Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why this reunion is a BAD thing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • sabbathite
    replied
    Originally posted by warningrules View Post
    hi everyone, it's been probably more than a year since i've posted here, and since the announcement on the eleventh, i've felt inclined to make this thread. First off, i'd like to start off by saying that i like the ozzy era. Not as much as the dio or the martin era, but i do enjoy listening to the original line up of the sabs more than almost any other band. So, now that we have that out of the way...

    Black sabbath is the greatest band of all time. I can't think of another band that's better. They created a genre, they were the first of their kind, and their influence on rock music is only seconded by the beatles. With this band being so great and so important, they should live on forever, so people many years from the end of sabbath can enjoy their music. Such a band should leave behind an amazing legacy.
    Ozzy, however, is the complete opposite. I don't know exactly when his voice went to shit, but it's been a long time. Actually, to be honest, it's been a long time since he's released a record worth listening to... Sometime around the death of rhoads. Is this really what we want to hear?

    So, anyone up for an all instrumental version of the album?
    yes!!!!! This is what we want to hear. In fact, if you don't want to hear it then you are basically anti-sabbath.....so go away. I'm up for a all instrumental version of your posts..so go play your violin if you're gonna cry about the wishes of ozzy/tony/geezer/bill....as most importantly it, the new album, is something they want to hear!!! Someone has been telling you that black is really white and that the moon is just the sun at night 'cause you're all stuck on stupid!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Josef_K
    replied
    @Sabbathite

    I said IT MUST LOOK LIKE I think you are a generic sab fan who is close minded by not liking the other line-ups", I brought that up to point out that this was NOT my point. Thanks for actually reading my post dude... I tried to be nice in my criticism and you just come off as a complete jerk who posts replies only to have the opportunity to tell people they are stupid. Well I've taken a lot of crap from people who don't care to listen to what I say, why should I care.

    You said "Children of the Grave" are real, just what is "Children of the Sea"?? It's fiction... etc etc. From that and the rest of your post putting Sabbath mk1 over everything else, I got the impression that you didn't really want to get into the other Sabbath albums. Obviously that was a false impression, but I would like to argue that you really didn't state your opinions clearly, even if I hardly believe you care about what I argue cos you seem to hate me for whatever reason :D

    I won't comment on your "proof" of that you are not a close minded person, because no one said you were. What was so dumb with my last comment I cannot understand, probably because of my low IQ (which is quite much more than 92 if you have to know, but at least you gave it a try). Lot of people wonder why BLACK SABBATH with Dio and whoever else doesn't sound more like it did with Ozzy, it's not overly clear to everyone that the band changed radically more than once. Maybe they, along with me, are just a bunch of idiots who should shut their mouths and try to be more like you? What do I know, anyway always nice to discuss these things with hateful people, have a nice day.

    Leave a comment:


  • sabbathite
    replied
    You see what I'm talking about now when I say they should have changed the name of the band? :D Sorry to use you as an example dude, but your post is just 100% proof of the Sabbath fan that ALWAYS looks for the shreds of Ozzy Sabbath in EVERY OTHER ERA and then complains about the lack of those. Yes they did keep the same name, but they were A DIFFERENT BAND. With Dio, with Gillan, with Glenn, with Ray, with Martin. Just because it is different doesn't mean it cannot be better. Geezer wrote "Children of the Grave" about the cold war etc, just like you explain. I consider those lyrics a masterpiece. Dio wrote "Children of the Sea" about pollution and the ignorance of humanity towards nature. I consider those lyrics a masterpiece. What did you want exactly, Dio to write like Geezer? Why? Would you like Ritchie Blackmore to play guitar like Tony Iommi as well? If so, please explain why. No of course you don't, cos Ritchie wasn't in "Sabbath". Well, again, try to look beyond the name and see different bands.

    I could continue on about how masterful "Born Again", "Seventh Star", "Anno Mundi" etc etc are but I think you get my point. Black Sabbath didn't "do their thing" anymore after 1978. Black Sabbath changed, they were no longer Black Sabbath. They called themselves Black Sabbath, but they were not the same band. I see nothing wrong with that. I don't see it as the band evolved their sound or anything, just that they changed the sound that's all. They couldn't stay the same, and frankly I don't believe they wanted to, lots of interviews hint on this. So again, sorry about making you look like that generic sabbath fan who only likes the ozzy era cos he is to close-minded to give the others a chance. That wasn't my point, but I know it looks like it. My point is, the name confuses and frustrates people, cos it's not the same band. But it's not bad just because of that.

