versus performance.

I have not suggested you are not able to do so. As I said, some may consider they can, some may well be able to, some imo cannot.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't stand there at a show with a scorecard either, and frankly, I'm a little insulted that you think some of us are that shallow.

I'm sorry if you choose to feel insulted, but powerless to prevent your choices ;) But what I said was:
And I know his voice is not always perfect, he occasionally fluffs a note, is not quite on pitch for a moment or two ... I simply don't spend time concentrating on that, but rather on the vast majority of his performance which was without fault.

No mention of score cards at all, nor even the suggestion they were kept. I do not consider you shallow .. nor do I generally consider people who are hyper-critical shallow. Negative sometimes, half-empty glasses perhaps, thoughtless in how they word their criticism on occasions, and sometimes apparently irritated by those of us who post positive reviews, which concentrate on the vast majority of a performance we love, rather than feeing any need to point out the (often very few) imperfections.

I was referring to focus in terms both experiencing the shows, and of posting reviews and "critiques" of them when I, like others, come here afterwards and review/recount my experiences. I remember the discussion (the year before last?) on a thread which opened by calling for more criticism in reviews .. more "balance". Like others, my positive reviews were dismissed, and at times ridiculed, as not objective, not "helpful" in aiding someone decide whether a show was worth going to, a responsibility I see no need to accept. My reviews have been parodied, words and phrases are taken and popped on threads, presumably in attempts to flame a response. Now if you want shallow .. look no further :lol:

But my stance was for those who want to identify imperfections that's their choice. Mine is to concentrate on all that worked superbly. That's not deep, any more than those who want to make sure they cover the flaws are shallow. They and those who, like me, post positive reviews simply operate from different hilltops.

Caryl

[AndrewG]

Show respect towards Meat is all fine and well but I think we should also show some respect towards people who can only see Meat on YouTube as they can't afford to go to the shows or simply live too far away to see him OR on occasions have tried to go and the show has been cancelled. YouTube may be all they have and I value such opinions too. Of course going to shows in person is always better but I think we shouldn't close the door on people having a say just because how they can view/listen to Meat is somewhat limited, ie "your opinion sucks as it is based on YouTube videos only". This seems a bit disturbing to me.

[robgomm]

Speaking of "missing the point": The rule states that you must not post your opinion on a YouTube video unless it's favorable.

As for the room thing - bad comparison. This is a website on which fans discuss Meat Loaf. It's neither his "room" nor one in which he's permanently present. It's a community he decided to become a member of. I'm also surprised that you favor lying to people, especially since it comes to someone you adore. Flattery only makes sense if it's honest flattery, otherwise it's deception.

Err no actually Mouse was trying to say be fair when posting you didn't think much of the youtube video because the quality of the sound may not do Meat justice, he never said you couldn't say you wasn't keen on it, just to bear in mind the quality of the recording and be respectful. How many more times? :facepalm:

The room thing is not bad, it's relevant. Like it or not Meat comes here and reads what we say. That you don't seem to give a damn whether he is here or not and what is said says a lot about you and your supposed like for Meat. Perhaps you think Meat himself should be banned so he doesn't get offended by the stupid thoughtless comments people make? Perhaps you think this should just be a general music forum? Well guess what, IT'S NOT. This IS a Meat Loaf forum, it's HIS name at the top, and he has EVERY right to come here and not be upset by thoughtless mindless idiotic comments that people wouldn't make if they cared about him even just a little bit.

Finally you can shove off about lying to people instead of being honest. How would saying, it wasn't his best performance be lying? I expected more intelligence from you :facepalm:

If you're not keen on something fine say it, but you need to respect the feelings of the artist who comes here. There's never any need to go further than saying it wasn't his strongest performance but he gave it his all. Would we go further if he wasn't here? Probably yes, but as he is and we care for him we HAVE to think about what we say, just like you would do with any close friend or family member. In my opinion the only time to EVER go into detail over one of Meats performances is if he asks you himself. If you are so desperate to go into details of Meats performance or want to say really strong words about it then you can always PM other members too as Meat won't see that and that way you would be showing him some care and consideration at least.

[lyn]

Unfortunately the "rules" laid out in the You Tube thread that's just emerged make the above impossible, and seeing as that's a closed thread I apologise for having to post that here in the show thread.

I hope everyone had a great time and there were cowboy hats a plenty for Meat's night in Texas. Stay safe on your travels everyone.

Yes the damn threads get closed before everybody gets to see them. I think amature stuff like do it yourself YT films should be barred from here imho. We all know really bad negativity comes from these from the same people. Meat doesn't want to read the really negative a hurtful rubbish. Imo, if films are to be posted here then they should either be your own or professional, at least then it may cut out some of the really negative comments. ;) :-)

[AndrewG]

Who decides what is a professional / good enough quality YouTube video? Is a super high quality with Meat in bad voice allowed? Is a rubbish video in which Meat sounds amazing allowed? If I can Google a YT vid of Meat at a specific show, why isn't it allowed to be posted here? It makes no sense.

The videos of Meat at the SHOF were pretty poor quality yet everyone loved them.

[lyn]

I wasnt talking or judging the quality of a youtube video, just expressing my feelings about Meats voice at that concert (you don't need a high-rez video in order to judge it, nor a tricked official live dvd). Sorry I hurt your feelings, or because of your fears that band members might actually see this, I got deleted. It wont happen again!

Look this seems to be the age old stick of dynamite that blows up the whole of a thread, and seems to be a usual target on here, and that is the criticism of Meats voice. Please people, Meat does come and read the threads, or have we forgotten that??? Common courtesy should be shown ;)

[lyn]

Who decides what is a professional / good enough quality YouTube video? Is a super high quality with Meat in bad voice allowed? Is a rubbish video in which Meat sounds amazing allowed? If I can Google a YT vid of Meat at a specific show, why isn't it allowed to be posted here? It makes no sense.

The videos of Meat at the SHOF were pretty poor quality yet everyone loved them.

I can see your point AndrewG, and understand entirely, but it is these YT vidoes that are causing issues here. If we are to all post criticism about a video, then it should be done with respect and consideration of Meat. But the problem here Andrew is that never seems to happen. It blows out of proportion then threads are closed etc, etc. Yes it'd be nice to think that people could post any YT footage here as long as all issues stated at the start of the thread are considered. ;)

[PanicLord]

Like it or not Meat comes here and reads what we say. That you don't seem to give a damn whether he is here or not and what is said says a lot about you and your supposed like for Meat. Perhaps you think Meat himself should be banned so he doesn't get offended by the stupid thoughtless comments people make? Perhaps you think this should just be a general music forum? Well guess what, IT'S NOT. This IS a Meat Loaf forum, it's HIS name at the top, and he has EVERY right to come here and not be upset by thoughtless mindless idiotic comments that people wouldn't make if they cared about him even just a little bit.

If you're not keen on something fine say it, but you need to respect the feelings of the artist who comes here. There's never any need to go further than saying it wasn't his strongest performance but he gave it his all. Would we go further if he wasn't here? Probably yes, but as he is and we care for him we HAVE to think about what we say, just like you would do with any close friend or family member. In my opinion the only time to EVER go into detail over one of Meats performances is if he asks you himself. If you are so desperate to go into details of Meats performance or want to say really strong words about it then you can always PM other members too as Meat won't see that and that way you would be showing him some care and consideration at least.



Yes, 100% agree, well said

[lyn]

:twisted: Thank you for proving my point :up:

You don't like the performance, yet you didn't see it.

All you have seen is some camera phone footage.

As I maintain, people who love a performance due to a badly shot clip may not be basing their opinion on the best media, but liking it is not likely to hurt Meat's feelings whereas saying his voice isn't as powerful (based on that self same badly shot clip) is something that would cause upset.

Isn't Meat worthy of that small consideration?
Really?

Finally! Someone with some balls and some common sense that can actually point out the flaming obvious that should be followed on all threads! To like or dislike a clip or what ever is ok, but whereas saying things like his voice isn't as powerful etc, is hurtful to Meat. We should remember 3 vital points here: (1) Commonsense, (2) Respect and (3) Courtesy. Follow those and everything should be fine and dandy ;) :)

[Sarge]

"my favorite artist's voice sucks today" route.....which really pisses me off! If you don't like him then why the ~~~~ are you here.

No one said that Meat Loaf's voice "sucked" and why do you keep on claiming that someone who is disappointed with a particular thing Meat Loaf does does "not like him". This daft allegation (straw man) is brought up by you and others again and again. It's getting old. Come up with something else for a change.

Err no actually Mouse was trying to say be fair when posting you didn't think much of the youtube video [...]

No he wasn't, otherwise we wouldn't have this thread dedicated to a a controversial rule. It's funny how you repeatedly refer to something that doesn't exist, LOL. You're right, that really deserves a facepalm - probably more than one.

That you don't seem to give a damn whether he is here or not and what is said says a lot about you and your supposed like for Meat. Perhaps you think Meat himself should be banned [...] Perhaps you think this should just be a general music forum?

Have you run out of arguments or why do you resort to stupid, offensive allegations again? None of my posts imply any of the things you accuse me of.

I expected more intelligence from you

Says the guy who argues in the way I referred to above. :roll:

If you are so desperate to go into details of Meats performance or want to say really strong words about it then you can always PM other members too as Meat won't see that and that way you would be showing him some care and consideration at least.

:facepalm: How do I know what user A thinks if he/she only sends his/her thoughts to his/her buddy user B via PM? Unlike you, I'm interested in what others think, even if I don't like what they say. Who are you to think that you can define who must and who must not express their opinion in public? The purpose of this forum is that fans discuss topics related to a particular artist. It's a place for fans in general, not only for fans who always gush over everything Meat Loaf says or does. Yeah, send everybody whose posts you don't like over to the dark corner where they don't bother you. :down: Astonishing what kind of suggestions I have to read more than 20 years after the collapse of communist Germany. I wonder why I still bother to respond to some people. Waste of time.

[Julie in the rv mirror]

I was referring to focus in terms both experiencing the shows, and of posting reviews and "critiques" of them when I, like others, come here afterwards and review/recount my experiences. [...]

But my stance was for those who want to identify imperfections that's their choice. Mine is to concentrate on all that worked superbly.

But that's my point, Caryl; perhaps I'm not articulating it clearly. I'm not talking about nitpicky things like a missed note here and there- that's what I'm referring to when I say "shallow". I don't go to any show looking for imperfections. I am talking about the entire experience, and maybe my experience is different than someone else's. But, as I said, I think some people don't really want to know what I think/ feel.

[Monstro]

It blows out of proportion then threads are closed etc, etc.

There in lies the major issue, the tour review threads should provide forum members with a history of Meat Loaf shows and the mod team try to ensure that these threads are kept as close to on topic as they can for this purpose and NOT to appease any particular forum member who may be browsing.

Whenever there's a tour the mod team can guarantee arguments over the same old subjects time and time again and you won't win any prize for guessing what the most common trigger to the arguments is, youtube videos.

My personal opinion is that the youtube vids shouldn't be posted in the tour section, 1) the arguments they constantly cause just ruin the threads and bring out the worse in people and 2) they just give Red Pony a reason to go galloping through the vids on youtube and get them deleted. You want to watch a vid from a show, watch it on youtube, like someone posted earlier google is your friend.

