Thread: CRUSH vs BOUNCE
View Single Post
 
Old 03-06-2018, 07:30 PM
Supersonic's Avatar
Supersonic Supersonic is offline
The One And Only Real Backstage Killer
I'll Post When I'm Dead
 
Join Date: 03 Aug 2002
Location: Bangkok
Gender: male
Posts: 16,082
Send a message via MSN to Supersonic
Default

Aloha !

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alphavictim View Post
Ebbin was hired for Crush precisely because he was good with drumloops and the like. This was in, what, 1999? Plus even Destination Anywhere features them aplenty. For all the ill-led modern influences the band had during that era, drumloops were the one they'd been using for the longest time (even if it dates the album a ton).
Yeah, that's the official reason they hired him, I very much doubt that though, it's not like he had a massive resume with this stuff. Once Bruce Fairbairn had died both the band and the record company wanted a fresh sound, thus tried an upcoming producer. I've a feeling he was hired because he started the same way Jon did, he's even started his career at the Power Station Station if I remember correct.

I think with nu metal, Bon Jovi weren't able to reproduce nowadays poprock climate because there really wasn't one. There wasn't any popular music out there made on a piano or guitars. Back then it was either nu metal, or the kind of pop music made by Britney Spears and the likes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alphavictim View Post
Linkin Park were, as weird as that sounds, a highly innovative band that actually utilized loops and effects in creative ways. The reason they were hated is precisely because they did not fit in with the tough guy persona nerdy metalheads and angry bikers alike had developed as part of the genre's identity over the years (they even had a rapper - rap and metal were pretty much opposing tribes in the early 2000s).

Plus it's not like Oasis wrote complex songs, or broke new ground. Or is that precisely the reason they never broke big in the US and were over as a cutting edge band by album number three? I disagree with the approach to use complexity as the reason for musical staying power.
I never said complexity is needed, but maybe I wasn't clear in what I tried to say?

Once britpop came, I think in a way, the circle was complete. We'd started with britpop in the sixties and the circle ended in the late nineties with the same kind of guitar orientated rock and pop songs. Once nu metal followed, it really was more of what had happened the last 10 years. It was more hiphop but without the wit and storytelling and more metal but without the musicianship usually coming from the pioneering metal bands, hence saying it was a rather dumbed down. It didn't really offer anything new. I'm not sure if I can explain myself any better, but I think you get the gist of it?

Now I never really "got" the nu metal genre. Sure, there were exceptions, but a lot of the stuff out there was really similar. Papa Roach and Limp Bizkit were all the same to your average radio listener while, with grunge for example, Nirvana and Pearl Jam both had its own sound. I liked Limp Bizkit for its gimmick, but Korn and the likes... Meh. To me, the instrumentation is just a bunch of chords with drumloops and the rapping is nothing but rhymes, there's no witty stuff or storytelling in there like there was with late eighties, early nineties hip hop. But then again, I never got past the singles, I wouldn't know what the albums sound like.

Salaam Aleikum,
Sebastiaan
__________________
Reply With Quote