Jump to content

Metal Mayhem


Recommended Posts

I ordered a copy of Black Sabbath - Tyr from them. The product details say 1990...original release, yes? No...what I received is a cheap bootleg on International Records Syndicate, Inc from 1999. So now we know why they ignore emails concerning product details...fucking scam artists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stopped dealing with them when I paid for Flame's "Blaze" CD, which also said original, and it was a damn CDR. The two Danger Danger CDs I got from them (the two "Cockroach" versions) were both CDRs as well, and that wasn't listed either.

 

I will never buy from these con-artists again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have 4 Black Sabbath cd's issued on I.R.S. - Headless Cross, TYR, Cross Purposes and Forbidden. They were all purchased brand new/sealed at a Music 4 Less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Umm, it's not a bootleg guys.

 

http://www.bsnpubs.com/aandm/irs.html

 

See down at the bottom of the page where all the releases on the label are listed. Black Sabbath - Tyr is one of them.

 

Well, maybe not a boot, but sure as hell not what I ordered. In their catalog the year of release is listed as 1990. The ol' bait & switch.

 

Cocksuckers.

 

Plus, like I said...the version that I got is some kind of European reissue from 1999 called "Classic Rock Series"...NOT the original from 1990.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, maybe not a boot, but sure as hell not what I ordered. In their catalog the year of release is listed as 1990. The ol' bait & switch.

 

Cocksuckers.

 

Plus, like I said...the version that I got is some kind of European reissue from 1999 called "Classic Rock Series"...NOT the original from 1990.

 

Matt, you're a good dude, but I gotta say I think you're way off base on this one.

 

The album was released in 1990. When people list things, the majority of the time the year that is listed is the year the album came out, not the year of the specific pressing. If you're lucky, the seller will list both, but the information that 99% of people out there are looking for is the year of the album's release, not the year a given pressing came out.

 

You *ASSUMED* that the year given was that of the pressing, not the year of the album. If it was that critical that you not just receive any pressing of the CD, but instead a SPECIFIC pressing of the CD, you needed to ask before buying.

 

You jumped to conclusions, man... :)

 

-Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You gotta be kidding me. If this wasn't Metal Mayhem, I'd give the seller the benefit of the doubt & chalk it up to a misunderstanding. But listing the year of release as 1990, anybody would assume that this was an original pressing, not a reissue, & I'd bet anything that it's listed this way intentionally. And I believe their track record for answering emails has already been covered.

 

9 times out of 10 sellers list the year of the pressing, not the original year of release...at least that's what I've noticed on the stuff I've been picking up. It seems to be the rule rather than the exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing pisses me off more than paying decent money for a disc and getting a damn cdr in the mail. Happened twice to me with MM. Never again. I chalked it up as a lesson learned and moved on. There are plenty of better sellers out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ordered a copy of Black Sabbath - Tyr from them. The product details say 1990...original release, yes? No...what I received is a cheap bootleg on International Records Syndicate, Inc from 1999. So now we know why they ignore emails concerning product details...fucking scam artists.

 

Just my 2 cents but if I saw someone list a CD that said 1990 original release, then I would think it was the 1990 pressing just based on them saying "original" release. But if they just said something to the fact as "released in 1990", then that's different and I'd ask first if I actually cared about the pressing being sold. As a rule of thumb, I never take for granted what sellers say anymore because I've been disappointed several times in the past. There are a lot of sellers out there who aren't actually collectors and don't even know themselves they are misrepresenting a CD because they don't know any better, they are just doing their best to list and sell a CD, your common Joe Schmo doesn't usually care about pressings, they just want a copy of a CD. But in this case obviously Metal Mayhem should be in the know since that is their specialty.

 

I always ask up front if I want a specific pressing before bidding but I can obviously understand not asking and trusting an auction description just based on the fact that a seller is a well known seller with a very good reputation (such as Metal Mayhem).

 

But I'm not taking sides here since I'm obviously not involved in any of these transactions and haven't looked at the specific listings in question, I'm just giving my point of view based on my past experiences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ordered a copy of Black Sabbath - Tyr from them. The product details say 1990...original release, yes? No...what I received is a cheap bootleg on International Records Syndicate, Inc from 1999. So now we know why they ignore emails concerning product details...fucking scam artists.