    Sorry all for going off topic, I just had to reply on this one, you know I can't help myself sometimes (A). Anyway, I promise to be good now and say at least something about the actual reunion. The only "bad" thing I can see in it is that it eliminates Tony Iommi's chances to do a project that still has potential and isn't "just" a nostalgia act. However, especially now with his recent cancer and everything, I doubt that he has much time left for new projects, maybe after all it is time to do the nostalgia act (which is not at all a bad thing btw) before he has to retire anyway? I can't help blaming myself for thinking like this, but maybe that's the most logical way to think given the information we have. \
    Originally posted by mythology View Post
    Amen brother!!
    HEY JOSEF_K....you have me pegged wrong dude....saying I am "a generic sab fan who is close minded by not liking the other line-ups..." yeah I said what I said about Dio lyrics...but nowhere, and I mean NOWHERE did I say I didn't like any of the other versions. I am a HUGE Gillan fan and loved it when he joined the band....saw them live here in So Cal at the Long Beach Arena. I have everything Gillan has ever done (shame how the Gillan band in the late 70s and the early 80s got no recognition on US radio...). And I happen to like VERY MUCH the Dio Sab albums...undeniably great stuff. The Martin era I could never get into. I saw them with Halford and I was hoping for an album!!! At any rate, you seem to know alot about me from my one post, and what you are misguided, saying I "look for the shred of OZZY SABBATH in the other eras and then complain when I don't find it"...or whatever????How did I refer to that? All i said, or suggested in what I said was that the original line-up was and always will be BLACK SABBATH to many of us....and a OZZY strained and shot out voice will always be preferable to anyone else when that band; when TONY GEEZER BILL hit the stage.
    OH...and about me being close minded: have you ever listened to albums entitled Sheer Heart Attack A Night At the Opera or News Of The World???? They are from the band whose fans can have no such thing as a closed mind----as the amazingly many different textures and genres and the versatility of the songs and performances within even just one album is remarkable. A closed mind would not equally love Stone Cold Crazy, Bring Back That Leroy Brown, Lily of the Valley, Tenement Funster, and In The Lap Of The Gods (all from the same album)!!! In fact, this closed mind actually enjoys putting on Jim Croce or Simon and Garfunkel after having just listened to Danzig,
    Lastly, you said, in regards to the name Black Sabbath being used post-Ozzy, that: "...the name confuses and frustrates people, cos it's not the same band." I don't even know what to make of that...only to say you must hold discourse with people who share a IQ of, well I'll be nice and generous and say, oh about 92!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • mythology
    replied
    Originally posted by sabbathite View Post
    I know that I, being a fan of the band throughout the 70's while it was actually happening, have a certain amount of, well, depth to my feelings on the matter. Sabbath, particularly because of the lyrics, meant much more to me when I became a follower in the early 7o's then some of these people who werent even born then that are posting on here (not suggesting that they arent entitled to post however),,,but if OZZY's voice is limited or not what it was....well then that is what it is. WHAT MATTERS is that it is the four of them! Some of you people on here seem to only view their liking of Sab with Dio or Martin or whoever was the singer on the basis of well that album was the best or it had four great tracks and played live they were brilliant or Dio is a real talented vocalist while Ozzy can't even sing....blah blah blah..
    Man, I think I speak for some of the older cats on here, SABBATH for us were like the leaders of a political party or the iconic image that stood for angst/rebellion/protest/picking up a joint instead of a gun/the Vol 4 cover epitomized it (as opposed to the two fingers dio used when he raised his hand)...these are our boys man...if OZZY has to get up there and struggle and strain and whatever to deliver the set...well that like just being down for the cause....and I'd not trade OZZY as the singer in SABBATH for someone as talented a singer as Freddie Mercury (or OK, I'll say it Dio) was, or someone who technically isnt a great singer, like a Lemmy. It's OZZY TONY GEEZER BILL....just like the cover of SABOTAGE back in the day (albeit a slightly older and worn at the edges entity).
    AND lastly, speaking for myself, BLACK SABBATH to me will always only be about the CHILDREN OF THE GRAVE, because as the generation of the Cold War and Vietnam etc...that is and was the reality...Children of the Grave were real.....and just what is a Child(ren) of the Sea??? it's fiction just like the dragons and the warlocks and the rainbows in the dark.
    Amen brother!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Josef_K
    replied
    Originally posted by sabbathite View Post
    I know that I, being a fan of the band throughout the 70's while it was actually happening, have a certain amount of, well, depth to my feelings on the matter. Sabbath, particularly because of the lyrics, meant much more to me when I became a follower in the early 7o's then some of these people who werent even born then that are posting on here (not suggesting that they arent entitled to post however),,,but if OZZY's voice is limited or not what it was....well then that is what it is. WHAT MATTERS is that it is the four of them! Some of you people on here seem to only view their liking of Sab with Dio or Martin or whoever was the singer on the basis of well that album was the best or it had four great tracks and played live they were brilliant or Dio is a real talented vocalist while Ozzy can't even sing....blah blah blah..
    Man, I think I speak for some of the older cats on here, SABBATH for us were like the leaders of a political party or the iconic image that stood for angst/rebellion/protest/picking up a joint instead of a gun/the Vol 4 cover epitomized it (as opposed to the two fingers dio used when he raised his hand)...these are our boys man...if OZZY has to get up there and struggle and strain and whatever to deliver the set...well that like just being down for the cause....and I'd not trade OZZY as the singer in SABBATH for someone as talented a singer as Freddie Mercury (or OK, I'll say it Dio) was, or someone who technically isnt a great singer, like a Lemmy. It's OZZY TONY GEEZER BILL....just like the cover of SABOTAGE back in the day (albeit a slightly older and worn at the edges entity).
    AND lastly, speaking for myself, BLACK SABBATH to me will always only be about the CHILDREN OF THE GRAVE, because as the generation of the Cold War and Vietnam etc...that is and was the reality...Children of the Grave were real.....and just what is a Child(ren) of the Sea??? it's fiction just like the dragons and the warlocks and the rainbows in the dark.
    You see what I'm talking about now when I say they should have changed the name of the band? :D Sorry to use you as an example dude, but your post is just 100% proof of the Sabbath fan that ALWAYS looks for the shreds of Ozzy Sabbath in EVERY OTHER ERA and then complains about the lack of those. Yes they did keep the same name, but they were A DIFFERENT BAND. With Dio, with Gillan, with Glenn, with Ray, with Martin. Just because it is different doesn't mean it cannot be better. Geezer wrote "Children of the Grave" about the cold war etc, just like you explain. I consider those lyrics a masterpiece. Dio wrote "Children of the Sea" about pollution and the ignorance of humanity towards nature. I consider those lyrics a masterpiece. What did you want exactly, Dio to write like Geezer? Why? Would you like Ritchie Blackmore to play guitar like Tony Iommi as well? If so, please explain why. No of course you don't, cos Ritchie wasn't in "Sabbath". Well, again, try to look beyond the name and see different bands.