[Tri.somethin]

Read all 96 responses...and all I have to say is WOW. What a load of BS from everyone. Post the vids, delete posts as you see fit...

TL;DR...KEEP CALM, CARRY ON!

[stretch37]

No one said that Meat Loaf's voice "sucked" and why do you keep you on claiming that someone who is disappointed with a particular thing Meat Loaf does does "not like him". This daft allegation (straw man) is brought up by you and others again and again. It's getting old. Come up with something else for a change.


lol, I'm not "coming up" with anything, but thanks for the suggestion.

Let me explain the idea more clearly. When people who are a member of a "FAN" club for an artist they are "FASCINATED" by start commenting on the rather poor quality of Meat Loaf's voice and the less-than-favourable performance he is giving, it is a stark contrast to people who ARE fans of the CURRENT Meat Loaf - not the 1980's version ;) - Who consistently love, enjoy and praise his live performances. ESPECIALLY those who actually ~~~~ing attended the gig.

So yes Sarge, and anyone else on here who is going to shit on this once its posted, it is an insult that you come on his fan club and tell fans who love and adore his voice and were at the concert and heard an amazing performance, that based on a crappy cellphone youtube clip, you think he sounds terrible. Its just plain STUPID! get it?

[Monstro]

Calm down Stretch or I'm going to be up all night taking the expletives out of your posts

[lyn]

I would like to take the opportunity to applaud the Mod team for a written consideration of Meat's feelings. Especially since he has expressed his concerns of the You Tubes.

I don't think it has a lick to do about censorship....I think it has all to do with compassion. Something which is very nice to see. A much appreciated change.

A lot of balls and integrity was shown by The Flying Mouse, and compassion too ;) Well worth shouting a beer if we didn't live so far apart, lol ;) :)

[Paul Richardson]

Its just sad that honest opinions cannot be shared on a forum because some consider them to be 'uninformed', which is only another 'uninformed' opinion afterall...

[BostonAngel]

Come on, Sarge.
This is not a boring forum. If it is then we are ALL just a bunch of bores.
Since joining last year, I haven't laughed so much at all the comments posted on here. Because they can be honest, subtle, rude, funny, controversial or whatever. But, don't call it boring!!!
And, secondly, who would want to control the crowd on here?
Hats off to the Mods!!

I agree that it definitely isn't boring. I am finding it fun to be here again. For the past 2 years it has been less & less fun. I have noticed that people that haven't posted in awhile are starting to post again.
You said it perfectly - comments are all the things you mentioned.
And I also agree with you on that HATS off to the Mod! I think they are doing a fantastic job. The whole point of this thread was to head off a potentially controversial issue b4 it became one. Unfortunately it backfired and still created controversy. I applaud the mods for being proactive in a difficult situation. I am behind them 100%

[CarylB]

But that's my point, Caryl; perhaps I'm not articulating it clearly. I'm not talking about nitpicky things like a missed note here and there- that's what I'm referring to when I say "shallow". I don't go to any show looking for imperfections. I am talking about the entire experience, and maybe my experience is different than someone else's. But, as I said, I think some people don't really want to know what I think/ feel.

OK .. and in my post you quoted and replied to I was very clearly talking about the kind of show where the vast majority went well .. which I have to say has almost invariably been my experience. I said I liked to concentrate on the positives, but if others wanted to highlight imperfections that was their choice. And honestly I struggle to think of shows where the whole experience left me disappointed .. even the very few shows which have ended abruptly because Meat was ill (I can think of 3) gave me great enjoyment until he was stricken and had to leave the stage or be carried off.

So perhaps I didn't articulate my point clearly either ;) I'm not uninterested in what most people here think/feel, provided it's expressed with some respect for Meat if it's about his work. I'm less interested if it's diving in to concentrate on what you say are nitpicky things .. and I still think that poor quality bootlegs are generally a poor basis for judging a performance. That's simply where I stand on the issue.

Caryl

[Sarge]

@ Stretch

Maybe you should just put up with the fact that some people have another concept of "fan" and "fan club" than you.

it is an insult that you come on his fan club and tell fans who love and adore his voice and were at the concert and heard an amazing performance, that based on a crappy cellphone youtube clip, you think he sounds terrible. Its just plain STUPID! get it?

It's also an insult to accuse long-time fans, good people who surely don't hate Meat Loaf and who have been around much longer than you of "not liking Meat Loaf" just because they said that the vocals on a performance appear "weak" to them (for example) on one occasion. It pisses me off how a wannabe forum police treats these people.

No one keeps you from disagreeing with something you don't like or think is wrong. Unfortunately some people favor censorship and attacking and defaming their fellow fans over a civilized discussion.

[Paul Richardson]

The whole point of this thread was to head off a potentially controversial issue b4 it became one. Unfortunately it backfired and still created controversy.

As you say (I think) there's nothing quite like shooting oneself in the foot ... :twisted: :D

[lyn]

Who is disrespecting Meat? How do you define disrespect? When a pre-emptive rule is made saying to comment on something if you enjoy it, but keep quiet if you don't how is that not bordering on censorship? Meat himself said in a recent interview he's a "straight-shooter". So am I. Things really became comical to me when it was said if your opinion was not positive to blame the clip. Problem is Patti sounds fantastic on those clips, not saying Meat sounds bad mind you, but should I only comment that Patti sounded great, which leaves an implication that Meat might not have?

If you can't figure it out.....look it up in the dictionary as we are sick of pointing it out!!!

The Flying Mouse has done a wonderful job in starting this thread, and now it has gone to hell! You wonder why people leave the forum??? Well it is type of fighting/nit picking that drives people away. The fact that people can't control what they say when expressing criticism about anything that Meat does etc. Keeping a civil tongue inside ones head, commonsense, courtesy and respect needs to be shown.

Hell, we are all not going to agree on something......so hit dis-like or like, or comment.....whatever takes your fancy......but Meat does read here! Keep it appropriate! A no brainer really, you would think!!! ;) :-)

[lyn]

Ever seen a university library? It's not always the newest and best material you find there. It's also not the case that each painting is photographed via the newest and best equipment, that's not possible for various reasons. Moreover, there are paintings that have disappeared or do no longer exist. So all you have may be old black-and-white photos of them. According to your reasoning such paintings should be ignored when evaluating an artist's work. (?)

We don't always have proper (who defines that, by the way?) sources available to base our opinions on. SO WHAT? Are we not allowed to discuss the Napoleonic Wars just because we haven't taken part in them? How do we know that books we read about them are a proper account of what happened? If you're only allowed to have an opinion about something if you have the "right" sources available, we can hardly discuss anything.

All our opinions are based on something that has already been filtered somehow, even when it comes to things we experienced ourselves. You can perceive something in a certain way today and in another way tomorrow.

Whether someone says "Meat sounds great on this" or "Meat's voice sounds weak here" is a result of various factors like perception, expectation, experience, preferences, association, situation/circumstances, context... You can't say who is "right" and who is "wrong". It doesn't have that much to do with Meat Loaf himself. That's why he shouldn't take "negative" comments that personal - because they usually aren't.



Is that OUR fault? Maybe he should at least try to understand his fans instead of (over)reacting the way he usually does. Do you think it makes fans happy to be wrongfully accused of not liking him again and again? He always expects us to be considerate towards him, so why can't he show a little consideration himself? That's my sense of fair play. Fair play should go both ways, otherwise you can't call it "fair".

If someone had intentionally insulted Meat Loaf, I'd agree that the mods should take action but banning posts in which someone simply reflects on what they see/hear is wrong. As I said, even a high-quality recording does not ensure that the listener/viewer will like what they hear/see. Fans talk about what they like and also about what they dislike. That's what they do, especially on internet forums (that's what they are usually created for). It's what keeps fan communities alive. The most active and interesting forums are usually those on which you're not told which opinion is "right" and which is "wrong". (Mind you, I'm not talking about the usual forum rules regarding the tone and wording of posts.)

In spite of going for a hunt for posts that could contain the slightest trace of criticism, Meat Loaf should pay attention to all the positive stuff as well and be glad that there are people who are that much interested in his work, even if not all of it is to everybody's liking.

But I have the feeling that discussing with you is in vain. You are obviously convinced that you did the right thing and are defending your baby (the new "rule") with fangs and claws and are immune to counter-arguments. If you want to be mod on a boring forum that conveys an atmosphere and is full of silly restrictions that prevent honest, diverse, interesting discussions so be it.

I understand your motivation but I don't think that you're doing the community and Meat Loaf any favors with that rule.

I'm glad I'm not a mod on here as how could you put up with rubbish like this!!! Thumbs up for the job that The Flying Mouse is trying to do, and thumbs down for comments that I have quoted here.

End of story!!

[lyn]

Its just sad that honest opinions cannot be shared on a forum because some consider them to be 'uninformed', which is only another 'uninformed' opinion afterall...

They can be mate, but just with a bit of respect ;) We all know Meat reads here from time to time. But we just need to be careful on how we show our honesty ;) Still get our point across, but by using respect, compassion and commonsense ;)

[Sarge]

I'm glad I'm not a mod on here as how could you put up with rubbish like this!!! Thumbs up for the job that The Flying Mouse is trying to do, and thumbs down for comments that I have quoted here.

End of story!!

Another person running out of arguments. :-P Are you angry that my post wasn't deleted? Maybe someone could come up with a new rule, claim that I violated it and remove the post that bothers you that much after the fact? :twisted: (Just trying to adapt to some people's attitudes here.)

[lyn]

Calm down Stretch or I'm going to be up all night taking the expletives out of your posts

:lol: Stretch has a point though ;) :lol:

[suzieq]

I would like to see the mods stick to the original plan and have the new rule implemented. You Tubes posted for comment and moderated accordingly. I agree with posting the rule before it becomes a problem (and history stands that it HAS become a problem).

[Julie in the rv mirror]

And honestly I struggle to think of shows where the whole experience left me disappointed .. even the very few shows which have ended abruptly because Meat was ill (I can think of 3) gave me great enjoyment until he was stricken and had to leave the stage or be carried off.

I guess that's where you and I are different, Caryl- such an experience would not have been a very positive one for me. I think you see what I'm getting at. ;)

I'm not uninterested in what most people here think/feel, provided it's expressed with some respect for Meat if it's about his work.

You, maybe- other people, I'm not so sure.

[BostonAngel]

As you say (I think) there's nothing quite like shooting oneself in the foot ... :twisted: :D

You are taking what I said out of context and missing the point. However, I don't feel the need to try and explain myself further.
I will repeat, that I do applaud the mods for the effort that they are making and I hope that effort continues.

[Paul Richardson]

You are taking what I said out of context and missing the point.


Its called irony ... ;)

[lyn]

Another person running out of arguments. :-P Are you angry that my post wasn't deleted? Maybe someone could come up with a new rule, claim that I violated it and remove the post that bothers you that much after the fact? :twisted: (Just trying to adapt to some people's attitudes here.)

Oh I have plenty of arguments that is for sure ;) You want your post removed? Easy.....plenty would report it Sarge.

