A band changes its music style, what's the fuss?

[TheRightToArmBears]

Well it depends. Linkin Park have 3 good songs; they've always sucked so I don't care.

If it's a good band changing to something I don't like (say, Foo Fighters going from an interesting post-grunge band to a dull rock band) then I'll be annoyed. Of course, this works the other way around too. The latter works (mostly covers I guess) of Johnny Cash are better in my eyes than his earlier stuff.

It just depends if I like it or not.


On the subject of Metallica: I'd say they sold out at St Anger. Metallica was a gamble; it was different to what they'd done before that was succesful. I'd argue that if they were truly selling out they would have just tried to write Master Of Puppets again. Once again with Load and Reload they didn't want to make the same album again, but in this case it failed. St Anger was more a case of jumping on the bandwagon at the time, and it was awful in any case. Death Magnetic is actually a good album, and I can't make up my mind about it. I feel they nicked a few tricks from Anthrax on it though (not so much that I'd call them out on it, it's just interesting).

 

[FallenTraveler]

havent read the whole thing, but seriously...

I really dont mind when bands try to change styles. Seriously, it's pretty awesome sometimes.
But Linkin Park has just gone down hill, minutes to midnight was alright, but this is just.... ugh I dont see how anyone can like it.

Linkin Park are the only ones who I am truly annoyed with for changing styles, everyone else is pretty good about it

 

[Nemu]

There's a difference between evolving musically and simply changing style to appeal to a different, maybe even wider audience.

Totally agree here.

Well I hate when people criticize when a band changes it's sound, because they don't see from the band's point of view. I mean, everybody started hating Metallica for releasing Load and Reload, and just wanted more thrash, but what was only forty or fifty songs for the fans was ten years of playing the same music for Metallica itself, you just get sick of it and want to mix it up and try new things.

I hated Metallica after ...Justice, actually.
The moment they started making videos, inflating their egos and shipping out the same generic, awful "metal", they lost me. (Well, truth be told, ...Justice was a bit weak, but dammit it all if "Harvester of Sorrow" and "Blackened" aren't STILL kick-fsking-ass songs.)


Personally, I'm a music snob. I don't take issue with artists evolving, I just take issue with those same artists expecting us all to continue liking them after the fact. There is a reason I started listening to the music I do-I have expectations and "likes" and if they aren't met to a certain degree, I move on.

Linkin Park are part of a genre I thought was utter tripe, so I really couldn't care less that they're even still around.

 

[jonnosferatu]

I liked it approximately the way it was and want more of that. Of course, it's statistically much more likely that they reached "the way it was" through stylistic changes from what they had been doing previously, so I probably benefit.

I don't fault the band for making the change, I just don't listen to the albums I don't particularly like.

 

[SantoUno]

Reminds me of why people need to grow up and stop saying 'Metallica WAS good and then they sucked. Fucking morons don't get change.

If you're calling me and other people morons simply because it is our opinion that Metallica used to be good but now they suck then you're the one with problems.

For me I feel that a metal band does indeed sell out when they venture off into non-metal territory (see Metallica, In Flames, Soilwork, etc.)

Yes I do believe In Flames sold out now, but not since Reroute To Remain, although that album was the sign of their change. I feel they truly dropped the ball with A Sense Of Purpose. Seriously, it's fucking horrible when compared to their masterpieces from the '90s. At least the albums before ASOP somewhat retained their melodic death metal roots, but with ASOP it seems like they just said "Fuck it" and ditched true metal in favor or poppy, weird sounding metal.

And for those who try to bash us haters that we can't accept change, that's not true at all. There are plenty of bands who dramatically or at least somewhat changed their style but still stayed true to their roots and didn't have a major face lift for the sake of a wider audience.

Grindcore Carcass -> Death Metal Carcass -> MDM Carcass
Arch Enemy with Johan -> Arch Enemy with Angela
Doom Metal Katatonia -> Modern Day Katatonia (can't classify their new stuff but it's still good)

 

[Arkhangelsk]

There is a diffrence beetween selling out and changing musical styles.

King Crimson,Ulver change styles Metallica and In Flames sell out.

Thats my opinion, i dont particularly hate In Flames or Metallica for it, but for me what they do feels commercial.

How have In Flames sold out? Yes, they changed to a broader audience, but they are people who have to make money as well. They still make good music. I also believe part of the change was that they were feeling the disconnection to Jesper's soon-to-be departure. And wouldn't doing something just because the fans want it count as selling out as well?

