Good Bands that Hit the Crapper.

Pablo Honey - good album.
The Bends - very good album.
Ok Computer - good album.

Everything since - pretentious bore.

Gotta love seeing Ten Club members posting opinions about Pearl Jam hitting the crapper after this or that record. If you hold that belief then why the shit are you even here?

I have to disagree with the idea of Radiohead hitting the crapper. I don't think their last album was that good but it wasn't craptastic....just sounded like, well, the Radiohead of recent years. Anyway, it's hard to take anyone seriously when they reduce a great record such as Kid A to "blips and bloops."

Weezer is the first band that comes to mind when reading the thread title. Just holy shit, they're so bad. And it's so sad that they released two super great records, basically masterpieces, and then so blatantly just gave up and started writing such junk.

Green Day...Jimmy Eat World...that's all I can think of at the moment.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Kid A and Amnesiac to me were trash. fuck the bleeps and bloops. give me actual instruments.

I thought the Pumpkins' Zeitgeist was one of their best ever. I know I'm in the minority on that, but I loved it, I listened to it today as a matter of fact. Oceania? ok, but kinda boring. Just one long song to me. But the live show to go along with it was good. A bit too pumped up though. It was billed as "visually stunning effects from the same guy who brought you Roger Waters The Wall Live". SP had a spinning globe with some images on it. It was bizarre that they pumped it up the way they did. Maybe Billy expected everyone to be on shrooms.

Chili Peppers are a great example of your original question. I find their music a complete bore now. I bought their last one for $5, listened to it, and gave it away. it's really too bad, because their output is 10x the quantity of PJ. Seriously, 18 b sides from one album? that's insane. good for RHCP fans.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Kid A and Amnesiac to me were trash. fuck the bleeps and bloops. give me actual instruments.

I thought the Pumpkins' Zeitgeist was one of their best ever. I know I'm in the minority on that, but I loved it, I listened to it today as a matter of fact. Oceania? ok, but kinda boring. Just one long song to me. But the live show to go along with it was good. A bit too pumped up though. It was billed as "visually stunning effects from the same guy who brought you Roger Waters The Wall Live". SP had a spinning globe with some images on it. It was bizarre that they pumped it up the way they did. Maybe Billy expected everyone to be on shrooms.

Chili Peppers are a great example of your original question. I find their music a complete bore now. I bought their last one for $5, listened to it, and gave it away. it's really too bad, because their output is 10x the quantity of PJ. Seriously, 18 b sides from one album? that's insane. good for RHCP fans.

I totally agree with SP's Zeitgeist. It was the first album I bought of theirs even though I had been a fan long before. I loved Z then worked my way backwards all the to their first. I bought Oceania you are exactly right it really bored me to no end. I was looking for one song with an edge, some heavy riffs nothing nada.

I hate to say it but my friend Michael Franti and Spearhead. Loved his music from 20+ years ago with his political stances. Today he's appears to be looking more for the hits with radio play. Nothing wrong with that but I'm just more in tune his stirring political views and earthly lyrics. The music just seems watered down of late including his new album ALL PEOPLE. He's coming here to Fort Lauderdale on Thursday, Club Revolution. We are supposed to have dinner him, the band and road crew. Then a costume party afterwards.....my costume the Gary Shider of Parliament Funkadelic with the diaper. it should be lots of fun...I wonder where can I find a huge Afro wig?

Peace

Saying radiohead is laughable...

The strokes - classic first album but they were never really able to capture that magic again, not that everything they've put out since has been bad, but it hasn't been on the same level of the first one.

Same goes for interpol

My favorite band that had a severe decline would be oasis. Two masterpieces followed by a great album that I love, followed by a bunch of mediocrity. Some songs being almost unlistenable.

Green Day went down the pan with American Idiot.

the wiggles :fp:

Lifted wrote:

My favorite band that had a severe decline would be oasis. Two masterpieces followed by a great album that I love, followed by a bunch of mediocrity. Some songs being almost unlistenable.

Yes. As soon as Noel stopped writing 100% of the songs, they started to suck.

Tim Simmons wrote:

EarlWelsh wrote:

Gotta love seeing Ten Club members posting opinions about Pearl Jam hitting the crapper after this or that record. If you hold that belief then why the shit are you even here?

They still can write the occasional tune, but it's not like 91-98 where every tune they wrote is great. But it's silly to think just because we don't view a band in a certain light we have to leave the band behind.

I'm more dubious of people who can't acknowledge anything negative about the band more than people who do.

Plus, we're using the word "crapper" very loosely here, in some cases we mean they went to absolute shit and in others we're just talking a drop off in quality. The Stones are my other favorite band, and I can't sit here and tell you with a straight face that their post-Tattoo You catalog is as good as their stuff from the 60's, 70's and first part of the 80's. I enjoy their later period, I like Bridges To Babylon and Voodoo Lounge for instance, but I'm not going to pretend they're as good as Exile On Main St. In the case of both PJ and The Stones, I still enjoy talking about the music. Especially the part of their career I enjoy the most. I haven't hated anything PJ has done, but I do wonder if I'd like some of it as much if another band put it out. I'm enjoying LB for instance, but it's not a revelation or anything. Like No Code and Yield were when I heard them. It's more like, "Hey, that's pretty damn good" as opposed to "Holy shit!". And I thought it was a huge improvement over the last album, so I was pleasantly surprised. But being a member here doesn't mean you have to constantly drink the PJ Kool Aid.

SatansFuton wrote:

Tim Simmons wrote:

EarlWelsh wrote:

Gotta love seeing Ten Club members posting opinions about Pearl Jam hitting the crapper after this or that record. If you hold that belief then why the shit are you even here?

They still can write the occasional tune, but it's not like 91-98 where every tune they wrote is great. But it's silly to think just because we don't view a band in a certain light we have to leave the band behind.

I'm more dubious of people who can't acknowledge anything negative about the band more than people who do.

Plus, we're using the word "crapper" very loosely here, in some cases we mean they went to absolute shit and in others we're just talking a drop off in quality. The Stones are my other favorite band, and I can't sit here and tell you with a straight face that their post-Tattoo You catalog is as good as their stuff from the 60's, 70's and first part of the 80's. I enjoy their later period, I like Bridges To Babylon and Voodoo Lounge for instance, but I'm not going to pretend they're as good as Exile On Main St. In the case of both PJ and The Stones, I still enjoy talking about the music. Especially the part of their career I enjoy the most. I haven't hated anything PJ has done, but I do wonder if I'd like some of it as much if another band put it out. I'm enjoying LB for instance, but it's not a revelation or anything. Like No Code and Yield were when I heard them. It's more like, "Hey, that's pretty damn good" as opposed to "Holy shit!". And I thought it was a huge improvement over the last album, so I was pleasantly surprised. But being a member here doesn't mean you have to constantly drink the PJ Kool Aid.

True, true. Good points, dudes. "The Crapper" just seemed an unfair place for a fan to put PJ, haha, but if we're talkin' about different levels of "crap," if you will, then okay.

EarlWelsh wrote:

I have to disagree with the idea of Radiohead hitting the crapper. I don't think their last album was that good but it wasn't craptastic....just sounded like, well, the Radiohead of recent years. Anyway, it's hard to take anyone seriously when they reduce a great record such as Kid A to "blips and bloops."

it's an opinion, dude. I like them better when they leave the effects and keyboards in the other room. simple as that. I didn't like Kid A or Amnesiac, loved In Rainbows, didn't like King of Limbs. I've loved those songs when Thom has played them live acoustically, like at Bridge School.