You are forever, in many threads playing the violated victim......a person without rights.....quite humorous really :twisted: :lol: but you never take into consideration the feelings and thoughts of others here, and especially of Meat. Myself and plenty of others are simply trying to say that we like what Mouse has posted to start the thread and that when discussing the YT video that we take into consideration its quality, etc, etc. Then you'll discover that many are wanting others to be considerate to others when posting their honest opinions. If you find that violating or insulting, well that is your problem, not ours. I'm stating that Mouse has done a fine job. Your post I quoted was a pure example of disrespect, NOT running out of arguments! ;)

:lol: You're not adapting well then :twisted:

[BostonAngel]

Its called irony ... ;)

Definition of irony (n)
bing.com · Bing Dictionary
i·ro·ny [ rənee ] 1.humor based on opposites: humor based on using words to suggest the opposite of their literal meaning
2.something humorous based on contradiction: something said or written that uses humor based on words suggesting the opposite of their literal meaning
3.incongruity: incongruity between what actually happens and what might be expected to happen, especially when this disparity seems absurd or laughable

I don't find anything humorous or laughable about this. Nothing about what I said was contradictory. I do find it absurd that people can't seem to use respect and compassion when posting their thoughts. Just my thoughts

[CarylB]

I guess that's where you and I are different, Caryl- such an experience would not have been a very positive one for me. I think you see what I'm getting at. ;)

Yes I do .. and when it happened it was terrible. However, I would not have described Meat's performance as poor or the show as a waste of money. I would have, and in fact did, describe what had gone before the show came to an end, which was positive, with Meat putting all his energy and passion into every song.

After Newcastle I wrote that he seemed to be "saving" his voice at the start, but then grew stronger and was belting out the songs, hitting the notes, and the song before Paradise was really great. Then when the band started the intro to Paradise, he tried to start, at least twice, and it was clear his voice had completely deserted him.

In Florida he came on in style and delivered 3 songs faultlessly, and I was all set for another spectacular show. Then he went into the wings and disappeared, followed by Kasim, who returned to say Meat had been taken ill.

At Wembley he was doing brilliantly .. song after song delivered with energy and passion .. and then he seemed to stagger ... and simply dropped like a stone.

I think you see what I'm getting at ;)

Caryl

[lyn]

I guess that's where you and I are different, Caryl- such an experience would not have been a very positive one for me. I think you see what I'm getting at. ;)



You, maybe- other people, I'm not so sure.

I can see your point there Julie ;) We as fans experience Meats concerts differently, and have different expectations of them too. For some, such as myself, as long as Meat was on the stage then I'd be happy regardless. Some go by quality of the performance, which imho is fine too. I suppose what we look for in a performance is what makes us happy. Something that may make one unhappy may not phase the next. It's just how we are wired ;)

I agree, there some that value Meat, but others I'm unsure of too ;)

[Paul Richardson]

Definition of irony (n)
bing.com · Bing Dictionary

Yes, I understand the meaning of irony ...

... what was ironic was that the aim of the thread (as you said) was to prevent the very thing its created - a row - so yes, hats off to all concerned (!)

[loaferman61]

If you can't figure it out.....look it up in the dictionary as we are sick of pointing it out!!!

The Flying Mouse has done a wonderful job in starting this thread, and now it has gone to hell! You wonder why people leave the forum??? Well it is type of fighting/nit picking that drives people away. The fact that people can't control what they say when expressing criticism about anything that Meat does etc. Keeping a civil tongue inside ones head, commonsense, courtesy and respect needs to be shown.

Hell, we are all not going to agree on something......so hit dis-like or like, or comment.....whatever takes your fancy......but Meat does read here! Keep it appropriate! A no brainer really, you would think!!! ;) :-)

Uh, there is nothing in my post you quoted that is in the dictionary unless you mean the individual words. Look at how angry you get. This is about more than youtube videos, it is about principle and people making arbitrary rules that are one-sided. This whole "courtesy" and "respect" straw man is weak. What was so wonderful about starting this thread? Is that under "w" for wonderful or "s" for starting in your Funk and Wagnals? If you don't get that there has been a sense of repression around here for some time look up "oblivious". Actually it should be a "no-brainer" that sometimes you are not going to like what people say and handling it like a mature adult so everybody else doesn't have to tip-toe on eggshells. When people admit that they have not posted what they truly felt to avoid being hassled that is just not right.

[loaferman61]

I'm glad I'm not a mod on here
See we finally agree on something. :D

[BostonAngel]

Uh, there is nothing in my post you quoted that is in the dictionary unless you mean the individual words. Look at how angry you get. This is about more than youtube videos, it is about principle and people making arbitrary rules that are one-sided. This whole "courtesy" and "respect" straw man is weak. What was so wonderful about starting this thread? Is that under "w" for wonderful or "s" for starting in your Funk and Wagnals? If you don't get that there has been a sense of repression around here for some time look up "oblivious". Actually it should be a "no-brainer" that sometimes you are not going to like what people say and handling it like a mature adult so everybody else doesn't have to tip-toe on eggshells. When people admit that they have not posted what they truly felt to avoid being hassled that is just not right.

I personally find it sad that you consider others asking for courtesy and respect weak. Those two character traits are to be admired and valued in my opinion.
It is not about a one-sided rule. it is about making a rule that is fair to most - the fans and Meat included. Again it is about respect and courtesy, which you find to be "weak"
What is wonderful about this thread is the mods listened to what many have said about how to improve the forum and came up with a proactive solution.

[loaferman61]

I personally find it sad that you consider others asking for courtesy and respect weak. Those two character traits are to be admired and valued in my opinion.
It is not about a one-sided rule. it is about making a rule that is fair to most - the fans and Meat included. Again it is about respect and courtesy, which you find to be "weak"
What is wonderful about this thread is the mods listened to what many have said about how to improve the forum and came up with a proactive solution.

I said it was a weak straw man, at least quote me straight please. I plan to take a break from posting anyway. This whole sheeple mentality from people who can't see the larger picture or understand what standing on principle is about are never going to do anything but follow. Asking people to Think outside the box is impossible when they can't even see they are in one.

[LuuuuvMeat]

Can we look into getting rid of the "dislike" button? I think it's over used and discourteous and disrespectful IMO.

[lyn]

I personally find it sad that you consider others asking for courtesy and respect weak. Those two character traits are to be admired and valued in my opinion.
It is not about a one-sided rule. it is about making a rule that is fair to most - the fans and Meat included. Again it is about respect and courtesy, which you find to be "weak"
What is wonderful about this thread is the mods listened to what many have said about how to improve the forum and came up with a proactive solution.

Yes being proactive here is better than being negative ;) Some should learn from that at times ;)

[lyn]

Uh, there is nothing in my post you quoted that is in the dictionary unless you mean the individual words. Look at how angry you get. This is about more than youtube videos, it is about principle and people making arbitrary rules that are one-sided. This whole "courtesy" and "respect" straw man is weak. What was so wonderful about starting this thread? Is that under "w" for wonderful or "s" for starting in your Funk and Wagnals? If you don't get that there has been a sense of repression around here for some time look up "oblivious". Actually it should be a "no-brainer" that sometimes you are not going to like what people say and handling it like a mature adult so everybody else doesn't have to tip-toe on eggshells. When people admit that they have not posted what they truly felt to avoid being hassled that is just not right.

Lmao, how angry I get!!! Laughable really! I'm not angry! Frustrated.....yes.....but angry no. You are obviously angry though :twisted:

If you think courtesy and respect are weak then you are sorely mistaken. They are only a couple of the human traits that Meat, and many other fans here follow and believe in. ;) We owe it to Meat, and others here to do that. No-brainer that one ;) Otherwise members here are going to leave as stated earlier in the thread.

[BostonAngel]

I said it was a weak straw man, at least quote me straight please. I plan to take a break from posting anyway. This whole sheeple mentality from people who can't see the larger picture or understand what standing on principle is about are never going to do anything but follow. Asking people to Think outside the box is impossible when they can't even see they are in one.

It doesn't feel too good when someone takes your words and misquotes them does it? How does it make you feel
I can see the larger picture and that is exactly what I am discussing. I am also standing up for MY principles. Some of those principals are courtesy, respect, compassion and thoughtfulness. I am not following along with anyone here. I am stating my own opinions - what I believe in. Just because I don't believe what you believe does not mean I am a follower.
I think what upsets you is that the so many people support Mouse, the mods and the idea that they came up with. YOu therefore have to attempt to put those that agree with them and disagree with you down. I find it insulting to be called a follower simply because I don't think the same as you do.
Thinking outside the box has very little to do with what this discussion is all about. If you want to bring that into it, in fact I think Mouse was actually thinking outside the box with the orginal post. He didn't allow the status quo to continue. Instead of letting the usual negative, endless & pointless - in my opinion - debate go on about Meat's voice based on very short, poor quality YouTube video clips, he was proactive and came up with what was thought was a workable solution to that very isssue.
I can't say thank-you enough or give the mods enough praise for their actions.

[Sarge]

I decided to delete my previous post. Instead of wasting more precious time with reacting to certain statements, I'm just saying this:

I hope that one fine day the members of MLUKFC will remember what this forum is actually supposed to be about and transform the war zone it has become back to the place it used to be. I'm not very confident that it's gonna happen, though.

[Tri.somethin]

I said it once, ill say it again..... KEEP CALM, CARRY ON. RISE UP, CARRY ON.

this is getting ridiculous.

[Mr. Happy]

I read the first half of the first page, then stopped caring because it was dissolving into the standard "what makes a real fan?" argument. So if I'm derailing the argument, I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, I just can't buy into this camera phone idea. I love Meat and that's why I'm here, but you CAN judge a performance based on most youtube clips, and that goes for most artists. If it's a bassy, distorted clip with little there on the upper end of the spectrum, and you can hardly hear the vocals, then no. But with 90% of clips, yes, you can hear enough to make your own mind up. Check out recent stuff by Sammy Hagar, Edguy, Iron Maiden, Van Halen, etc. There's so much camera-phone material of gigs over the past few months and some of these bands sound great, and some don't. On other nights, they might sound a bit better. Some sound worse. The point is, you CAN hear it, and you CAN tell the difference between the performance (basically), and the medium it was captured on.

THIS is exactly true. Saying that you can't judge a performance from a YouTube video is complete crap. A dodgy camera can't mask the fact that a singer may or may not be singing out of tune. It's an all or nothing thing, not "well, it sounds bad...but maybe it's the video!" No, it's not the video. It's the performance, and if you think otherwise than you're far more optimistic than you have the right to be. Will the sound be distorted? Probably. What WON'T happen is that it won't seem as if the singer is singing out of tune if they're not. This is really common sense.

Just as an example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFR-JEe7qyE

The quality of this audio is absolute crap. It's a dodgy audience recording from 1987. And yet you can still hear that Meat sounds ~~~~ing brilliant, and so does the band. You can very easily make a judgement from this...and the only reason you people are up in arms about the other videos which were posted recently (which were of a similar quality) is because the person dared to make a post that wasn't overly positive. Can't you see how ridiculous that is? Having some sort of convoluted rule that bans YouTube from here is just stupid, because it's not the videos that are the problem. It's the people.

