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

[noble cookie]

Well, obviously people like bands for the music they make.

If they change that music to something else that their fans dislike. The fans won't like it.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Well, I think it's mostly because I listen to Reel Big Fish for ska. If I wanted to listen to hardcore, I would listen to something else. I do believe it's ok for a band to change styles like that, but the reason why so many people hate change. I think that a band trying some new stuff is better than having all their songs sound the same. That's why I love M.I.A. like I do... I mean, this was her massive hit...


and then she comes out with this...


That's a brave move and I can really respect that.

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.

Or maybe because their new stuff just isn't very good? Their original style was cheesy, but they put out a couple of good songs. Now their new stuff is just... bad. Change doesn't matter if the change is for the worse.

 

[mParadox]

recently people blasted Linkin Park for changing their style.

To be fair, i also, for a while, hated the new music but now their songs dominate my playlist.

 

[EeveeElectro]

People throw a tantrum whenever something changes, it's just human nature. I like bands who reinvent themselves, such as My Chemical Romance or Linkin Park. It's probably because I listen to everything and will give anything a chance.
The only one I didn't like was when Avril Lavigne decided to release Girlfriend. Someone who stands by the fact that girls don't have to sing stupidly written pop music and wear tiny skirts in the video, then goes on to be one of those things makes me disappoint. I know that song was a joke and I've heard some of the other songs off the album, some of it is good and some of it is just as shite.

 

[Trogdor1138]

It's good if the change is for the better to evolve their styles. For example, The Beatles has a few very distinct styles throughout their albums. David Bowie would be the best example, he always reinvented himself and his stuff is amazing.

I think the best way for an artist wanting to change is to keep about 50% of their old style and then mix the other half up. I'm not really a fan of bands that stay the same for many years because they can't top their old works. Though Iron Maiden and Megadeth have done this mostly successfully.

So yes, change can be really good... As long as it isn't St. Anger... Good god I hate that album.

St. Anger failed primarily because whichever dick was in the studio that day decided that drums needed to sound like tincans. It could have been greatly improved if they mixed it right.

Agreed, I've got the Some Kind of Monster film which I really love because it's one of the most well made documentaries I can think of despite hating the end result of the album. Lars was just a huge problem and for some reason after 3 years all they could release was that. It's a shame because when watching it you see how much they all go through with life and it seems like such a waste.

If they changed the drums, upped the sound quality and changed a few other things around it'd be good. But the fact is they used a trash can for a drum set, recorded it through a 5 dollar usb microphone and took out any sort of redeeming qualities it could've had. Maybe one day they could do a remix or something, I'd look forward to seeing a good quality mix of it so I can actually try listening to it without my ears bleeding.

 

[Kris015]

Yeah, i hate to say it, but i hate what Linkin Park has become. They were the first band i started really listening to and they are soooo far away from their roots now.

 

[tzimize]

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. Also, I'm laughing internally at all the haters pix I have saved somewhere on my PC.

Personally I feel that if a band (that I like) completely changes their style, I am going to feel a BIT betrayed. I am a tiny part of the reason of their fame, and as such they should cater to me. On the other hand, they are artists and masters of their own profession so I can just get the fuck out. The result anyway will be that if a band changes their style too much, they will in all likelyhood lose the thing that made me a fan in the first place, and as such probably lose more fans than me (and maybe gain new ones). So...win some lose some.

 

[TeeBs]

Well, I think it's mostly because I listen to Reel Big Fish for ska. If I wanted to listen to hardcore, I would listen to something else. I do believe it's ok for a band to change styles like that, but the reason why so many people hate change. I think that a band trying some new stuff is better than having all their songs sound the same. That's why I love M.I.A. like I do... I mean, this was her massive hit...


and then she comes out with this...


That's a brave move and I can really respect that.

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.

Or maybe because their new stuff just isn't very good? Their original style was cheesy, but they put out a couple of good songs. Now their new stuff is just... bad. Change doesn't matter if the change is for the worse.

I never liked Metallica but I fully support the Idea of them becoming a smooth jazz band

 

[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?

 

[the Dept of Science]

Change isn't necessarily good or bad. It just depends whether it was for better or for worse.

Noone complained about Bob Dylan going electric after they heard Highway 61 Revisted.
Noone complained about the Beatles releasing Sgt Peppers/the White album, Talking Heads releasing Remain in Light, Pantera after they dropped the whole hair metal thing.
Nick Cave, David Bowie, Radiohead, Tom Waits, the Magnetic Fields, the Velvet Underground, Frank Zappa, the Flaming Lips, Animal Collective have all had massive stylistic changes between albums or even within albums and noone complains about that.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

Change isn't necessarily good or bad. It just depends whether it was for better or for worse.

Noone complained about Bob Dylan going electric after they heard Highway 61 Revisted.
Noone complained about the Beatles releasing Sgt Peppers/the White album, Talking Heads releasing Remain in Light, Pantera after they dropped the whole hair metal thing.
Nick Cave, David Bowie, Radiohead, Tom Waits, the Magnetic Fields, the Velvet Underground, Frank Zappa, the Flaming Lips, Animal Collective have all had massive stylistic changes between albums or even within albums and noone complains about that.

Actually there's quite a lot of people who wished they stuck to hair metal. I wish they had stuck to the thrashy-groove on Cowboys from Hell instead of going to full groove metal.

EDIT: Forgot. A lot of people hated the new Anthrax (with John Bush) but I actually liked it. He wasn't as funny as Belladonna, but the production on those albums was much less flat, and the songs had some great riffs. Volume Eight: The Threat is Real was terrible though.

That said, I'm still excited Belladonna's coming back.

 

[Trogdor1138]

Agreed, I've got the Some Kind of Monster film which I really love because it's one of the most well made documentaries I can think of despite hating the end result of the album. Lars was just a huge problem and for some reason after 3 years all they could release was that. It's a shame because when watching it you see how much they all go through with life and it seems like such a waste.

If they changed the drums, upped the sound quality and changed a few other things around it'd be good. But the fact is they used a trash can for a drum set, recorded it through a 5 dollar usb microphone and took out any sort of redeeming qualities it could've had. Maybe one day they could do a remix or something, I'd look forward to seeing a good quality mix of it so I can actually try listening to it without my ears bleeding.

My thoughts exactly.

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.

Or maybe because their new stuff just isn't very good? Their original style was cheesy, but they put out a couple of good songs. Now their new stuff is just... bad. Change doesn't matter if the change is for the worse.

Now that's a matter of the subjectivity of music, we are talking about change, not the music itself. Hell, I'd support the idea of lady gaga shifting her music style from shit to also shit, because it means she has the cajones to actually try something different. If this was about the music, I'd be telling you right now that I absolutely loved Death Magnetic, St. Anger was failed by the drums and Load & Reload were Brilliant shifts in pace. But of course this isn't about the music, it's about the change.

I initially didn't like Load and Reload but upon listening to them a couple of times recently they've grown on me. Can't say the same for Death Magnetic unfortunately, I still feel that it just didn't really do anything for me, despite it technically being a solid metal album, it just isn't as good as their earlier stuff and comes off more as a band imitating Metallica than actually being them. I wish they'd do an another album like Load or And Justice.

 

[DJDarque]

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.

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.

I personally don't find Metallica after the black album to be that good. It's more generic hard rock, as opposed to the earlier thrash, but I don't hate them for it.

 

[Megawizard]

In my personal opinion, if a band changes its style radically from what they used to do, they should probably change their name as well; even if they only modify it a little, but there should definitely be something that sets them apart from what they used to be.