|
Post by joladella on Dec 29, 2014 7:46:38 GMT -5
I think almost any bad evolves to some extend. Are there any well known bands that clearly did not evolve or barely evolve? Would be interested in your thoughts on least evolved or most 1-dimensional bands. Bon Jovi? I used to be a fan when I was a young teenager, until I realised that the world might change, but their music won't ever. That was not the problem for me, but they just started to bore me. Or did it change? I ignored them after "New Jersey" and only heard the radio singles which seemed to confirm this, mostly power ballads.
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Dec 29, 2014 7:49:25 GMT -5
It wasn't really though was it? Oasis were never going to rip up rock n roll and reinvent the wheel. There albums have variations of sound and feeling but going to a different planet was never on the cards. And so what? They were fucking good at what they did. Bands like Radiohead are out there if you want to listen to them. To be honest Radioheads last three albums sound far more alike than Oasis' last three. I think King Of The Limbs was the last thing I listened to by them, quite average. What you say doesn't surprise me but a lot less people would comment on that in the press etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2014 9:39:27 GMT -5
Just asking ?? I know threads take on life's of its own and I love that ...but he asked for other one dimension bands seems like every post is a debate on oasis sound or 95 percent ..... On his point. another band sounded sorta one dimentional especially during the DAVE years. Was my boys VAN HALEN. TOP JIMMY from there last lp with roth could have fit on there first .....they did what they did better than anyband in world at the time ..why change ,......
|
|
|
Post by beentherenow on Dec 29, 2014 10:03:11 GMT -5
I think Oasis get a real raw deal with regards to how they were perceived as never changing their sound. Ok they weren't exactly Radiohead or Pink Floyd but Supersonic to Falling Down is a great journey.
Boy to Achtung Baby was 7 albums and I'd argue that from DM to SOTSOG was a great progression over 4 albums. Where they went horribly wrong was regressing after SOTSOG, they should have continued down that path for at least another album.
When U2 returned to their original sound with 'all that you can't leave behind' they'd been experimenting for an entire decade not just one album!
In saying that going back to my original point bands like Foo Fighters can keep churning out the same music year on year and don't seem to get anywhere near the flack that Oasis got.
I'd also say only Oasis two albums follow a similar style MG and HC the others are all quite different
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2014 10:13:25 GMT -5
Black sabbath. Probably the best example of a one dimential band along with deep purple , you knew what you were getting. You were not gonna hear seargent peppers or ok computer ...but they did it very well and stuck to it. Nobody seemed to care they did not evolve
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Dec 29, 2014 11:11:34 GMT -5
To be honest Radioheads last three albums sound far more alike than Oasis' last three. I think King Of The Limbs was the last thing I listened to by them, quite average. What you say doesn't surprise me but a lot less people would comment on that in the press etc. Well Limbs was the last album by Radiohead so you haven't missed anything. I personally think Limbs is a complete 180 from what In Rainbows was. Rainbows was a semi return to straight ahead guitar album. Limbs had almost zero guitar for the most part.
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Dec 29, 2014 11:16:06 GMT -5
It wasn't really though was it? Oasis were never going to rip up rock n roll and reinvent the wheel. There albums have variations of sound and feeling but going to a different planet was never on the cards. And so what? They were fucking good at what they did. Bands like Radiohead are out there if you want to listen to them. To be honest Radioheads last three albums sound far more alike than Oasis' last three. I don't think Hail To The Thief, In Rainbows or King of Limbs sound alike. HTTT is a hot mess. Too many tracks running the gauntlet of all their interests between 1998 and 2002. In Rainbows was more of a throwback, mid 90s type of guitar album. Very rare from Radiohead over the last 14 years or so. King of Limbs felt more like Atoms For Peace than Radiohead. Still contained some really nice moments like Bloom, Codex and Seperator. I honestly have no idea where Radiohead will head off to next in 2015. Prob more Limbs than Rainbows but who knows.
|
|
|
Post by World71R on Dec 29, 2014 11:58:16 GMT -5
Oasis evolved? It's always been 1966 to them. In that case, you must be talking about Beady Eye then.
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Dec 29, 2014 12:01:56 GMT -5
Oasis evolved? It's always been 1966 to them. In that case, you must be talking about Beady Eye then.
|
|
|
Post by World71R on Dec 29, 2014 12:11:57 GMT -5
In that case, you must be talking about Beady Eye then. Sheeeiiiittt lol I do like Beady Eye, however, it's just that much of DGSS sounded like they were stuck in the 1960s with their ideas, and even some BE tracks were from that same state of mind. There's some really good tracks on both albums, but you can't deny that a lot of the music was stuck in the 1960s with some of the ideas put into it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2014 12:46:10 GMT -5
"Radioheads last 3 albums sound more alike than Oasis'' last 3" "Boy to Achtung Baby is better than DM to SOTSOG" Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by matt on Dec 29, 2014 15:30:12 GMT -5
Oh, yes. That's why I can't appreciate their music. It all sounds alike. You telling me Sunday Bloody Sunday sounds exactly like Lemon?
|
|
|
Post by Manualex on Dec 29, 2014 15:43:50 GMT -5
Oh, yes. That's why I can't appreciate their music. It all sounds alike. You telling me Sunday Bloody Sunday sounds exactly like Lemon? matt give him at least some leverage, lemon and mofo would be a fair comparison, both are about the same topic and they dont sound alike.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Dec 29, 2014 15:50:58 GMT -5
Oh, yes. That's why I can't appreciate their music. It all sounds alike. You telling me Sunday Bloody Sunday sounds exactly like Lemon? No. We can cherry pick instances where that isn't the case with any band listed in this thread. I typically don't consider myself a fan because of a good few songs. Especially when a band has a large discography.
|
|
|
Post by LlAM on Dec 29, 2014 16:04:01 GMT -5
U2 are like most popular bands, they found their concept and they stick to it. Look at Coldplay for example, they've been writing different versions of Fix You for years. Radiohead play triphop drums and spacejazz chords with Thom Yorke whining over it (sometimes the play a song backwards to shuffle the cards a bit).