Accept that some people may not be 100% positive. As long as they're respectful, they have every right to mention to it.

ALSO, one more example. Go to the Everything is Permitted rating thread in the TTBH forum (it's on the front page of it), and read the top two comments, particularly the second one. That's the perfect template for how you should react to a negative post.

[BostonAngel]

I read the first half of the first page, then stopped caring because it was dissolving into the standard "what makes a real fan?" argument. So if I'm derailing the argument, I'm sorry.



THIS is exactly true. Saying that you can't judge a performance from a YouTube video is complete crap. A dodgy camera can't mask the fact that a singer may or may not be singing out of tune. negative post.

Since you haven't bothered to take the time to actually read what the discussion is all about your opinion to me is almost worthless. In other words you are offering up a comment on a discussion when you don't even know what it is all about. I think it also being condesending and disrespectful others who have taken the time and effort to put their thought into words. IF you can be bothered to comment, I think you should at least be bothered to understand what you are actually commenting on so you can offer something real,productive and knowledgable to the discussion. IF you had in fact been bothered to read, you would know that the discussion was not about who is or isn't a real fan. It is about posting thoughtfully and respectfully and not making a negative judgement & comment based on a distorted poor quality YoTube clip that doesn't accurately reflect the real performance.
THere is one part of what you posted that I do want to respond to. YouTube videos taken with cell phone cameras that have very poor sound and very poor picture quality are not anywhere near a true representation of the actual quality of the true performance. Most of them are in fact crap. The sound is very distorted with the background noise, etc. You can't truly judge the vocals with all that distortion. The picture is also distorted depending on far back you are in the crowd and the resolution on the device you are using.
My example, if though isn't about MEat is this: At Motley Crue last summer I took a video with my digital camera of Tommy Lee's drum coaster solo; His drum set is like a mini-roller coaster that goes around, for those that are not aware. The sound and picture were very poor. I wouldn't want people judging his musical ability or the impact of that amazing special effect by my video. If you look up any of the official promo videos of it, you can see how truly awesome this event is. I readily admit, that the quality of my video is crap. That doesn't mean the effect itself was crap. I wouldn't post my own video here because I wouldn't want to disrespect Tommy Lee's ability like. that.

[Mr. Happy]

Since you haven't bothered to take the time to actually read what the discussion is all about your opinion to me is almost worthless. In other words you are offering up a comment on a discussion when you don't even know what it is all about. I think it also being condesending and disrespectful others who have taken the time and effort to put their thought into words. IF you can be bothered to comment, I think you should at least be bothered to understand what you are actually commenting on so you can offer something real,productive and knowledgable to the discussion. IF you had in fact been bothered to read, you would know that the discussion was not about who is or isn't a real fan. It is about posting thoughtfully and respectfully and not making a negative judgement & comment based on a distorted poor quality YoTube clip that doesn't accurately reflect the real performance.

I read a quarter-ish of it, then skimmed over the rest. I took enough away from it to conclude that it's the same crap which has been going on forever, and I have better things to do with my time than read it all again. TheDoode's post stood out to me above the rest, and I saw that no one had answered it (shocker!) and figured I'd give it the respect it deserved. Considering that the whole discussion stemmed from this issue, and the rest has sort of been done before, I didn't think the comment was that out of place. You can call that dismissive if you want (and it probably is). I don't really care. Some people need to grow up.

@ the bolded part, did you notice the fact that I took the time to hunt down a YouTube link appropriate for the discussion? Or to find a post on these forums that demonstrated my fact? I don't post in this sort of discussions without some degree of effort, thank you very much. You can't brush off what I say just because it wasn't to your liking (and before you disagree, that's exactly what you did). Brushing off my entire post with something as condescending and disrespectful as "negative post" is ignoring my points in favour of shoving your fingers in your ears and screaming at the top of your lungs.

THere is one part of what you posted that I do want to respond to. YouTube videos taken with cell phone cameras that have very poor sound and very poor picture quality are not anywhere near a true representation of the actual quality of the true performance. Most of them are in fact crap. The sound is very distorted with the background noise, etc. You can't truly judge the vocals with all that distortion. The picture is also distorted depending on far back you are in the crowd and the resolution on the device you are using.

My example, if though isn't about MEat is this: At Motley Crue last summer I took a video with my digital camera of Tommy Lee's drum coaster solo; His drum set is like a mini-roller coaster that goes around, for those that are not aware. The sound and picture were very poor. I wouldn't want people judging his musical ability or the impact of that amazing special effect by my video. If you look up any of the official promo videos of it, you can see how truly awesome this event is. I readily admit, that the quality of my video is crap. That doesn't mean the effect itself was crap. I wouldn't post my own video here because I wouldn't want to disrespect Tommy Lee's ability like. that.

I never said it was a true representation of the overall performance, and that's because you're 100% right. It doesn't show the entire quality of the performance. However, it doesn't make a brilliant performance into a terrible performance. If someone's voice sounds out of key in a video, it is out of key. That's not the video lying to you, and no matter how much distorted the video is, the person singing out of key. Yes, you may not be able to hear stuff properly, but it's not changing what was actually recorded. If that wasn't the case, the video I linked would most likely show Meat singing out of key, because it's a pretty dodgy recording. But, shockingly enough, it doesn't. Saying otherwise is to ignore what is being played for you in favour of following some fantasy you prefer.

Just to clarify, I'm not saying Meat was singing out of key in those videos that were linked (I don't think it was all that bad, actually). But to dismiss someone's negative opinion on the grounds of "well it's a bad recording!" is pretty much the definition of a strawman argument. I have no problem with what Meat showed us. I have a problem with people trying to censor opinions they don't like based on something like this.

My apologies for disrupting the main discussion. Ignore this and go back to that, if you want. This issue has been annoying me for a while, and this seemed like the right thread for it.

[Sarge]

It is about posting thoughtfully and respectfully

The post that started this discussion isn't. It's about keeping opinions about YouTube videos "off the forum" unless they are positive. Mr. Happy stuck to the original subject that was discussed before the thread derailed. I don't see what's wrong with that.

your opinion to me is almost worthless.

The perfect example of a "thoughtful and respectful" comment.

This thread is beginning to become funny in a strange way. It seems to develop a life of its own. I guess my pessimism regarding the future of this forum was justified. I'll have a drink and listen to the song Mr. Happy posted the link to.

Don't forget to hit the "dislike" button. ;)

[Mr. Happy]

This thread is beginning to become funny in a strange way. It seems to develop a life of its own. I guess my pessimism regarding the future of this forum was justified. I'll have a drink and listen to the song Mr. Happy posted the link to.

Don't forget to hit the "dislike" button. ;)

The one I linked probably isn't quite as bad as the one in the other thread, but it's the best I could do on short notice :3

EDIT: Better example than the one I posted before. It's not Meat Loaf...but he's singing in key, isn't he?

I thought audio quality butchered that sort of thing?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-8apJ7yfcU

[BostonAngel]

..........I never said it was a true representation of the overall performance, and that's because you're 100% right. It doesn't show the entire quality of the performance. However, it doesn't make a brilliant performance into a terrible performance. If someone's voice sounds out of key in a video, it is out of key......

You are right it doesn't make a brilliant performance into a terrible one. Extremely poor quality of the audio portion of a video does make a good vocal sound like crap. Background noise, distortions, etc can make it sound off key when it isn't. Anyone who has been to a show of any artist and watched a brilliant, flawless sounding performance live, then seen videos posted on line of that show knows this to be true. The video itself can in fact sound off-key, even if the actual performance wasn't. I have heard it countless times on clips. I think it would be offensive & disrespectful to any musician to post such poor quality video as an example, which is why I won't go hunting for them to post. That is why the mods were asking that people not post negative comments and judge Meat's vocals based on poor quality, distorted and untrue sounding video clips. Don't make a judgement, especially a negative one until you have the whole true picture. I believe it to be a fair and reasonable request. I think that it does come down, at least in part, to having respect for Meat as an artist; An artist that you claim to be a fan of. if you aren't a fan, then why be part of this forum? That question isn't directed at anyone personally. Just a question for all to think about.

[Paul Richardson]

Since you haven't bothered to take the time to actually read what the discussion is all about your opinion to me is almost worthless. In other words you are offering up a comment on a discussion when you don't even know what it is all about. I think it also being condesending and disrespectful others who have taken the time and effort to put their thought into words. If you can be bothered to comment, I think you should at least be bothered to understand what you are actually commenting on so you can offer something real, productive and knowledgable to the discussion.

This is getting way out of hand ... I thought Mr Happy's post was thoughtful and considered, and certainly didn't deserve this outburst ... 'worthless', 'condescending', 'disrespectful' ... what happened to the respect and courtesy that some are promoting on this forum ... or is that respect and courtesy only afforded to certain 'approved' views and to hell with anyone else's ?

[JennaG]

I can see where Mouse was coming from in his original point and to a degree, I agree with him.

I personally don't mind people posting YouTube videos from shows OR posting their opinions on them, providing they take into account that some videos aren't going to be muchn of a true representation of what a show really sounded like and to judge Meat's performance based on those would be unfair to him.

I've only been a member of this forum for two years but I've seen plenty of discussions go in the same direction and I think this one is another one that will just go round and round in circles until a stop is put to it.

[chairboys]

This thread is reminding me of a wedding when one guest throws a bread roll and all hell breaks loose..

[BostonAngel]

This is getting way out of hand ... I thought Mr Happy's post was thoughtful and considered, and certainly didn't deserve this outburst ... 'worthless', 'condescending', 'disrespectful' ... what happened to the respect and curtesy that some are promoting on this forum ... or is that respect and curtesy only afforded to certain 'approved' views and to hell with anyone else's ?

I think it was disrespectful and discourteous of him to admit he hadn't read everything and therefore was not fully knowledgeable of the matter yet still offer up an opinion. People took the time to express their opinions. In order to form his own opinion, Mr, Happy owed those people the couresy & respect of reading them and becoming informed on the matter before posting.
Without reading everything, any opinion formed is based on lack of information, lack of knowledge, misinformation, and misinterpetation of the limited knowledge that has been obtained. To me, yes, an opinion not based on all knowledge available on a subject is worthless. It would be like me offering up an opinion on the last elections in Serbia.
Which goes back to the original idea of this topic. it is unfair and disrespectful to make a judgement, especially a negative one or voice an opinion based on inaccurate, distorted information. A certain amount of respect is initially given freely. Become dispectful, which in my opinion, Mr Happy and other have been, and the respect has to be earned back. To me calling people names, talking down to them, presenting your own opinion as fact, and not taking the time to read what others have said in order to be fully informed is being discourteous and disrespectful. Just my opinion

[Paul Richardson]

I think it was disrespectful and discourteous of him to admit he hadn't read everything and therefore was not fully knowledgeable of the matter yet still offer up an opinion. People took the time to express their opinions. In order to form his own opinion, Mr, Happy owed those people the couresy & respect of reading them and becoming informed on the matter before posting.

To be fair I think he was just exasperated by people arguing the same point backwards and forwards.

You don't need to read the whole of this (extremely) long thread to understand that this is the same (very) well rehearsed argument that we've had time and time again.

