|
Let me preface this by saying there will be an actual question ...or three at the end of the post. Also, this is my opinion. I'm not here to insult you if your opinion differs from mine. It's just something I noticed. Oh, and it's quite long.
So today I realized that Linkin Park had a CD that came out after Minutes to Midnight. MtM made me so sad that I stopped paying attention to the band I liked. It was like what happened with SC2. Waiting nearly half a decade for "a sequel" and then being sorely disappointed and curling up in a corner to be totally miserable.
I figured I'd give A Thousand Suns a shot. With an open mind I went and listened to the album from start to finish to see where they went with the relatively quick release after that wait for MtM. In the end I assured myself it couldn't be worse than MtM anyway so it can't be that bad.
Apparently I was mistaken. I'll just say that I do indeed like deep lyrics and content in songs....however, the way the lyrics are presented is still important to me. If I don't like the presentation I'm not going to like the songs.
I didn't like the presentation. Actually, I hated the presentation with a burning passion. I was so shocked at what I heard that I had to remind myself that I was actually listening to LP. In fact if you listen to say...a classic like "In the End" to any of the new stuff you'd be hard pressed to see a resemblance in the sound of the band at all.
Now instinctively I know and believe that LP are their own band and they have the right to change the music how they see fit. I also know that even in the "glory days"...and I use that term very lightly...of LP they were a band people either really loved or really hated. I really loved HT and Meteora. I really hate MtM and ATS. That should be simple in theory.
I read a few reviews of ATS to see what everyone else thought. As expected most of them were negative.
It was the positive reviews that caught my eye though. Not that their opinion was different but how they justified that their opinion was different.
Unsurprisingly people that like MtM generally like ATS. One positive review of ATS went to so far as to say that MtM was one of the most under appreciated rock albums of 00...and that it deserved to be named one of the best rock albums of the decade.
Regardless of that they all had one common theme. That "former" fans of LP don't like the new sound because LP grew up and the "former" fans did not. LP obviously had to get out of the angsty teenager phase, and experiment with more forms of music to advance the band to a new level. Only "true" fans can see the absolute brilliance of the new direction LP went and that the haters simply don't understand the lyrics.
Whether that's true or not is completely up to debate. However, am I the only one that finds such an explanation insulting? That the only possible reason I don't like such a DRASTIC change in sound is because I never grew up? Is it really so impossible to not like the new sound of the band because well...you just don't like the way it sounds? Does this also mean that I was never a true fan?
I find it odd that "true" fans must stay fans forever regardless of whether or not you actually like the music the band produces. Let's be honest here, whether you like LP now, before, never, or always...the band has fundamentally changed the way they sound. You can scarcely recognize them now from what they were before. To some, this won't be a problem. To me, it sure as hell is.
I understand the lyrics. I understand the message. I understand what LP was trying to do. I hate the way that it was all presented.
This means that I haven't grown up?
Apparently I'm missing a thread somewhere.
The whole point of this is me wondering whether people actually believe that explanation or not. Is it some sort of bullshit last ditch effort to mask their own distaste? I have no doubt that there are some people out there that genuinely like all four albums. I also have no doubt that there are people out there that believe MtM and ATS are better than the first two albums. You can see this completely polarizing view fans with other bands too. Lostprophets are a PRIME example. The same band made Rooftops and Shinobi vs Dragon Ninja after all. Yes this threw me for a loop too. Do all opinions, likes, or dislikes have to have some hidden scheme to valid?
I wonder why people can't have opinions for opinions sake. Why is it that others believe there has to be some ulterior motive for EVERYTHING?
When I smoked I smoked because I wanted to. I didn't give two shits whether my friends smoked or not. I liked to do it, so I did it. Nothing more.
However, I was constantly told that the only reason I smoked was because others did it. The fact that I enjoyed doing it was completely irrelevant...I smoked because others did it, period. I was hopelessly addicted to cigarettes and smoked because I HAD to. Not because I enjoyed it.
