Jump to content

Signs that a band is becoming stale


bacardimayne

Recommended Posts

How can you tell when a band is getting stale?

A big clue for me is when they start referencing their old songs in their lyrics

Examples:

Metallica - St. Anger (Fuck it all and no regrets I hit the lights on these dark sets..)

Aerosmith - Legendary Child (Took a big chance at the high school dance..)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good thread.

Since you mentioned "the 'tallica" ...Unforgiven II and III were more than signs, they were slaps in the face :P

Another sign is when the artist/band says that their new album is a return to form, or the style of what made them big- which is code for "we took bits of our old songs and papier mache'd them together because frankly, we are out of ideas"...see Death Magnetic or Black Sabbath's 13.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good thread.

Since you mentioned "the 'tallica" ...Unforgiven II and III were more than signs, they were slaps in the face :P

Another sign is when the artist/band says that their new album is a return to form, or the style of what made them big- which is code for "we took bits of our old songs and papier mache'd them together because frankly, we are out of ideas"...see Death Magnetic or Black Sabbath's 13.

this. i call it death magnetic syndrome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To expand on Doom's idea..

When they get Rick Rubin to produce their comeback album, and claim it's a "return to their roots" when in reality it's just stripped down shit that sounds nothing like they actually sounded in their heyday.

:lol:

I actually like albums like Death Magnetic, 13, and A Different Kind of Truth but that made me laugh

Aerosmith's last album was a colossal failure, though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. Here is my list:

Genre hopping and other weird musical changes. Think, Kiss and Queen's flirtations with disco (Dynasty, Hot Space), Metallica and country ('Mama Said') as well as alt. rock ('Until it Sleeps'), Zeppelin and reggae ('D'yer Mak'er'), Neil Young during the ‘80s, The Stones and a whole multitude of styles (thanks to Jagger‘s prodding). Somewhat related, pandering to the mainstream is never a good thing, e.g. Elvis during the ‘60s film era, Load-era Metallica - even GN’R and the cheesy video ballads. Also, startling image changes (Freddie’s über gay look, Metallica's short hair, Jagger‘s spandex and tank tops, Axl‘s various Illusion costumes).

The 'return to the roots' thing, yes. Also, when they constantly feel the need to put down their last album, to hype up their latest album, blaming their last album on production difficulties, etc. and insisting that this time, ‘this is the definitive release’ from the band.

Greatest hits samey sets syndrome, Nugnr being a perfect example.

Huge time lapses between albums, or, a refusal to put out an album at all, case in point, Nugnr. You could also point out Metallica and The Stones who take years to put out albums.

The release of a Greatest Hits or Best of Album. It usually signifies something, such as an inability to release a proper album, or a realisation that, it is the beginning of the end and the band a rounding things off.

Vegas residencies (although bands have usually went stale, way before taking this awful step).

When the band cannot play live without bringing out a bunch of inflatables on tour a la Stones, GN’R (Illusion Tour), Floyd (Wall Tour).

Separate limos.

The departure of band members. With a few examples (Deep Purple Mark II, Taylor era Stones) this usually is disastrous for the band.

Solo albums. When various members start releasing solo albums, you simply know it is the beginning of the end, case in point, Guns N’ Roses (Believe in Me, Pawnshop Guitars, It is Five O’ Clock). You could also look at The Beatles (John and Yoko’s avant garde solo albums). Jagger. Also, watch out for film careers (Jagger and Ned Kelly, Gene Simmons, Ringo Starr).

Edited by DieselDaisy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you tell when a band is getting stale?

A big clue for me is when they start referencing their old songs in their lyrics

Examples:

Metallica - St. Anger (Fuck it all and no regrets I hit the lights on these dark sets..)

Aerosmith - Legendary Child (Took a big chance at the high school dance..)

I don't agree with this one. I like it when a band or artist inserts a playful lyrical nod to something they've done in the past, I think it's quite cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genre hopping can be a good thing though. What if the Beatles had remained a bubblegum cover band for their entire careers?

I think it depends how authentic it comes across and whether or not the artist is simply chasing trends and jumping on a bandwagon (case in point, Metallica Load and St Anger albums).

Nobody has a problem with a band or artist expanding their musical palette (The Beatles later work etc), but just because Bon Jovi want to do a country album it doesn't mean they should.

Edited by Towelie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

metallica are poster childs for genre hopping gone bad following every single fad. IE load/reload(alt rock shit) st anger(nu metal shit) then jumping back into thrash when thrash became popular again with death magnetic.

another way i can tell is when a band just stops trying anything new and just starts with the repetitive song structures/themes. a band this reminds me of is in flames.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

metallica are poster childs for genre hopping gone bad following every single fad. IE load/reload(alt rock shit) st anger(nu metal shit) then jumping back into thrash when thrash became popular again with death magnetic.

another way i can tell is when a band just stops trying anything new and just starts with the repetitive song structures/themes. a band this reminds me of is in flames.