Basically there are two opinions, those who believe Meat Loaf can do no wrong and those that believe Meat Loaf has a career of highs and lows, with the former wanting to censor the latter in case Meat Loaf reads anything even remotely critical and becomes upset ... :roll:

[Adje]

Don't forget to hit the "dislike" button. ;)

Brilliant. This made me spill my drink! :lol:

[Wario]

This thread is hilarious to me too

[BostonAngel]

To be fair I think he was just exasperated by people arguing the same point backwards and forwards.

You don't need to read the whole of this (extremely) long thread to understand that this is the same (very) well rehearsed argument that we've had time and time again.

Basically there are two opinions, those who believe Meat Loaf can do no wrong and those that believe Meat Loaf has a career of highs and lows, with the former wanting to censor the latter in case Meat Loaf reads anything even remotely critical and becomes upset ... :roll:

If you haven't read everything then again your opinion is based on misinformation and misinterpretation of the matter at hand. In order to form thoughtful useful opinion you do need to be fully information. Again it would like me giving an opinion on the elections in Serbia.
I know he can do wrong, he is a human being and no person is without flaws. I am not of the opinion that no matter what he does he should be criticized, picked apart, and judged as less than a success for it, which is the other side of it. I am also not for the nit-picking of, well on this song, on the third note he was way off key and on this note on this song his timing was a little off from the rest of the band. to me that is being hyper-critical and just looking for the negatives. No one is perfect, and flawless. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"
I am all for reading a negative opinion if the person forming and posting that opinion is well informed. If you have been to a live show and feel that his performance overall was off-key, his voice was weak, etc..I am willing to hear it. I will take the good with the bad. If that judgement of his performance is based on a short, poor quality, distorted video clip taken with a cell phone camera, then i am not interesting in reading that opinion, since it isn't based on real knowledge; it is based on a distorted ill-informed view. I believe in having respect for and being considerate of the man that you claim to be a fan of.

[LisaT]

I wonder what Meat will make of all this when (or if) he reads it? I can't see it making him want to come back here again! Just saying.

[Paul Richardson]

If you have been to a live show and feel that his performance overall was off-key, his voice was weak, etc..I am willing to hear it. I will take the good with the bad. If that judgement of his performance is based on a short, poor quality, distorted video clip taken with a cell phone camera, then i am not interesting in reading that opinion, since it isn't based on real knowledge; it is based on a distorted ill-informed view.

But if you compare a bootleg with crap audio from 1987, with a bootleg with crap audio from 2012, its difficult to say that the vocals are better in 2012.

That's not an ill-informed view, its comparing like with like, and as has been said before, the band and Patti invariably sound good inspite of the quality of the recording.

Why on earth we can't simply state what we like or dislike without all this grief is beyond me.

I believe in having respect for and being considerate of the man that you claim to be a fan of.

I don't claim to be a fan - I am a fan - at what point was I disrespectful or inconsiderate of Meat Loaf ? :roll:

[Sarge]

Why on earth we can't simply state what we like or dislike without all this grief is beyond me.

Because it's no longer about music. It's about damned politics.

[TheDoode]

If you haven't read everything then again your opinion is based on misinformation and misinterpretation of the matter at hand. In order to form thoughtful useful opinion you do need to be fully information. Again it would like me giving an opinion on the elections in Serbia.
I know he can do wrong, he is a human being and no person is without flaws. I am not of the opinion that no matter what he does he should be critized, picked apart, and judged as less than a success for it, which is the other side of it. I am also not for the nit-picking of, well on this song, on the third note he was way off key and on this note on this song his timing was a little off from the rest of the band. to me that is being hyper-critical and just looking for the negatives. No one is perfect, and flawless. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"
I am all for reading a negative opinion if the person forming and posting that opinion is well informed. If you have been to a live show and feel that his performance overall was off-key, his voice was weak, etc..I am willing to hear it. I will take the good with the bad. If that judgement of his performance is based on a short, poor quality, distorted video clip taken with a cell phone camera, then i am not interesting in reading that opinion, since it isn't based on real knowledge; it is based on a distorted ill-informed view. . I believe in having respect for and being considerate of the man that you claim to be a fan of.

If all you are presented with is a clip, and you want to discuss that clip, then you have to take THAT CLIP for what it is. If someone posts a clip for discussion, then it makes sense to discuss what's there, rather than what isn't. I don't think that people are looking to pull a performance to pieces and analyze every little part of every note, they're just commenting on whether, on the whole, it was 'on' or not. And for the majority of clips on youtube, you CAN tell whether or not a performance is vocally 'on'. This applies to all bands, not just Meat Loaf.

As for the other issue: I think that some users are feeling oppressed because it's almost like they're being 'banned' by others from giving their own opinions on a performance or a clip, even if those opinions are respectful (which they should all be, and for the most part, are). It feels sometimes like it's almost a case of 'agree with this or get ten thousand posts telling you you're wrong, calling you ridiculous, and hitting the dislike button on your posts fifty times'. Regardless of how you phrase it, it could be seen as almost passive-aggressive. I get that this is a fan page, upsetting other people is the last thing I want to do - like most of the others here, but what kind of a discussion forum would it be if people were prohibited from giving their own opinions?

As for not reading the entire thread... I have, and it's the same argument from the first few pages, going on and on again.

[GDW]

By the way who won the election in Serbia?:-)

[CarylB]

I can see where Mouse was coming from in his original point and to a degree, I agree with him.

I personally don't mind people posting YouTube videos from shows OR posting their opinions on them, providing they take into account that some videos aren't going to be much of a true representation of what a show really sounded like and to judge Meat's performance based on those would be unfair to him.

I think that's a fair middle ground. Some people may well be able to listen to a poor quality bootleg and not make ill-founded judgements, but we have seen many occasions when this has not been the case. I wouldn't argue that on some bad recordings you may be able to identify that a note is on or off key, but I still believe to judge the strength of a voice may be a very different matter.

Paul Richardson wrote:
Basically there are two opinions, those who believe Meat Loaf can do no wrong and those that believe Meat Loaf has a career of highs and lows, with the former wanting to censor the latter in case Meat Loaf reads anything even remotely critical and becomes upset ...

I don't believe to polarise people like this helps, nor is it really accurate. I'm one of the people who has over the years frequently been accused of believing Meat Loaf can do no wrong .. you may think this. Yet repeatedly I will post that yes, Meat will fluff the odd note here and there, is occasionally off pitch, may miss a cue, may struggle at times. Mouse, who suggested and argued his case, will be critical of performances, and has not suggested at any time that he thinks people should not criticise, providing it is done with some respect for Meat's feelings .. which has been the position of Rainer and his team continually, because the performer in question is entitled to that. Phrases like "even remotely critical" just do not help imo.

People often say that they should be able to offer constructive criticism to "help" Meat. fair enough. However if you know someone is sensitive to criticism (and I'd say most people are .. you only need to look at how quickly people here get can get angry when their views are dismissed or countered) it seems pointless to say "He should have a thicker skin". He doesn't .. and if your criticism is to be helpful to anyone, they need to hear it without reacting defensively, so wise critique and advice will be couched in such a way as to make it easier for them to hear ie bearing in mind their feelings.

Monstro suggested that one way forward might be to not post bootlegs in the show review threads. That seems to me a good compromise. Meat is likely to read those threads. He has not given permission for people to privately record at his shows (most tickets actually prohibit it), and if he does not like this being done he, as the artist, is perfectly entitled to have that view. If it will irritate, upset or anger him to see a poor bootleg being used as a basis to deliver a negative judgement on his performance, why should we, as people who profess to be his fans, want to do this on a forum dedicated to him, on those threads we can be pretty sure he will read .. let alone see our right to do it as some principle we need to fight for?

Meat himself says frequently, he doesn't consider himself a singer first and foremost. He knows his voice isn't perfection every night from start to close. He puts on a SHOW .. a performance from an actor who sings, and every thought, effort and scrap of energy goes into giving people who go to those shows an entertainment. I do understand that the many who cannot get to shows want to see extracts from them. Julie said that she saw merit in the suggestion that sometimes those at a live show, being caught up in the excitement and pleasure of being there may not be totally objective. I wouldn't disagree, but surely this is what Meat's shows are about .. not a list of songs to be delivered one after the other, but an evening's entertainment, a spectacle he has conceived, planned and delivered to ensure several thousand people that night experience two hours of excitement and pleasure.

To me it's not surprising if he gets upset to read that someone who was not there to experience everything he's put together to deliver that night of excitement, finding his performance wanting based solely on vocals which they have only heard on a bootleg tape which may be distorted. His performance is more than his vocals, the night is more than his vocals. So given his over-riding objective is to give a great show to his fans, why would we not want to consider his feelings, and deliver any comments carefully and in such a way as to not make him feel bad? That's what I don't understand. Consideration for his, or indeed anyone's feelings, does not compromise my rights or principles at all.

I've seen the phrase "keep Meat happy" a few times, as if this is a bad thing. He works so damn hard to make us happy when we buy an album or a ticket to a show, why would we see that as something bad .. or let's flip it round .. why would we not want to try and avoid making him unhappy or distressed? I do not see a request for thoughtfulness as censorship, nor is it something I see as something unique to be afforded Meat alone. Thoughtfulness in how we address others is surely something for everyone. Meat deserves this respect, and we know he will read these review threads, so we know what we say will be read by him.

And just to confirm .. I do not worship him as a God .. do not think he is perfect and can do no wrong. I think he is a warm, passionate, sensitive, talented human being who works his ass off to do his best and give his fans a wonderful night of entertainment that will take them to a better place for a couple of hours. That earns him some thought and care from me.

Caryl

[AndrewG]

Monstro suggested that one way forward might be to not post bootlegs in the show review threads. That seems to me a good compromise. Meat is likely to read those threads. He has not given permission for people to privately record at his shows (most tickets actually prohibit it), and if he does not like this being done he, as the artist, is perfectly entitled to have that view. If it will irritate, upset or anger him to see a poor bootleg being used as a basis to deliver a negative judgement on his performance, why should we, as people who profess to be his fans, want to do this on a forum dedicated to him, on those threads we can be pretty sure he will read .. let alone see our right to do it as some principle we need to fight for?


This seems like a terrible "compromise" to me. And it is not really a compromise in my opinion, just censorship/ignorance.

I don't own this site so the owners can do all they like and favour whatever opinions are on here and not listen to me and they can ban YT videos from here all they want. I suspect many fans would still simply Google them and forget about MLUKFC in the long run. In my opinion it is not going to gain any fans, perhaps clamped down on arguments if that is favourable. Meat might come back if that is the objective but as a consequence I think some more objective fans will leave/stay away.

There are worse things in life so whatever is the way forward it is fine by me. ;-)

[Sebastian.]

This thread is hilarious to me too

My reaction to it...


http://i.imgur.com/PRyIW.jpg

[AndrewG]

http://media.mlxxfc.net/U7Bfumx7QU6ixeXT8lrfOA2.jpg

[Wario]

If all you are presented with is a clip, and you want to discuss that clip, then you have to take THAT CLIP for what it is. If someone posts a clip for discussion, then it makes sense to discuss what's there, rather than what isn't. I don't think that people are looking to pull a performance to pieces and analyze every little part of every note, they're just commenting on whether, on the whole, it was 'on' or not. And for the majority of clips on youtube, you CAN tell whether or not a performance is vocally 'on'. This applies to all bands, not just Meat Loaf.

