Bands that don't change their sound

2»

Comments

  • tonadax
    tonadax Posts: 594
    one of the most obvious:
    Slayer

    others:
    the ramones
    rammstein
    sonic youth
    tool
    pj makes changes, not really wide changes...
    the melvins
    papa roach´, urgh....
  • reeferchief
    reeferchief Posts: 3,569
    Tiki Barber wrote:
    Definatly COLDPLAY.....more than any other band i can think of.

    He said bands that are still quality, there is more life in a shooting alley full of smack heads than a Coldplay song.
    azwyldcats wrote:
    Bon Jovi

    Again I would'nt describe these as quality but each to there own.

    Metallica have somewhat of a trademark sound.
    Queens of the Stone Age are probably my favourite band I can think of that has'nt been mentioned that have a sound and are quality
    Can not be arsed with life no more.
  • Klumpie
    Klumpie Posts: 2,649
    Motorhead
  • becker
    becker Posts: 9
    pearl jam. you could take tracks from any of their albums and interchange them. they are a good band though still.
  • dirtyT
    dirtyT Posts: 3,620
    Korn. They hardly even change lyrics.
    Cuyahoga Falls 98, Columbus 00, Cleveland 03, Columbus 03, Toledo 04, Grand Rapids 04, Kitchener 05, Cleveland 06, Cincinnati 06, Washington DC 08, Philadelphia IV 09, Columbus 10, Cleveland 10, Chicago 13, Pittsburgh 13, Cincinnati 14, Chicago (1) 16, Chicago (2) 16
  • PearlJamaholic
    PearlJamaholic Posts: 2,019
    well going by what i heard a metal head saying at the record shop when arguing why metallica sucks now, he said "atleast new metal church sounds like old metal church." though ive only heard a few metal church songs im gonna have to say them also.

    about pj, i dont know about that. i dont recall the uke being around since the beginning or boom. and i really cant picture them doing a song like leash or evenflow today. plus they really didnt do the punk sound until maybe dte.
    http://db.etree.org/PearlJamaholic
  • dirtyT
    dirtyT Posts: 3,620
    PearlJamaholic wrote:
    well going by what i heard a metal head saying at the record shop when arguing why metallica sucks now, he said "atleast new metal church sounds like old metal church." though ive only heard a few metal church songs im gonna have to say them also.

    about pj, i dont know about that. i dont recall the uke being around since the beginning or boom. and i really cant picture them doing a song like leash or evenflow today. plus they really didnt do the punk sound until maybe dte.
    I agree with you. I think No Code is a great example of how they changed their sound, and then to Yield, and so on. I think their albums are each unique, but everyone has their opinion. I happen to agree with your's.
    Cuyahoga Falls 98, Columbus 00, Cleveland 03, Columbus 03, Toledo 04, Grand Rapids 04, Kitchener 05, Cleveland 06, Cincinnati 06, Washington DC 08, Philadelphia IV 09, Columbus 10, Cleveland 10, Chicago 13, Pittsburgh 13, Cincinnati 14, Chicago (1) 16, Chicago (2) 16
  • harmless_little_f***
    harmless_little_f*** Posts: 8,005
    dirtyT wrote:
    I agree with you. I think No Code is a great example of how they changed their sound, and then to Yield, and so on. I think their albums are each unique, but everyone has their opinion. I happen to agree with your's.

    Me too. If anything, Pearl Jam are frustratingly DIFFERENT with each album. I wish that Avocado was just slightly darker a la Riot Act, and I was thrown off PJ for a couple of years after hearing Binaural. It was just SO different to the PJ I knew and loved at the time.
    'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'

    - the great Sir Leo Harrison
  • reeferchief
    reeferchief Posts: 3,569
    PearlJamaholic wrote:
    well going by what i heard a metal head saying at the record shop when arguing why metallica sucks now, he said "atleast new metal church sounds like old metal church." though ive only heard a few metal church songs im gonna have to say them also.

    about pj, i dont know about that. i dont recall the uke being around since the beginning or boom. and i really cant picture them doing a song like leash or evenflow today. plus they really didnt do the punk sound until maybe dte.

    I would class Whipping, STBC, Blood, and Lukin all as having the punk sound not to mention the cover of Sonic Reducer, but I agree I think Pearl jam mix it up toa large degree compared to the majority of bands mentioned in this thread.
    Can not be arsed with life no more.
  • Alex_Coe
    Alex_Coe Posts: 762
    reeferchief wrote:

    Metallica have somewhat of a trademark sound.
    Queens of the Stone Age are probably my favourite band I can think of that has'nt been mentioned that have a sound and are quality


    Queens of the Stone Age are great, but they have definitely changed their sound. Lullabies to Paralyze was totally different from anything else they have ever done. The same goes for all their albums. Each one is a different beast. The S/T was a bass-heavy robot rock album, and R was slightly different. Poppier with songs like Ode to Clarissa, Lost Art, and Pointless. Those songs would have seemed horribly out of place in the S/T.

