jond7699
8x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 8,306
|
Post by jond7699 on Feb 10, 2006 17:11:02 GMT -5
Finally heard this song this morning on my way to work. I am impressed. It sounds pretty much like a Godsmack lead single should sound like
|
|
jdmasta289
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 3,692
|
Post by jdmasta289 on Feb 10, 2006 23:29:54 GMT -5
I do like how he repeats "Speak" as spoken-word at the end, but I've never been a huge Godsmack fan.
Similar chart run to "Straight Out Of Line"? Sure, I'd say so. Number one at active rock? Sure, I'd say so. As many album copies sold as their last three albums? I'll go with no on that one, but they'll come pretty close. Their hardcore fan base is still there, but the nu-metal kids from 1998-2002 have long since disappeared.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 11, 2006 0:51:18 GMT -5
Their hardcore fan base is still there, but the nu-metal kids from 1998-2002 have long since disappeared. Tell that to Disturbed, Korn, System Of A Down, Linkin Park, Crossfade, etc. I don't know how you can make a claim like that when so many nu-metal bands are still going platinum or higher.
|
|
jond7699
8x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 8,306
|
Post by jond7699 on Feb 11, 2006 15:09:27 GMT -5
Their hardcore fan base is still there, but the nu-metal kids from 1998-2002 have long since disappeared. Tell that to Disturbed, Korn, System Of A Down, Linkin Park, Crossfade, etc. I don't know how you can make a claim like that when so many nu-metal bands are still going platinum or higher. People have been calling for the death of nu-metal for years. That type of talk doesn't phase me anymore
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 11, 2006 16:02:21 GMT -5
It just still annoys me because it seems ridiculous to single out nu-metal when rock in general is really going down the tubes as a whole. For every four established bands and one new band you can pick out that are doing well, there are ten established bands and twenty new bands going down the shithole.
|
|
jdmasta289
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 3,692
|
Post by jdmasta289 on Feb 11, 2006 16:42:33 GMT -5
Hey now, I have never been calling for the end of nu-metal. I just realize that the artists who have gotten played on alternative rock stations (and, to an extent, active rock stations) have been less nu-metal and more in other genres, whatever they may be.
Sure, artists like Disturbed, Staind, Godsmack, Korn, etc. etc. are still going, but 1) the "buzz" isn't there like it used to be and 2) while longevity doesn't seem to be an issue with them, their songs aren't dominating the charts like in 2000 or 2001.
Believe me, I'm not a hater; I'm just telling it like it is. While these artists are remaining successful, they are simply not getting as much airplay as they used to.
Artists like Linkin Park & Papa Roach have remained popular, but in 2000, artists like Kid Rock, Limp Bizkit, & Crazy Town were able to score huge hits and nobody has come along to replace them since their downfall. The "buzz" has worn off.
I mean, what artists dominated alternative 2005? Weezer, NIN, Green Day, Foo Fighters, Gorillaz, SOAD, Killers...all able to score multiple hits from each album.
Which artists dominated 2000? Quick, which bands come to mind?
Penance, I understand your argument. And it hasn't changed by that much. But a simple observer could say "the buzz has worn off" and new bands are chic right now. I don't have numbers to back up because there are no g*d damn websites that actually list album sales.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 11, 2006 17:17:04 GMT -5
Okay, I see where you're coming from, but I think that's the difference between active and alternative. Just as Disturbed, Godsmack, and the like are not dominating alternative as they used to, the same goes for bands like Weezer, Fall Out Boy, and the White Stripes on active. And I realize that you're saying that the harder bands used to dominate alternative as well, but it seems like things have changed a lot for both active and alternative stations in terms of what side of the musical fence they stand on. So I wouldn't expect Disturbed or Godsmack to do extremely well on the alternative charts anymore.
But it seems like you're saying the lack of airplay on alternative is going to reduce their sales, and that might still be true, but it also seems like sales have very little to do with airplay anymore. You can run a fine-toothed band comb through both active and alternative charts and pick out a bunch of artists that are doing great chartwise but are really slumping saleswise. Trapt, HIM, Shinedown, and the Strokes for example. I really don't think the way their singles are doing on the charts reflect their relatively weak sales performances.