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Dec 29, 2014 16:05:25 GMT -5
^ Foo Fighters are another example
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Dec 29, 2014 16:09:37 GMT -5
Disturbed.
They've made the same album how many times now?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2014 16:32:54 GMT -5
Hers some more Nickelback Korn Iron maiden Rainbow ( deep purple spinoff band )
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Dec 29, 2014 17:16:02 GMT -5
Hers some more Nickelback Korn Iron maiden Rainbow ( deep purple spinoff band ) Aw yeah Nickelback. Horrible band.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2014 17:45:55 GMT -5
Hers some more Nickelback Korn Iron maiden Rainbow ( deep purple spinoff band ) Aw yeah Nickelback. Horrible band. be careful thats Lennon2217 favorite band Right Lennon2217 j/k
|
|
|
Post by matt on Dec 29, 2014 18:50:26 GMT -5
Disturbed. They've made the same album how many times now? In a nutshell: Early 80s U2: Post-punk Mid to late 80s: Ambient/alternative rock 90s U2: Electro/dance alternative 2000s: MOR rock Pretty decent palette there - though you have a point about the 2000s - they arguably have been making the same album time and time again. But they're not relevant anymore and who cares? Not great but still good, I really enjoy their recent record - just like Paul McCartney and Bob Dylan, they're known for their best work and their careers shouldn't be judged on their later albums.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Dec 29, 2014 18:54:29 GMT -5
To be honest Radioheads last three albums sound far more alike than Oasis' last three. I don't think Hail To The Thief, In Rainbows or King of Limbs sound alike. HTTT is a hot mess. Too many tracks running the gauntlet of all their interests between 1998 and 2002. In Rainbows was more of a throwback, mid 90s type of guitar album. Very rare from Radiohead over the last 14 years or so. King of Limbs felt more like Atoms For Peace than Radiohead. Still contained some really nice moments like Bloom, Codex and Seperator. I honestly have no idea where Radiohead will head off to next in 2015. Prob more Limbs than Rainbows but who knows. In Rainbows seems more like a natural sequel to OK Computer, maybe even more so with The Bends. Granted, the critics and fans wouldn't want it that way as there wouldn't be that hat-trick of surprises - starting with The Bends, then throwing a curve ball with OK Computer, and then another with Kid A. In a five year period, it is an astonishing trilogy of albums.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Dec 29, 2014 19:01:43 GMT -5
I think Oasis get a real raw deal with regards to how they were perceived as never changing their sound. Ok they weren't exactly Radiohead or Pink Floyd but Supersonic to Falling Down is a great journey. Boy to Achtung Baby was 7 albums and I'd argue that from DM to SOTSOG was a great progression over 4 albums. Where they went horribly wrong was regressing after SOTSOG, they should have continued down that path for at least another album. When U2 returned to their original sound with 'all that you can't leave behind' they'd been experimenting for an entire decade not just one album! In saying that going back to my original point bands like Foo Fighters can keep churning out the same music year on year and don't seem to get anywhere near the flack that Oasis got. I'd also say only Oasis two albums follow a similar style MG and HC the others are all quite different Problem with Foo Fighters is that they are not as criticall revered or popular as Oasis. When you are as critically successful and massive like Oasis were in the 1990s, the responsibility to surprise people is massive. Noel was right when he said they should have taken a long break after Knebworth and re-invented themselves somewhat. Noel is a big fan of U2, and he knew he you could change your sound and be massive at the same time - that's what appealed to him. Heck, they could have got away with Be Here Now and seen that as their Rattle & Hum (self-indulgent mess) and come back with a new sound and they could have maintained the popularity. Unfortunate for Noel in that he was the only creative force in Oasis, so it's very difficult to pull that off even with one genius in a band, but if he bided his time and let the songs come to him rather than force write them (as he admits), he could have pulled a great idea out the hat. It will be interesting to hear Chasing Yesterday then - it may be proof that he always had it in him to change the sound.
|
|
|
Post by Corky Ianucci on Dec 29, 2014 19:04:13 GMT -5
Oasis sound changed a little bit, not their style, and I think that comes down to lack of musicianship or scared to fuck up the formula.
Oasis songs are mind numbingly simple to play. I tell anyone who wants to learn how to play music, learn Oasis and Nirvana songs, they're really easy to play but fucking awesome.
God bless.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Dec 29, 2014 19:05:49 GMT -5
Disturbed. They've made the same album how many times now? In a nutshell: Early 80s U2: Post-punk Mid to late 80s: Ambient/alternative rock 90s U2: Electro/dance alternative 2000s: MOR rock Pretty decent palette there - though you have a point about the 2000s - they arguably have been making the same album time and time again. But they're not relevant anymore and who cares? Not great but still good, I really enjoy their recent record - just like Paul McCartney and Bob Dylan, they're known for their best work and their careers shouldn't be judged on their later albums. I was actually listing another band that I think is samey, Disturbed.
|
|