    Then came Songs for the Deaf, and that was completely different from R in that it was a hundred times heavier and raw, in that Mark Lanegan is a main member of the band rather than a guest vocal.

    Now Era Vulgaris is coming out, and the news is it/s nothing like any other Queens records. Era Vulgaris is going to be more about the vocals, where Josh breaks out of his comfortable range of singing.


    Sorry for the long rant, but I had to say it!
  • Lifted
    Lifted Posts: 1,836
    The Maestro wrote:
    Red Hot Chili Peppers (although many would dispute calling them "good")
    Franz Ferdinand

    first of all they are good. second of all i think we already declared that not changing your sound doesn't neccessarily make you a bad band....and third of all if you listen to their old stuff (pre-californication)...it is quite different than their new stuff. although i would agree their style has been the same for their past three albums.
  • Lifted
    Lifted Posts: 1,836
    reeferchief wrote:
    He said bands that are still quality, there is more life in a shooting alley full of smack heads than a Coldplay song.



    Again I would'nt describe these as quality but each to there own.

    Metallica have somewhat of a trademark sound.
    Queens of the Stone Age are probably my favourite band I can think of that has'nt been mentioned that have a sound and are quality

    i'll agree with you on bon jovi, but coldplay is at least a quality band. they might be overrated and they might not be great, but they are quality. parachutes was a very good album, so was rush of blood to the head, and i would've enjoyed x&y more if it had something i hadn't already heard on one of the previous two albums.
  • reeferchief
    reeferchief Posts: 3,569
    Tiki Barber wrote:
    i'll agree with you on bon jovi, but coldplay is at least a quality band. they might be overrated and they might not be great, but they are quality. parachutes was a very good album, so was rush of blood to the head, and i would've enjoyed x&y more if it had something i hadn't already heard on one of the previous two albums.

    I'm not dissing your taste just giving my own opinion, it all sounds the same to me, very bland, come to think I would put Travis in the same category although they dont sound like CP all there music sounds bland and similar.
    A lot of people like both these bands I guess they're just not for my ears.:)
    Can not be arsed with life no more.
  • reeferchief
    reeferchief Posts: 3,569
    Pantera also had a unique sound aka Dimebag Darrell, awesome band.
    Can not be arsed with life no more.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    reeferchief wrote:
    I'm not dissing your taste just giving my own opinion, it all sounds the same to me, very bland, come to think I would put Travis in the same category although they dont sound like CP all there music sounds bland and similar.
    A lot of people like both these bands I guess they're just not for my ears.:)

    i kinda agree. i think rush of blood to the head was a great album, but all their songs sound pretty much the same and i see no need to ever own another coldplay album. same with travis... i just need the greatest hits. when coldplay releases a best of, ill buy that and never look back.
  • dirtyT
    dirtyT Posts: 3,620
    Agree with whoever said RHCP.
    Cuyahoga Falls 98, Columbus 00, Cleveland 03, Columbus 03, Toledo 04, Grand Rapids 04, Kitchener 05, Cleveland 06, Cincinnati 06, Washington DC 08, Philadelphia IV 09, Columbus 10, Cleveland 10, Chicago 13, Pittsburgh 13, Cincinnati 14, Chicago (1) 16, Chicago (2) 16
  • pjfan85
    pjfan85 Posts: 124
    azwyldcats wrote:
    Neil Young but in a very good way

    Zeke

    Bon Jovi

    Marilyn Manson

    No offence, but Neil Young is a pretty bad example.
  • pjfan85
    pjfan85 Posts: 124
    Oasis
    The Ramones
  • Lifted
    Lifted Posts: 1,836
    soulsinging wrote:
    i kinda agree. i think rush of blood to the head was a great album, but all their songs sound pretty much the same and i see no need to ever own another coldplay album. same with travis... i just need the greatest hits. when coldplay releases a best of, ill buy that and never look back.

    well i guess you agree with me then. if you saw what i said, i just said that they were a quality band...not great, and that they don't change their sound which is the point of this thread. you must think they are at least quality if you though rush of blood to the head was great. but anyway yeah, thats why i said i didn't like x&y, because it had nothing on it that you couldn't listen to from the first two albums.

Categories