 

Just my 2 cents but if I saw someone list a CD that said 1990 original release, then I would think it was the 1990 pressing just based on them saying "original" release. But if they just said something to the fact as "released in 1990", then that's different and I'd ask first if I actually cared about the pressing being sold.

 

Huh? I'm interpreting Matt's comments differently than you are. If the listing did indeed say "1990 original release" then yes, I think there's a valid beef. I'm reading the "original release, yes?" to be part of Matt's commentary, not wording from the listing.

 

Matt, can you provide a link to the listing so we're not guessing what was actually said?

 

Thanks,

 

-Dan

 

P.S. That's why I always provide high-res pics of the tray card back, so people can make their own determination if it's the pressing they are looking for, rather than leaving it open to interpretation...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ordered a copy of Black Sabbath - Tyr from them. The product details say 1990...original release, yes? No...what I received is a cheap bootleg on International Records Syndicate, Inc from 1999. So now we know why they ignore emails concerning product details...fucking scam artists.

 

Just my 2 cents but if I saw someone list a CD that said 1990 original release, then I would think it was the 1990 pressing just based on them saying "original" release. But if they just said something to the fact as "released in 1990", then that's different and I'd ask first if I actually cared about the pressing being sold.

 

Huh? I'm interpreting Matt's comments differently than you are. If the listing did indeed say "1990 original release" then yes, I think there's a valid beef. I'm reading the "original release, yes?" to be part of Matt's commentary, not wording from the listing.

 

Matt, can you provide a link to the listing so we're not guessing what was actually said?

 

Thanks,

 

-Dan

 

P.S. That's why I always provide high-res pics of the tray card back, so people can make their own determination if it's the pressing they are looking for, rather than leaving it open to interpretation...

 

Yeah...the "original release" is my commentary. It doesn't say that in description (doesn't say reissue, either, for that matter). Here's a link:

 

https://metalmayhem.com/shop/view_product.p...product=up00570

 

No pic (convenient, cause the artwork on this reissue is different than the original). Just says "Year Of Release 1990". Sorry, but I still take that to mean that this is a 1990 pressing. If it's a reissue from 1999, it should say so. At the very least, it's intentionally deceptive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Umm, it's not a bootleg guys.

 

http://www.bsnpubs.com/aandm/irs.html

 

See down at the bottom of the page where all the releases on the label are listed. Black Sabbath - Tyr is one of them.

 

Well, maybe not a boot, but sure as hell not what I ordered. In their catalog the year of release is listed as 1990. The ol' bait & switch.

 

Cocksuckers.

 

Plus, like I said...the version that I got is some kind of European reissue from 1999 called "Classic Rock Series"...NOT the original from 1990.

Its not a bootleg, its a standard reissue that can be picked up in any regular music store.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ordered a copy of Black Sabbath - Tyr from them. The product details say 1990...original release, yes? No...what I received is a cheap bootleg on International Records Syndicate, Inc from 1999. So now we know why they ignore emails concerning product details...fucking scam artists.

 

Just my 2 cents but if I saw someone list a CD that said 1990 original release, then I would think it was the 1990 pressing just based on them saying "original" release. But if they just said something to the fact as "released in 1990", then that's different and I'd ask first if I actually cared about the pressing being sold.

 

Huh? I'm interpreting Matt's comments differently than you are. If the listing did indeed say "1990 original release" then yes, I think there's a valid beef. I'm reading the "original release, yes?" to be part of Matt's commentary, not wording from the listing.

 

Matt, can you provide a link to the listing so we're not guessing what was actually said?

 

Thanks,

 

-Dan

 

P.S. That's why I always provide high-res pics of the tray card back, so people can make their own determination if it's the pressing they are looking for, rather than leaving it open to interpretation...

 

Yeah...the "original release" is my commentary. It doesn't say that in description (doesn't say reissue, either, for that matter). Here's a link:

 

https://metalmayhem.com/shop/view_product.p...product=up00570

 

No pic (convenient, cause the artwork on this reissue is different than the original). Just says "Year Of Release 1990". Sorry, but I still take that to mean that this is a 1990 pressing. If it's a reissue from 1999, it should say so. At the very least, it's intentionally deceptive.

