Comments on: All Known Metal Bands Revisited

By: sunburntkamel

sunburntkamel — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 08:45:05 +0000

It’s awesome that he’s removed his diatribe, and posted thanks instead.

of course, as with all internet wankery, i took a screenshot: http://www.box.net/shared/2rrec2cpry

@shawn – that’s only the bands that he didn’t have. He explains that what he had at that point was a subset of EM, so EM’s 47,000 makes up ~92% of his content.

By: b.

b. — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:19:35 +0000

Still trying to digest this.
Still alarmed and annoyed.

Time to find it at a bookstore to see if the obscure local bands are in it.

By: gjhead

gjhead — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 09:01:11 +0000

This guy’s response sort of sucks. He’s basically saying “yeah, i copied everything but no one else though of it first so fuck you.”

It’s the “in-print” version of “FIRST POST!!!”

By: Invisible Oranges

Invisible Oranges — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 20:03:43 +0000

It seems the author has taken down the defense/statement on his page.

Keith, I’m with you on the idea of a gigantic universe of individual expression being subsumed under a greater orthodoxy. And, the idea of authorial intent being almost irrelevant in almost a “he doesn’t know what he’s playing with” way – I find that interesting also. I’m not sure if I completely agree. The attribution of an author, publisher, and price tag shows that forces are certainly trying to bring that power under an umbrella. That beauty of the vastness of metal, unfiltered and uncommodified, is already in the original metal-archives site.

By: Keith Kahn-Harris

Keith Kahn-Harris — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:43:22 +0000

Just blogged my thoughts on the book:

http://kkahnharris.typepad.com/weblog/2008/07/more-on-all-kno.html

By: steve57

steve57 — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:25:03 +0000

I was almost with the guy until the 'false metal' addendum, then I went back and reread:

"appealing mostly to those fairly unfamiliar with metaI"?

Laugh on dude, like what you meant to say is; 'it's just a coffee table art project for hipsters'?

fucking dilettante.

By: dschalek

dschalek — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:15:40 +0000

“All Known Sex Partners of Gene Simmons” Vol. I-IV

By: Invisible Oranges

Invisible Oranges — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:58:40 +0000

Anthony, you make a most interesting point about how tradition is necessary to contextualize experimentation. The recognition of DNA in a later mutation (calling someone an "old soul", "a chip off the old block", etc.) is one of the coolest aspects of human existence.

Black metal is both the most experimental and retro-fetishistic metal subgenre. Like with any other area of life, one just has to sift through the crap.

Dave, a metal t-shirts book would be fantastic. Calling Mr. Christe to "All known demo tapes" thread...

By: shawn

shawn — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:52:37 +0000

Agreed. The "author" admits that he integrated THIRTY-FIVE THOUSAND band names from Encyclopedia Metallum. The published book features "just under 51,000" band names. By my math, this means that almost 70% of the band names listed in his book were "integrated" from Encyclopedia Metallum. So, for all his two years of research, the author managed to still only provide 30% original material...

That's indefensible, in my opinion, and his take on it is really disheartening.

He says: "printing it as a book was my idea, and mine alone. Had it been another?s idea, they would have done it."

I say: that doesn't mean it isn't stealing.

McSweeny's is an interesting (if not a little too clever) company. I think any other author on their imprint would be outraged if 70% of their work was printed elsewhere without being given credit. I hope they will consider reprinting and giving the site full credit and share profits for their hard work.

By: dschalek

dschalek — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:45:30 +0000

How ’bout “All known metal t-shirts”? OR “All known demo tapes”? OR “All known show fliers”? OR “All known Dimmu Borgir clone bands”? Those topics would be infinitely more interesting. Anyone want to collaborate?