My point is that when you consider all the albums that have gone gold or higher last year, it becomes clear that there is still a considerable market for nu-metal bands even if radio is less of a home for them. You can't just go by what the radio indicates anymore, you have to look at what sales are saying, and the sales are saying that nu-metal is still selling.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 11, 2006 17:19:05 GMT -5
Or if you really want to condense my argument to a fine point, I guess you could say that I'm really suggesting that radio is not that important anymore when it comes to artist promotion and album sales. It's far from a dead dinosaur, but I think there's enough evidence that exists to show that radio isn't the monolithic judge of success that it used to be.
|
|
|
Post by Walking Contradiction on Feb 11, 2006 19:45:40 GMT -5
Regarding some of the "nu-metal" bands mentioned:
- Korn continue to succeed because they were essentially the innovators of nu-metal, and no other band has really been able to duplicate their sound. Many have tried, but Korn just comes across as more convincing than all of these other nu-metal bands, and more creative as well.
- System of a Down may have nu-metal influences in their music, but they set themselves apart by drawing from a wide variety of other influences, including alternative, Eastern music, and old-school metal. Their harder/faster numbers have a quirkiness that sets them apart from other nu-metal bands, and their mellower songs, in my opinion, are just more well-written than most similar offerings from other nu-metal bands. They're truly in a class by themselves.
- Bands like Godsmack, Staind, and Crossfade are more post-grunge than nu-metal if you ask me.
- Although Linkin Park fits the "nu-metal" description pretty closely, their pop sensibility (and to a lesser extent, the industrial sounds in their music) is what allows them to continue to have major success outside of Active Rock. Perhaps the same could be said for Trapt and Papa Roach as well.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 11, 2006 22:29:25 GMT -5
For the purposes of this discussion, I don't think it's so important why they are popular so much as the fact that they are popular. There are lots of good reasons why Korn and Linkin Park and SOAD and Mudvayne and Godsmack and Disturbed and Slipknot and Papa Roach and Staind and probably a bunch that I'm forgetting right now are still popular, but the point isn't why they are popular, the point is that they are popular.
The reason I'm trying so hard to bury this point into people's skulls because I just hate it when people try to claim that they're a fad that's died out or something when the evidence to the contrary is obviously there. People are quick to point to bands like Sevendust and Cold that aren't nearly pulling in the numbers that they used to pull in as a sign that the entire genre is dying out, but this happens all the time in any genre of music if you stop to look hard at history enough.
It really bothers me because the majority of the people that do that also seem to take pleasure in it, like they get some kind of weird satisfaction out of seeing people's hard work suffer. I'm not saying anyone here is doing that at all, far from it, but I'm just kind of making clear why I really get bent out of shape when I hear people talking about the death of nu-metal, or the death of any genre, really. I don't understand how people could hate something so much to wish for failure. It seems like a very selfish attitude.
|
|
Sox5452
New Member
Joined: January 2006
Posts: 74
|
Post by Sox5452 on Feb 13, 2006 16:10:15 GMT -5
I agree, NuMetal still is selling, but it isnt quite as popular as it was before. Also, regarding Staind and Godsmack, they might fit better into the Post-Grunge category now, but when they first came out, they were definitely more Nu-Metal.
|
|
Crushcrushchris
5x Platinum Member
Default
Joined: November 2003
Posts: 5,131
|
Post by Crushcrushchris on Feb 14, 2006 8:58:29 GMT -5
Instant impact at #8 and rising.
|
|
|
Post by reception on Feb 21, 2006 18:30:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by reception on Feb 22, 2006 17:54:19 GMT -5
It's featured on the Radio & Records EPK.
|
|
Chato
2x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2005
Posts: 2,028
|
Post by Chato on Feb 23, 2006 8:57:01 GMT -5
Penance , I can see why it seems selfish to you when some people are cheering about how a genre is "dying" but I think the main aspect of wanting nu-metal to "die" is the fact that many people (including me) are frustrated about the state of one of their favorite radio formats .Personally, I think that the majority of nu-metal is generic , disposable and not worth being played on any radio format . I really like the changes alternative radio has made and I think it has improved a lot since 2001/02 . ActiveRock is playing almost nothing but post-grunge and nu-metal these days and every hint of a change of this mess makes me a little more confident that active rock might also change for the better soon .
