View previous topic :: View next topic
|
|
Poll: Which group generally make the better music? |
|
|
|
|
Artists who have their greatest success on 1st album. |
|
4% |
[1] |
Artists who have their greatest success on later albums. |
|
95% |
[21] |
|
|
|
|
|
Total Votes : 22 |
|
|
Author |
Message |
- #1
- Posted: 10/24/2013 19:49
- Post subject: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?
|
Which do you find produce the best music? Artists who have their greatest success on their 1st album or Artists who have their greatest success on later albums (maybe even 4th or 5th album).
By 'greatest sucess' I mean what is generally seen as their best album by most. For example, Pearl Jam's would have to be the album 'Ten'. You may think 'Vitalogy' is their best and there is nothing wrong with you considering it their best. Still... can you see where I am coming from? Admittedly, some artists may have 2-3 albums in contention. Just use what makes sense to you.
I hope I have explained it well.
Last edited by Kiki on 10/24/2013 19:55; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
paladisiac
= music
Gender: Male
Location: Denver 
|
Behrus58
Gender: Male
Age: 29
- #3
- Posted: 10/24/2013 19:54
- Post subject:
|
Great Topic.
I think Growing success is more important it is like finding your style slowly but sounding original
yeah .. The biggest example for growing success is easily Radiohead. and as you see they didn't change their style once they did it twice.So How can they do this ? if a band is "really" great , their debut album is NOT their best or at least it is their best with a small advantage (like Arcade fire!Which i think Suburbs even beats Funeral)
But just ..take a look at muse!They lost it.Matt bellamy just had nth to offer after copycatting radiohead and lost it somehow.
Love to see what others say
|
|
|
paladisiac
= music
Gender: Male
Location: Denver 
- #4
- Posted: 10/24/2013 20:01
- Post subject:
|
most of the time, my favorite artists are those that have grown over time -- radiohead, prince, nirvana, kanye, genesis. my least-fav artists usually start out hot and burn out from there. I believe the difference lies in the talent and creativing of an artist -- those that don't have much tend to use up all their good ideas right away. _________________ fav artists NOW | ALL-TIME favs | i listen 2 more music than u so u don't have 2!
|
|
|
- #5
- Posted: 10/24/2013 20:26
- Post subject:
|
Interesting question. Checking the bands and artists I've been listening to for the past couple of weeks, in every case it's the ones that started out modestly and later went big that I enjoy the most. Except for Arctic Monkeys, who will probably have that first album-success hanging over their heads like the albatross in "Rime of the Ancient Mariner". Personally I think AM is their best album, though. Anyway, time to vote!
EDIT: Though! It could be said (and should be said) that Metallica was a lot better BEFORE they went big (aka Black Album). But they could still count, as they've always been one of my favourites, and they made several albums while slowly growing bigger, then BAM!, Black Album arrives.
|
|
|
|
HazeyTwilight
boyfriend in your wet dreams
Gender: Male
Age: 27
Location: Elmo Knows Where You Live 
- #6
- Posted: 10/24/2013 20:37
- Post subject:
|
This topic for me all depends on whatever. I think it all comes to terms with the amount of maturity an artist has. For example: a fresh new band drops their debut album and it receives massive critical and commercial attention - if it's unexpected or not. The problem with this situation is that each subsequent album is going to have less and less appeal and the attention the debut gets slowly elludes their grasp. This is why - in my opinion - bands like The Strokes and Arctic Monkeys has gone in directions far beyond what their fans found so appealing in the first place and has made a completely new sound for their style. If more bands are consistent in their quality and the change of sound is just context, then it can be interesting.
Artists who struggle to get success on the debut but has grown to the top later in their career are far more interesting to me. Bands like the Flaming Lips would've been an obscure one-hit-wonder artist if it weren't for The Soft Bulletin. Now, they're one of the most interesting and endearing bands in the music industry today and with the aforementioned success, they've gotten the budget to express their ideas in the most craziest, zaniest and profound way possible to make a work of art. Plus, they've been going since 1983 and they just got their success in 1999, so there's a history in the making that fans can buy into.
So, I don't know who makes better music, like I said in the beginning, it depends on maturity. _________________
|
|
|
- #7
- Posted: 10/24/2013 21:35
- Post subject:
|
I feel the most talented and genuine of artists (in what those words means to me personally) tend to improve over time.
|
|
|
Jasonconfused
If We Make It We Can All Sit Back and Laugh
Gender: Male
Location: Washington 
- #8
- Posted: 10/24/2013 21:57
- Post subject:
|
I've never really thought of it as relevant. There are bands like the Beatles that obviously grew and reached peak success in their later albums, but then you have bands like The Doors that I personally think had their best work in their debut, although I love most of their other albums as well. The Stones got better with time, King Crimson peaked with its debut. David Bowie grew, Ozzy's solo career peaked early. The Beach Boys grew, Brian Eno peaked with his early pop (IMO even though I imagine many of you will disagree). I really don't think it matters too much to me. _________________
|
|
|
meruizh
Gender: Male
Age: 33
- #9
- Posted: 10/24/2013 22:36
- Post subject:
|
Intresting topic.
It made me think, my favorite bands now a days, have true solid work after either an average-bad debut, or even a really good one.
The bands that have lost my affection completely, are the ones who began with an outstanding debut, and the failled album, after album to achieve a descent work.
Favorite Bands Now
The National; I mean this is the best example of a band that have shown in their last 4 albums what a great band they are. In their first two, although I dont consider them bad albums, they just lack of the escence the latest albums have.
Radiohead; nothing to say about them, they got their page written in history.
Arcade Fire; an exception to the rule. I keep wondering when are they going to deliver a weak album.
Arctic Monkeys; Oh what an amazing band! Incredible debut, really good follow up, a weird defyning new style third album, a forth album continuing the search of their sound, and an amazing fifth album! AM wow!
The Dark Side
The Stokes; after This Is It, everything else was below any expectations.
Interpol; even if you consider Antics as a good album, everything appeared like shit compared to their debut.
Red Hot Chilli Pepper; so many shitty albums I dont even know where to start.
In between Darkness and Light
Coldplay; with high and lows, from Parachutes and A Rush Blood to the Head, to X&Y; and from Vival la Vida to Mylo Xloto, I still have hope they can deliver a solid album _________________ "Hurry Up, We're Dreaming"
|
|
|
davidhuret
Gender: Male
Location: Lille,France 
- #10
- Posted: 10/25/2013 08:49
- Post subject:
|
Growing: that's what it's all about, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|