I dont see anything in this thats wrong.

Tyr was released in 1990, which is all I read it as.

What you have to remember is most people buying CDs really dont care if its an original issue or a reissue, so to start putting in info like "reissue" would be pointless.

Simple fact is, if you want to know whether its original or not, email them.

If they dont answer, dont buy.

 

I have bought CDs off eBay and Amazon in the past, where I want specific issue, whether it be for specific track listings or covers etc, and before buying I have emailed them to check.

 

I really dont think Metal Mayhem has done anything wrong here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ordered a copy of Black Sabbath - Tyr from them. The product details say 1990...original release, yes? No...what I received is a cheap bootleg on International Records Syndicate, Inc from 1999. So now we know why they ignore emails concerning product details...fucking scam artists.

 

Just my 2 cents but if I saw someone list a CD that said 1990 original release, then I would think it was the 1990 pressing just based on them saying "original" release. But if they just said something to the fact as "released in 1990", then that's different and I'd ask first if I actually cared about the pressing being sold.

 

Huh? I'm interpreting Matt's comments differently than you are. If the listing did indeed say "1990 original release" then yes, I think there's a valid beef. I'm reading the "original release, yes?" to be part of Matt's commentary, not wording from the listing.

 

Matt, can you provide a link to the listing so we're not guessing what was actually said?

 

Thanks,

 

-Dan

 

P.S. That's why I always provide high-res pics of the tray card back, so people can make their own determination if it's the pressing they are looking for, rather than leaving it open to interpretation...

 

Yeah...the "original release" is my commentary. It doesn't say that in description (doesn't say reissue, either, for that matter). Here's a link:

 

https://metalmayhem.com/shop/view_product.p...product=up00570

 

No pic (convenient, cause the artwork on this reissue is different than the original). Just says "Year Of Release 1990". Sorry, but I still take that to mean that this is a 1990 pressing. If it's a reissue from 1999, it should say so. At the very least, it's intentionally deceptive.

I dont see anything in this thats wrong.

Tyr was released in 1990, which is all I read it as.

What you have to remember is most people buying CDs really dont care if its an original issue or a reissue, so to start putting in info like "reissue" would be pointless.

Simple fact is, if you want to know whether its original or not, email them.

If they dont answer, dont buy.

 

I have bought CDs off eBay and Amazon in the past, where I want specific issue, whether it be for specific track listings or covers etc, and before buying I have emailed them to check.

 

I really dont think Metal Mayhem has done anything wrong here.

 

Must be just me I guess from the comments on this thread. To me, I read 1990 as meaning it's an original pressing from 1990, especially since there is a reissue floating around. And I disagree that "most people" don't care about the pressing...at least the ones shopping at Metal Mayhem. They specialize in rare & out of print cd's...there website proudly proclaims "Metal Mayhem is your place to find those rare and hard to find metal CDs you've been wantin' to get your grubby little paws on." I'm just saying that if he's selling a reissue, the way it's listed is misleading...& I believe that's by design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ordered a copy of Black Sabbath - Tyr from them. The product details say 1990...original release, yes? No...what I received is a cheap bootleg on International Records Syndicate, Inc from 1999. So now we know why they ignore emails concerning product details...fucking scam artists.

 

Just my 2 cents but if I saw someone list a CD that said 1990 original release, then I would think it was the 1990 pressing just based on them saying "original" release. But if they just said something to the fact as "released in 1990", then that's different and I'd ask first if I actually cared about the pressing being sold.

 

Huh? I'm interpreting Matt's comments differently than you are. If the listing did indeed say "1990 original release" then yes, I think there's a valid beef. I'm reading the "original release, yes?" to be part of Matt's commentary, not wording from the listing.

 

Matt, can you provide a link to the listing so we're not guessing what was actually said?

 

Thanks,

 

-Dan

 

P.S. That's why I always provide high-res pics of the tray card back, so people can make their own determination if it's the pressing they are looking for, rather than leaving it open to interpretation...

