X Freaks Forum

News:

  • Welcome to the X FREAKS forum!
    Please read the rules :)
  • Please read and accept our Privacy Policy
  • XFF - Ad free since 2006 \o/

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - madrigal

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 6
1
General chat / X at its peak?
« on: April 30, 2020, 10:46:06 AM »
Greetings all from quarantine land!

I was feeling a bit nostalgic so looked up the X with orchestra concert on Youtube to listen to while working from home. This was one of the first live performances I heard with X when I first started listening to them some 15-16 years ago (I feel old). As I was listening I was struck by what a fantastic performance this was and it made me think... was this X at their peak? It's about half a year after Jealousy was released. I'm a big fan of Art of Life, but even that didn't sound this good live, did it?

You can find the concert here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERsYZOBa5nI

What do you guys think? Instead of discussing the decline of X, when do you think they were at their peak?

2
Can we at least agree that Jesushiki is our lord and savior?



I'll just leave this here: https://goo.gl/images/2F3pXm

3
Maybe we are just frustrated because after following the band for 15+ years, having expectations about their reunion being broken again and again by Yoshiki, losing money with cancellations and empty promises while a band which once had its value, was somehow important to us, became just a tool for Yoshiki autopromotion. We created high expectations with lots of announcements which turned to nothing while Yoshiki cancel concerts, postpone albums because he is too busy making drama on Twitter and travelling to promote a two year old movie about himself. Sometimes I read the news and think that hide was really THAT important on the band and Yoshiki has some hard times making the band work without him.

This. Paris 07, etc.

But, still, keep it civil guys, no need to be rude.

4
Albums/Singles / Re: "WE ARE X (Movie)" Original Soundtrack
« on: March 03, 2017, 03:41:00 PM »
Soundtrack's on spotify too! :D

And so is X Singles apparently?!

The remaster of AOL is actually really great! Does anyone know if the version on "The World" is remastered too? Made me kinda excited again!

5
Albums/Singles / Re: Songs that seem underrated, whether now or ever
« on: November 01, 2016, 12:06:01 AM »
I love Alive  :)

6
Other Projects / Re: We Are X Round Up/Mention of New Song
« on: October 15, 2016, 11:49:45 PM »
I am really anxious to see this documentary. I am hoping for a worldwide release, via any format, before the supposed X Day in March.

Nice to hear that they have recorded a new song for the credits. During the Summit last night, they played an acoustic version with Yoshiki on piano and Toshi.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4FKjFR-Y0s

Not too sure what I think of this song, will be good to hear a full studio version.

Side topic, it is quite excting / frustrating that there are snips of so many "new" ...("new"), songs floating around! Hero, Angel, Kiss The Sky, now La Venus...

... did I hear 'in the rain'?

7
The Concerts / Re: X Japan World Tour 2016 - X Day
« on: January 26, 2016, 12:07:55 AM »
My friend can't go after all, so I have a spare ticket in A2 if you're interested  8)

Possibly, I'll PM you! :)

8
The Concerts / Re: X Japan World Tour 2016 - X Day
« on: January 25, 2016, 09:28:06 PM »
I still haven't booked my ticket.. I supposed I should! I'm all in for a meet up too, but can't do Friday since I'm usually working..

9
General chat / Re: We Are X Doc Promo Poster Revealed!
« on: January 25, 2016, 09:17:38 PM »
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/we-are-x-sundance-review-858743     interesting review! Pretty much summaries the 'Yoshiki focus' which a lot of other people have mentioned.

The review talks about two members committing suicide, and calls MSG the culmination of years of reunion touring... Hmm.. The first is just wrong and the second makes it sound awfully smoother than it actually was :P (a shout out to all of us who went to Paris in 08...)