You know I think that Load is where their hearts are really at, I think that stuff was pretty "honest" and would probably have preferred them to stick to what they wanna do instead of "back to the classic thrash" (that they can't quite do anymore) to appease the fans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the dreaded covers album???

That's never a good sign.

or even worse...... the christmas album :nervous::nervous::nervous:

That's usually at the point where they hit rock bottom. Everyone knows they have a problem, but they have to scrape the depths of the gutter before they will admit it to themselves.

scottweiland.jpg

Nobody sings White Christmas with as much passion as a coke addict.

Edited by Towelie
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Beatles did not so much as genre-hop as, they were actually creating genres as they went along. Genre hopping is, when there is a distinct, already pre-existing genre (such as disco) that a band grabs in a rather, cynical manner, to revive their career prospects. Or just because they are big tarts like Jagger haha.

I forgot the covers album. Yes, I agree - Dylan's Self Portrait, TSI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Beatles did not so much as genre-hop as, they were actually creating genres as they went along. Genre hopping is, when there is a distinct, already pre-existing genre (such as disco) that a band grabs in a rather, cynical manner, to revive their career prospects. Or just because they are big tarts like Jagger haha.

I forgot the covers album. Yes, I agree - Dylan's Self Portrait, TSI.

I don't think I'd agree that The Beatles invented these genres. I think you can get some bands or artists who are just remarkably adept at adapting to loads of different musical styles and genres (The Beatles, Prince for example) and then you get others who can do one thing and one thing really well, but that's it (The Stones, Metallica, Slash, most classic rock bands).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you actually denying the fact that The Beatles (et al) did not play a major part in the 'album revolution', and did not, instigate psychedelia?

No, that's not what I said at all.

I said they didn't invent the genres of music they were playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

metallica are poster childs for genre hopping gone bad following every single fad. IE load/reload(alt rock shit) st anger(nu metal shit) then jumping back into thrash when thrash became popular again with death magnetic.

another way i can tell is when a band just stops trying anything new and just starts with the repetitive song structures/themes. a band this reminds me of is in flames.

You know I think that Load is where their hearts are really at, I think that stuff was pretty "honest" and would probably have preferred them to stick to what they wanna do instead of "back to the classic thrash" (that they can't quite do anymore) to appease the fans.

i dont know i felt the load albums were really half assed and slapped together, i felt their was some good ideas(bleeding me kicks ass) that would have been much better if they would have fleshed them out more. i do agree i would much rather listen to a load type album than death magnetic, where it seems like their brains were on auto pilot :lol:

How about the dreaded covers album???

That's never a good sign.

or even worse...... the christmas album :nervous::nervous::nervous:

That's usually at the point where they hit rock bottom. Everyone knows they have a problem, but they have to scrape the depths of the gutter before they will admit it to themselves.

scottweiland.jpg

Nobody sings White Christmas with as much passion as a coke addict.

yup lol

lynyrd-skynyrd-christmas-time-again-spv0

twisted-christmas.jpg

you know twisted sister hit rock bottom. not only did they do a christmas album, but in come all ye faithful they rip themeselves off and use the same solo as "were not gonna take it" :facepalm:

Edited by bran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you actually denying the fact that The Beatles (et al) did not play a major part in the 'album revolution', and did not, instigate psychedelia?

No, that's not what I said at all.

I said they didn't invent the genres of music they were playing.

I do not think there were too many people playing psychedelia before Revolver and Sgt Pepper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

metallica are poster childs for genre hopping gone bad following every single fad. IE load/reload(alt rock shit) st anger(nu metal shit) then jumping back into thrash when thrash became popular again with death magnetic.

another way i can tell is when a band just stops trying anything new and just starts with the repetitive song structures/themes. a band this reminds me of is in flames.

You know I think that Load is where their hearts are really at, I think that stuff was pretty "honest" and would probably have preferred them to stick to what they wanna do instead of "back to the classic thrash" (that they can't quite do anymore) to appease the fans.

i dont know i felt the load albums were really half assed and slapped together, i felt their was some good ideas(bleeding me kicks ass) that would have been much better if they would have fleshed them out more. i do agree i would much rather listen to a load type album than death magnetic, where it seems like their brains were on auto pilot :lol:

I think Load is strong, but you definitely describe Reload perfectly with "half assed and slapped together" :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...