It links up to the whole music thing. I can't just not like the music. The only reason I don't like the music is because I don't "get it" and not because I just don't like it.
Why is that view so prevalent? Did free thought and will die during my short lifespan? Has it really gotten to that point and I just missed it?
P.S. I have since quit smoking. Heavy PT at the Popo academy + smoking isn't really an awesome combination.
|
To the first half:
This is the typical "the new things of x are worse than x's old things"
You can apply it to everything. Mostly to video games or music i guess.
A new album from an artist is always worse than the old albums.
The new pokemon game is always worse than the first one.
I dont know why everyone is saying this but i hate it so much.
Everytime i see someone saying things like you did i just think its stupid.
Are you all just afraid of something new?
Of course it can be true sometime but 99% of the people say that new things are worse than old things.
Dont buy/get new things then and stop complaining, i cant stand it anymore.
|
It's the same thing that happens to every band, you need to change the music you produce or you will go mad.
Perhaps they changed the things you liked but for someone else they removed nothing of importance. As Afasi & Filthy says, "hard to continue forward in life when you're walking on you're standing on your head".
Now, saying that people that continue to listen to the old stuff is immature is of course riddicolous.
|
I think I know what you mean. Every time some people tell me why I do things, I tend to get mad. Really mad. I know of course, that they only do that because it makes things easier for them and the general consensus seems to be, that actually having to think about the things you do or say is evil. If you're anything like myself, you'll immediately try to reason, that you do X because you simply like it and you'll then get trolled heavily for that and noone will believe you. I fear it's just as things are. I completely stopped telling people what kind of music I like because of things like that. I just listen to what I like and (nowadays) try to not give a darn about what others think of it.
On a side note (though these are vastly different types of music): There is a huge difference between experimenting with your music as a band and all of a sudden changing everything that got you originally into their sound (which I believe is the most common source of "old > new"). If you're into that kind of stuff, check In Flames and Dark Tranquillity for example. While DT's sound changed a lot, it didn't part from its original feeling imho, and I dig every single album of them. IF on the other hand just decided that emo is cool and basically changed everything they stood for in the course of two albums. People tell me I don't like them, because I don't get the meaning of their new music. Maybe. I don't actually want to, because I don't like it. At all.
|
Wow that was a great read. I must agree that this "ulterior motive" tendency in human judgment that you're talking about can create some sad results.
I feel it stems from the core nature of how people perceive the world: contextually. We see colors as relative to our range of visual memories, not as visible spectrum light in a certain predefined wavelength range. We define and disseminate our world in words, which are themselves defined by other words. Even as we form metrics that are absolute, as in number theory or mathematics, we cannot escape the fact that every idea we harbor, such as a number, is intimately connected with some other, such as the notion of countability.
Judging a target is defining it internally, and every man's definition will be shaped by the ideas that he holds, absorbing the unknown content like the polyps of a sea anemone wrapping a clown fish. So while you and I can detest frameworks such as the notion of fandom in judging any given piece, we too are chained by our own assumptions.
Anyways the sad result here is that the reviews you take issue with go so far as to assert but one reason why anyone detracts from the albums. It's a silly notion with arrogant scope that's barely relevant to reviewing the albums themselves.
EDIT: To specifically talk about music, works, especially in contemporary music, are conveniently categorized by artist, album, genre, etc. which almost hand-holds us into contexts by which we judge bodies of music. We already judge by comparison, and it only follows common sense that the best comparison is to something similar. So we compare albums to other albums, often of the same artist, assuming expectations that they are of the same genres.
|
I think this all have to do a lot with beliefs and liking.
I guess everyone has a set of beliefs which he assumes to be right. For example one can believe that it is sufficient to apply common sense to all kind of problems or that it is right to believe in God (regardless if he actually believes) or that some kind of music is superior to another or that smoking is bad.
