Is it a good idea for an artist to change their sound, or test new sounds? [Archive]

weeberteeoatser

08/21/08, 01:56 AM

No. That is why Taking Back Sunday will always be the best band ever.
Hahahahahaha.

Anyway. It could go either way. Most of the time I like when a band takes the time to experiment, try new things, incorporate different sounds into the music.... but then sometimes it doesn't work in their favor and they should have just stuck with their original sound.

maria126

08/21/08, 04:11 AM

A lot of the time it does work out.
But some of the time it doesn't.

Hey Kevin

08/21/08, 05:44 AM

i encourage an artist experimenting with their music, i might hate what they put out and never want to see them live again because of it, but as long as they are doing what they want because they themselves want to do it fo the sake of art

booyah.achieved

08/21/08, 05:53 AM

Whatever it takes to keep them enjoying the job.

If they don't like music, they quit and we all suffer.

YouzaxTRICK

08/21/08, 06:17 AM

Yes.

Red Hot Chili Peppers, for example.

kwsqd

08/21/08, 06:20 AM

Red Hot Chili Peppers have only gotten worse... much much worse as time goes on.

alice+interiors

08/21/08, 06:20 AM

It's always good to test new styles, but it often doesn't work out and staying with a similar technique helps to establish artists/bands.

IWasaCamera

08/21/08, 06:57 AM

Good can be perceived from the vantage point of the artist and the listener in this case. If it only concerns the latter, I would personally rather see an artist take risks than stay mired in a predetermined formula where every twist and turn is predictable. Bob Dylan, The Beatles, Radiohead, Talk Talk, Wilco, Paul Simon, and so on are all acts who have taken gambles and known varying measures of success (artistically speaking). What is important (at least to me) however, is the distinction between incorporating new sounds/influences and mere pastiche. Nothing more unpleasant than a cheap imitation.

While it can obviously go both ways, I'd say this is a generally positive attitude toward music as art from a musician's perspective as well. As long as they continually strive for excellence and for the creation of a work that embodies who/where they are as humans at that very moment, I have no complaints.

Dr. Acula

08/21/08, 07:48 AM

I love to see bands evolve and change things up. Sometimes it doesnt work but I would rather that happen then hear them write the same record 10 times.

chipdip18

08/21/08, 01:06 PM

Good input so far. I'd like to see more examples though, see if we can get more discussion flowing.

thesafeword

08/21/08, 01:11 PM

People don't really like change, so it's safest to not, but sometimes it works and sometimes staying the same gets old.

chaosB4storm

08/21/08, 01:17 PM

From experience within my own band, I would find it very difficult to try to keep the same sound throughout a career. I think that change is usually the natural way to go about things, and staying the same is what takes work. As you mature and change as a person, your music maturing and changing is nearly inevitable. Look at Brand New. And I know that people see The Devil and God are Raging Inside Me as an immitation, but whether or not Lacey can mature and grow as much as his influences does not reflect that he is, in fact, honestly changing and maturing naturally. When a band is under the impression that their current sound is impossible to improve upon, they are usually headed in the wrong direction.

thesafeword

08/21/08, 01:19 PM

Yeah, but TDAGARIM is easily Brand New's worst. They are a good example of change though, not one album sounds the same from them, so that's nice.

chipdip18

08/21/08, 01:21 PM

People don't really like change, so it's safest to not, but sometimes it works and sometimes staying the same gets old.

Haha catch 22. If you don't change people get tired of your music, if you do change people won't like it. Is this what your getting at?

chaosB4storm

08/21/08, 01:23 PM

Yeah, but TDAGARIM is easily Brand New's worst. They are a good example of change though, not one album sounds the same from them, so that's nice.

The three albums are not fair to compare. It's like if I wrote the words in a picture book, and then wrote an epic series of novels. Although I would come closer to succeeding with the words in the picture book, my second work is a much more difficult task to succeed in.

thesafeword

08/21/08, 01:24 PM

Yeah, it's risky and depends on the band. SOme can stay the same and stay successful and others need to change. But I don't think that bands should put a lot of thought into it and force it, they should just do their writing and if the sound changes, then it changes.

thesafeword

08/21/08, 01:25 PM

The three albums are not fair to compare. It's like if I wrote the words in a picture book, and then wrote an epic series of novels. Although I would come closer to succeeding with the words in the picture book, my second work is a much more difficult task to succeed in.
I'm talking sound here and it sounds the worst.

llwilliamsll

08/21/08, 01:27 PM

checkered.stars

08/21/08, 01:28 PM

Maybe it all depends on who the artist is ultimately writing for, the fans or himself.

chipdip18

08/21/08, 01:28 PM

It seems as though we fall in love with the original sound, being that it's the sound we fell in love with. For the band to change their sound is alright in my book, but it's a risk as far as how the fans will take to it. But they are the musicians and as someone said before, as long as they're enjoying themselves and not doing it just to fit the trend (i.e. inept).

