Which band has fallen the most in the last fifteen years?

1356

Comments

  • Like someone said, I think this song may have a little poetry to the lyrics. I don't know what its about, but lyrics aren't what I mean by matured. I just keep finding myself defending this band, because in the real world (outside this board) RHCP are widely loved for their last three albums. Its the one band I know everyone at work, in my family, amongst my friends will enjoy without exception. All of my music loving friends love RHCP. May be its that popularity that some don't like here. One of my friends recently made a random compilation off limewire, whats on it? old PJ, SG hit, 2 RH songs, SP and more RHCP than anything. And all that RHCP is from the last 3 albums. Yet here they don't sound like they did in 93, and people think they've "fallen" - in the real world yall are in the minority. The "improvement" and "maturity" is obvious to anyone that actually has all the albums.

    And thats the thing, based off the negative comments here, I'd bet that yall don't have the albums or have been really exposed to the whole albums. Especially if you're saying the songs sound the same, I know you're talking out your ass. You just heard the radio songs and came to the conclusion you already wanted to make. Sorry that the last PJ sucked and RHCP doesn't sound like porn music anymore, but you guys are hating on one of the best bands around today.

    Totally agree with you, how can someone say the songs all sound the same? They should listen to Stadium Arcadium all the way through, and then try and say the same thing. The songs on the second disc sound completely different from each other.
  • bobasfeetbobasfeet Posts: 1,113
    Creed ... easily.
  • Since when does popularity necessarily coincide with good music?

    It usually doesn't, but there are two factors that add to that: 1) I can tell its good. 2) people that I know that like similar music or some of the same bands that I consider to be better than others. That plus all of people who's preferences I don't know. I can tell its good without anyone else's opinion: I'm just surprised to hear bashing here when I never hear it anywhere else.
    bombs, dropping down, please forgive our hometown
  • Odin wrote:
    In the last ten years, Goo Goo Dolls.

    In the last fifteen years, Aerosmith. They haven't been the same since Get A Grip.

    Aerosmith - agreed, more than anyother I can think of.
    bombs, dropping down, please forgive our hometown
  • yellowled24yellowled24 Posts: 3,118
    bobasfeet wrote:
    Creed ... easily.
    were they ever good to start with??
    "....and was very surprised to see that he didnt actually have a recipe for anus-ankle soup." - Big Ed
  • korn kinda went downhill
  • bobasfeetbobasfeet Posts: 1,113
    were they ever good to start with??


    I was talking on a popular level. To answer your question...NO
  • Matty BoyMatty Boy Posts: 421
    Guns N' Roses-I don't know if they've fallen or been abducted by aliens.
  • yellowled24yellowled24 Posts: 3,118
    bobasfeet wrote:
    I was talking on a popular level. To answer your question...NO
    ;) i know...its all good. None of their shit gets played anymore...they mustve clicked onto the fact that Scott Stapp was a try hard Ed
    "....and was very surprised to see that he didnt actually have a recipe for anus-ankle soup." - Big Ed
  • And thats the thing, based off the negative comments here, I'd bet that yall don't have the albums or have been really exposed to the whole albums. Especially if you're saying the songs sound the same, I know you're talking out your ass. You just heard the radio songs and came to the conclusion you already wanted to make.

    It shouldn't be neccessary to buy albums where the singles suck on the off chance that the B-sides will change your mind about a band. Have you honestly ever bought an album where you hated all the A-sides but absolutely loved the B-sides? Because it has yet to happen to me.

    In my experience crap A-sides = worse B-sides which means I save money and time.
  • thecorythecory Posts: 290
    nirvana
  • Johnny_NJohnny_N Posts: 60
    lol
  • It shouldn't be neccessary to buy albums where the singles suck on the off chance that the B-sides will change your mind about a band. Have you honestly ever bought an album where you hated all the A-sides but absolutely loved the B-sides? Because it has yet to happen to me.