They dont make good music anymore, their song structures are poor, predictable and generic, their sound has become generic metalcore, they had an original Melodic Death Metal sound, and much better song structures during Subterrean/Lunar Strain, then the Folky Jester Race aswell was pretty good.

Im not very zelous over this, but this is my view of the band, they turned commercial and lost the soul of their music. I dont particularly like Whoracle or anything they made after that.

I don't think they'd make good music if they continued on the same genre as The Jester Race. Because then their music would be forced, not to mention that by the time of Whoracle, they'd made a significant change in members. They do what they do best, and apparently people like it, seeing as it's made significant success.

You don't have to agree with me, but to flat out say that they "don't make good music anymore" is a pretty false statement. Stating it as a fact would be silly, but now I'm jumping over to semantics.

 

[Ancientgamer]

I don't mind when a band changes it's style. I mind when a band changes it's style and sucks as a result.

The OPs example of Linkin Park is a little off though. From "Hybrid Theory" to what ever crap they are shoveling out now, there style hasn't changed that much. Most of there music is just as contrived and whiny as it has been from the beginning. Except now they are starting to sound more like Christian Rock...

The exception is the Album "Meteora". I have absolutely no fucking clue how that band made that album, but they did! And, it's amazing! I guess Mike Shinoda must have done most of the writing for that album or something, but I still can't figure it out.

Now, a better example of a band that changed their style and sucked as a result would be Metalica. Now, we could have a whole discussion on why Metalica sucks, but let's just say that "Black", and kicking out Dave Mustane and founding their careers off the leeching of his work are the two big reasons.

Now see, that's not a band changing its style and then sucking, or a band changing its style and selling out. That's just a band changing its style and you not liking it, which is fine, but lets call apples apples shall we?

 

[Kenbo Slice]

There's a difference between evolving your sound and completely changing it. Take Avenged Sevenfold for example, Sounding the Seventh Trumpet and Waking the Fallen are great metalcore albums. Then City of Evil came out, and they didn't evolve, they changed completely.

 

[Brightzide]

People will hate regardless of what you do. Evolving your style usually warrants negative feedback from core fans and positive from all other sides ( if it is a good change afterall ). And if you dont change, you get told that all your songs sound the same *cough cough* Nickelback . Let bands do what they want, it's their paycheques they're risking and your fan following antics really doesnt cross their minds before that does.

 

[Aurora219]

I like bands evolving but not doing a complete U-turn on their music style. They usually take me with them if they do. Sudden, massive changes though just makes me wonder, because I listen to a band for their take on music, and if that's suddenly different it's a bit jarring.

And the new Linkin Park album sucks balls. It's just not ..interesting.

 

[Metal Brother]

If you change your style, you're a sell-out.
If you 'stay true' to your 'roots', you're a one-trick pony who needs to evolve.

Whatever you do as a musician, haters gonna hate.

Well said, and well summarized.

I personally feel that musicians have no choice BUT to evolve and change their styles. Each album is the product of the people who make it and the times in which it is created, so each one will naturally be different.

But each fan interprets the music in the same way: in the context of his life and experiences at the time he hears it. Unless the changes the band is going through match up well with the changes the fan is going through, the fan will not like the new music as much. And if the band's changes are significant, this can easily alienate the fans.

Take a look at the band Theatre of Tragedy, for example. For their first 3 or 4 albums they were an amazing goth metal band, with a distinctive sound. But after that they quickly changed into a techno/pop dance band, because that was what the band leader was into. More power to them if they're happy, but for me that was the end of them...

 

[Chancie]

I'm fine when some bands change, but I at least want to be able to see the old sound at least somewhere in there.

Linkin Park is the only one I can think of that changed their style so drastically that I can no longer stand them.
When I first heard them, I liked their sound. That's why I took a liking to them. When you change what I first liked, it's only reasonable that I might not like it. Makes sense to me, anyways.

 

[RJFTW]

If a band/band members want to do a CD out of the genre that got them famous and fans, that should be relegated to a side project. Keep to your core, play your style of music and if you feel you need "more creativity" in other venues then do it with other people. Pretty plain and simple.

 

[Sarah Kerrigan]

Because people have followed them for so long.

Case in point, Linkin Park.

 

[ElTigreSantiago]

System of a Down has managed to evolve its sound a bit in every album without selling out and sucking. Lamb of God has as well. So it is possible, but if one of these bands started playing entirely different music, I would be very pissed. If I want change, I download some other bands. I don't want my old bands to change into new ones.