-
This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:
1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.
2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.
3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.
Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.
Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.
Thank you!
Red Hot Chilli Peppers - how do you rate them?
- Thread starter garlei
- Start date
We keep on harking back on Anthony's voice like it's some new revelation or something. There are great artists with poor vocals, great artists with poor vocals who go out of their way to further butcher up and distort their already lousy singing abilities, and then there are those who know that their vocals are a weakness and work on improving it. Anthony realized this a long time ago and has been improving ever since. If you compare his "Joke band" period when they first started out to now interms of harmonies/melodies and his expansion of his repertoire from a screamer/rapper, you hear how far he's come both in the studio and live, man. He's well suited for the band he plays in, you know? I don't know how large your sample size of the live show's of RHCP you've seen is, but out of like 9 live gigs I've seen of them, he was only piss poor in one of them and that was probably due to exhuastion.
Sometimes you can appreciate an individual from a band you don't particularly like, say a wicked bassist, drummer, lead, but I think in order to fully love and appreciate a band as a whole, you've gotta come to terms with the sum of the parts. I certainly couldn't go on hating the lead vocalist and still dig the rest of the band, man. It would drive me nuts, you know?
They did the album (half the tracks) premiere last night on the local new rock station over here and it was fantastic, bro. I promised myself that I wasn't going to listen to it but instead wait for the release, but I just couldn't, man. It was just too much to handle. My ears were starting to hurt from the anticipation, man.
RHCP- 13 Instrumental #1
02-slug-woman_with_the_tattooed_hands-cms-(live)
Sometimes you can appreciate an individual from a band you don't particularly like, say a wicked bassist, drummer, lead, but I think in order to fully love and appreciate a band as a whole, you've gotta come to terms with the sum of the parts. I certainly couldn't go on hating the lead vocalist and still dig the rest of the band, man. It would drive me nuts, you know?
PhiLLer said:
They did the album (half the tracks) premiere last night on the local new rock station over here and it was fantastic, bro. I promised myself that I wasn't going to listen to it but instead wait for the release, but I just couldn't, man. It was just too much to handle. My ears were starting to hurt from the anticipation, man.
RHCP- 13 Instrumental #1
02-slug-woman_with_the_tattooed_hands-cms-(live)
Yossarian said:
Yeah the album is amazing. I've listened to it non-stop and every track is just pure magic. Flea is so brilliant on this album and finally John steps forward and goes fullout, his guitar playing is amazing on this album. Anthony's voice is much better too on this album, he seems more comfortable hitting the high notes. Chad hits hard as ever.
I just can't stop talking about how great this album is. It's truly a work of art.
GoldenSpike
Reserve Team
I'm a big Chili's fan but I swing towards the older stuff as its a bit more funkah and im more into that.
I just got the new album and although good, i think that 28 tracks was a bit excessive. They seem to have swayed through a variety of genres and thats good, but there's just too many tracks that sound similar and just squeezed out, I dont hear any emotion in how they are played or voiced.
ReadyMade is a brilliant Rage esque track and some of the quiet ones like slow cheetah are really nice, but just a 13 track album would have been better in my opinion.
7/10 for me, and i suppose making it have 28 tracks means that everyone will find one they like but thats sort of selling out...
I just got the new album and although good, i think that 28 tracks was a bit excessive. They seem to have swayed through a variety of genres and thats good, but there's just too many tracks that sound similar and just squeezed out, I dont hear any emotion in how they are played or voiced.
ReadyMade is a brilliant Rage esque track and some of the quiet ones like slow cheetah are really nice, but just a 13 track album would have been better in my opinion.
7/10 for me, and i suppose making it have 28 tracks means that everyone will find one they like but thats sort of selling out...
V
Virgo
Guest
lawl, that caps off my night, someone accusing a commercial band of sort of selling out.
GoldenSpike
Reserve Team
It was meant to be sarcastic, obviously since BSSM they have become commercial which is why I like their older stuff.
Space is king.. ... or so I sing...
Space is king.. ... or so I sing...
Virgo said:
How come NIN are spared from your wrath concerning commercialism? The biggest goth/industrial band out there, huh?
I think you've just got an irrational level of hate for this band and use the hallow and meaningless word of "commercial" as a crutch.
