Please read - Youtube vid comments
 

: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.

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.

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

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

: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:

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?

: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:

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!

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.

: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:

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.

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

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.

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)

: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?

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

@ 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: 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:

: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.

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 :))

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.

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.

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.

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:

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!

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

... 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 ...

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 !

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:
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

"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.

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.

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!

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.

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?

Exactly! That's the bottom line.

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.

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

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

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?

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

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.

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

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

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!

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.

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

: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.



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.


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.



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.


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.



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.



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


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:



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.





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.



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


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.



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.




Agreed.


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:

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.


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:

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

: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).



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?




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.



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.



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


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

There's a world of difference.


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?


Better you than me :p :lol:

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.


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.



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 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.



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.



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.



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:

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!

: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.




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.



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?


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.



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.





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.


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

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.

: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?


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.


One does ones best :mrgreen:


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:

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



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:

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

: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.






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:

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.

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

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

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!!

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

Too bad you didn't join earlier. ;)

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.

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:

Entirely fair and reasonable in my view too.

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

: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?




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:



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



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?





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.




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).



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.



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.


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.



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 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.

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

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:

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: The answer is 7.

And I might have even missed one or two.

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

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

: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!

@ 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.

: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:

:twisted: Agreed.

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. :))

Missed that post:

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

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?

More people probably gasped that someone has allowed you to drive. :shock:

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.

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.

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.

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'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

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.

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.

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. ;) :-)

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.

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 ;)

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. ;)

Yes, 100% agree, well said

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 ;) :)

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.

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.

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.

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

: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.

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.

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.

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!

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?

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