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 23, 2006 14:59:22 GMT -5
Penance , I can see why it seems selfish to you when some people are cheering about how a genre is "dying" but I think the main aspect of wanting nu-metal to "die" is the fact that many people (including me) are frustrated about the state of one of their favorite radio formats .Personally, I think that the majority of nu-metal is generic , disposable and not worth being played on any radio format . I really like the changes alternative radio has made and I think it has improved a lot since 2001/02 . ActiveRock is playing almost nothing but post-grunge and nu-metal these days and every hint of a change of this mess makes me a little more confident that active rock might also change for the better soon . I think you're thinking about a few things here in the wrong way. First off, the fact that you think that radio should be devoted to specific kinds of bands shows that you're ignoring the main point of radio from a business perspective, and that is to be as relevant to as many people as possible. I personally don't listen to the radio because I want control over what I listen to, but if you're going to listen to radio then you have to take the bad with the good. It's the downside of getting a wide variety of songs to hear. That and the commercials. However, I do think there needs to be a clearer divison between active and alternative, because active is already skewed toward the heavy rock and nu-metal crowd, and alternative is steering toward the punk and indie and soft rock crowd, and the fact that some of that peanut butter still gets in that chocolate means that there's not as wide a line between active and alternative as there should be. So I can understand frustration there, but again that ties back in to what I said above: radio stations want to appeal to a broad audience, so alternative will play active and vice versa if they think it'll get them more listeners. It's the good and the bad and everyone has to deal with it in their own way. But the main thing I think you are wrong about is when you say that nu-metal is disposable, and I can't imagine you believed I would agree with you on that note either. Bands like Godsmack and Disturbed are no more disposable and no less meaningful than Coldplay or the White Stripes or the Killers, and most of you probably think I'm batshit apefuck insane now, but what I say is true if you think about it from a certain perspective. The reason why a person (read: me) would like a band like Korn or Staind is because they want some kind of A) emotional release or B) enjoyable experience, and it's arguably the same thing with Modest Mouse or Wilco, although more than likely not on the same level. When I listen to the Mars Volta, it's because they are wildly random and unpredictable musically and because Cedric's lyrics are impossible to pick apart but I love doing so. I like Sigur Ros because the music is breathtaking and ultra relaxing. I like Coldplay because I find their music to be very enjoyable when I'm down and need something somber to match my mood or sweet to lift me back up. Don't forget that music has that kind of effect, because that's where I'm going with this. What kind of music do you listen to when you're upset? When you're frustrated? When you want to vent? Most people would probably choose something in the metallic range, correct? I like a lot of metal bands, and I think metal is great, but melody is not something you can easily pry out of Lamb Of God or Shadows Fall. It really takes some doing in my opinion. Bands like Taproot and Cold are simply taking the heavy aspects of metal, the catharsis of rage, the great release of anger, and throwing it all in a nice warm soup of melody, catchy hooks, and big choruses. And that appeals to me because it means that I get that outpouring of emotion that I want and I can sing along with it or find myself humming the chorus later in the day. Am I going to find deep meaning in a nu-metal song? No, most of the time I'm not, but music doesn't have to necessarily be about that either. Music can just simply be about hearing something that is enjoyable to you. Something that gets you moving, that picks you up and puts you back where you want to be. Something that inspires you. When I feel like I've got a lot of shit on my mind, it helps to have a song like Bullet With A Name or Just Stop or Falling to put me back where I need to be. To get me in the right state of mind again. Now I could care less if people decide nu-metal has no artistic or technical merit. That's never been that important to me. I will go ahead and agree that it largely doesn't, but I don't think it has to in order to be enjoyable or to inspire people or for people to associate with it. Feel free to disagree, but it's probably just because nu-metal doesn't grab you in the same way that it does me. Maybe it just doesn't have what you're looking for, but that's the beauty of music: it can mean so many different things to different people, and we all don't have to like everything, because what we like will still always be there for us. But (and to tie this back to the start) there lies the problem with radio. It's trying to get out to the entire sea of listeners, and that means gathering a little bit of everything. It means you have to put up with nu-metal and hard rock just as much as I have to put up with all the indie rock that I could largely do without. That's why I choose not to listen to the radio, because if I do then I don't have control over what they play, but again, that's the price of listening to radio. You have to take the bad with the good. It's the downside of getting a wide variety of songs to hear. That and the commercials. Now, I'll stretch this discussion out till the end of time if need be because I am that dedicated to the music that I enjoy, but I'd really like it if we could just see eye to eye on all of this. I'm not asking for you to start liking nu-metal here, but I'm just saying that you could try to understand where it comes from and why people like it and why it's still on the radio. We are all on the same wavelength here, just different ends of the proverbial dial, and we're all going to have to learn to share. That means my chocolate is going to be in your peanut butter.
