hi mana

//Take notice as to wether or not Pacifier really have the broadband
//appeal that real "rock'n'roll" bands of time have had.

Since you're asking us to compare, can you give us some examples to compare to please? I have no idea who you mean when you say "real".

I just heard that their playing the whole album on The Rock today. Nice move - means I can hear it, hope a friend has taped it (as I'd not do that myself of course) - then I can spend the $30 on another fine Kiwi album instead!

Well to put the stool Pacifier is sitting on next to that of say bands like SplitENZ, Crowded House would be silly. But by comparison (setting time and sound diffreences apart) to ones like "Dragon" one can been made. Dragon and the song "April Sun in Cuba" reached #2 in the US, beaten only by Paul Mcartney and "Mull of Kintyre" (One of his biggest Hits). Now that was REAL rock'n'roll music. But still Shihad/Pacifier, supposedly going strong now for over 3 years have not (in my opinion) smashed the NZ charts or even come close to denting any overseas.

Now you can try and say that its harder today to get "out there" BUT, would you be right? I think NOT!. Back in those days it was near impossiblle to get air time for Kiwi rock bands on Kiwi radio. So bad infact that stations like Hauraki were born. But, although not exactly easy today it still doesnt compare with difficulties of those times.

So please "Joe", do give your comparison a public veiwing?. Or actually, don't bother.

you've got a point there, i think pacifier will make an impact, but how much impact they make will be the interesting outcome of it all...
personaly i think they'll do well in NZ and Aussie, it comes down to just goin on the hard slog and makin themselves known

//But still Shihad/Pacifier, supposedly going strong now for over 3 years have not (in my opinion) smashed the NZ charts or even come close to denting any overseas.

-=> think about it on another level though alarmnzboys - is CHART sucess really what pacifier needs???... not getting that 'number one hit' or even getting into the top 20 isnt the end of the world - do you honestly think pacifier would STILL be going at it, now, if they cared so deeply for this kind of thing.
i mean, considering they've been going at it for a fair few years now, and they've built a pretty hefty fanbase, i would pretty much consider them to be succeeding at a pace that suits most [them included].
i reackon a band is like wine - gets better with age. i think pacifier still have a few more years left in them. they probably havent achieved the success [you're talking about] coz they're saving the best till last.

shihad are all good as a band(even though blindspott are way better)but they have made faults on each of there albums.On the general electric for eg they went over board with there computer generated effects and that distracted you from the music. You could say Shihad/pacifiers success is that for the last few years they have been the only good rock band in NZ, but then that isint true because they were also a success in Australia wich have many bands of high quality. Maybe we are all so use to hearing shihad/Pacifier on the radio on cds tapes etc etc that we dont appreciate them as much as we use to?

alarmnzboy

when you say something like this.....// "im a dedicated trance/HH/hi NRG addict" and your knowlege of whats going on in the new zealand music scene doesnt stem past what you here heard on the radio, makes me really question how you can say......// a talentless era of NZ Rock Music.

if you wanted a debate this is a good place to come, but you provided no backing to what you posted, which makes it quite obvious that you are uninformed, and just trying on a bit of a stir. really what you said is no deeper than saying pacifier and new zealand music sucks. bro thats not gonna go very far.

new zealand music is cool, you should take a look sometime, hell ill even take you if you want, (provided you dont bring the glow sticks ;)

peace see ya next week

// Take notice as to wether or not Pacifier really have the broadband appeal that real "rock'n'roll" bands of time have had.

You haven't heard the album at all have you?

// By trying to promote NZ bands to NZ fans you automatically commit murder.

Maybe it is just me but that makes no sense.
Trying to kill a dead cat with an invisible knife is hard work.

they must be real rocknroll cos dont you reckon jon toogod is starting to look a little like an aging rolling stone, who's been on the road taking all sorts of substances for years - thats what rock n roll is. it aint about good songs anymore // it never was, it's always been about a selfish lifestyle... if you want good songs tune your radio to classic hits!