    I could continue on about how masterful "Born Again", "Seventh Star", "Anno Mundi" etc etc are but I think you get my point. Black Sabbath didn't "do their thing" anymore after 1978. Black Sabbath changed, they were no longer Black Sabbath. They called themselves Black Sabbath, but they were not the same band. I see nothing wrong with that. I don't see it as the band evolved their sound or anything, just that they changed the sound that's all. They couldn't stay the same, and frankly I don't believe they wanted to, lots of interviews hint on this. So again, sorry about making you look like that generic sabbath fan who only likes the ozzy era cos he is to close-minded to give the others a chance. That wasn't my point, but I know it looks like it. My point is, the name confuses and frustrates people, cos it's not the same band. But it's not bad just because of that.

    Sorry all for going off topic, I just had to reply on this one, you know I can't help myself sometimes (A). Anyway, I promise to be good now and say at least something about the actual reunion. The only "bad" thing I can see in it is that it eliminates Tony Iommi's chances to do a project that still has potential and isn't "just" a nostalgia act. However, especially now with his recent cancer and everything, I doubt that he has much time left for new projects, maybe after all it is time to do the nostalgia act (which is not at all a bad thing btw) before he has to retire anyway? I can't help blaming myself for thinking like this, but maybe that's the most logical way to think given the information we have.

    Leave a comment:


  • Charger
    replied
    Originally posted by nunoni View Post
    come on, money grab or not, the reunion is fantastic as long as it includes great new music which I'm sure it will! Ozzy is actually on much better form than in the past 20 years, and Tony played splendidly in the H&H reunion (so get well soon and fully!) and so did Geezer Butler. The only real question mark is Bill Ward, but if he says he's up to it, I believe him fully.
    Well now it is quite likely that atleast the summer tour will be canceled. Cancer treatments are a bitch and they made the mistake in 2010 to be little overly confident about Ronnie's recovery...although that was the kind of person Ronnie was to the end...
    Plus for all of us fans it needs to be about Tony's recovery above all else....