There are some fundamental axioms in each person that are not to be changed by any reasoning but can be altered by experience.
As you pointed out you found some reviews of MtM which implied that not liking it means not able to understand some things. They may try to put in a logical way but I think it is still just expressing taste of a group of people. I, for example, have developed some reasoning "proving" that all music is inferior to classical/serious music. Even though those points I made seem true, they must contain some of those axioms (which are unique to each person). And because the sets of axioms differ from person to person, there are a lot of different tastes and views of beauty and art...
What is the most important thing is to respect others although if they seem to have different beliefs/tastes.
As with that smoking. One can be strongly convinced that it is bad and that it smells bad. The only reason for your starting smoking he can accept is because your friends already are smoking.
(The other thing is that I cannot respect someone who is smoking and forcing me to breathe that smoke too.)
This all is just my opinion. I hope it is comprehensible...
Edit: grammar
|
people suck, you're learning!
however, what I'd like to know is when did LinKin PaRk get out of the angsty teenager stage??
|
I used to love Linkin Park because it was so teen angst-y.
And then they really changed around their music into something different, and I personally didn't care for their transition either. So you're certainly not alone in that regard.
But the whole "true fans are always fans" things is nonsense. You can still be a fan of "Old" Linkin Park. I still listen to Hybrid Theory and Meteora. I tell people I like their old stuff but not their new stuff, if I'm asked "Do you listen to Linkin Park?" I'm a big fan of their old music, and so I still consider myself a fan of theirs.
Our tastes change over time (we mature), so there was always a chance that we would stop listening to the music we used to like. But new LP music is definitely not the same as old LP music anyway.
You can be a fan of something or someone to any extent or degree that you see fit. Don't think that you need to absolutely adore everything about a group or person or else you're not a "true" fan. And you're always allowed to have an opinion, as long as you can defend it 
|
On March 09 2011 21:31 MasterReY wrote:
A new album from an artist is always worse than the old albums.
The new pokemon game is always worse than the first one.
I have to disagree.
During all the time that I've actively followed bands now, only the bands that stopped making music entirely because they love it began to suck. Somewhere down the road, even the most "for real" bands seem to lose at least a bit of their passion and start doing music because in the back of their mind there is this voice that tells them:"You better stop taking a break right now, you gotta start making more music or otherwise you'll be broke sooner or later". Either this, or something that happens more often, is that the people within the bands simply change over time. A band of 5 or 6 people doesn't make music together for 5 years, then they come back together and all of a sudden they're simply totally different people, with different ideas, and different notes coming out of their fingers when they play music.
It happened to most of the bands I liked. But there are exceptions. They are very rare, but when you see them you immediately know why it didn't happen to them too.
Trent Reznor , more or less the sole mind behind Nine Inch Nails, for example, didn't disappoint with the exception of one or maybe two albums (and even that's questionable) whenever a new one came out. That's because he really dedicated himself to his music for prolonged periods of time, experimented a lot, and discarded a lot of musical pieces until he assembled something that sounded worthy of being put on an album.
When you listened to interviews of him during the time a new album came out, he always sounded very passioned about creating something that's the best he can possibly do. He is also a known real nerd, and spends months inside his little lab experimenting with all kinds of sounds, just drowning in music. (by the way, if you're interested, Ghost I-IV is an instrumental masterpiece of more than 30 pieces and a result of one of those lengthy sessions, feel free to "pirate" it, as Trent Reznor released it under the Creative Commons License ).
He is one of the very few examples who don't seem to get old, and that's because he just loves making music and being creative. Most other bands simply seem to lose that over time.
|
just about linkin park:
I initially didn't like minutes to midnight but after listening to the cd a few more times and hearing them live i like it a lot more, almost as much as the previous ones.
I really don't like a thousand suns, there is like 1 song on the cd that i like.