10
The Concerts / Re: X Japan Japan tour 2015
« on: August 19, 2015, 10:55:24 AM »
They're apparently also releasing the first single of the new album on Oct 23.

http://www.xplosion-online.com/?p=4787#.VdRShGDe_OQ

11
Offtopic / Re: Religion or whatever you believe in
« on: August 24, 2009, 08:56:52 PM »
First, about the "rejected gospels", at the time when the bible was put together there were a few gospels around of which many were written long after the eye wittnesses were all dead which doesn't make them very trustworthy. So what they did was to choose four gospels, that were all written when eye witnesses were still around, and have these as standards cause they were the most trustworthy. So really no "choosing of the ones fitting the catholic church the best". More like neglecting the ones written over hundreds of years after Jesus' death and resurrection. So choosing the most trustworthy.

You make a good point here. Many other gospels were rejected because they couldn't be trusted, but then the 4 gospels we know today were also not that believable as a source of facts. As always, anyone can find faith in them, if that's what you seek.

The gospel according to Mark, which supposedly is the earliest, was written (guessed to be written) around 70AD. This was followed by the gospels of Matthew and Luke, written probably sometime between 70AD and 100AD. And John's was probably the last one written, at the end of the century.

There is a high possibility that Mark's, Matthew's and Luke's gospels share a common source, or that the later two, were based partialy on Mark. The reasoning being that there are just too many similar passages. Either way, most people during the time couldn't write, so until the stories were written down, they were most likely passed by word of mouth. And that likely made the stories undergo small, but frequent alterations, until it was probably hard to tell what had been added, and what had not.

Also, if you think of it, the writers of these gospels were early christians, at the time that christianity was expanding. The whole point of the gospels was to inspire people to believe in Jezus and to join the faith. The tools of almost all religious writers at the time was to include symbolic elements, such as magical numbers, places, dates etc. The romans, whom the gospels for a large part were for, as that's the birth place of early christianity, were used to these symbolisms, from their own beliefs, and it's logical that when trying to teach a faith, you use the right words for your listeners.

Another last interesting fact: The 4 canonical gospels were originally untitled and anonymous until 180AD when suddenly they were given the names that we now know them by. So it's possible that some of the gospels may have been written by Jezus's actual disciples, but perhaps that too, is just to inspire faith.

The four gospels were actually used very early on by the early christians! What about them makes them not as believable as a source of fact? And just as with the rest of the bible they are not written as a collection of facts but as testimonies.

The writer of the gospel of Mark is according to the tradition the assistant of Peter (since he probably couldn't write as he was only a fisherman), and Mark himself is mentioned in at least one (don't know how many) of Pauls letters in the new testament. But writing the gospels were probably sort of a "plan B" since most of the early christian leaders were absolutely sure that Christ was to return during their lifetime - eg Paul.

The "small frequent alterations" are things I've never heard of but it's easy to imagine that such a thing could happen. Though most of the stories were passed on by the disciples while teaching and preaching and since a lot of people that were around Jesus still were around when the gospels were brought to use any big and vivid "alterations" would probably have been corrected by one of the christian leaders e g Paul who frequently wrote letters to the different christian parishes.

About the dates - they are very disputed and some things point on the fact that they are written earlier than you say. Which only makes it more likely that disciples and eyewitnesses were still around.

About how the gospels were written - can all to well have been affected by where where they were written and to whom it was ment to reach. E g I heard that the gospel of John was written to for the greeks - and that's just logical but has more to do with what style of writing you use and not the content of what you write (eg the beginning of the gospel of John talks of the word - logogs - a very important thing to the filosofical greeks). You don't write a children's book with buraucratic text and you don't write an instruction manual with children's lanugage - but you don't change the actual content.

But one must also take into concideration that the christians were persecuted by the romans, and trying to spread the gospel was a thing you did with a high risk for your life.

And about the names - I've never heard that they didn't get their names until then. I have heard though of earlier accounts of the names of the gospels so I guess that's disputable. But it's not that long a time though ca 100 years. And I guess the names of the authors weren't the most important thing, but at least there must have been a traditional knowledge of who wrote which!

12
Offtopic / Re: Religion or whatever you believe in
« on: August 24, 2009, 12:09:36 AM »
I really liked your stories, so thank you for sharing :)

And would you happen to have any sources regarding how many times the bible was, as you claim, rewritten? As far as I know that isn't common knowledge.

I've always been interested in history, so I have a few facts about this.
As previously said, the bible has continually been a tool, to mean and say what certain individuals wanted it to mean and say.