I think your're getting at something. As listeners, we usually don't accept the change of sound as much as the artists do, and are more close-minded with what we think they sound like, or should sound like.

thesafeword

08/21/08, 01:31 PM

Exactly what I meant, people don't like change because they were comfortable with what the artist was making when they started liking the artist.

chaosB4storm

08/21/08, 02:06 PM

I'm talking sound here and it sounds the worst.

I don't think it's that easy though. From the moment an album has a different goal than another album, the success level cannot be judged on an equal ground.

I think YFW and DE come closer to achieving their ultimate goal, but their goals are lame compared to TDAGARIM in my opinion.

thesafeword

08/21/08, 02:09 PM

IWasaCamera

08/21/08, 02:10 PM

TDAG is the closest they've come to decent music.

Anthony Lutz

08/21/08, 02:11 PM

It depends on whether or not you're Kris Roe.

chaosB4storm

08/21/08, 02:13 PM

Techincality or how hard it was to make doesn't make it better. YFW and Deja sound way better. There really isn't a stand out song or two in TDAGARIM, it's kind of boring to me. It's not bad, but it's their worst.

It doesn't make it any better, but it makes it harder to compare.

They finally attempted to make great music, and although the success level wasn't as high, the achievement was a more difficult task.

But I do understand what you're saying. You find it boring. I wholeheartedly disagree.

Troggy

08/21/08, 02:15 PM

If Incubus hadn't kept changing, they would have sunk years ago. Some bands have a good niche when they start out, but others need to keep pushing the envelop to avoid getting lost in the shuffle.

thesafeword

08/21/08, 02:18 PM

With YFW and Deja had some really good songs that stick with me and get stuck in my head. And with TDAG it seemed a little forced sometimes and never really stuck with me.

llwilliamsll

08/21/08, 02:19 PM

Hey Kevin

08/21/08, 02:19 PM

My band used to play poppy bass heavy shoegaze but we've turned into more of free jazz improv drone band.

its so much more fun doing whatever you want, thats why its art

chaosB4storm

08/21/08, 02:19 PM

With YFW and Deja had some really good songs that stick with me and get stuck in my head. And with TDAG it seemed a little forced sometimes and never really stuck with me.

My top 5 brand new songs are all off of tdag easily.

llwilliamsll

08/21/08, 02:20 PM

With YFW and Deja had some really good songs that stick with me and get stuck in my head. And with TDAG it seemed a little forced sometimes and never really stuck with me.
Kind of like Mike Kinsella for me. I loved all his albums under the name of Owen, but his latest one felt a little off (though still awesome). Just overproduced and such where as his previous albums were done by himself (recorded and produced and such).

thesafeword

08/21/08, 02:25 PM

My top 5 brand new songs are all off of tdag easily.
I only really like Archers, my top 5 are Seventy Times 7, Jude Law, Sic Transit Gloria, I Will Play My Game Beneath the Spin Light and Okay I Believe You, But My Tommy Gun don't. In no order.
Kind of like Mike Kinsella for me. I loved all his albums under the name of Owen, but his latest one felt a little off (though still awesome). Just overproduced and such where as his previous albums were done by himself (recorded and produced and such).
Exactly.

chaosB4storm

08/21/08, 05:09 PM

I only really like Archers, my top 5 are Seventy Times 7, Jude Law, Sic Transit Gloria, I Will Play My Game Beneath the Spin Light and Okay I Believe You, But My Tommy Gun don't. In no order.

1. Limousine
2. You Won't Know
3. The Archers Bows Have Broken
4. Millstone/Jesus/Sowing Season

thesafeword

08/21/08, 05:35 PM

Seventy Times 7 and Jude Law and A Semester Abroad are so fucking catchy though.

Troggy

08/21/08, 05:38 PM

:-/

"Jude Law..." is so bad. So are the incessant brand new digressions.

FeynmanWannabe

08/21/08, 06:04 PM

Alright, a new official Brand New thread!

Wait, what?

HangsLikeHeaven

08/21/08, 06:07 PM

I hate Brand New.

StreetSurgery

08/21/08, 06:16 PM

It disgusts me how much Brand New gets talked about on here..

theguy77

08/21/08, 06:31 PM

i think its always a good idea for a band to experiment by their third or fourth album.