All great bands, the ones who transform their status from a fringe, cult band into one with a much greater appeal through their great and diverse sound gain mass popularity at some point. It's not like they're going out of their way to pander to just one specific group like the MTV crowd or anything. Just because you're being carried by MTV or have a big marketing machine doesn't mean that you've sold out. You can't expect a band after all that they've been through to still continue to play the same type of **** that they were playing 20yrs ago when they were in their late teens to early twenties. Would you prefer that they still write stuff like Party on your pussy, Magic Johnson, Yertle The Turtle, Sex Rap, Catholic schoool girls rule even though they're into their 40s now? They've changed, modified and progressed in their musical base and thusly have gained a bigger following like most great and memorable bands do.
Writing more melodic and beautiful music does not equal selling out in any way, man.
V
Virgo
Guest
Yossarian said:
nah NIN's last album was complete sh*te just because Trent lacked the talent (or the drugs) to do something good. By no means was it something like let's do this so we can sell more.
Red Hot Chilli Peppers as well as bands like Incubus have suffered major shifts in their style, which coincided the band to become lighter, more "MTV friendly " or radio friendly and therefore sell more albums. The fanbase was largely changed as well. Is this just a coincidence? Is it just because they, as artists, decided to pursue another artistic path? I really don't think so.
See, I have no problems with bands that sell a lot, I have problems with bands or artists that change their style so they can sell more. For instance Chris Cornell, I hate his guts now and I'd bitchslap him if I saw in walking down the street.
I'm sure the musical path the Chili Peppers have chosen wasn't chosen with selling more albums or getting onto MTV. The line-up changed and the last years they've been heavily influenced by the sound that John Frusciante brought along. At the moment he is the driving force behind the bands musical style.
Also they've become older, more mature and they've evolved just like every band.
Also they've become older, more mature and they've evolved just like every band.
NottsSupporter
Sgt. Pseudo Dane
wise words coming from a mexican... 
(no offence all real mexicans..)
(no offence all real mexicans..)
V
Virgo
Guest
PhiLLer said:
quite convenient isn't it.
even if it wasn't intended, whatever, I don't hate them, I'm just not a fan.
However, they do play commercial rock (as in soft rock that sells) whether you guys want to admit it or not, and therefore it's impossible for them to sell out, hence my sentence that shocked Yoss.
I wasn't even having a go at them, hell most of the people here listen to stuff much more sh*tty in my books, so I just thought it was a stupid thing to say.
Virgo said:
Sure, changing musical styles has worked out in their favour and yes they do have quite a few songs that are very radio friendly but they certainly didn't make a concious decision to move into that direction I think.
Like I said they're current sound is heavily influenced by the genius that is John Frusciante and he would be the last person on earth to start making commercial music for the sake of it.
PhiLLer said:
completely agree
the Chillis can fill up any arena regardless of their current music. they're carreer already guarantees them an enourmous amount of fans. they don't really need to project "friendly rock" songs to become more sucessfull in terms of fans and money
Let me just say that Philler and brother Funkster have pretty much spoken for me in a much more to-the-point and concise manner, but I still have an urge to spew my guts out with my usuall three page replies....hurhurhur.
I think it's a decent album with some diverseness interms of the melodic, replayable songs and the edgy hard rock sounding ones. It's had a pretty good commercial success so that's probably what's bothering you about it most. If Trent's life was still spiralling out of control and the album was a commercial flop, you'd be all over it, because that'd mean that it was rejected by the tainted and stupid mainstream audience. It's a song-oriented and mellower project than his previous works, something I gather you associate with being commercial and too soft. You've gotta reinvent yourself in this business and go out of your comfort zone or else you won't survive much long with being bland and redundant. Like the members of the RHCP, he's no longer a kid, man. You can't expect him to regurgitate what he was doing 10-15yrs ago. He can't be the same drug-addled, angst ridden punk who was destroying his sets at this age and be still taken seriously. As you age, you either adapt and expand or you just clutch onto a raft of what got you to be famous in the first place and drown.