And the reason why they've change their style of music is because chester (The white singer for those who don't know) can't really scream/sing like he used to anymore. They tend to go with much more mellow lyric accents to keep his voice from getting any worse now. It's to be expected given the age of the band and the stress he has put on his voice over the years.
This is also consequently why they don't perform many songs from albums previous to minutes to midnight. I'm pretty sure if they preformed crawling that chester wouldn't be able to sing anymore lol.
|
Man, I liked Linkin Park when I was young, but damn, in a song in Meteora there were parts where they played bad notes.
I realized this and was like "mmhkay that's pretty bad". But I thought it was alright. Then I learned about Pink Floyd or other bands with flawless records AND gigs and I quit things like LP alltogether.
Plus the lyrics... the lyrics... so repetitve, completely made for teenage-crisis.
|
This is why I haven't followed a band in many a year. They might come out with some kickass album that is 7/15 tracks of awesome, and then shift gears for the next album, I pay for the full thing, but only like a couple of songs, or even none. This is why I think purchasing individual songs through things like iTunes is one of the greatest inventions ever. No more do I have to commit a large sum of money to stuff I don't like, to get at stuff I like. I can find what's right for me and get that.
I like certain things in my music, so I hunt for music that fits my personal criteria, as opposed to following bands that I associate with a particular style. That just leads to disappointment when their style changes, or they just come out with a bad album. Same thing with movies, video games, and literally any entertainment product I buy...because its not like I can impose my will on another human being. They're free to make their own decisions, follow their own passions and invent their own material without having to wait for my go-ahead.
|
On March 09 2011 21:02 Jayme wrote:
When I smoked I smoked because I wanted to. I didn't give two shits whether my friends smoked or not. I liked to do it, so I did it. Nothing more.
Scrap this attitude, really it doesn't fool anyone except those around you who have similar problems facing reality. You aren't born liking cigarettes, you aren't born liking the old LP while hating the new, somewhere along the way you made a choice and that choice had a reason. Things don't happen randomly. Open your eyes, see yourself for who you are and stop having those idealist attitudes where you are unexplainable, you will be much happier that way. And you might come to like some new pieces of music which is never a bad thing.
Sure they might be wrong but that doesn't make your attitude towards this whole thing any better. And since you used the words "hate with a burning passion" I am fairly sure that they are at least partly right, there is no reason ever to hate music. Shows that you do it more as a way to identify yourself than just for the music.
|
On March 09 2011 21:02 Jayme wrote:
In the end I assured myself it couldn't be worse than MtM anyway so it can't be that bad.
Oh I see what you did there :p
On March 09 2011 21:02 Jayme wrote:
I really hate MtM and ATS. That should be simple in theory.
Hybrid Theory? lol
As for LP and these albums, I prefer their original work but I still sorta like their new stuff. Most of their lyrics are pretty mundane and somewhat...immature, so I never put too much weight on them.
|
On March 10 2011 04:38 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2011 21:02 Jayme wrote:
When I smoked I smoked because I wanted to. I didn't give two shits whether my friends smoked or not. I liked to do it, so I did it. Nothing more. Scrap this attitude, really it doesn't fool anyone except those around you who have similar problems facing reality. You aren't born liking cigarettes, you aren't born liking the old LP while hating the new, somewhere along the way you made a choice and that choice had a reason. Things don't happen randomly. Open your eyes, see yourself for who you are and stop having those idealist attitudes where you are unexplainable, you will be much happier that way. And you might come to like some new pieces of music which is never a bad thing. Sure they might be wrong but that doesn't make your attitude towards this whole thing any better. And since you used the words "hate with a burning passion" I am fairly sure that they are at least partly right, there is no reason ever to hate music. Shows that you do it more as a way to identify yourself than just for the music.
That's the type of thing I'm confused about though.
So according to you it's completely impossible to enjoy something for the sake of it? I don't think I'm born with all those characteristics ingrained in me and I don't believe I ever implied that. What the hang up was that my ABILITY to choose something has to be so riddled with ulterior motives you lose the initial reason for doing what you're doing. Why is this?
