Jump to content

Vitne Eveille

Hot People
  • Content Count

    203
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Vitne Eveille

  • Rank
    Kisaki's Errand Boy
  • Birthday January 17

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.VITNE.net
  • twitter
    @VITNEOfficial

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Norway

Recent Profile Visitors

579 profile views
  1. Vitne Eveille

    In terms of the "elderly bandsman" mentioned above, I would imagine many artists have felt that way within various genres and subcultures. I imagine Motley Crue looked at some of the up-and-coming bands in the very late 80s and cringed at the overly flamboyant and derivative style of the late glam-metal bands. And oddly enough, it seems that when most people think of glam-metal, they think of that Poison "poodle" look, and not the Motley Crue "Shout at the Devil" look, which was actually toward the beginning. I'd say not many think of early X Japan when thinking of VK, but rather more of a band like Royz, as an example. Basically, it was just refreshing to hear this directly from Yoshiki, and I thought I would share that with you. Personally, I don't believe you have to look like a manga character to be VK, but there should certainly be that "essence of Japan" that is noticeable (but you certainly can look like a manga character). Just like to be glam-metal, you don't have to look or sound like Poison (as much as I like them), and you also don't have to be Steel Panther. Thanks for all the open-minded replies!
  2. The other day I met YOSHIKI. I was at a showing of We Are X in Oslo, Norway. Norway doesn't have a huge VK scene so I was happy he had come. It turned out to be his first time in Norway. I asked him "Can western bands be visual kei?" - He laughed and replied "Of course!" So I followed up with "If a western band is to be visual kei, is there something they must adhere to, in terms of style or aesthetic?" He explained VK is more of a mindset, born out of them feeling like they didn't really fit in anywhere. As he said, they played "super heavy" and "super soft" music. He also told me about a festival he hosted recently where the bands were everything from metal to pop, and there was even a band that didn't play music (that got some laughs around the room). He summed everything up by saying it really isn't a genre, but more of a mindset allowing yourself to be as creative as you want. And it also generally has makeup. I am summing these things up from memory. So here's my take on VK: 1. You must be influenced by Japan/Japanese music (because after all, it originates from Japan). 2. Make creative use of makeup/visuals. 3. Be somewhat diverse in terms of style. 4. Be doing your own thing confidently (basically: be true to yourself, because people and fans can see through you being a cookie-cutter). So basically, no you don't have to have a lolita in the band. One member doesn't have to wear a surgical facemask at all times. You don't have to have death-metal growls in your music. Some music fans within genres and subcultures get really elitist and that gets irritating, especially when people say that VK is only Japanese (so is glam-metal only truly American? Can you not make Brazilian samba music if you aren't from Brazil?). VK is unique in that it is vague but also has a meaning. A band alone isn't just "visual kei" but "visual kei rock" would be a better indicator. I think in that sense, the addition of the term "visual kei" before "rock" to me would indicate the above traits I listed, like being influenced by Japan, be somewhat "different" in terms of makeup/visuals and potentially have a diverse musical style. I had a blast meeting YOSHIKI. He's a funny and nice guy, and it was an honor having him in Norway.
  3. Vitne Eveille

    Yeah! Congratulations on 10 years! I only discovered MH maybe 2-3 years ago? I forget how, but it must have been searching something like "visual kei forum" This forum is probably the most fun forum I've been a part of. I'm also a member of a few other forums for other types of music, but none are really as welcoming and "not full of crap" as MH is. That's a pretty amazing feat what with the abundance of trolls roaming around forums. So excellent job on keeping everything relevant and generally pretty nice. This forum has also been quite helpful and receptive to my questions and polls As an artist there are things I wonder about people's listening and discovery habits and stuff, and many users of this forum have assisted me in my search for knowledge, at least on the VK/Jrock side of things. MH has been far more helpful than other places. I think it is the niche thing, because another forum (or FB group, really) has been quite good too, a glam metal group. Again, a niche. So thank you for the years, and keep up the awesome work!
  4. That's why I'm curious. I doubt it is in terms of being a legitimate musician, but some people seem to dismiss a solo artist simply because they are a solo artist. Well-said, thanks for the response!
  5. Some of his songs are pop and stuff, but I'd say many of his songs are rock. Of course, everyone's definition is different. But in this case I'm using him as an example because I feel like a lot of people seem to associate "solo artist" with "he just sings and plays guitar" - Enough people here should know what Gackt does, so I thought he was a worthy example Thanks for the reply!
  6. I'm asking this question out of curiousity. I've come across numerous people in the past who have told me they pay significantly less attention to solo artists as opposed to bands. But at the time I never asked why. How do you feel about this? In rock music, are solo artists just generally viewed as inferior to bands? Note that I do NOT mean a full-on rock band vs a singer-songwriter (singer and acoustic guitar). A good example of what I mean is a solo artist like Gackt vs a band like The Gazette. Generally rock-band style instrumentation, both of them. In some cases, I'm sure it is because that fan was a fan of that solo artist's band before they became a solo artist. Or maybe they just think bands are more interesting, or somehow more legitimate? Assuming a band and a solo artist are in the same genre, does this "bands are cooler than solo artists" idea hold any weight whatsoever, or is it just some strange stigma? I don't believe so, but I'm really interested to find out others' views. For example I love Gackt, but I have little interest in Malice Mizer. I love Motley Crue yet I also love Vince Neil's solo stuff. I'm a Billy Idol fan, but I'm not so interested in Generation X. Thanks for your insight!
  7. Haha, rey mysterio. I love the extremely vague description on the twitter account. And it joined Twitter in September, and still nothing. While I'd love to see Yoshiki and Gackt actually record something as a band (too bad SKIN never did anything other than that concert), I don't have my hopes up that this actually has anything to do with them.
  8. Yeah if it's related to something else, it makes more sense why it's being released separately. I'd love a brand new single though, ideally with an addtional b-side song, other than only the instrumental version of the single.
  9. Vitne Eveille