The first time a "real" bible was put together was only in 382 AD during the famed Council of Rome (under Damascus) where they decided what would go into the bible and what would be omitted. One of the big descisions was choosing which gospels would go in. The ones that were chosen, were obviously picked because they presented the "right" image of the church and Christianity. All the other gospels were rejected. This caused many of them to get lost (although by 382 some were already fragmented or missing) and it made the texts generally accepted as being less worthy and there were even times in history where citing certain gospels (such as the gospel of Judas) was a high form of heresy.

Throughout history the bible has been copied (often by hand), translated, rewritten etc so that nowadays there are many different versions of the bible floating around, that I'll just post a link with a pretty complete list of the editions. The most used being The Authorised King James Version, The New King James Version, The New International Version, and others. To be clear, this is about the English versions of the bible alone... If you were to include other languages, the list would be pretty impressive.

This last part in my opnion only. If people were to take the bible as a book with beautiful stories that can inspire faith in religious people, than that's fine. But if you take it literally, then that's when you start creating a lot of problems... The bible isn't a sience book and yet there are many people out there who take whatever version they have and truly believe God and/or Jezus said this or that. Not only does that create problems between them and people who aren't christian, but even christians end up fighting over who has the right words of God in their book.

I may be going a little far here, as I am not christian, and I don't mean to discriminate. But I really do believe that not thinking for yourself and just believing what you read, has been a base for many of mankind's stupidest mistakes.

First, about the "rejected gospels", at the time when the bible was put together there were a few gospels around of which many were written long after the eye wittnesses were all dead which doesn't make them very trustworthy. So what they did was to choose four gospels, that were all written when eye witnesses were still around, and have these as standards cause they were the most trustworthy. So really no "choosing of the ones fitting the catholic church the best". More like neglecting the ones written over hundreds of years after Jesus' death and resurrection. So choosing the most trustworthy.

Secondly, sure - mistakes can be made while copying books - but comparsions have been made between really old versions of the bible (from the old testament in caves in Israel if I remember correctly) and versions from a couple of hundred of years later and newer and newer, and they have found that the differences aren't really as many as you'd think! The were actually really good at copying books.

About how to read the bible. Different people have different ways of looking at this. For most people it has to be either a book of fairytales or a book of science. BUT, what mustn't be forgotten is that the bible is a book that is written to be read in all times. Not just 1000 years ago, but also today. If it had been written only to be read today it would have been written differently - and the same if it was ment to only have been read 1000 years ago. It's a book to be read by all kinds of people and therefore it's written in the way it's written.

Unfortunately, christianity has been used for peoples own interests and loads of bad stuff. The focus has unfortunately been taken from core of the christian faith more than once - which is not fair! Even though people have done bad stuff in it's name - the core is still the same. God himself came down as a man and died for our sins. Everyone of us are sinners in the need of God's mercy. Jesus Christ is our savior and the only way to God. Whatever bad has been done in the name of christianity - it's all really about putting your faith in Jesus that he will forgive your sins so that we may have new life in him after we have died.

13
X JAPAN World Tour / Re: X Japan in Paris - 10th October?
« on: August 23, 2009, 11:16:41 PM »
The studio version sounds much more polished. You can listen to a recording here: (for the moment at least)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9OMdznT74g

asdfsdsdasd...thanks for the link....<3<3<3

(p.s.....I kinda like the live version more...maybeXD)

This version is absolutely brilliant!!!!! SO GOOD. The harmonies are AMAZING. This is the best I've heard from X in... I don't know... at least the best since the reunion. Such a big surprise! :D

14
Albums/Singles / Re: Vote for songs to the X Japan Best Of album
« on: June 01, 2009, 05:23:06 PM »
Hey, hope we get a PV compilation with the album if it turns out to be a single disc album...

15
Albums/Singles / Re: Vote for songs to the X Japan Best Of album
« on: May 20, 2009, 05:19:31 PM »
I voted for Standing Sex,

Let's try to make this a real compilation, right?
Vote for the real songs! The great songs always forgotten!
How about getting Voiceless Screaming and Miscast on there too?