 

Yeah...the "original release" is my commentary. It doesn't say that in description (doesn't say reissue, either, for that matter). Here's a link:

 

https://metalmayhem.com/shop/view_product.p...product=up00570

 

No pic (convenient, cause the artwork on this reissue is different than the original). Just says "Year Of Release 1990". Sorry, but I still take that to mean that this is a 1990 pressing. If it's a reissue from 1999, it should say so. At the very least, it's intentionally deceptive.

I dont see anything in this thats wrong.

Tyr was released in 1990, which is all I read it as.

What you have to remember is most people buying CDs really dont care if its an original issue or a reissue, so to start putting in info like "reissue" would be pointless.

Simple fact is, if you want to know whether its original or not, email them.

If they dont answer, dont buy.

 

I have bought CDs off eBay and Amazon in the past, where I want specific issue, whether it be for specific track listings or covers etc, and before buying I have emailed them to check.

 

I really dont think Metal Mayhem has done anything wrong here.

 

Must be just me I guess from the comments on this thread. To me, I read 1990 as meaning it's an original pressing from 1990, especially since there is a reissue floating around. And I disagree that "most people" don't care about the pressing...at least the ones shopping at Metal Mayhem. They specialize in rare & out of print cd's...there website proudly proclaims "Metal Mayhem is your place to find those rare and hard to find metal CDs you've been wantin' to get your grubby little paws on." I'm just saying that if he's selling a reissue, the way it's listed is misleading...& I believe that's by design.

The bulk of Metal Mayhems stock from my experience is a lot of new releases from the likes of Frontiers etc, despite their slogan.

 

As I say, I think of the population of CD buyers, and even the collectors, that worry about whether its an original or reissue is in the minority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Matt on this one. That listing is intentionally mis-leading. If you are buying the 1990 I.R.S. release, that is what you expect to receive. Not a 1999 re-issue. MM knows what they are doing. When I sell, I, at the VERY least, would list the cd as 90/99. 95% of logical human beings would understand that it is a re-issue just from that. I have never purchased anything from MM, and definately will avoid them now. That is just bad business. Plain and simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Matt on this one. That listing is intentionally mis-leading. If you are buying the 1990 I.R.S. release, that is what you expect to receive. Not a 1999 re-issue. MM knows what they are doing. When I sell, I, at the VERY least, would list the cd as 90/99. 95% of logical human beings would understand that it is a re-issue just from that. I have never purchased anything from MM, and definately will avoid them now. That is just bad business. Plain and simple.

 

 

I too agree with Matt. It looks intentionally mis-leading to me also. If MM didn't think it would matter to buyers if this listing was an original or not... then they would have just said that this is a reissue in the first place. It's not like MM doesn't know the difference from a reissue and an original. Sneaky wording if nothing else... really could have made the item more clear.

 

I also believe that a buyer needs to be very careful... But with someone like MM this kind of thing shouldn't happen, it could have been avoided if they had of worded the item honestly to the best of their knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Matt on this one. That listing is intentionally mis-leading. If you are buying the 1990 I.R.S. release, that is what you expect to receive. Not a 1999 re-issue. MM knows what they are doing. When I sell, I, at the VERY least, would list the cd as 90/99. 95% of logical human beings would understand that it is a re-issue just from that. I have never purchased anything from MM, and definately will avoid them now. That is just bad business. Plain and simple.

 

 

I too agree with Matt. It looks intentionally mis-leading to me also. If MM didn't think it would matter to buyers if this listing was an original or not... then they would have just said that this is a reissue in the first place. It's not like MM doesn't know the difference from a reissue and an original. Sneaky wording if nothing else... really could have made the item more clear.

 

I also believe that a buyer needs to be very careful... But with someone like MM this kind of thing shouldn't happen, it could have been avoided if they had of worded the item honestly to the best of their knowledge.

 

That's the point in all of this. Be as vague as possible so that you have people divided. Half don't care and are satisfied. The others call bullshit and misled by the listing. It seems to be worth it to them to take the chance that the first group are the ones buying. But the fact that they are so hard to get a hold of does make all of this seem calculated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the same way the Danger Danger "Cockroach" discs and the Flame "Blaze" disc were listed. No mention of CDR in the listings for either one. No response to my many attempts to contact them. That's just bad business. :hammer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been reading this thread and I have to say I can see where Matt's coming from too. Me - I couldn't care less if a CD is re-issued and that's the version I have. But that's not the point here.