    Welcome to MH!
  10. Cool project! I really like the "Lay To Rest" song, and also "Dystopia." Especially "Dystopia." Apparently we were on the Decadent Society Volume 2 together! As for the singing, I like it! I think you've got a cool gothic-y voice. Don't let the haters get to you. You are on key, good pitch. I'm not much of a fan of most music with screaming, so I can't comment on the screaming, as that is just a personal preference. I've released a number of things now, and my earlier stuff, some of it I now cringe at my vocals, but some people really loved those albums. And some reviewers tore them apart. Some reviews were so bad they made me laugh! Whenever an absolutely awful review comes out for my music, I think of Motley Crue describing how all their albums up until Dr. Feelgood were just ripped apart by "professional" reviewers. They said they usually wouldn't even read reviews of their albums, but they also said that bad ones were great publicity. They said that they really didn't care what reviewers thought because it wasn't about them, it was about the fans. Especially on my first two albums that I sang on, I got a good bit of criticism on my vocals. I got a lot of "he's not using his range very well" and "he sounds bored". Largely because of that feedback, I've worked more on my voice, as I have a generally low voice. I've gotten much more confident over the years, so now there's not much criticism. But every once in a while there is. I try to take that criticism with a grain of salt, put it in my mind, and maybe work on that a little for the next song. But like Motley, for me its not about reviewers, it's about the fans. They are a much better judge of what you are doing. I'm by no means a guru on any of this, but I find that it helps to listen to the criticism, laugh and say "man, fu¤% that guy," think about what they meant, and how it could potentially improve your sound. Great work, keep doing what you are doing, keep pushing the envelope, and strive to get better at what you do every single time. If you try something and it sounds like crud, analyze the situation and get back at it. I'm gonna buy the album
  11. Vitne Eveille

    I wasn't aware of this until now. I'm going to go check it out! In terms of my response to the poll, I usually prefer songs to be left alone, MAYBE remastered. Then, adding on a couple of brand new songs. That's the type of Best Of album I love. However, this really depends upon if I was familiar with the band before the re-recordings were done. Maybe I find a band, listen to the "Best Of" first, come to enjoy that a lot, and then dive into their previous releases and versions....Maybe I end up liking the re-recordings better, simply because that's what I heard first. A lot of times when things are re-recorded though, I feel like they lose some of the original magic. A very specific case for me was Twisted Sister's re-recording of "Stay Hungry" called "Still Hungry". While it's interesting to hear them re-recorded, I really liked the originals better. There's something about the way those sounded at the time when they were recorded. Wild, uninhibited. But the newer versions sound more polished and less "alive."
  12. Vitne Eveille

    I don't care what anyone says, if the album comes out, I'm on it day 1. I'm super excited for the film coming in February (I think that's right) to streaming, DVD etc. Some of their newer songs are some of my favorites, especially Jade. I.V. is really cool too.
  13. Are all these songs removed? None of the soundcloud embeds are showing up for me.
  14. Pretty wild! He's certainly been busy
  15. Vitne Eveille

    I think the new albums sounds great, and I think Matt Skiba fits in really well. I think the production with John Feldmann is awesome, and it's great to hear them back more to their skate-punk roots. Good Charlotte's new album is pretty awesome too, also produced by John.
×