What if a band records/mixes/masters an album, and "releases" it online, but hasn't, or perhaps doesn't plan to, do an actual physical release? Can it still be submitted? I'm not talking about promo versions or whatever, that's a different story. But I know that there are bands which have finished albums or demos and released them either by hand-made CD-R's or onto the internet, but either have no plans to do more than that, or are waiting to do a "physical" release until they find a label, have more money, build up more of a fan base, etc. It seems in that situation the album could still be considered to have been released, even if there aren't physical copies outside of CD-Rs or whatever, as it is still acknowledged as being "released" by the band.

I was just wondering as to the position of the metal archives with respect to these sorts of albums.

No, it must be released physically even if it is consider an official album. If it was released on a limited amount of cd-r's that is still acceptable, but a completely net based release is not.

The album can be added as long as the band is already on the archives. It cannot be the band's sole output. See Halford for an example.

Why the distinction? I understand that a promo is not the same as a real release (the Alestorm crap going on right now), but consider a band (or, as would more likely be the case, a solo project) which makes albums but has no intention of making pressings of them, or considers releasing them online to be enough?

I can't think of any specific examples of this, but I couldn't see why they wouldn't be considered legitimate albums, simply because they weren't released in physical form. After all, in this day and age, many obtain their music via the web anyway.

I'm not trying to overturn the rules; I'm just wondering if there was a specific reason this distinction has been made.

By Dawn Cursed is a band that only releases albums online (though he has not released any in a long time); they're released, though, with specific track lists, case art and so on. By Dawn Cursed has been here for as long as I can remember, so it's not entirely unheard of for a band to have web-only releases and be here on the archives.

I think it's mostly just a rule of thumb to discourage every 14 year old with a keyboard from adding his bedroom black metal project to the Archives that just put his demo up on Myspace.

Shouldn't that band be deleted then?

Perhaps, perhaps not. That's beyond my judgement and certainly not my call.

But I don't see how whether or not the release is physical adds to or takes away from the fact that it's legitimate music, that was written, played, recorded, arranged, etc., just like any other music. Electronic distribution is the newest medium, and while it may not replace CDs, or not completely do so, or any other possibility, it should be embraced to some degree.

Many rules on the archives seem to be more of a, as I noted, rule of thumb situation; it's up to the discretion of the person reviewing the band to decide if it fits or does not fit. As such, I would imagine some level of digital distribution is allowed, even if that is a band's only method of distribution; it's making the distinction between a serious musician and a fellow who has recently learned of the magic of this fancy thing called "Black Metal" and wants to get in on the action.

And of course, if these things are not judged on a case-by-case basis, that means that one such Myspace Metal band who burns a few dozen copies of his Craptastic Casio Creation would be regarded as a more legitimate band than someone who has been releasing their albums over the internet for years.

I can't think of a good reason why a release needs to be physical in order for it to be considered legitimate. A CD is just one way of disseminating media; the internet is another. Who knows what the standard format might be in the future? As long as a collection of music is recognized by the band as an album, and has been approved for public consumption by said band, I don't see any reason why the form of consumption must be some kind of physical media rather than electronic.

No, oan online release will never replace a physical release in the eyes of collectors. The value of such releae is zero, it may help you to discover a new band, but not much more. Nowadays, everybedroom noise bands can claim to have twenty albums online with their stuff. Physical release is further step, which gives a bad more relevance. The rule 7 is clear and exclude a bands which plan to releae something but have not done so. The rule will certtainly not change, if anything, it may become even more stricter. The decision was made a long time ago to use the criterium for the relevance of the band.

Are you aware, that every myspace band can claim their four downloadable songs to be a "demo".
What a total loss of values and artistic integrity in music, not just in metal.
How many of such ainternet only bands have made a lasting impact on the metal scene or a timeless work of art worshipped by all? I cannot think of any.

New formats may can, but for a long time, they will stay physical, since especially metal fans want to hold something in their hands, look at great covers, read lyrics, see rare photos etc.