I can see how alot of you would think that my own opinions are somewhat inept. And i agree that my opinions are based on sources that arent in tune with the band and its entirety. However i never claimed that my judgements were that of an informed listener. Only that i know what i hear on radio and the occasional discussion im privey too.

With that in mind i posted that which i did. The overall outcome i desired was not intended to be seen as:

// just another plonker judging the value of NZ rock by it's 'mass appeal'.<<<<-----Media based.

Instead, i was actually trying to find out wether or not Pacifier had the kind of support i thought fitting of a band with broad horizons. But on that note, i do realise that i got a bit heated and said a few sarcastic and unfounded remarks to which there is no justifiable reasoning to support. These remarks were intended to bring emotion into play. And they certainly did, very admirable if nothing else.

I noticed that my statement:

//Take notice as to wether or not Pacifier really have the
//broadband appeal that real "rock'n'roll" bands of time have had.

stirred up a bit of discussion/abuse. But, i still stand by it based on historical trends. Since rock'n'roll was born (cheessy :P), it had never failed to do one thing, "Catch People!". What percentage of people could honestly say they dont like songs like "U2 - With or without you" or "Pink Floyd - Dark Side of the Moon", not many. This is the kind of appeal i am talking about, in no way was it relative to air-play on stations like 91ZM. And yet still i have failed to see Pacifier attain this sort of magical control over first time listeners. Although i don't doubt that some/alot of people are caught by their music.

When i first heard the numerous tracks by Pacifier played on radio, and at work courtesy of manamana i was undoubtedly impressed. But not neccesarily motivated to get it. Something the bands of time have never failed to do.

Also, as i said earlier i am somewhat dependant on tracks being released in genre's like Hard House and Trance at the moment. But contrary to what you might think, or not, i have an extensive collection of albums from various periods along the rock timeline. So i do, cautiously, lay claim to having a developed (not neccasarily great) ear for the music. And it is based on this, that i maintain Pacifier as a band are not yet an icon like representative of rock music in NZ, but am condifedent they have potential (as long as the project themselves right).

Finally, i am astonished to see so many deidicated fans here with so many valid points and opinions on all aspects. And i think its a shame that to the uninformed Pacifier listener (me, and most other homebound drivers), i have been led by media and so on...to create an image of Pacifier that i see now to be grossly inaccurate. In turn leading me to suggest the band undertake a new direction on its promotion.

Good Luck Pacifier, although it looks like you are not going to need it.

Oh, and i bought the Good Shirt album today. Kinda nice bar one or two songs...

I still think "sophie" could have gone global :p

// All i ask is that for a moment you step outside of your circle, and look around. can they cut it?

okay, here are some non-hyped facts about shihad/pacifier

1. they were ranked #2 Australian band of the year a couple of years back - not bad for a band of non-australians. obviously someone "over there" thinks they have some talent.

2. iggy pop said that they were one of the best live acts he had ever seen. not a bad compliment to a "less than half decent rock band" from one of the worlds greatest punk performers. i wonder if alarmnzboys has seen them live?

shihad have attracted some of the biggest names in music production to work on their recent albums. you just dont get gggarth to produce your album if your talentless.

as posted before, faith no more (or their touring company - or both) invited them to tour. obviously someonel likes them there.

In terms of achieving commercial success, i hope they do "make it" in america. only because they have slogged their guts out in australasia for the past 12 years with little financial reward. its time they got to reap the rewards of producing such honest (non-sellout) music. a lot of top 20 bands in the usa are shit. complete commercial shit. but there is a discerning listening public sitting under the surface who will recognise good music when they hear it - this just may not be reflected in the billboard charts. commercial success does not have to mean being #1 in usa. it doesnt mean being on the cover of rolling stone. usa is a fucking big place - and doing "badly" over there can still mean becoming a millionaire.

i hope they get what they deserve. i just hope they come to mainland europe so i can see they play the new album live.

peace out.