|Music Music in General, Bands, Swap Stories, Swap Band Equipment, etc|
| ||Thread Tools|
|05-22-2017, 02:22 PM||#1 (permalink)|
No Effects, just cooler
Join Date: Nov 2008
Sitting at breakfast listening to music this morning. Thinking about how bands evolve in sound. Sometimes just getting technically better, sometimes moving into different genres all together. In some cases it works. Sometimes not.
I think the best broad example I can give of this is Linkin Park. Obviously it's impressive that they've managed to stay relevant through to 2017. Espically given they started as a Nu-Metal band in the early 2000s, and had a considerable break between their second and third studio albums. But as a fan, they evolved past my tastes after Minutes to Midnight (studio album 3).
I have other examples of this. I fear one of my favorite bands is heading in this direction.
This is getting long winded and almost more of a blog entry than a forum post. And I could go on..
Now a question. Have any of you ever experienced this? Or even the reverse? Where their older stuff makes you wonder how this is the same band?
|05-22-2017, 05:46 PM||#2 (permalink)|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Seems like most bands get worse over time. I figure when they hit success, they either try and milk that style for all its worth, or veer off trying to become technically better or more avant-garde.
Propagandhi got better over time. Failed States is awesome, but I don't like any of their other stuff much. That's probably because they made a style change that veered towards metal and away from punk.
Another one that improved is The Flaming Lips. Their old stuff really kind of sucked.
Last edited by russc; 05-22-2017 at 05:59 PM.
|05-28-2017, 02:59 PM||#3 (permalink)|
AKA Maggy Moo
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Orem, UT
Is Linkin Park still relevant? I haven't listened to the radio or mainstream music anymore. All I know is that their new stuff is garbage.
I've seen it go both ways though. My favorite band, Periphery, has gone through some pretty serious evolutions over their run, but IMO it's been good for them. Revocation, another favorite of mine, has gotten better as well.
I'm not a huge fan of the way Opeth went, though. Nor am I too hopeful of the new Sikth album coming out soon.
For the most part, I think it depends on why they're evolving. Sikth's downfall is that they lost one of their vocalists, who played a big part in the catchier/hookier parts of the vocals. The part the new songs are lacking. Periphery's evolution has been enjoyable for me because the music is still authentic. They aren't trying to stay relevant, they aren't trying to cash in, they're just making music because they want to.
|05-28-2017, 04:21 PM||#4 (permalink)|
Join Date: Jul 2006
here the issue with this topic. when do we allow band or person change style play. since if you keep play same style over and over it kind get stale or old for them. so band or person has to change style of play to challenge band or person. its hard choice to make and for fans to like. but to me if band does not challenge them self or person does not challenge them self.
pc steam handle chrisfallout666
|05-28-2017, 05:27 PM||#5 (permalink)|
It's a catch 22. Bands that stayed the same have really boring new releases. Bad Religion, Iron Maiden, Pennywise, Megadeth, Ozzy, etc. all consistently release new albums that all sound like their old albums, just without any of the edge that made their old stuff good. Sure, they haven't"sold out", but isn't being formulaic and uncreative also selling out? Basically knowing they have a fan base that will buy the same old stuff?
I hate Metallica, but i give them credit for reinventing themselves and staying relevant.
I think the best thing you can hope for is bands to break up in their prime and the members go on to contribute to other awesome bands over time. Even if it it's niche stuff.
|05-31-2017, 10:21 PM||#6 (permalink)|
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Brandon, Florida
I can't say that bands get worse over time. At least not most of them.
It's that once they're signed up and making money, things like touring take a lot out of them. Or they try to stay with the style that got them there when they should let themselves evolve or, conversely, decide that now that they're not struggling they can afford to experiment.
It's rarely worse it's just different. And the fans they made when they had their style at the start wander off when they change, and they don't pick up as many new ones that may like them now, but only know how they sounded to begin with.
On the other hand, once a band is signed, they're under pressure to release music. This puts them under a deadline and they have to make an album in a year, or two, or three. When that first album was the best of what they had built up, rewritten a dozen times, and refined in the local scene.