If such bands were admitted, the rule 7 would have no value and all bands that play reasonably metal could be admitted or argued, with or without releases.

Napero posteda great explanative article here on the forum some time ago, so when you ask him, I am sure he will re-post it.


This is nowadays placed in the submission queue:

The band must meet our requirements in terms of musical style: in other words, be "metal enough";
The band must have already possess a physical release: in other words, a valid proof of its existence.
With a link to rule 7.
http://www.metal-archives.com/newband.php

So in short, it is one of the fundamental laws of the site, which are not supposed be questioned, so please stop it. It will not change, plain and simple.

And to accept a band, because they say they will release something physical soon is a way to hell and would open a door to to total chaos here.
There were no such rule when the site started, but soon enough the owners have recognized, to which ends it may lead. And you would want the site to return back to the problematic early stage of development.

Quote:
"....are waiting to do a "physical" release until they find a label, have more money, build up more of a fan base. "

In Other words, will gain more relevance to fans and the scene, which is EXACTLY the point here.

The criterium is an objective one, unlike the subjective musical quality, trendiness, outfits or age, which are all things, because of which many confused kiddies demanded to take valid bands off the archives.


"Myspace Metal band who burns a few dozen copies of his Craptastic Casio Creation."

Such band is not metal at all, to begin with. I have told in another thread, the "Just a piano and a handful of dreams" bands cannot be considered metal at all, even if they claim to be the most satanic obscure bands on earth with ultra grim logo or something like that. So the criterum is already used for bands that are reasonably metal.

Did you see this Witcher? http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=17228

That band shouldn't be on the archives it even says right on their page that all of the releases are online only.

Neither this one (side project of the former):
http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=20771

Yes, it was decided to keep this band and Moon O)) and watch their development, since they were accepted in a time, when there was no such strict rule (unfortunately). At least Moon O)) seem to plan to release a CD-R soon.

By Dawn Cursed lasting inclusion is quite discutable, you are right.

"New albums are added every couple of months."

Moon O)) is no longer on the archives.

edit: They are still here.

This By Dawn Cursed band should go , but more mods should agree on their exclusion, since the band member will surely protest - he links to the reviews here on his page. I still vote for their removal, since there is absolutely no intention to make CDs or tapes in the future, unlike Moonn, who are kept only because they were allowed under different rules and have such plans.

Moonn is still here : http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=17098

The band was called Moon D))), not Moon O))) and is here as Moonn: http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=17098

edit: DAMN YOU, DUST666!!!!

That explains why I couldn't find them, I was searching for the name with an O)) as Witcher's post said. One small mistake leads to another. No big deal, but thanks for pointing it out guys.

Witcher, thanks as always for giving a clear elucidation of the reasons for the policy.

However, I disagree that relevance or fan base should be a criterion for entrance onto the archives. First of all, the number of fans or scene relevance has no bearing on whether or not they classify as a metal band, so as long as MA is intent on documenting all metal bands, this shouldn't matter. Secondly, scene relevance or fan base does not necessarily correlate in any way with a physical release. For example a band could have released many albums, but have few or no fans or relevance, or a band could have released no physical albums, but have legions of fans who love the music.

I understand the intent to prevent a legion of bedroom/myspace bands from invading the archives, but it is a different story when a band has actually produced an album, however chosen to release it in an electronic rather than physical format. Does this make it somehow less of an album? You're totally right about an online release never replacing a physical one in the eyes of collectors; however, I don't see the logic in collector value somehow corresponding to an album's validity.

The collector value certifies a value of the release, the physical release cwill always have a bigger value as a piece of supreme, complete art than an online release. Yes, in my eyes ad in eyes of other, online mp3s will never be considered real albums, just becuase of that you could lump together some songs from a band's history and release them online as a an album, still it will not be valid release with all.
Some user here on forum was suprised to see Psycroptic logo, logo of his favorite band, because he just downloads everything, those are the sad results of that.