IWasaCamera

08/21/08, 09:01 PM

It depends on whether or not you're Kris Roe.
haha
:-/

"Jude Law..." is so bad. So are the incessant brand new digressions.
Yep.

Joey Mac

08/22/08, 05:26 AM

The only problem I have when artists expirement with a new album is they call it their best work ever... If it bombs then it definately wasn't the best work ever...

theguy77

08/22/08, 08:33 AM

i'll even say that brand new digressions get pretty annoying, i already talk about them a lot on here but when you make the same points about the same specific topics over and over again they start to sound less and less poignant. but they are very applicable to to this disucssion as well as more than half the other things discussed on this site, like i said a few times before they symbolize the connection between the AP scene and the outer underground music world, and the die hard fans of each.

allhourcymbals

08/22/08, 08:36 AM

It's about what people expect, and what they actually get. At least for me personally. If you tell me we're having something for dinner, but then go ahead and make something else, I'm not too into it because I had a taste for what was originally planned. I don't know if that's a good example. As far as music, I leave it open and try not to expect the same all the time.
Well if a band says they're not going to try anything new with a new record and then come out with something completely different, then it'd be like "Okay, what are you doing...", but if nothing is said, then you shouldn't expect/assume anything.

wtfmates

08/22/08, 08:38 AM

I like it when bands experiment. After a couple albums, you don't want them to make another record with the exact same sound, and I'm sure they don't want to either.

theguy77

08/22/08, 08:38 AM

Well if a band says they're not going to try anything new with a new record and then come out with something completely different, then it'd be like "Okay, what are you doing...", but if nothing is said, then you shouldn't expect/assume anything.

this. i dont think bands should ever speculate whats going to be done on their next album. you can never know becuase inspiration and changes in the tide happen so quickly and randomly and you dont want to pull your fans in all the different directions you're going in because they wont follow them as readily. just release it when it's released and let it sound how it sounds when you finish.

wtfmates

08/22/08, 08:38 AM

I think change depends on the artist. For example, blink-182 went from their pop-punk roots to a more mature, darker, experimental sound on their last untitled album. IMO, I believed it worked out.
and even earlier, blink changed their sound from songs like carousel, josie, dammit, to stuff like all the small things, the rock show, first date, and stuff, which would be a good thing for them, because this changed skyrocketed them into the mainstream.

Wait, Blink 182 matured?

allhourcymbals

08/22/08, 08:38 AM

Even after one album, I don't want a second one that's basically the same thing. It's like standing still. I want the bands I listen to/appreciate/see live/support/love to move forward.

theguy77

08/22/08, 08:40 AM

Even after one album, I don't want a second one that's basically the same thing. It's like standing still. I want the bands I listen to/appreciate/see live/support/love to move forward.

its often the formula though, to use your sophomore album as an attempt to refine the sound you made with your first album, because often that first album has a lot of things you hate and wouldnt have known about at the time due to inexperience in writing and recording.

wtfmates

08/22/08, 08:41 AM

Even after one album, I don't want a second one that's basically the same thing. It's like standing still. I want the bands I listen to/appreciate/see live/support/love to move forward.

Word. I've never understood why some fans go fucking crazy and start bashing a band as soon as they change up their sound.

Even if it's only a small amount of change, it's better than remaining at the same spot, musically, for years.

allhourcymbals

08/22/08, 08:42 AM

its often the formula though, to use your sophomore album as an attempt to refine the sound you made with your first album, because often that first album has a lot of things you hate and wouldnt have known about at the time due to inexperience in writing and recording.
I'd still consider that moving forward. That's still bringing something new to the table, it doesn't have to be like a completely new sound to be moving forward.

kitti_katt420

08/22/08, 08:52 AM

Even after one album, I don't want a second one that's basically the same thing. It's like standing still. I want the bands I listen to/appreciate/see live/support/love to move forward.

this

IWasaCamera

08/22/08, 08:58 AM

I think change depends on the artist.
Well this is insightful.
its often the formula though, to use your sophomore album as an attempt to refine the sound you made with your first album, because often that first album has a lot of things you hate and wouldnt have known about at the time due to inexperience in writing and recording.
Refining your sound does bring something new to the table.
Good can be perceived from the vantage point of the artist and the listener in this case. If it only concerns the latter, I would personally rather see an artist take risks than stay mired in a predetermined formula where every twist and turn is predictable. Bob Dylan, The Beatles, Radiohead, Talk Talk, Wilco, Paul Simon, and so on are all acts who have taken gambles and known varying measures of success (artistically speaking). What is important (at least to me) however, is the distinction between incorporating new sounds/influences and mere pastiche. Nothing more unpleasant than a cheap imitation.