 

Simply put, if I saw what Matt saw I too would assume it's an original 1990 release. When I got it and found out it was a 1999 reissue I personally wouldn't be bothered, but I can understand how some of you freakier (;)) CD collectors might be. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me the listing is very non-descript but does lead me to believe a 1990 pressing.

If I am looking for something in a very specific condition, i.e. original pressing, non-music club, no cut outs, no drill holes, no clipped corners, writing on inserts, etc. I always ask.

 

It has been backed that MM does not answer emails so I'll avoid them.

 

Someone made a good point above that the average Joe selling a CD is probably not intentionally misleading anyone. Someone who sells CD's for a living knows better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the point in all of this. Be as vague as possible so that you have people divided. Half don't care and are satisfied. The others call bullshit and misled by the listing. It seems to be worth it to them to take the chance that the first group are the ones buying. But the fact that they are so hard to get a hold of does make all of this seem calculated.

 

That's it in a nutshell. And this email I got pretty much confirms that:

 

"I am not trying to scam you at all. I have both versions of the TYR in stock and thought I would send you the import version as it is a rarer cd. I in now way tried to rip you off. I sent the order right away. I can send you the IRS version tomorrow or I can refund you through paypal. Let me know and I will resolve this."

 

So out of the goodness of his heart, he decided to send me the reissue instead of the original, claiming it's rarer?

 

Oh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Posts

    • Atlantis is amazing 👏  Was my album of that year 
    • A lot to like on this release but also some stuff just too light for me. 
    • What a honey Gudrun Laos was and what a Killer track this is!    
    • I didn't say I didn't like it. It's a good album, but I guess after years of reading folks praise for it I built it up to be something more than it actually was. 
    • We already know you're a leftist idiot! Known all around these parts!
    • How are you guys letting horrible songs get into your head???
    • I'm surprised you didn't like it. That's a shame. 
    • It's a mystery alright, although how the band could okay this for release is an even bigger mystery. Also find it intresting that all of the reviews I've read have failed to mention the bizarre mixing and mastering of this record, which kinda makes you question their credibility as rock reviewers.   This I don't agree with at all. The thing that makes H.E.A.T the awesome band that they are is that they've never compromised with their sound or felt the urge to follow trends. We all know that they've could have gone the Dynazty route, making hard 'n' heavy records, that would probably have made them an even bigger and more popular band with the masses. Of course that's not what the fans want, and they know that. We want H.E.A.T to sound like H.E.A.T - and I think they've done a damn fine job of that on this record. I don't mind a bit of experimentation, like on Demon Eyes, as long as it's the exception and a temporarily deviation from the trademark sound. As for bangers, I do think there are some here, but they're all ruined to some degree by the poor mixing job. No, they don't reach the awesomeness of let's say "Dangerous Ground" or "Rock Your Body" from the last album, but stuff like "Nationwide", "Not For Sale", "Hold Your Fire" and "Wings Of An Aeroplane" come pretty damn close. Being the AOR fanatic I am, my main criticism with this band is always that I want them to be more AOR, like on the first 2-3 records. If you're looking for a direction, then this record is clearly a distinctive step away from that. They want to be pure melodic hard rock and not AOR, I think it's pretty clear. Truthfully it's been evident from "Tearing Down The Walls" and onward, but Force Majeure makes it even more evident that no change in that direction is very probable.   If there's anything that this album doesn't lack, it's guitars. The guitars are so loud in the mix that Kenny´s vocals are drowning in them. The album is unlistenable with good headphones, you have to play it through speakers or earphones to make it somewhat listenable. Other weird little things about this record: CD is released in Europe as a f*cking digipak for some reason. Who's beind this strange and unnecessary decision, the band or the label? Also, no writing credits. You have to go to Discogs or Spotify to find out who wrote these tunes.
    • You need to know who you are before trying to figure out who other people are.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.