    In my experience crap A-sides = worse B-sides which means I save money and time.
    Personally, I've bought many albums that I much preferred the "rest of" as compared to the supposed "best of" that we are more likely to hear.
    At time I am as guilty of it as anybody else, but I believe it is really dumb to judge a group solely based on what you might hear on the radio or see on VH1. There's no way to judge a band's worth and talent based on two or three songs....not completely anyway.
    And no, RHCP's songs do not all sound the same...I would also suggest you listen
    All I have to do is revel in the everyday....then do it again tomorrow

    They say every sin is deadly but I believe they may be wrong...I'm guilty of all seven and I don't feel too bad at all
  • Get_RightGet_Right Posts: 12,858
    direwolf74 wrote:
    You didn't like Automatic for the People? I still think that record is the best thing they ever recorded. After that, here's how I view their later albums:

    Monster: decent, but not great.
    New Adventures in Hi-Fi: better than Monster.
    Up: never liked it.
    Reveal: bored me to tears.
    Around the Sun: see Reveal.
    Accelerate: amazing album and a glorious return to form. By far their best album since Automatic for the People.

    But that's just me.

    AFP is a good record, but it makes me want to jump off a bridge after listening to it. Too depressing for me. Your ratings support my feelings- very medicore all the way around. I havent heard the new one yet, but Im not eager to do so.
    As someone who had reckoning on IRS vinyl and first saw them in 1983, it was over once I heard stand and happy shiny people. Tough getting me back.

    Great name by the way fennario.
  • Get_RightGet_Right Posts: 12,858
    pipedreams wrote:
    I agree although New Adventures was pretty good and neither band is nowhere near as good as back in the day live. Fables and Life's Rich Pageant were unbelievable shows. Hard to compare recent U2 tours with the Joshua Tree tour. Just my 2 cents.

    I started seeing REM on the reckoning tour, and I think they do still bring it live, its just that I do not like any of the later catalog.

    U2, same, they still puit on a great live show, but I have not like the records since achtung
  • SchokiSchoki Posts: 5,072
    Moby
    REM
    Oasis
    U2
    Stones
    Korn
    Smashing Pumpkins
  • JulienJulien Posts: 2,457
    U2
    RHCP
    Metallica
    2006: Antwerp, Paris
    2007: Copenhagen, Werchter
    2009: Rotterdam, London
    2010: MSG, Arras, Werchter
    2012: Amsterdam, Prague, Berlin
    2014: Amsterdam, Stockholm
  • wcsmithwcsmith Posts: 165
    Seeing as this is entirely subjective (like most questions requiring critical comment), I'll throw my hat in the ring:

    I will stand by the high quality of Avacado and I also disagree that U2 has fallen off. The U2 backlash has a lot to do (imho) with their longevity and Bono's over-exposure and tendency to insure that everybody knows what he thinks about everything. I can understand how they might bug some people, but that does not detract from the quality of their musical output. Besides, when compared with 95% of what's considered 'popular' today, U2 stands pretty tall. And their live show is astounding...

    I'll agree with the general sentiment about Metallica. I never got into the Load/Re-Load albums and I made an earnest effort to get into St. Anger, but it just didn't cut it for me. No solos? Seriously?

    A couple of years ago, I would have put the Black Crowes up near the top, but their newest album put that to rest. Ditto for the Counting Crows.

    Live is right up there with Metallica...I also agree about Weezer. A couple of good songs surrounded by generic throwaways. DMB is also another band that has completely lost my interest.

    And Tool is close to losing my interest after 10,000 Days...
    "I'll ride the wave where it takes me"
  • PJ-SinPJ-Sin Posts: 348
    I just thought of another one, STP. The first two albums were great but after that it was just lame. I guess some people need to be on drugs to sing well. Scott doesnt even sound that good with Velvet Revolver either...
  • BrezBrez Posts: 570
    I think the perfect answer for this is Weezer, with Metallica being a close second.

    Yeah I just repeated what the OP said... dammit.
    And before his first step... He's off again...
  • smithnicsmithnic Posts: 1,563
    Brez wrote:
    I think the perfect answer for this is Weezer, with Metallica being a close second.

    Yeah I just repeated what the OP said... dammit.


    Weezer's still around kind of.
    Their Pinkerton is often labelled as the start of Emo. So I wouldn't say they fell apart over the last 15 years. They had their niche and still sort of do.

    Metallica certainly would be tops there. The Black Album sold like 20 million and then St. Anger was a piece of crap along with that terrible movie. The movie sort of showed how out of touch they are as a band though.