|
|
Chato
2x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2005
Posts: 2,028
|
Post by Chato on Feb 23, 2006 17:17:40 GMT -5
Well , I agree with almost everything you've said here . I also don't listen to the radio that much but sometimes I just don't want to think about what song I put next in my playlist or what CD I'm gonna play and that's when I really enjoy listening to radio , it doesn't necessarily have to be a commercial station but it might also be some netradio , there you have others creating the playlists for you but without the commercials . Recently I've really come to enjoy listening to online alternative/indie rock stations and I'd love if I could say the same about active rock stations . Two recent examples are Ra and Intangible , last summer they both had splendid singles out which were by no means too heavy or unmelodic , yet both barely made the top30 on Active whereas both should've been Top10 hits IMO.
|
|
jdmasta289
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 3,692
|
Post by jdmasta289 on Feb 23, 2006 21:23:19 GMT -5
Penance,
Terrific post. I knew vaguely that was how you felt by previous posts but those are excellent arguments.
Personally, I don't take time to download and listen to different songs by Godsmack, Disturbed, Staind (and all the bands that probably fit that post-grunge/nu-metal category) like I do with music in the emo or punk category, but I respect the fact that the previously mentioned bands continue to make records. I believe it is music the masses can identify with and you should take it for what it is - which is really made for radio, and that I am perfectly fine with. That doesn't mean YOU can't identify with it, it's just that the masses can identify also.
Bands like Story of the Year and Alkaline Trio will never be as popular, and I am perfecty fine with that.
But here is one thing I truly have NEVER EVER understood about what is truly "alternative". If bands like Godsmack, Staind, and Creed borrow riffs from Nirvana and Alice In Chains, why aren't they alternative? Why is that music put squarely in the Active Rock or Metal Category. If an alternative band influences you more than any other band, I would say that makes you alternative. In the sense that what is "alternative" is what is essentially "modern rock", why shouldn't Seether be considered truly alternative? The Foo Fighters borrow riffs from Nirvana and they get played on 100% of alternative stations. Nickelback do not get 100% of the format, and I don't understand why.
Which leads me to an entirely different post.
|
|
Sox5452
New Member
Joined: January 2006
Posts: 74
|
Post by Sox5452 on Feb 25, 2006 16:20:48 GMT -5
Well I think one reason bands like Staind and Godsmack arent considered alternative is because what people consider alternative is very different from what it was in the early 90s. Alternative now seems to better fit bands like the white stripes and Coldplay, as well as indie and punk rock. Staind and Godsmack sound nothing like those bands. Alice in Chains would probably also be considered Hard Rock if they were out now, they were never really 100% alternative back then either. The genres have changed over time, so bands like Seether fit a lot better in the hard rock category.
|
|
jdmasta289
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 3,692
|
Post by jdmasta289 on Feb 25, 2006 17:17:07 GMT -5
Point taken, but if people's definition of alternative nowadays is more in the line of Coldplay & the White Stripes, then why are active-leaning bands so much more successful than they used to be? Why are Staind & Godsmack shelling out top 5 hits album after album? And why do "alternative" stations mix them in together?
Alice In Chains weren't the only grunge band to influence the nu-metal bands. Pearl Jam and Nirvana (and Soundgarden to an extent) were all considered alternative then and they still are today. So why are the bands they influenced NOT alternative? That is ridiculous to me.
What pisses me off is when people waste their time hating on bands like Godsmack, when 50 Cent and the Black Eyed Peas are making music that is 1000 times worse. Of course, that is only my opinion, but inoffensive and genuine music beats out cliched and horrible overrated crap like what pop stations are playing today.