As for the other issue: I think that some users are feeling oppressed because it's almost like they're being 'banned' by others from giving their own opinions on a performance or a clip, even if those opinions are respectful (which they should all be, and for the most part, are). It feels sometimes like it's almost a case of 'agree with this or get ten thousand posts telling you you're wrong, calling you ridiculous, and hitting the dislike button on your posts fifty times'. Regardless of how you phrase it, it could be seen as almost passive-aggressive. I get that this is a fan page, upsetting other people is the last thing I want to do - like most of the others here, but what kind of a discussion forum would it be if people were prohibited from giving their own opinions?

As for not reading the entire thread... I have, and it's the same argument from the first few pages, going on and on again.

truth. everyones a fan here. i hate the personally insulting "you claim to be a fan" remarks. just shut up and lock this thread please. so much waste. i see 8 new posts and am saddened its all on this thread.
we made a big deal out of bread crumbs.

[AndrewG]

I think a separate thread should be started in which we can argue whether or not the YouTube video opinions thread should be closed.

[Paul Richardson]

I don't believe to polarise people like this helps, nor is it really accurate ... phrases like "even remotely critical" just do not help imo.

It was only an attempt to sum up (in 50 words or less) the interminable pages and pages of argument in this thread. IMO succinctness is to be admired - maybe you should try it sometime ;)

[Mr. Happy]

To be fair I think he was just exasperated by people arguing the same point backwards and forwards.

Exactly this, thank you. And to be even more fair, I didn't ignore it completely. I skimmed over it and read the odd post here and there ;) Do you people not realise that you constantly bitch about the same damn thing time and time again? It's ridiculous, and it's so predictable that it's depressing.

As for not reading the entire thread... I have, and it's the same argument from the first few pages, going on and on again.

Colour me surprised.

Again, sorry for dragging this away from the main discussion. Hate me if you want, I don't really care. It was nothing personal against you, BostonAngel, and if you feel I've been unfair in my remarks then I'm genuinely sorry. I'll be leaving now :|

[CarylB]

It was only an attempt to sum up (in 50 words or less) the interminable pages and pages of argument in this thread. IMO succinctness is to be admired - maybe you should try it sometime ;)

Thank you but no, because IMO such succinctness can result in generalised or (as in this case) polarised statements which I think make things worse in these debates. Speed reading or even ignoring my posts might help. Perhaps you could try that sometime ;)

[GDW]

That was short and sweet.:-)

[AndrewG]

Lol @ even disliking little jokes made here. Pathetic, honestly. Perhaps R. could implement an automatic dislike functionality where my and several fellow forum members' posts are automatically disliked by certain people. Saves button clicks and bandwidth in the long run.

[LuuuuvMeat]

Lol @ even disliking little jokes made here. Pathetic, honestly. Perhaps R. could implement an automatic dislike functionality where my and several fellow forum members' posts are automatically disliked by certain people. Saves button clicks and bandwidth in the long run.



LOL! I was trying to make a little joke with my previous post but of course the people who "disliked" it confirmed my point. So silly.

[AndrewG]

LOL! I was trying to make a little joke with my previous post but of course the people who "disliked" it confirmed my point. So silly.

Maybe I am reading too much into the dislike functionality...

Not to go completely off topic but I kind of agree with you that the dislike function seems to be used to show disrespect towards certain forum members rather than that it is used to really dislike the content of specific posts. In this light several forum members advocating for more respect towards Meat Loaf when posting I find the use of it by those specific people a little bit hypocritical but anyway....

[LuuuuvMeat]

Maybe I am reading too much into the dislike functionality...

Not to go completely off topic but I kind of agree with you that the dislike function seems to be used to show disrespect towards certain forum members rather than that it is used to really dislike the content of specific posts. In this light several forum members advocating for more respect towards Meat Loaf when posting I find the use of it by those specific people a little bit hypocritical but anyway....



Absolutely. It is clear as day the dislike funtion is used by certain people to antagonize other people in the forum. There's a pattern. I'm still confused on why the like/dislike is here?

[stretch37]

Absolutely. It is clear as day the dislike funtion is used by certain people to antagonize other people in the forum. There's a pattern. I'm still confused on why the like/dislike is here?

which is probably why it still doesn't exist on facebook....It can be used for the equivalent of trolling.

[LisaT]

It's no wonder Meat is staying away, is it? If I were him, having read all this lot, I would too! When I saw that he had been back here a couple of times, I was hoping that maybe he was considering joining us again. Can't see it happening now! :(

[CarylB]

Absolutely. It is clear as day the dislike funtion is used by certain people to antagonize other people in the forum. There's a pattern. I'm still confused on why the like/dislike is here?

I'm reluctant to judge the reasons why people I do not know really well use the functions. I can only speak with any accuracy for my use of them, which is as I said on the thread when they were introduced. I see them as "Agree" and "Disagree" .. even though the words come with the software.

I use them in some threads when I agree with a post but have nothing to add, or to indicate I do not when I see no need to spell out my reasons which I may have already posted, or may probably known by most members. In this way I suppose I see it, for me, as nodding or shaking my head in a discussion.

If I saw a pattern against my posts which gave me concern I would address it with the person direct. If it gives me none, because it is what I expect, or I sense it might be to try and ruffle my feathers .. I simply take no account of it ;) I choose not to be antagonised :-)

Caryl

[LuuuuvMeat]

I'm reluctant to judge the reasons why people I do not know really well use the functions. I can only speak with any accuracy for my use of them, which is as I said on the thread when they were introduced. I see them as "Agree" and "Disagree" .. even though the words come with the software.

I use them in some threads when I agree with a post but have nothing to add, or to indicate I do not when I see no need to spell out my reasons which I may have already posted, or may probably known by most members. In this way I suppose I see it, for me, as nodding or shaking my head in a discussion.

If I saw a pattern against my posts which gave me concern I would address it with the person direct. If it gives me none, because it is what I expect, or I sense it might be to try and ruffle my feathers .. I simply take no account of it ;) I choose not to be antagonised :-)

Caryl


That is a great way of thinking and usage of the fuction but IMO it's clear others have not done that {a judgment.}

As for choosing not to be anatagonised I say kudos to you but unfortuntealy it still doesn't lessen the intention.

[Sarge]

Perhaps R. could implement an automatic dislike functionality where my and several fellow forum members' posts are automatically disliked by certain people. Saves button clicks and bandwidth in the long run.

That idea occurred to me, too, :twisted: but actually I couldn't care less. Who can take such "dislikes" seriously? I had a look at the "Top 10 Billy Joel Songs" thread and guess what? One person "disliked" every post on it (except for one that was probably overlooked). Laughable.

[LuuuuvMeat]

That idea occurred to me, too, :twisted: but actually I couldn't care less. Who can take such "dislikes" seriously? I had a look at the "Top 10 Billy Joel Songs" thread and guess what? One person "disliked" every post on it (except for one that was probably overlooked). Laughable.



I think stretch37 is correct when he said it's a form of trolling.

[Wario]

I think stretch37 is correct when he said it's a form of trolling.

It is I think. No matter what I say or other people say it seems someone dislikes it. I dunno. its whatever. Ive gotten warned about saying stuff about it cause its insulting apparently, so im not gonna say anything else. Ill just let the dislike spam continue. be honored to get dislikes, I sure am.

As I see it there needs to be a leaderboard with the most amount of disliked posts by a user. Sarge, me, and Andrew would totally top it :))

PS. theres a reason theres no dislike button on facebook.

[BostonAngel]

That idea occurred to me, too, :twisted: but actually I couldn't care less. Who can take such "dislikes" seriously? I had a look at the "Top 10 Billy Joel Songs" thread and guess what? One person "disliked" every post on it (except for one that was probably overlooked). Laughable.

I realize this is getting off topic from the original post, however since you keep bringing the topic up: IF you don't care if someone dislikes what you post, why do you keep bringing it up.
I truly have no clue if someone dislikes anything I say, I don't bother to check cause it truly doesn't matter to me. Not everyone is going agree with me so they can go ahead and dislike anything I post. I don't have a problem with it.
Maybe it has become time to revisit the use of the dislike button and come up with rules for it's appropriate use. Or you can ignore it.

[LuuuuvMeat]

oh the irony!:D

[Sarge]

since you keep bringing the topic up:

I don't "keep bringing the topic up". I replied to a post by AndrewG. Relax!

oh the irony!:D

:))

[R.]

Bottom line:

Post your Youtube vids, but don’t start bitching when they get horse kicked by a red pony. Post them on topic, that means no 20 year old footage in a thread dealing with a recent show, just deal with this particular show only. Comment on these vids as you like, but do so in a respectful manner. And keep these comments on topic, speculating about something else than the thread‘s topic may get your post removed. To make this perfectly clear, making conclusions about the quality or make of a soon to be released DVD in a concert review thread is definetly not on topic and it’s not an opinion either. Post your comment and be done with it. Don’t try to impose your opinion on fellow posters with repetitive similiar posts, that’s just rude and will most likely derail a thread. We will clean these threads as we see fit, should we have the impression that a thread has been derailed.

We cool?

[Sarge]

Thank you, R. :-)

[Paul Richardson]

Thank you but no, because IMO such succinctness can result in generalised or (as in this case) polarised statements which I think make things worse in these debates. Speed reading or even ignoring my posts might help. Perhaps you could try that sometime ;)

I try to ignore as much as I can, but you did refer to my post specifically and mentioned me by name - so I had no choice but to respond. :roll:

I thought my generalisation ('polarised' is kind of harsh ... ) was on the whole fairly accurate.

However you've every right to disagree, and of course I wouldn't presume to include your good self in any generalisation, as experience has taught me otherwise ... ;)

[AndrewG]

We cool?
We cool.

[Julie in the rv mirror]

If all you are presented with is a clip, and you want to discuss that clip, then you have to take THAT CLIP for what it is. If someone posts a clip for discussion, then it makes sense to discuss what's there, rather than what isn't. I don't think that people are looking to pull a performance to pieces and analyze every little part of every note, they're just commenting on whether, on the whole, it was 'on' or not. And for the majority of clips on youtube, you CAN tell whether or not a performance is vocally 'on'. This applies to all bands, not just Meat Loaf.

As for the other issue: I think that some users are feeling oppressed because it's almost like they're being 'banned' by others from giving their own opinions on a performance or a clip, even if those opinions are respectful (which they should all be, and for the most part, are). It feels sometimes like it's almost a case of 'agree with this or get ten thousand posts telling you you're wrong, calling you ridiculous, and hitting the dislike button on your posts fifty times'. Regardless of how you phrase it, it could be seen as almost passive-aggressive. I get that this is a fan page, upsetting other people is the last thing I want to do - like most of the others here, but what kind of a discussion forum would it be if people were prohibited from giving their own opinions?

As for not reading the entire thread... I have, and it's the same argument from the first few pages, going on and on again.