16
The Concerts / Re: Best Live versions of ALL songs?
« on: April 17, 2009, 05:03:56 PM »
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdNiCLi0_3g[/youtube]

a w e s o m e

17
YES! FINALLY!
I just luuve the Tears remix from TRANCE X and just can't wait for the trance version of Love Replica. Just wish they'd do ART OF LIFE too... :/

18
hide / Re: hide new Best-Of : We ♥ hide
« on: February 14, 2009, 10:25:29 PM »
Is it going to be a worldwide release?

19
Yoshiki / Re: New Yoshiki Jewelry
« on: December 23, 2008, 10:22:56 PM »
DUDE! He just can't be serious about that yourself jewelry... IS THE MAN BLIND?

20
Forum Games / Re: Things, that pissed you off today
« on: December 08, 2008, 08:32:53 PM »
What really pissed me off today is the fact that some people HAVE to hurry inside the bus, pushing and screaming acting like they're no older than 14 (sorry all normal people of the age of 14). AND WHEN THEY GET ON BOARD THE BUS THEY DON'T EVEN SIT ON THE FREE PLACES, THEY JUST PLUG THE BUS UP. Oh, I was sooo angry.

21
General chat / Re: What would you expect from a new album/ep/single?
« on: November 27, 2008, 07:25:03 PM »
Using old hide tracks would be cool, at least if it's a real guitar track instead of those noises in I.V., it was kind of false promotion saying that it contained unreleased guitar tracks from hide, sure it was from hide, but it was so little!

22
General chat / Re: What would you expect from a new album/ep/single?
« on: November 27, 2008, 06:48:45 PM »
Though it would still be only one of the songs, if there are new songs I'm sure they wouldn't just put hide rendomly in them, SCARS has the tradition of being sung by hide in concert, and it would really be great to have this semi-new version of SCARS on e.g. the JAPANESE BEST ALBUM whenever that's coming out.

23
General chat / Re: What would you expect from a new album/ep/single?
« on: November 27, 2008, 06:15:49 PM »
Today it suddenly struck me what would be really nice if it were to be released! A new edit version of SCARS that includes the spoken intro by hide! I bet they have some old studio recording of him doing it that they can use! It would really be nice and they could have it as a tribute to hide at the same time, since it would be the first time hide would sing a studio version of an X song that really with X and not his own version of the song :) Waddaya think?

24
Forum Games / Re: What was your last purchase?
« on: November 20, 2008, 04:22:52 PM »
Dir en grey - UROBOROS European Limited Edition :)
Not my latest purchase but it arrived today!

25
X JAPAN World Tour / Re: X Japan in Paris: Who's coming? Round 2
« on: November 10, 2008, 07:29:40 PM »
Nonononot going :)

26
Offtopic / Re: The Likely End of TheOtherEast.com
« on: November 10, 2008, 07:29:07 PM »
That's really sad!
But I do think you'll get back most of the old readers since they will try to find out what happened to the site, and the word will spread!

Good luck with the new site, I'll be sure to read it :)

27
Offtopic / Re: [NEW] X-FREAKS MEMBERS GALLERY !!!
« on: November 09, 2008, 10:44:25 PM »
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA IT'S SO REPRESENTATIVE x)))) I like the tights.

Oh, you have no idea! I wear tights like... like... all the time... ;)

Haha, when I tried them on the first time, the day before the photo I though they were so cold! So I told my friend (male) about it on the bus the morning after and he said: "Yeah, I know!", me:  :o

28
Offtopic / Re: What makes you proud of your country?
« on: November 09, 2008, 10:40:43 PM »
Lovely food we can call our own

OH SORRY WE HAVE NONE OF THOSE 8)

Smorgasbord, baby! Don't forget about the smorgasbord! :P

30
X JAPAN World Tour / Re: PARIS SHOW IS OFFICIALLY POSTPONED.
« on: November 07, 2008, 10:30:10 PM »
SWEEEEDEEEENNNN YAY!!!!!!!!! :D
IF THIS WILL HAPPEN I REALLY HOPE IT'S BEFORE I JOIN THE ARMY (if not I hope I can have a free day).

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 6