Quote:
|
Originally Posted by xDxOxNx
First off, sorry I made a new thread about this, but I feel that this hasn't been said....and if it has, oh well.
Think of this from a more logistical perspective. If you were a band that spent thousands of dollars on the production of a new album....why on earth would it be a "decoy"? To pull one over on the fans so we can all be blown away by the "real" album? Haha, you got us!! Oh, wait! Didn't we all steal this album? Ok, so I guess Tool is saying that it is really ok for us to steal their hard work, oops...I mean decoy. Come on!!
The decoy theory is very anti-cost productive. Think about how much it cost to make this so called "decoy". The only way they could ever possibly regain their loss is if they actually release this album in May! Even if you don't think this is their greatest album, it still took alot of blood, sweet and tears to produce.
Don
|
It would cost literally nothing to leak a bunch of old material while potentially saving money through misdirection with people not having the real deal.
Is anyone else into recording music here? The production sucks on everything but vicarious when you listen to it on good studio monitors. Barassi would be fired for anything but vicarious on this. One of the comments i originally heard about the leak was that maynards vocals are to far back in the mix...they are because its remastered old recordings and that would have only been fixable in the mixdown.
Listen to the Pot at 4.34.. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4...that super straight cymbol hit...
danny could do that in his sleep now.
this isnt "the album"