And also, I recently looked over on the pop chart. People claim that pop is "balanced" nowadays like it WASN'T in 2002. There are 3 crossovers from this chart and 16 (!) from the urban chart. What a freaking joke.
I'll stick to Godsmack over 50 Cent any day.
|
|
halo19
4x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 4,683
|
Post by halo19 on Feb 25, 2006 17:34:53 GMT -5
The term "alternative" is kind of too varied in the first place (are Coldplay, SOAD, and the White Stripes really the same kind of music?). But I guess that since the bands of the '90s "went mainstream" it would've been natural for mainstream rock of later to borrow from the grunge bands of the time.
|
|
|
Post by allnightmarelong on Mar 25, 2006 23:24:02 GMT -5
IV Tracklisting:
Livin' In Sin Speak The Enemy Shine Down Hollow No Rest For The Wicked Bleeding Me Voodoo Too Temptation Mama One Rainy Day
Due out April 25
|
|
Nicholas2.0
6x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 6,666
|
Post by Nicholas2.0 on Mar 26, 2006 3:00:31 GMT -5
I keep reading that they want to push their boundaries and expand their sound, and I really want to respect them, considering there was nothing wrong with the first album, but "I Stand Alone" aside, they never evolve. They continually set me up for disappointment. I mean yeah, the singles are all varying degrees of "okay" to "good," but it's the same damn song every time.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Mar 26, 2006 12:53:51 GMT -5
I keep reading that they want to push their boundaries and expand their sound, and I really want to respect them, considering there was nothing wrong with the first album, but "I Stand Alone" aside, they never evolve. They continually set me up for disappointment. I mean yeah, the singles are all varying degrees of "okay" to "good," but it's the same damn song every time. I dunno, I've actually sat down and listened to all three albums back to back and I was struck by how Faceless was a far more consistent, direct, and powerful album song for song. The first two kind of revel too much in Alice In Chains style songwriting and Faceless is just more driven and to the point. I'd say they've definitely at least become much better at creating their brand of rock effectively, even if that's not much of a notable achievement stylistically.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Apr 13, 2006 12:51:38 GMT -5
Having heard IV, I see now that they chose Speak to be the single because it's safe ground for their fanbase. The actual album seems to mesh what they had on The Other Side quite nicely into their core sound. Voodoo Too also doesn't come off nearly as hokey as I figured it would. Especially nice are One Rainy Day and Hollow (I'd especially like to know who the female backup vocalist is), they definitely show off their Other Side, and the bluesy Shine Down is awesome. Didn't think they had that in them. I assume that The Enemy and Voodoo Too are earmarked as the follow-up singles.
|
|
Sox5452
New Member
Joined: January 2006
Posts: 74
|
Post by Sox5452 on Apr 13, 2006 15:21:12 GMT -5
Godsmack, Disturbed, and Mudvayne are 1,2,3 in the Active Rock chart this week.
|
|
|
Post by allnightmarelong on Apr 13, 2006 22:47:03 GMT -5
I downloaded the new album and its REALLY GREAT. probably their best album yet (thats hard to say because I love them all). songs worth noting: Voodoo Too, Hollow (sounds like The Other Side EP), and The Enemy. should be a really big album for them. hopefully the album that gets them the success they rightly deserve
|
|
Crushcrushchris
5x Platinum Member
Default
Joined: November 2003
Posts: 5,131
|
Post by Crushcrushchris on Apr 16, 2006 9:57:51 GMT -5
I'm surprised at the strength that this one has on AR holding off RHCP.
How many weeks @ #1 so far for Speak on Active?
|
|
|
Post by American Idiot on Apr 16, 2006 18:09:03 GMT -5
Alright now that I've heard the album, I have to agree with just about everyone said above. I don't know if I like this better than their self-titled or Faceless since I have to listen to it more, but its a very good record that I'm sure I won't get sick of too quickly. I think the song that most stuck out to me was Temptation, and even though the lyrics make it kind of a relative cheesy song, it could make a good single. The Enemy, Shine Down, and Hollow are worth noting as others above said for possible future singles as well.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on May 2, 2006 17:50:54 GMT -5
Judging from first week sales, they could go gold in less than a month. Score another one for the "dying" nu-metal scene.
|
|