I know I'm a bit late to the party, but I wanted to comment on this post, as well as to agree with what Mr. Happy has said. I've listened to bootlegs of varying levels of quality ranging from cell phone videos to audio recordings which sound pretty much as good as official releases, and I absolutely agree that a bad quality recording won't turn a good performance into a bad one and vice versa. I have so-so quality recordings that I listen to for enjoyment, because it's all we have, and I like the performance so much.

That said, I think TheDoode's suggestion is a good one to evaluate each clip for what it IS, as opposed to what it isn't, and to take each with a grain of salt, so to speak.

Mouse, who suggested and argued his case, will be critical of performances, and has not suggested at any time that he thinks people should not criticise, providing it is done with some respect for Meat's feelings .. which has been the position of Rainer and his team continually, because the performer in question is entitled to that.

You're right Caryl, but in most cases, it's not the mods that are the issue, it's other posters, as mentioned in TheDoode's post which I quoted above.

I don't "keep bringing the topic up". I replied to a post by AndrewG. Relax!

Apparently, some people feel compelled to hit the "dislike" button even when the post is clearly a reply to a specific person who is not his or herself. :roll:

[renegadeangel]

Wow. Some people have way too much time on their hands.
I have seen Meat perform live so many times I've lost count. Has every song he performed been dead on?
Yes. He perform a song in a way that few can. I saw him last year again and its always the same. He blows me away with what he brings to his performance.
I don't offer any opinions on You Tube performances cause to be honest, it's a brief snapshot of an event. I want the whole event before I say anything.
People who wish to be critical or opinionated, well thats their lookout.
I buy every album he makes
I go see him live every chance I get.
I am never disappointed cause what I see is someone who his his heart and soul to the performance.
I don't believe for a second that I have the right, even though I paid for the privilege, to criticize anything he does.

[stretch37]

If all you are presented with is a clip, and you want to discuss that clip, then you have to take THAT CLIP for what it is. If someone posts a clip for discussion, then it makes sense to discuss what's there, rather than what isn't. I don't think that people are looking to pull a performance to pieces and analyze every little part of every note, they're just commenting on whether, on the whole, it was 'on' or not. And for the majority of clips on youtube, you CAN tell whether or not a performance is vocally 'on'. This applies to all bands, not just Meat Loaf.

As for the other issue: I think that some users are feeling oppressed because it's almost like they're being 'banned' by others from giving their own opinions on a performance or a clip, even if those opinions are respectful (which they should all be, and for the most part, are). It feels sometimes like it's almost a case of 'agree with this or get ten thousand posts telling you you're wrong, calling you ridiculous, and hitting the dislike button on your posts fifty times'. Regardless of how you phrase it, it could be seen as almost passive-aggressive. I get that this is a fan page, upsetting other people is the last thing I want to do - like most of the others here, but what kind of a discussion forum would it be if people were prohibited from giving their own opinions?

As for not reading the entire thread... I have, and it's the same argument from the first few pages, going on and on again.

I also want to respond to this. The Doode brings a valid point to the table, and If I were standing in the shoes of someone who had respectfully "disliked" Meat's vocals, I would feel opressed for my opinion.

And I have been before. Lets not forget the countless times I've said "This isn't his best" or "hopefully he's just warming up for the next few shows" etc type comments. And I've been told to opress my opinion just to make a few people happy, or less upset.

Having said that, it is very important to understand that not all of us are doing what I just said. I certainly don't. I respect someone who dislikes something and states their opinion. Mostly because I do it all the frieking time. I can be a critic as well as praise something as awesome. But there is a difference between critiquing something, and bashing Meat. And the comments I responded to on here were clearly bashing Meat. If they were not meant to be insults, then they should be worded as such.

People, spend a little more time on your wording if your consistently getting shot down by others for insulting Meat. Rather than blaming those who are getting upset and feel negativity from your posts, put a little bit of effort in by making sure your post is not offensive. I do it all the time. Its that type of respect for your fellow members that is lacking on these forums.

[clarification] - For those who I know will jump on this, yes, the odd time when someone has highly provoked me, I have lost my patience on here. I've had people take digs at me, I am certain, just to get an angry reaction. I do not claim to have anywhere near perfect communication, or control of my temper when it comes to people who I can tell are purposefully trying to be hurtful. But what I do notice is a lack of respect overall. From the "super nice people", its lack of understanding that someone can dislike a performance. From the "super cynical people", its lack of respect for those who really like something. And then theres the whole spectrum in between and the bass ackwards ones like me who flip depending on the performance and my mood :P So as a group of fans, friends, and acquaintences, what I think we all need, perhaps myself included, is to have more respect for fellow members.

Having said that, this does not include or excuse deliberate digs at Meat Loaf. There is a difference between saying "he doesn't sound like he did 20 years ago" and saying "he sounds worse than the hang cool tour". The latter is bound to be highly upsetting to those who attended the hang cool tour, and sounds like this tour is bound to be worse than the hang cool tour. Yes, it is an opinion, but it drags down the mood of the people excited for the current tour. Plus, that comment was, I believe directed at a terrible quality cell phone video, which misses all the small details of Meat's voice.

It is my opinion, and I believe that of several others, that deliberate insults thrown at Meat on his own fan club are why people are upset, not normal discussion and opinion - good or bad.

[LisaT]

Wow. Some people have way too much time on their hands.
I have seen Meat perform live so many times I've lost count. Has every song he performed been dead on?
Yes. He perform a song in a way that few can. I saw him last year again and its always the same. He blows me away with what he brings to his performance.
I don't offer any opinions on You Tube performances cause to be honest, it's a brief snapshot of an event. I want the whole event before I say anything.
People who wish to be critical or opinionated, well thats their lookout.
I buy every album he makes
I go see him live every chance I get.
I am never disappointed cause what I see is someone who his his heart and soul to the performance.
I don't believe for a second that I have the right, even though I paid for the privilege, to criticize anything he does.

I have to say that I feel exactly the same. I go to see Meat's shows because I love the passion and the humour that he brings to his performances. I go to be entertained, and entertained I most certainly am - every time. I have NEVER come away from a show disappointed - EVER - even when Meat has gone off key or fluffed a line. It doesn't matter to me if his vocals aren't 'perfect' 100% of the time, as long as he sounds good for the most part - which, from my experience, he does.

[LuuuuvMeat]

I have to say that I feel exactly the same. I go to see Meat's shows because I love the passion and the humour that he brings to his performances. I go to be entertained, and entertained I most certainly am - every time. I have NEVER come away from a show disappointed - EVER - even when Meat has gone off key or fluffed a line. It doesn't matter to me if his vocals aren't 'perfect' 100% of the time, as long as he sounds good for the most part - which, from my experience, he does.

I agree. Well said.

[AndrewG]

On the note of coming away from a Meat Loaf show and not being disappointed. Well I have been left disappointed once, but 1 out of 20 or so really ain't that bad at all I think. When he's on the money, he's on the money. Indeed I guess a YouTube vid cannot possibly contain the atmosphere and excitement of being there. Special shows like RAH spring to mind regarding that. Perhaps a pro shot of that would have been able to capture some of the aura, I'm not sure. It's not all just about the voice. The connection between the song, the band, the audience and you as a person is something that cannot all be captured on a camera.
For people not being able to attend the gig I still think a YouTube vid is better than nothing, but perhaps it is easy for me to appreciate what is really happening when I watch a vid as I kind of subconsciously can understand the quality difference that is there. That is not just for Meat Loaf, but bootleg vids/audios from all artists. My ears can kind of fill the gaps if you get what I mean (lack of bass, richness and power usually).

...I've waffled enough...

[BostonAngel]

On the note of coming away from a Meat Loaf show and not being disappointed. Well I have been left disappointed once, but 1 out of 20 or so really ain't that bad at all I think. When he's on the money, he's on the money. Indeed I guess a YouTube vid cannot possibly contain the atmosphere and excitement of being there. Special shows like RAH spring to mind regarding that. Perhaps a pro shot of that would have been able to capture some of the aura, I'm not sure. It's not all just about the voice. The connection between the song, the band, the audience and you as a person is something that cannot all be captured on a camera.
For people not being able to attend the gig I still think a YouTube vid is better than nothing, but perhaps it is easy for me to appreciate what is really happening when I watch a vid as I kind of subconsciously can understand the quality difference that is there. That is not just for Meat Loaf, but bootleg vids/audios from all artists. My ears can kind of fill the gaps if you get what I mean (lack of bass, richness and power usually).

...I've waffled enough...

I actually give you alot of credit for your "waffling". IT shows that you have been paying attention & put some thought into what others have said. You have considered that there are a few different points of view on the issue and what someone else's thought process might be.
KUdos to you
I need a LOVE button for your post here

[lyn]

I read the first half of the first page, then stopped caring because it was dissolving into the standard "what makes a real fan?" argument. So if I'm derailing the argument, I'm sorry.



THIS is exactly true. Saying that you can't judge a performance from a YouTube video is complete crap. A dodgy camera can't mask the fact that a singer may or may not be singing out of tune. It's an all or nothing thing, not "well, it sounds bad...but maybe it's the video!" No, it's not the video. It's the performance, and if you think otherwise than you're far more optimistic than you have the right to be. Will the sound be distorted? Probably. What WON'T happen is that it won't seem as if the singer is singing out of tune if they're not. This is really common sense.

Just as an example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFR-JEe7qyE

The quality of this audio is absolute crap. It's a dodgy audience recording from 1987. And yet you can still hear that Meat sounds ~~~~ing brilliant, and so does the band. You can very easily make a judgement from this...and the only reason you people are up in arms about the other videos which were posted recently (which were of a similar quality) is because the person dared to make a post that wasn't overly positive. Can't you see how ridiculous that is? Having some sort of convoluted rule that bans YouTube from here is just stupid, because it's not the videos that are the problem. It's the people.

Accept that some people may not be 100% positive. As long as they're respectful, they have every right to mention to it.

ALSO, one more example. Go to the Everything is Permitted rating thread in the TTBH forum (it's on the front page of it), and read the top two comments, particularly the second one. That's the perfect template for how you should react to a negative post.

I totally disagree with that, about the phone quality! I took footage of Meat when I had seen him in the Hunter Valley, and I'm here to tell you that the video footage wasn't as good as the the real thing. The footage on my camera didn't sound as good, and wasn't what the concert sounded like. Meat sounded good, but the poor quality of the video camera on my phone was to blame for that. That is why myself, and so many here are up in arms about allowing YT footage to be posted. Poor quality footage only attracts negative comments, that later on Meat will read. We don't want Meat to read that and base how good or bad his performance is based on amature footage. Neither do we want new members here who haven't seen Meat live yet, to get the wrong impression from a poor quality clip off a phone.

[Wario]

Im gonna be honest about posting 1988 material in conjunction with current performance videos.....

Its unfair to Compare 64 year old meat with 44 year old meat. One of our biggest debates here is always whats the better meat loaf voice? 1987-1993 or the current one. Ill also like to note meat isnt a tenor anymore (hes more of a baritone now), so the comparisons are unjust.