    Leave a comment:


  • Billy Underdog
    replied
    Originally posted by sabbathite View Post
    I know that I, being a fan of the band throughout the 70's while it was actually happening, have a certain amount of, well, depth to my feelings on the matter. Sabbath, particularly because of the lyrics, meant much more to me when I became a follower in the early 7o's then some of these people who werent even born then that are posting on here (not suggesting that they arent entitled to post however),,,but if OZZY's voice is limited or not what it was....well then that is what it is. WHAT MATTERS is that it is the four of them! Some of you people on here seem to only view their liking of Sab with Dio or Martin or whoever was the singer on the basis of well that album was the best or it had four great tracks and played live they were brilliant or Dio is a real talented vocalist while Ozzy can't even sing....blah blah blah..
    Man, I think I speak for some of the older cats on here, SABBATH for us were like the leaders of a political party or the iconic image that stood for angst/rebellion/protest/picking up a joint instead of a gun/the Vol 4 cover epitomized it (as opposed to the two fingers dio used when he raised his hand)...these are our boys man...if OZZY has to get up there and struggle and strain and whatever to deliver the set...well that like just being down for the cause....and I'd not trade OZZY as the singer in SABBATH for someone as talented a singer as Freddie Mercury (or OK, I'll say it Dio) was, or someone who technically isnt a great singer, like a Lemmy. It's OZZY TONY GEEZER BILL....just like the cover of SABOTAGE back in the day (albeit a slightly older and worn at the edges entity).
    AND lastly, speaking for myself, BLACK SABBATH to me will always only be about the CHILDREN OF THE GRAVE, because as the generation of the Cold War and Vietnam etc...that is and was the reality...Children of the Grave were real.....and just what is a Child(ren) of the Sea??? it's fiction just like the dragons and the warlocks and the rainbows in the dark.
    You said it, man!

    Leave a comment:


  • nunoni
    replied
    come on, money grab or not, the reunion is fantastic as long as it includes great new music which I'm sure it will! Ozzy is actually on much better form than in the past 20 years, and Tony played splendidly in the H&H reunion (so get well soon and fully!) and so did Geezer Butler. The only real question mark is Bill Ward, but if he says he's up to it, I believe him fully.

    Leave a comment:


  • sabbathite
    replied
    Listen you post-ozzy sab fans

    I know that I, being a fan of the band throughout the 70's while it was actually happening, have a certain amount of, well, depth to my feelings on the matter. Sabbath, particularly because of the lyrics, meant much more to me when I became a follower in the early 7o's then some of these people who werent even born then that are posting on here (not suggesting that they arent entitled to post however),,,but if OZZY's voice is limited or not what it was....well then that is what it is. WHAT MATTERS is that it is the four of them! Some of you people on here seem to only view their liking of Sab with Dio or Martin or whoever was the singer on the basis of well that album was the best or it had four great tracks and played live they were brilliant or Dio is a real talented vocalist while Ozzy can't even sing....blah blah blah..
    Man, I think I speak for some of the older cats on here, SABBATH for us were like the leaders of a political party or the iconic image that stood for angst/rebellion/protest/picking up a joint instead of a gun/the Vol 4 cover epitomized it (as opposed to the two fingers dio used when he raised his hand)...these are our boys man...if OZZY has to get up there and struggle and strain and whatever to deliver the set...well that like just being down for the cause....and I'd not trade OZZY as the singer in SABBATH for someone as talented a singer as Freddie Mercury (or OK, I'll say it Dio) was, or someone who technically isnt a great singer, like a Lemmy. It's OZZY TONY GEEZER BILL....just like the cover of SABOTAGE back in the day (albeit a slightly older and worn at the edges entity).
    AND lastly, speaking for myself, BLACK SABBATH to me will always only be about the CHILDREN OF THE GRAVE, because as the generation of the Cold War and Vietnam etc...that is and was the reality...Children of the Grave were real.....and just what is a Child(ren) of the Sea??? it's fiction just like the dragons and the warlocks and the rainbows in the dark.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jonas Psalter
    replied
    Originally posted by Ye Black Knight View Post
    Hark, dear WarningRules, and those whom have trepidation on ye assemblage of Gods Butler, Iommi, Osbourne, and Ward - ye minstrels known'eth as Black Sabbath!