The physical releases makes the music "carved for eternity", with all accompanying fixed visuals, lyrics and photos and therefore it is a valid criterium for relevance.
A sculptor needs also some material to capture his visual idea, without it, it would be just a thought.
This online trend can get the music to more people, but at the same time, sets the level of aristic aspiration and integrity damn low.
If the bands do not understand that, their bad, those who have music of a higher quality will recognize it sooner or later - the others - no loss.

You do not have to agree with that rule, but that is the only thing you can do abou it. The rule is rock solid and not to be questioned. You or others have no chance to change it for the extensive reasons given above. So please, stop trying.

By the same token, there are a few inconsistencies with this notion, I think.

A number of bands have seen fit to release an EP or something similar through a pay service such as iTunes; should a band elect to do this for their first official release, should they be disregarded?

Just the same, if, for instance, the fellow behind By Dawn Curse suddenly decides to print up 50 or 100 CD-R copies of his album(s), this would make the band able to stay in the archives, correct? If so, isn't that a pretty flimsy system? Given that the music stays the same whether it's an Mp3 or a CD, I'm somewhat puzzled as to why someone should go from being a nobody on the internet who gets no acknowledgement to an acceptable Metal band simply because some CDs were burned.

That is to say, By Dawn Cursed has released a number of albums, many of which having themes and so on that indicates the songs on the "album" do, indeed, belong to that single album; for instance, "Corrupting the Dream" has an entirely different style from "Cataloguing the Demons Part I"; yet both still have a degree of professionalism, despite rough production. Though the website has since fallen into a state of disrepair with few updates, in the past, he has expressed that he has no desire to charge people money for his music, and as such, makes it in such a way that it costs him no money.

Given the lack of updates on the website, we can potentially even reason that he has created CD-R copies of his albums for friends and family, and if so, would this not constitute a physical release? It seems to do so well enough for the wide array of Black Metal bands who press 33 copies that they give only to their dog (and of course, I realize that the policy here on the archives is typically that precedents and such are of no use).



This was the case, back before personal problems apparently began to plague the musician behind By Dawn Curse. If you'll notice the webpage, there are 6 releases in 2004, 4 releases in 2005, etc; and if you download them, you will see that they are not a collection of oddball songs thrown together with an album title, but they have themes that run through them and tie them together as an album, such that shuffling them in with other albums would sound very strange indeed.

The point is, I feel that, like many things on this site, these bands should be judged on a case by case basis, rather than a sweeping rule that says all bands with electronic releases only can not be allowed. Indeed, a group of files will never replace the value of a CD or an album for a collector, but not everyone is a collector, and some would dare to even say that the notion of a CD collector is one that is slipping into the past, slowly but surely (even if CDs themselves may never be phased out).



As I noted, if you listen to By Dawn Cursed's releases, you will note that there are distinct differences in production, style, musical themes, etc, in every release.

However, I think saying that a physical release will have a bigger value as a piece of "art" than an online release is up for debate. Continuing with the presented example of By Dawn Cursed, we have a man creating music to express himself, and then releasing that music for all to hear without scrutiny or charge - is this not more artistic than many Metal bands which are almost completely soulless and manufactured? To judge the worth of a release, and to define a release, through the eyes of a collector alone, alienates a large amount of people - many people are not collectors and do not wish to be collectors.

Furthermore, many forms of art in this day and age are not cemented through physical releases - digital art is increasingly on the rise and can not be ignored simply because it may not come in the form of a print, if you ask me.



Indeed, we may have no chance to change it, and maybe we are not trying to change it; but I should think that an alledged "rock solid" rule should have considerably fewer holes in it if it's going to be such a rule. Though, don't mistake this as me pressing the issue, as I began to type this reply before your's was posted and am simply too lazy to erase it.

Yes, in the moment he releases a Cd-R, iot becomes acceptable.

There are no loopholes, the criterium is currently the same for all bands, which would not be the case, when it was judged on the cae by case basis.
Then we could accept really every band that is musically metal without choice.