1987 meat is technically and factually better sounding then 2012 Meat. What 1987 meat lacks is a kickass band line up and stage presence. Very rarely does meat stay stationary at a micstand now. In 1987 or 1988 or 1989 or 1990 or 1991 for example meat would very rarely stray away from that micstand (in 1993 is when he really started to go full out). What I love about current meat is the performances he gives. his voice is just an added cherry on top of a huge sunday

Posting a 1988 video in 1 2012 thread is like bringing a watermellon to a pumpkin contest. Theres 2012 Epic Meat Loaf band and theres 1988 Epic Meat Loaf voice. To me its pretty much inarguable 1987-1993 were meats best years vocally (in fact its kinda a fact). 2010- currently are meat's best as a performer and stage man. Thats almost inarguable. Posting a 1988 video is like saying "why cant meat sing like jesus anymore?"

I loathe it when people criticize his voice and then saying his performance is bad. TWO DIFFERENT THINGS ENTIRELY.

My answer: "Meat cant sing like 1988 jesus anymore, but by god he performs better today then 8 billion buddahs"

Thats my view. Keep the 1987-1993 videos when we are discussing the goldne age.

NEVER confuse performance with singing. There are a shit tone of people who can sing better then Meat live nowadays. Yet There are only a handful who can match him as a performer and actor. And thats what he is first, an ACTOR. and thats how i judge him by now.

thats just my view on that matter

BASICALLY This is how the two eras stack up for me:

1988 - 1993 Meat Voice: 10/10
current meat voice: 6/10

1988 - 1993 Meat Performance: 8/10
current meat performance: 10/10

[lyn]

That is a great way of thinking and usage of the fuction but IMO it's clear others have not done that {a judgment.}

As for choosing not to be anatagonised I say kudos to you but unfortuntealy it still doesn't lessen the intention.

Maybe it does get used too much, but I like Caryl, and probably other members here see it as an agree and disagree button that can be used simply as you don't have any other comment to add. I use it for that. Not for the novelty of it or to show disrespect for others ;)

[lyn]

That idea occurred to me, too, :twisted: but actually I couldn't care less. Who can take such "dislikes" seriously? I had a look at the "Top 10 Billy Joel Songs" thread and guess what? One person "disliked" every post on it (except for one that was probably overlooked). Laughable.

It depends on the topic don't forget! ;)

[lyn]

Bottom line:

Post your Youtube vids, but don’t start bitching when they get horse kicked by a red pony. Post them on topic, that means no 20 year old footage in a thread dealing with a recent show, just deal with this particular show only. Comment on these vids as you like, but do so in a respectful manner. And keep these comments on topic, speculating about something else than the thread‘s topic may get your post removed. To make this perfectly clear, making conclusions about the quality or make of a soon to be released DVD in a concert review thread is definetly not on topic and it’s not an opinion either. Post your comment and be done with it. Don’t try to impose your opinion on fellow posters with repetitive similiar posts, that’s just rude and will most likely derail a thread. We will clean these threads as we see fit, should we have the impression that a thread has been derailed.

We cool?

Absolutely cool, and thank you for posting this. It might make things a lot easier for future threads ;) :)

[lyn]

Wow. Some people have way too much time on their hands.
I have seen Meat perform live so many times I've lost count. Has every song he performed been dead on?
Yes. He perform a song in a way that few can. I saw him last year again and its always the same. He blows me away with what he brings to his performance.
I don't offer any opinions on You Tube performances cause to be honest, it's a brief snapshot of an event. I want the whole event before I say anything.
People who wish to be critical or opinionated, well thats their lookout.
I buy every album he makes
I go see him live every chance I get.
I am never disappointed cause what I see is someone who his his heart and soul to the performance.
I don't believe for a second that I have the right, even though I paid for the privilege, to criticize anything he does.

Well AMEN to that! :) I'm glad I'm not the only one with those opinions :) Although I've only seen him live once ;)

[lyn]

I also want to respond to this. The Doode brings a valid point to the table, and If I were standing in the shoes of someone who had respectfully "disliked" Meat's vocals, I would feel opressed for my opinion.

And I have been before. Lets not forget the countless times I've said "This isn't his best" or "hopefully he's just warming up for the next few shows" etc type comments. And I've been told to opress my opinion just to make a few people happy, or less upset.

Having said that, it is very important to understand that not all of us are doing what I just said. I certainly don't. I respect someone who dislikes something and states their opinion. Mostly because I do it all the frieking time. I can be a critic as well as praise something as awesome. But there is a difference between critiquing something, and bashing Meat. And the comments I responded to on here were clearly bashing Meat. If they were not meant to be insults, then they should be worded as such.

People, spend a little more time on your wording if your consistently getting shot down by others for insulting Meat. Rather than blaming those who are getting upset and feel negativity from your posts, put a little bit of effort in by making sure your post is not offensive. I do it all the time. Its that type of respect for your fellow members that is lacking on these forums.

[clarification] - For those who I know will jump on this, yes, the odd time when someone has highly provoked me, I have lost my patience on here. I've had people take digs at me, I am certain, just to get an angry reaction. I do not claim to have anywhere near perfect communication, or control of my temper when it comes to people who I can tell are purposefully trying to be hurtful. But what I do notice is a lack of respect overall. From the "super nice people", its lack of understanding that someone can dislike a performance. From the "super cynical people", its lack of respect for those who really like something. And then theres the whole spectrum in between and the bass ackwards ones like me who flip depending on the performance and my mood :P So as a group of fans, friends, and acquaintences, what I think we all need, perhaps myself included, is to have more respect for fellow members.

Having said that, this does not include or excuse deliberate digs at Meat Loaf. There is a difference between saying "he doesn't sound like he did 20 years ago" and saying "he sounds worse than the hang cool tour". The latter is bound to be highly upsetting to those who attended the hang cool tour, and sounds like this tour is bound to be worse than the hang cool tour. Yes, it is an opinion, but it drags down the mood of the people excited for the current tour. Plus, that comment was, I believe directed at a terrible quality cell phone video, which misses all the small details of Meat's voice.

It is my opinion, and I believe that of several others, that deliberate insults thrown at Meat on his own fan club are why people are upset, not normal discussion and opinion - good or bad.

You've summed it up nicely mate :) :cool:

[Julie in the rv mirror]

It depends on the topic don't forget! ;)

Lyn, this is not directed at you, it just so happens yours is the post on the topic. I have seen the thread Sarge is referring to- I posted in it. Wario started the thread in the "Other Rock and Roll Heroes" section of the board, which is the appropriate place to put the thread. He listed his top 10 Billy Joel songs, and others chimed in and added theirs, we discussed a bit- nice thread. One individual took the time to "Dislike" every single post in the thread. Sarge said one was missed, could be.

Now, my point is, that maybe this person doesn't like Billy Joel, or isn't interested, in which case, IMO, the fair, respectful thing to do would be to simply not open the thread. The thread title was completely clear. She could have posted her own list, or, even post saying that she doesn't like Billy Joel and why- that is a discussion. Surely you can see why some people might be annoyed.

That thread was in no way disrespectful of Meat- I don't think he was even mentioned. Many music fan boards have sections for "Other Music", because often fans of one artist have other similar likes in common.

One board I belong to has a section for political discussions. It's not my thing, so I just don't look at it. If people don't like the "Other Music" forum, they don't need to read it. Better yet, if there is someone who annoys you so much that you dislike every single one of his or her posts, this board has an "ignore" feature- problem solved.

And, I realize it will only be a matter of time before this post is "disliked" as well. I can't let Wario beat me, can I? :lol:

[Tri.somethin]

This thread is still going on? O.o

[CarylB]

This thread is still going on? O.o

Indeed .. amazing. I haven't posted since Rainer gave his decision which seemed to me to provide an end to the discussion. His forum, his time and effort, his right to decide. But I did like and agree with Andrew's post which I've re-quoted below, so given all the furore that has been going on, I think I will now ;) I'm quoting it again because it deserves to be read again .. imo

On the note of coming away from a Meat Loaf show and not being disappointed. Well I have been left disappointed once, but 1 out of 20 or so really ain't that bad at all I think. When he's on the money, he's on the money. Indeed I guess a YouTube vid cannot possibly contain the atmosphere and excitement of being there. Special shows like RAH spring to mind regarding that. Perhaps a pro shot of that would have been able to capture some of the aura, I'm not sure. It's not all just about the voice. The connection between the song, the band, the audience and you as a person is something that cannot all be captured on a camera.
For people not being able to attend the gig I still think a YouTube vid is better than nothing, but perhaps it is easy for me to appreciate what is really happening when I watch a vid as I kind of subconsciously can understand the quality difference that is there. That is not just for Meat Loaf, but bootleg vids/audios from all artists. My ears can kind of fill the gaps if you get what I mean (lack of bass, richness and power usually).

I like and agree fully with this Andrew, and I think this is the nub of what some have been trying to say .. certainly it is for me. Not "waffle" at all ;) but rather a very good explanation of why these clips can be misleading, and why in my view Meat doesn't appreciate criticism (even if it is perhaps meant to be helpful) being based on them.

.. this argument ... It shouldn't be airing in this thread

Agreed


In case you hadn't noticed Caryl specifically mentioned my name and quoted my post. She was equally dismissive about my post, I responded in kind.

Paul, I'd observe that your first comment back was in response to my saying of your post:
I don't believe to polarise people like this helps, nor is it really accurate ... phrases like "even remotely critical" just do not help imo.

I don't think that was dismissive in any way which should offend; I gave my opinion straight and not rudely, or sarcastically. I then replied to your following response to that in kind ;) But you are right in saying

"Caryl's 'maturity and experience' means she doesn't need others to fight her corner" ;)

I have been worse insulted by others :lol:

Caryl

[chairboys]

As I see it there needs to be a leaderboard with the most amount of disliked posts by a user. Sarge, me, and Andrew would totally top it :))



I congratulate the three of you for all the effort you put in to be top of the pile.

[Wario]

I congratulate the three of you for all the effort you put in to be top of the pile.

It was being sarcastic. noting we were being aimed for no matter what we said.

Its done. lets move on

[GDW]

What if I dislike some parts of a post and like other parts of the post. Oh yeah! Don't reply.:-)

[R.]

If I ever see a discussion turning into a flamefest like this again, everyone involved will enjoy at least a month-long vacation from this site. We have a private messaging facility, if you really need to have a go at each other, use it. Also, there’s an „Ignore List“; it’s a pretty self-explaining tool. I urge you to use this feature. Don’t make me force this on you.

For the Youtube vids and coments, please refer to my post quoted below. Thread cleaned and closed.

Post your Youtube vids, but don’t start bitching when they get horse kicked by a red pony. Post them on topic, that means no 20 year old footage in a thread dealing with a recent show, just deal with this particular show only. Comment on these vids as you like, but do so in a respectful manner. And keep these comments on topic, speculating about something else than the thread‘s topic may get your post removed. To make this perfectly clear, making conclusions about the quality or make of a soon to be released DVD in a concert review thread is definetly not on topic and it’s not an opinion either. Post your comment and be done with it. Don’t try to impose your opinion on fellow posters with repetitive similiar posts, that’s just rude and will most likely derail a thread. We will clean these threads as we see fit, should we have the impression that a thread has been derailed.