I just told you why I started smoking. I started smoking because I wanted to see if I would enjoy it. Why I thought I might enjoy it I suppose can be bent and manipulated until it comes to something that isn't related to myself. Fundamentally, my desire to try smoking was to see if I would enjoy it.... I did enjoy it so I continued to smoke. That is the only motive I had. If I hadn't liked smoking I would have stopped instantly. I know this because when it became detrimental to smoke ( Going to the academy) I stopped doing so without any real issue. That's the point of what I was saying. I'm not quite sure how that's idealist.
The whole point about not liking the new LP is less able to be manipulated. I simply don't like how it sounds. I don't like that the songs got softer, and I don't like the vocals anymore. To me it seems I ... don't like how it sounds? I really don't know how to express it any other way. I don't really care that the band itself changed their sound because ALL bands do this. Perhaps not as drastically as LP, but I try to view each album on it's own feet. I realize it's impossible to be completely unbiased because you do have bands you gravitate to but I gave ATS an honest chance from start to finish. I WANTED to like it sir.
That's not unexplainable. It's simple yes, but far from unexplainable.
I guess I talked about LP too much in that whole Blog because people seem to be grasping that and running with it. I do not mind that LP changed their sound in so much as they have the right to do so. Hate may be a strong word and the whole "burning passion" thing was supposed to be tongue in cheek. However, I don't like it so I won't continue to listen to it. It's not because I am resistant to new things or something obscure thing like that. In contrast I liked the direction that Korn went and the direction that Atreyu went.
I am a happy person over all. I know that I can be an abrasive asshole that sometimes alienates people I meet. I'm far from a perfect individual and I don't believe I'm the only "thinker" in a flock of sheep. I know better than that.
I simply wanted to pose a question. People can't have opinions for opinions sake anymore?
EDIT: The newer pokemon games are awesome btw, just thought I'd say that 
|
On March 10 2011 03:36 Kukaracha wrote:
Then I learned about Pink Floyd or other bands with flawless records AND gigs and I quit things like LP alltogether.
Alas this is no longer, never will be and the world is a worse place for it.
|
I'm not exactly a fan of LP, but I've never understood the complaints about a band not sounding the same as they used to.
The simple fact of the matter is, a good band is going to do what they want to. If they do something their hearts aren't in, the music loses the most important aspect: It no longer has a soul.
Imagine if every Tool album was Undertow, or if Pantera had stuck to doing hair metal.
"The Boy Bands Have Won, and All the Copyists and the Tribute Bands and the TV Talent Show Producers Have Won, If We Allow Our Culture to Be Shaped by Mimicry, Whether from Lack of Ideas or From Exaggerated Respect. You Should Never Try to Freeze Culture. What You Can Do Is Recycle That Culture. Take Your Older Brother's Hand-Me-Down Jacket and Re-Style It, Re-Fashion It to the Point Where It Becomes Your Own. But Don't Just Regurgitate Creative History, or Hold Art and Music and Literature as Fixed, Untouchable and Kept Under Glass. The People Who Try to 'Guard' Any Particular Form of Music Are, Like the Copyists and Manufactured Bands, Doing It the Worst Disservice, Because the Only Thing That You Can Do to Music That Will Damage It Is Not Change It, Not Make It Your Own. Because Then It Dies, Then It's Over, Then It's Done, and the Boy Bands Have Won." - The title of Chumbawamba's last album
|
I think it's kind of silly how some people seem to view some music as globally better than some other music. They will argue that the new LP is better than the old LP and if you disagree you are wrong, or vice versa. If a band moves from one genre to the other, they haven't gotten better or worse they just appeal to a new set of people. It's like seriously arguing that chicken is absolutely better than beef, and thinking otherwise means you are wrong or immature or whatnot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