    Thou hath made an argument of passion and reason and this knight is in accord with thee: 'tis not mine wish to see Black Sabbath falter! In a matter of full truth, ye inkling of Sabbath's failure be'ith an agonizing nightmare this knight doth n'er wish to contemplate, much less see to fruition.

    Howe'er, let this knight propose another possibility of this reunion:
    What if Lords Sabbath be'eth invigorated once again by ye dark muse? What if Sir Richard Rubin lead'eth them to musical heights anew, just as he did with Lord Johnny Cash's "American" collection. (Although this knight's heart beats for Metal most true, to mine ears Lord Cash's canon be'ith sheer musical excellence!)
    What if we art graced with ye greatest odes that Sabbath hath e'er created?
    What if we art graced with ye greatest odes e'er created?

    We shalt never know what new heights Sabbath can attain if this reunion take'th not place. These Gods hath earned this quest for Metallic excellence, for 'tis an ambition which they hath succeeded many times before!

    This post now concludeth!
    Could we have the New International Version of this? I still can't fully comprehend the 1611 King James English.

    anyrate, about the reunion. Im not sure. I'm certianly not gonna be "Rolling Stone-minded" (meaning just because the Stones [mainly Jagger] sound absolutly horrable nowadays doasnt mean ALL classic rock bands sound horrable when they reunite [those guys (Stones) need to call it a career and just STOP!])
    I am very interested how the new album is gonna be.

    Leave a comment:


  • WarningRules
    replied
    Originally posted by hipster doofus View Post
    And I don't give a fuck about who I give a fuck about why you gave a fuck about what that guy gave a fuck about.

    Sincerely,
    Internet Hulk
    Although the majority of things you've said have been pretty annoying to me, I think you've brought up a good point with this. Internet tough guy.

    ---------- Post added at 08:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 PM ----------

    Originally posted by NoWayOut View Post
    yeah well if you dont like it than dont go see the show and dont buy the album haha its really that simple. theres still 8 great albums that you can rehash.
    That's a much better agument (although I'd like to argue that there's a few more than 8 great albums )

    Leave a comment:


  • NoWayOut
    replied
    Originally posted by WarningRules View Post
    Or you could stop being a pansy and accept that people are going to say things you might not like. Sure, you and the original 4 don't give a flying fuck about my opinion. So? I also don't give a flying fuck about your attempt at trying to convey a coherent argument (which didn't work, btw).
    yeah well if you dont like it than dont go see the show and dont buy the album haha its really that simple. theres still 8 great albums that you can rehash.

    Leave a comment:


  • hipster doofus
    replied
    Originally posted by WarningRules View Post
    Or you could stop being a pansy and accept that people are going to say things you might not like. Sure, you and the original 4 don't give a flying fuck about my opinion. So? I also don't give a flying fuck about your attempt at trying to convey a coherent argument (which didn't work, btw).
    And I don't give a fuck about who I give a fuck about why you gave a fuck about what that guy gave a fuck about.

    Sincerely,
    Internet Hulk

    Leave a comment:


  • WarningRules
    replied
    Originally posted by NoWayOut View Post
    Yeah well you all know what? Ozzy,Tony,Geezer,Bill and the rest of the world dont give a flying F%$^ about why you think its a bad idea. After seeing Heaven and Hell I too thought it would be a bad Idea. But you know what? im a fan, I love the ozzy material. Its the 4 original guys,and we might not ever get a chance to see them again. so be happy or stop being a pansy cause your opinion wont shut down the Sabbath train.
    Or you could stop being a pansy and accept that people are going to say things you might not like. Sure, you and the original 4 don't give a flying fuck about my opinion. So? I also don't give a flying fuck about your attempt at trying to convey a coherent argument (which didn't work, btw).

    Leave a comment:


  • NoWayOut
    replied
    Yeah well you all know what? Ozzy,Tony,Geezer,Bill and the rest of the world dont give a flying F%$^ about why you think its a bad idea. After seeing Heaven and Hell I too thought it would be a bad Idea. But you know what? im a fan, I love the ozzy material. Its the 4 original guys,and we might not ever get a chance to see them again. so be happy or stop being a pansy cause your opinion wont shut down the Sabbath train.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X