While it can obviously go both ways, I'd say this is a generally positive attitude toward music as art from a musician's perspective as well. As long as they continually strive for excellence and for the creation of a work that embodies who/where they are as humans at that very moment, I have no complaints.
Agreed, you're quite wise.

allhourcymbals

08/22/08, 09:00 AM

Well this is insightful.

Refining your sound does bring something new to the table.

Agreed, you're quite wise.
Hahaha. Oh, you.

llwilliamsll

08/22/08, 11:17 AM

Well if a band says they're not going to try anything new with a new record and then come out with something completely different, then it'd be like "Okay, what are you doing...", but if nothing is said, then you shouldn't expect/assume anything.
Fair, but I feel that the majority of people are used to expecting that same sound from the previous album, especially if it's the first album. I agree you should not assume anything but I think it's something that people do.

allhourcymbals

08/22/08, 11:21 AM

Fair, but I feel that the majority of people are used to expecting that same sound from the previous album, especially if it's the first album. I agree you should not assume anything but I think it's something that people do.
Oh no, you're right, I know that most people are guilty of this. I try not to expect anything from bands I like besides something I'll enjoy, and I'm rarely let down. Then again, I do listen to a wide range of music and am extremely open to new/different sounds as a general thing, so maybe it's just different for me, I don't know.

Chromefox

08/22/08, 11:22 AM

allhourcymbals

08/22/08, 11:23 AM

It depends. If the artist just has a great, natural feel for music, than whatever music they make should come out fine. If they're talentless tryhards though, experimentation will likely not work well in their favour.
If that's the case, then I wouldn't like their first release and most likely wouldn't even bother to check out anything else (if it's that bad), you know?

Chromefox

08/22/08, 11:26 AM

If that's the case, then I wouldn't like their first release and most likely wouldn't even bother to check out anything else (if it's that bad), you know? Not necessarily. When I was 14 I liked crap music that I don't listen to now. You may also have liked some shit back in the day. Those are the artists who didn't change or improve, while in the meantime, your tastes grew. Know how I mean?

allhourcymbals

08/22/08, 11:29 AM

Not necessarily. When I was 14 I liked crap music that I don't listen to now. You may also have liked some shit back in the day. Those are the artists who didn't change or improve, while in the meantime, your tastes grew. Know how I mean?
I think eventually you reach a point where you know what kind of music you like the best, after you've experienced a good amount of what's out there, and I think I've reached that point for the most part. If I really really hate a band though, I'll never like them, or at least not that album. I also don't like anything that I've ever hated before, and same vice versa, I don't hate anything that I've ever liked. I may not listen to it anymore, but if I do listen to it, I won't be like "Wow how did I ever listen to this?" I'll just be like aww, I remember when I used to love them. They're cute.

larsthedrummer

08/22/08, 02:05 PM

"Is it a good idea for an artist to change their sound, or test new sounds?"

Always.

theguy77

08/22/08, 02:08 PM

well, wilco could decide to leave alt-country and make mainstream country... haha

but yeah i cant think of any REALISTIC situation where its a bad idea, as long as you pull it off with dexterity.

chipdip18

08/22/08, 04:46 PM

I honeslty cannot think of any situation where it would be a bad idea.

Well sometimes it is bad for their career. Look at The Academy Is...(.) Almost Here wasn't bad, an enjoyable listen. They changed up their sound and Santi failed. Now they are stuck with making incredibly distasteful and bad music with Fast Times At Barrington High.

chipdip18

08/22/08, 05:17 PM

Did they really fail with Santi? They only seemed to get bigger from what I saw.

Eh, i think that fame really still drifted on the back of Almost Here. Many fans didn't like Santi very much at all, it seemed like a dip in their popularity to me, at most a plateau.

FeynmanWannabe

08/22/08, 05:22 PM

Artists should always keep making the same music, writing the same songs. Stick to what they're good at!

FeynmanWannabe

08/22/08, 05:23 PM

lol at William Becket being the Jenny Lewis of the group.

chipdip18

08/22/08, 05:24 PM

What does their newest release even sound like? Still a Rilo Kiley meets Fall Out Boy?

It's just bad. It's so generic.

Yes. And?

08/22/08, 05:29 PM

No. That is why Taking Back Sunday will always be the best band ever.
:appl:

brokenmixtape

08/22/08, 06:19 PM

I think it depends on the situation.
I'm happy that a band such as Brand New has: as much as I like 'Your Favorite Weapon' - I don't think they could've released it another two times; they could've easily done so but they did not- they were no longer at that point in their lives. I think 'Deja Entendu' was a good step up, as well as 'The Devil and God...'