What's too convenient and catchy a term is "Sellout" or "Commercial". Have they lost control of their music to outside influences? I don't think so. Why does anything that the record label is content with that gets decent radio/tv play has to be selling out? By that definition, just about every band with a modicum of success ever in the history of music would be a money grubbing sellout. I've just never understood why sucess is always equated with selling out. "Oh, they're no longer playing to a small circle of about 500 on Hollywood Blvd, they sold out', "They're actually gaining popularity and getting airplay", they've sold out, "they've challenged themselves, expanded their musical palette and have grown up", they've sold out.
As a band grows steadily in fan base support and emerges from the underground and has repeated success both critically and sales wise, it becomes 10x harder to sustain the edginess and hunger you had when you were just starting out and dirt poor and were just trying to survive until the next album, you know? And once you've gained a foothold in the industry and are no longer worried about putting food on the table and you're surrounded by outside influences who want to do this and that with your image and sound, and others who shower you with praises and awards left right and centre it becomes tough to pull off that same feeling that you had when you started out. Also, you've gotta take age into consideration. I'd be mighty depressed if a band that I supported were trying to pull off the same schtick that they were doing 15-20yrs ago.
Adding to your sound and making it distinctly different from what it was 20yrs ago does not equal selling out, man. You don't have to toil away in obscurity just to stay credible, man. There's nothing wrong with great album sales so long as it's not the first thing on your mind when you go into the studio.
Virgo said:
I think it's a decent album with some diverseness interms of the melodic, replayable songs and the edgy hard rock sounding ones. It's had a pretty good commercial success so that's probably what's bothering you about it most. If Trent's life was still spiralling out of control and the album was a commercial flop, you'd be all over it, because that'd mean that it was rejected by the tainted and stupid mainstream audience. It's a song-oriented and mellower project than his previous works, something I gather you associate with being commercial and too soft. You've gotta reinvent yourself in this business and go out of your comfort zone or else you won't survive much long with being bland and redundant. Like the members of the RHCP, he's no longer a kid, man. You can't expect him to regurgitate what he was doing 10-15yrs ago. He can't be the same drug-addled, angst ridden punk who was destroying his sets at this age and be still taken seriously. As you age, you either adapt and expand or you just clutch onto a raft of what got you to be famous in the first place and drown.
Virgo said:
What's too convenient and catchy a term is "Sellout" or "Commercial". Have they lost control of their music to outside influences? I don't think so. Why does anything that the record label is content with that gets decent radio/tv play has to be selling out? By that definition, just about every band with a modicum of success ever in the history of music would be a money grubbing sellout. I've just never understood why sucess is always equated with selling out. "Oh, they're no longer playing to a small circle of about 500 on Hollywood Blvd, they sold out', "They're actually gaining popularity and getting airplay", they've sold out, "they've challenged themselves, expanded their musical palette and have grown up", they've sold out.
As a band grows steadily in fan base support and emerges from the underground and has repeated success both critically and sales wise, it becomes 10x harder to sustain the edginess and hunger you had when you were just starting out and dirt poor and were just trying to survive until the next album, you know? And once you've gained a foothold in the industry and are no longer worried about putting food on the table and you're surrounded by outside influences who want to do this and that with your image and sound, and others who shower you with praises and awards left right and centre it becomes tough to pull off that same feeling that you had when you started out. Also, you've gotta take age into consideration. I'd be mighty depressed if a band that I supported were trying to pull off the same schtick that they were doing 15-20yrs ago.
Adding to your sound and making it distinctly different from what it was 20yrs ago does not equal selling out, man. You don't have to toil away in obscurity just to stay credible, man. There's nothing wrong with great album sales so long as it's not the first thing on your mind when you go into the studio.
V
Virgo
Guest
Yossarian said:
no man you have no idea about what you're saying here. NIN are an industrial music band. This last album apart from one or two song didn't sound one tiny bit industrial. It sounded like so many other rock bands out there. And also the lyrics are shockingly bad.
True industrial music fans have every right not to like it. I have friends that didn't mind it, but most didn't like it as myself.
I have no idea about the commercial success of the album, because I stopped caring about it, but I bet my arse it didn't sell as much as either The Downward Spiral or The Fragile.
