Album Rating: 3.5

but I sure know I wouldn't have been as keen on checking these guys out if their name was just TTNG

Album Rating: 3.5

also, people not buying their merch because of the potential negative connotations it could evoke around rednecks are not the sort of people that I would expect listen to this band anyway, so that point seems pretty moot to me

Adrian, band names / album artwork / etc. has an impact on all of us, whether conscious or not. I understand what you're saying, about how we shouldn't let names, etc. affect the way we view something, but those things do affect me.

Is there something wrong with being attracted to cool band names, or interesting album artwork? If you're going to argue you're immune to all of these things, then I have a feeling you wouldn't be entirely honest with yourself.

And I also understand that, but at the same time bands want as much support as they can possibly get. People do flock to cooler names - it's just how our minds work overall. Sure, we music critics may care more about the music, but the average Joe? He's going to prefer listening to a band called This Town Needs Guns over one vaguely titled TTNG, and these people do make a difference for a band that most likely has financial issues.

I def will be more apt to check a band with a cool name than one with a shit one, all things being equal. Its like if I see an album cover I really like I'll prob check that out. The music is first but those little things do come into play.

On the other hand if a band has a completely horrendous name like Gay For Johnny Depp I'll prob check em just for a laugh.

Either way TTNG sucks. Shoulda been This Town Needs Buns.

Album Rating: 3.5

well I would agree that it has an effect, but I don't think it's anything negative for me. I mean a lot of times I suppose I will be more inclined to check something out if I think the artwork is awesome (happens often) or the band name is cool (happens not very often at all). But it's only ever a positive reaction; I never let a name that I think is bad or some weird album artwork stop me from listening to something because I realize, consciously, that that would be trivial and illogical, so I just listen to the band anyway.



to recap: yeah I kind of agree with you, I'm just saying that this band having a different name would never have stopped me from listening to them.

"I def will be more apt to check a band with a cool name than one with a shit one, all things being equal. Its like if I see an album cover I really like I'll prob check that out. The music is first but those little things do come into play."

Absolutely. It's impossible for us to overlook these things, even if we value the music a ton.

Album Rating: 3.5

"and these people do make a difference for a band that most likely has financial issues."



I think you're overthinking this band's motives. This isn't some huge multi-pronged marketing scheme. It's preemptive damage control at most.

Aids, I do get what you're saying. And some of us, and probably many people on this website, know what they're going to like, regardless of outside influence. I just know that not everybody checks out TTNG because their friends told them about the band. I, for instance, found a Youtube video of them, which I clicked on because I saw the name and was interested.

And I love you too, but your initial comment came off quite hostile! Made me pretty confused.

what Aids said.

Album Rating: 3.5

wasn't trying to be hostile just starting discussion. I'm conditioned to be an asshole on this site, sorry (seriously), I just swear and say 'retard' a lot. It's pretty bad I need help.

"I think you're overthinking this band's motives. This isn't some huge multi-pronged marketing scheme. It's preemptive damage control at most."

I didn't mean to suggest the band changed its name because of marketing itself to as many possible. I just meant that their unique name has surely helped them to garner fans in the past, and they're losing that small opportunity based on the circumstances.

Album Rating: 3.5

you kind of implied that they knew they were doing this though, or that it was why the are doing it

"It's pretty bad I need help."
Agreed. You need to drink a cup of Jamaican Blue Mountain.

Also, one of the main reasons for them to change their name would probably be playing concerts in the U.S. - I mean, let's say you're playing a town of radical liberals and people are gonna be like "YEAH THIS TOWN NEEDS GUNS PLAYING TONIGHT!" They probably know that some people are way too sensetive/stupid.

And I definitely understand how that goes. I was a pretty useless user a year or two ago, to be honest, and was short with people much more than I should've been. But I know you're a chill guy, and even though your comment did throw me off, I wasn't too worried.

"you kind of implied that they knew they were doing this though, or that it was why the are doing it"

Well if that's the case then my mistake. It's clear enough that they changed it to avoid the gun control scandal.

abbreviations/acronyms as names remind me of ABBA and instantly undermine any musical credibility the band may have

That sounds more like you're an idiot.

Aids you're really telling me if you didnt know anything about Genesis or Emerson, Lake, and Palmer you wouldnt check out Genesis first? Come on dude come on.

What if Led Zeppelin was just called LZ. Even knowing how good they are now it just doesnt have the same fuckin power as LED ZEPPELIN. Everyone should like a good name, and it baffles me why some bands pick such horrible ones but I guess those are the people who think names dont matter.