    I would definitely put REM in there. They haven't put out a good album in years!
    Go Get 'Em Tigers!
  • ThecureThecure Posts: 814
    what about the backstreet boys. they were very popular (but sucked) and now they can't sell out malls.

    but i have to say that there are alot of band that hav efallen.

    1) REM - Some great records but since Bill left nothing
    2) Offspring - enought said
    3) Green Day - what are you doing trying to think of another album to release that will suck
    4) Wezzer - i am sad to say since Pinkerton is one of my favorites records
    5) RHCP - never liked them any way
    People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
    - Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

    If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
  • PaukPauk Posts: 1,084
    Definitely Offspring. Great up to Ixnay on the Hombre... and then Americana came out :( Conspiracy of One had a few good tunes but other than that the last 3 albums have been hugely disappointing.
    Paul
    '06 - London, Dublin, Reading
    '07 - Katowice, Wembley, Dusseldorf, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
    '09 - London, Manchester, London
    '12 - Manchester, Manchester, Berlin, Stockholm, Copenhagen
  • smithnic wrote:
    Weezer's still around kind of.
    Their Pinkerton is often labelled as the start of Emo. So I wouldn't say they fell apart over the last 15 years. They had their niche and still sort of do.

    I hear you but I am expecting big things from their next album. I mean it almost has to be better then Make Believe. I really like the one single form their new album, it's called Pork and Beans I believe, it sounded like vintage Weezer IMO.
  • direwolf74direwolf74 Posts: 1,622
    All of you R.E.M. bashers really need to give 'em another chance and check out their new album. I'm listening to it as I type this, and it's kicking my ass.
    "I try my best to chug, stomp, weep, whisper, moan, wheeze, scat, blurt, rage, whine, and seduce. With my voice I can sound like a girl, the boogieman, a Theremin, a cherry bomb, a clown, a doctor, a murderer. I can be tribal. Ironic. Or disturbed. My voice is really my instrument."

    -Tom Waits
  • Blind MelonBlind Melon Posts: 911
    Ozzy Osbourne
    If I could, think I would give in.
  • Omega47Omega47 Posts: 43
    LongRd. wrote:
    didnt realize "Live" is still around.
    Yeah, they're kinda there, kinda not.
    www.myspace.com/fusionsong
  • Omega47Omega47 Posts: 43
    direwolf74 wrote:
    All of you R.E.M. bashers really need to give 'em another chance and check out their new album. I'm listening to it as I type this, and it's kicking my ass.
    Their new album's amazing. I'm Gonna DJ at the end of the world.
    www.myspace.com/fusionsong
  • BamaPJFanBamaPJFan Posts: 410
    LongRd. wrote:
    That's Bullshit!i!

    No Code and Yield were better than Vs.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    but I agree, Avocado was awful ;)

    Vs. is my favorite album and to me Avacado is very similar to Vs.
    United Center (Chicago): 8/24/09
    Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09


  • Omega47Omega47 Posts: 43
    direwolf74 wrote:
    You didn't like Automatic for the People? I still think that record is the best thing they ever recorded. After that, here's how I view their later albums:

    Monster: decent, but not great.
    New Adventures in Hi-Fi: better than Monster.
    Up: never liked it.
    Reveal: bored me to tears.
    Around the Sun: see Reveal.
    Accelerate: amazing album and a glorious return to form. By far their best album since Automatic for the People.

    But that's just me.
    Monster: "Strange Currencies" is AMAZING. Umm, let me think what else. Not really anything. Oh, "Bang and Blame" sounds like Losing my Religion too much. Album art hurts my eyes.

    New Adventures in Hi-Fi: Have yet to hear it.

    Up: Something different, I really like it. But it's an acquired taste. LOVE the album art.

    Reveal: It's got its jems, one of the only times I can say the best songs were the singles. Imitation of Life, All the Way to Reno, and Chorus and the Ring are pretty much the only ones I can listen to without my finger twitching.

    Around the Sun: Really good, from what I've heard from it.

    Accelerate: A great return to their old sound! It's definitely a lovely album and a good thing, they were losing fans like crazy. Album art is the most amazing album art from an R.E.M. album as well. I love it.

    Yeah, I analyze the album art too. Tells a lot about the album. Guess I've adapted to R.E.M.'s genre-crossing ways.
    www.myspace.com/fusionsong
Sign In or Register to comment.