I think Trent has the right to change his style, as I have the right to not buy the new music he makes just because I was a massive fan of his previous works. The last thing I want is to become like an U2 fanboy that buys IPods just because the band says so and say "How To Dismantle an Atomic Bomb" was a masterpiece and Vertigo was a kickass song, it's embarassing man.
but to make myself clear on this point:
I HEARD WITH TEETH BEFORE IT WAS ON SALE AND I DIDN'T LIKE IT FROM THE FIRST TIME I HEARD IT
ok?
about this
Yossarian said:
I already answered here:
Virgo said:
I'll just say that a good example of a band that tears apart your whole sucess/maturing/change of style model is Tool.
The more Tool sells, the more mature they become and widen their fan base, yet, the more deep and complex their sound as gotten in search for their ideal sound.
You see I just can't accept that most of these other bands I've talked about moved towards MTV and radio friendly songs, just because they felt like it.
It's my opinion that most of them just stopped being artists and became music salesmen. You're obviously entitled to disagree with it as you like Red Hot and probably other bands that I referred. It would be weird if you didn't.
But please don't say I don't like it just because they sell a lot, that has absolutely nothing to do with it.
I haven't really heard any of their new music but I can't rate them on that. I love all of their old stuff tho. Great group.Virgo said:
Ok, my apologies for my assumptions about why you didn't like the album. But there's no reason to overreact in such a manner and disparage U2 fans or whatever.........what the **** does U2 hawking an IPOD have to do with the Chilis or NIN's latest release? You're so blindingly zealous about selling out and commercialism and all that other **** that it's no wonder you're a hard to please, angry-all-the-time character, man. What selfless, noble, humanitarian cause are you exactly fighting for?
Chill the **** out, honestly.
I will be the first to admit that I'm not the most clued in individual on the industrial scene, but I've become a fan of Trent Reznor's through Howard Stern who's a fan of his and has had him on his show. So I'm not the die hard that you're referring to here, but I do see the departure interms of the sound by NIN from previous albums, but let's be serious here, since when has Trent been a lyrical mastermind? Since when has he been strictly Industrial, huh? Isn't NIN more of a heavy metal band a la Marilyn Manson minus the Goth elements? They use samples, electronics, but mostly, they're a more metal oriented band with a ton of gear than anything else. So that's why I just don't understand why you're so narrowminded and so intolerant of a little departure from the norm.
I'm prone to making assumptions and I'll make another here. You probably formulated your opinion about this album before even finishing through with your first listen of it. Also, you might've had a better appreciation for it if you actually purchased it instead (I don't blame you here) of downloading it before it's release date. This MP3dom world makes everything so discardable, meaningless and easy to write off, man. How could you not have been the least bit interested or impressed by Dave Grohl's contributions to this album? Was it him that turned you off? It couldn've just simply been the lyrics alone.
Virgo said:
If you're going to use a strawman argument to debunk my paragraph about bands experimenting and adding to their sound, atleast make it reasonable, man. How can you be soooo specific and inflexible as to pick one band like Tool to shoot down my statement? Tool haven't outplayed themselves like other bands. They've only released like what, four official albums in 16yrs? Bands like that who continuely live off of hype and anticipation can get away with feeding their fans the same **** in each album with a little bit of experimentation here and there. It's not their sound that doesn't lend itself well to the radio/tv, it's the length of their meandering, dull and over-indulgent songs. They can be a straight forward heavy metal band and keep some of those 10+ minute songs to under 6 maybe, but they choose not to and still get decent radio play. They sell not because they've been growing, developing and becoming better, but because they're one of the biggest heavy metal/prog-rock acts around so let's not pretend that they're completely obscure here. They get a massive push publiclly like most other big bands. Not because they're innovative or anything. Just about every kid who's a rock fan I know always lists Tool as that band that they like to sound more intelligent and sophisticated musically, honestly. How has their sound gotten more complex since Aenima, huh? Lyrically, same ****, sound, same ****. I mean, it's pretty good ****, but don't pretend like they've turned the heavy metal genre or their own signature tone for that matter on their heads and reinvented something completely new for the masses.
I don't know if you've heard 10, 000 days yet, but it's gotta be their weakest release, massive letdown considering they had five years to come up with something. That's why Maynard has been hinting at disbanding the band for close to a decade now, it wears on you musically and mentally when you keep rehashing the same material over and over again, man
Get over yourself and drop this 'MTV-friendly' bull****.