This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
General Music Discussion Thread.
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
LookOut
The earlier stuff, while brilliantly written, just doesn't leap out of the speakers at me quite as much.
Try turning up the volume >:)
(no seriously, earlier albums usually means lower production, which means you need to CRANK UP THAT VOLUME)
Post by
donnymurph
Mid 90s dude. Hardly ancient in terms of production.
Post by
Monday
Mid 90s dude. Hardly ancient in terms of production.
What LookOut means is that a band's first couple albums don't usually have a high amount of production that go into them. Take Dragonforce for example. Valley of the Damned doesn't sound all that good production-wise, but Sonic Firestorm sounds much better production wise.
Post by
238331
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
240135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
LookOut
Most bands also tend to get worse as their career progresses, as well, so production value doesn't seem like a terribly important factor if we're to assume that it continues to go up regardless of how their other elements change. I mean, look at In Flames...
Are you saying In Flames' recent work is bad? I quite like A Sense of Purpose. Granted though, the only other album I have is Soundtrack to Your Escape (which is a great album).
Maybe I just misunderstood :)
Post by
238331
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
240135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Most bands also tend to get worse as their career progresses, as well, so production value doesn't seem like a terribly important factor if we're to assume that it continues to go up regardless of how their other elements change. I mean, look at In Flames...
I think the real problem is that the very act of writing new music usually involves something of a change in style as well. So generally the more albums a band puts out, the further and further they stray from their origins, thus possibly alienating people who might have started listening to them because they liked the original stuff.
Post by
LookOut
Most bands also tend to get worse as their career progresses, as well, so production value doesn't seem like a terribly important factor if we're to assume that it continues to go up regardless of how their other elements change. I mean, look at In Flames...
I think the real problem is that the very act of writing new music usually involves something of a change in style as well. So generally the more albums a band puts out, the further and further they stray from their origins, thus possibly alienating people who might have started listening to them because they liked the original stuff.
The opposite can also be true, if people keep dabbling in the same style and don't stray, people get the "same old same old" feeling and complain it's always the same.
Post by
mindthegap5
Hey yo gringo!
Post by
238331
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
The opposite can also be true, if people keep dabbling in the same style and don't stray, people get the "same old same old" feeling and complain it's always the same.
I know I would prefer for a band to continuously put out the same, consistently good music than to make a ^&*! towards a genre that that generally isn't good anyway. I mean, Galneryus is still amazing. Vader is still good. But, then look at Metallica...
What's wrong with Metallica?
Death Magnetic was a great album. St. Anger, while lacking in some parts, was overall quite enjoyable. And of course, all their stuff Load/ReLoad and back was what made them great.
Post by
Monday
Meh. I don't like Metallica either.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Meh. I don't like Metallica either.
That's not the point.
I don't like DragonForce. That does say anything about how their later albums compare to their early albums, though.
Post by
Monday
/shrug. I already pointed out how their later albums compared to earlier albums. To be honest I didn't really read the post beyond what you said about Metallica.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
238331
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Metallica started off in the 80s with lower production quality, but better overall music. As time has progressed, they now have better production, but their music is total garbage. I cannot even begin to agree that St Anger or Death Magnetic are remotely decent albums.
See, and that's where you're falling into what I described above:Most bands also tend to get worse as their career progresses, as well, so production value doesn't seem like a terribly important factor if we're to assume that it continues to go up regardless of how their other elements change. I mean, look at In Flames...
I think the real problem is that the very act of writing new music usually involves something of a change in style as well. So generally the more albums a band puts out, the further and further they stray from their origins, thus possibly alienating people who might have started listening to them because they liked the original stuff.
Your love of the early band causes you to dislike their later stuff, to the point where you think that it's objectively bad music.
Post by
238331
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.