It would create even more loopholes, hysterical reactions from musicians and nconsistencies that there are. It would be a best way to create something ass problematic as the side project rule.

And do not come here with digital music popularity. The people, who take metal seriously and are the backbone of the scene, will always prefer the real stuff.


If a band decided to release their first demo on the net only, it will be rejected, when they released a CD-r later, they will be accepted. Simple as that, there is no inconsistency in it.
Child porn is also becoming increasingly popular thanks to internet, but is such development healthy, welcome or socially valuable? I doubt that.

It is interesting, that most of the recent posts on the forum call for weakening of the rules, allowing more non-metal stuff or tolerating blatant disrespect of the rules by new users. Not even one about strengthening the rules, except for one or two posts in the metalcore thread. Think about it.

If there ever will be any change in the rules, they will only become more stricter, NOT the other way.
-------------------------------------
Given the lack of updates on the website, we can potentially even reason that he has created CD-R copies of his albums for friends and family, and if so, would this not constitute a physical release?

Certainly, that is why am I asking about him here.

Witcher, being here for longer than you, I fear I must contradict you somehow. Up to a couple of years ago, this site was quite favorable towards digital-only releases, including the admins and some mods (myself included); it was only with the MySpace boom that we had to reconsider it. So I see it more as a necessary compromise than a fundamental law.

I do not consider myself a collector (for starters, I lack the money for that), but I've met quite a few of them. There was this guy who believed vinyl was the only real deal, and only if it's from the original pressing! Most others are tolerant towards CDs, but many do not accept CD-Rs are valid releases.


To be honest, I believe sooner than we might expect we'll be forced to rethink that rule, as it will become impossible to further ignore the relevance of digital-only releases. IMO the biggest transition was already made in the late 80's, from analog vinyl to digital CDs. Removing the plastic that wraps up the bytes is only the next step.

That would mean loosing the releases as such, an album, would consist only of anonymous soundfiles, I for one hope that it will never come to that.
It would mean, that 1000 of bands that do not interest anybody, who has not left any lasting monument of their work would be accepted. The bands that rely on downloads only and have bigger goals with their music will recognize it sooner or later. Sorry, but that would mean a big decrease of quality and integrity for the site.
Sincer it was integrated to the written rules, it is an integral rule, there is no other way how to interprete that. The change was done in favour and for better quality of the site, not otherwise.

There would also be no valid criteria how to decide - should a crappy photo like a cover be enough? Two mp3, 4, 5 or at least six?

Cd with booklet for download or just a high quality front picture?
We would become lost in that.
If it would came to that scenerio, every sixth class unimportant band could claim having an extensive discography consisting of ten 3-song demos. Is it the desired stance for the site?
Look at this, it has no physical releases, but two albums with covers for download and the music is still indentifieable as guitar based metal. Would it be really desired to have the archives full of such bands and releases?
http://traktoroth-horde.tk/

Look at this, the members of this Czech band are far from being millionaires, but still they release their demo as a self-produced CD:
http://www.rainshadow.wz.cz/pages/main.htm
According to you and others here, they did not have to, they would find an audience and fans even without it. Or maybe not??

There was a discussion on the new media on the general forum, which was pretty useful, I cannot find it now somehow, so it would be very appreciated if someone could find that link.

Yes, it was the myspace boom that opened eyes of many...

Let's leave this discussion to the future, for now the rule is fine the way it is.

Perhaps you're less cynical than me concerning the current metal scene. IMO it has been going downhill for almost fifteen years. Which's way before mp3s and Myspace, so there must be something else to blame.

The way I see it, the chances of finding a worthwhile internet-only band, though rather slim, are actually higher than finding one in the Century Media or Nuclear Blast roster (other than the oldschool blockbusters, of course).

For the time being, allow me to clarify that By Dawn Cursed was and is an owner-sanctioned exception of sorts, and so the rule is not, in fact, absolute.