looking for some input

MassOfKthulu · Post by **MassOfKthulu** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 8:48 am

Haha.i loved the previous post
I know John's gonna do the right thing in the end
a few dislikes of mine in books:
too generic (mainstream bands-we all know it-who cares)
text that has nothing to do with the music (german encyclopedias)
saying this sounds like A or B band-this very rarely works-EVERYONE's been influenced by priest and maiden.i ld love to see some more accurate description.and YES pics
can;t wait for this book to be released.
now shouldn't it be accompanied by a compilation vinyl with some of the best bands in the book! im drooling
and spare us the band members names John,or they'll be getting more phonecalls than Barrack Obama

Satan is Our Pal · Post by **Satan is Our Pal** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:08 pm

Shadow Kingdom wrote:
Satan is Our Pal wrote:
US private metal is something I don't collect to be honest,.
That's the most insane thing I've ever read here.

Happy to oblige. I just listen to the stuff on mp3. I prefer the far superior NWOBHM scene.

tomas · Post by **tomas** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:33 pm

Please add a compilation LP with your top 10 US metal private press 7"es!

Shadow Kingdom · Post by **Shadow Kingdom** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:07 pm

Satan is Our Pal wrote:I just listen to the stuff on mp3.

Well there you have it.

Your opinion is useless to me now.

Shiremen · Post by **Shiremen** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:03 pm

I love price guides in books. Or to be more precise, I like to learn what price range to expect. So instead of exakt price, you could use a star rating. 1 is less than 20 dollars, 2 stars more than 20 dollars, 5 stars more than 500 dollars bla bla bla.

I also love rarity rating.

And thirdly, I like to bring the book with me to record fairs and such. So, size is important!

Post by **DaN** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:23 am

What's the latest news on this project, John? I noticed I never commented on this before, but I think most points are valid. What I'm really hoping is that it will include at least some rudimentary descriptions of the musical content, one or 2 lines on what sound/style is represented and perhaps a hint on weather it's a brilliant must-have or complete garbage. Leaving out something like this would only make the book appeal to the completist fringe and/or the handful of people who've already heard most of it.

Khnud · Post by **Khnud** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:33 am

I agree, some form of review is essential, otherwise we mortals will have no clue on what to purchase or not.

Nightlock · Post by **Nightlock** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:46 am

I never posted so I'll have my say now:

For the most part the main problems with most metal books out there in my opinion is the writers suck. Even Malc's book is at times way too clinical and boring, now I know to an extent it has to be objective but if you're describing sound in anyway it will have to have elements of the subjective as well (Malc is even very subjective at times).

Everyone here seems to think his N.W.O.B.H.M. guide is the blueprint of how heavy metal books should be made so I'll comment how I think it COULD have been improved...

More pictures and LOTS more graphic design, take The Corroseum for example. I think DaN has basically perfect sense for text/graphic balance unlike Malc's book which has lots of very plain looking white pages with black text and the writing it's self doesn't save this in anyway.

More item specific information presented in easy and quick to understand context. No one wants to have to read a few paragraphs to have to find out if the single has an insert or picture sleeve or not. By previous posts it looks like you have this issue under control though.

So basically I think it comes down to improving upon previous layout problems and a high quality of writing and you'd have a great book.

Khnud · Post by **Khnud** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:51 am

Nightlock wrote:Even Malc's book is at times way too clinical and boring

Try counting the times he uses the word "hopefuls"! I'd say in at least a third of the reviews.

Nightlock · Post by **Nightlock** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:00 pm

Haha, he doesn't really seem like a writer to me just some guy with way more specialised knowledge in that subject who happened to make a book about it. I do like the book just as a information source to us aspiring collectors though.

Post by **DaN** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:33 pm

To McMillan's defence it's hard not to repeat yourself when dealing with that amount of text. The less you worry about such details, the easier it is to actually get stuff done - at least according to my experience. It's also hard to compare the graphic design of a book with that of a website. With the latter you have virtually unlimited space to work with.

The best books both info- and layoutwise imo are Stark's Swedish HR/HM Encyclopedias, though some musical descriptions/opinions can be questionable.

Nightlock · Post by **Nightlock** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:18 pm

Good point and I do actually like the book and have used it as a reference point many times. It just seems like it has the capability of being so much more.

Glockose · Post by **Glockose** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:05 pm

Hello!
The book has been a little more slow going then I would have liked.

Things are still a little up in the air as to what it will look like.

I am very OLD school and don't like other people's descriptions. I'm a vinyl collector or then a music critic.

Most First books on a vinyl subject (60's Garage, 50's Rockabilly, 60-70's soul) Have been more of a discography, Just a way to know what is out there. Then it's up to the readers to ask questions to find out what things sound like.

There are a few new Psych books that are just Photos. (Pure Record Porn)

ALL I will be doing is a little of each.

There will be pictures of EVERYTHING. (PS/Inserts/Labels)
There will be all the info (Songs, Matrix, Year, State...........)
There will be something I call style (Hard Rock,AOR, NWOBHM,Early Metal, Power Metal, Thrash...........................)

That is all at this point

As of right now there are over 600 records

I have come up with a dead line in my head at that time the book will come out. IT WILL NOT BE COMPLET as I am still getting in 1-2 a week that I have never seen before.

This is only a field guide. Not something your going to sit down and read.

I am not a writer and I don't want to be. I just thought I would share some of this info with folks who would want it. If you don't like that layout or approach then do not buy it. Sorry

I am shooting to be done in Feb2010

Post by **DaN** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:37 pm

Cheers for the update. Keep it coming!

glockose wrote:There will be pictures of EVERYTHING. (PS/Inserts/Labels)
There will be all the info (Songs, Matrix, Year, State...........)

Sounds great. As long as all of that info is included, the actual layout won't matter much.

There will be something I call style (Hard Rock,AOR, NWOBHM,Early Metal, Power Metal, Thrash...........................)

Well that's certainly better than nothing. Seems the reviewing/recommending part will be up to the rest of us once the book is out.

I am shooting to be done in Feb2010

There goes the Xmas dollar

nightsblood · Post by **nightsblood** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:51 pm

Thanks for the update John

Re: Nightlock's post- good points, but it's very hard to come up with original-sounding descriptions in a book like Malc's or John's. There are only so many different ways to describe a band that existed for < 3 years and made one single

Malc's writing can sound repetitive, but I prefer that to some other metal books, like that fellow from Brave Words (name escapes me at the moment) who tries so hard to make his write-ups sound unique that they end up making little sense and become annoying to read (at least IMO)

TBH I'm kind of glad John's planning to keep the descriptions pretty minimal. Unless you happen to agree with almost all of John's opinions and tastes, the descriptions won't do you much good. What John considers 'brilliant' someone else might consider total crap and vice verse. I learned this lesson from reading Malc's book; I spent years tracking down a couple of singles that he described as top-notch, all-time legendary NWOBHM classics, and when I finally heard them I thought they were very weak. At the same time, he sort of writes off Witchfinder General

Keeping the descriptions very basic prevents anyone from making that all-too-common mistake; if you wanna know what something sounds like, you really must LISTEN to it yourself, not read someone else's opinion of it.
People may still disagree even with basic statements about style ("OMG! How can you possibly call RUSTEE NAYLZ 'early rock-metal' instead of 'trad US metal'?!?!"), but the style comments give you a decent idea of what to expect without implying whether it's godly, awful, or in-between