|
Post by singingsparrow on Feb 4, 2009 15:07:19 GMT -5
That's unfair. Well, almost. Kind of. As much as people like to pan the similarities between "How You Remind Me", "Someday", and "Far Away", there really aren't that many beyond the similarity that a lot of Active Rock ballads have. I mean, "Far Away" is very light, very mellow, and "Someday" is very upbeat, and "How You Remind Me" is very snarky and angry. I mean, technically I know there's supposed to musically be similarities, but I think the songs are different enough to stand apart. I think people tend to forget how "How You Remind Me" really sounded when they make these comparisons. Or they just don't care cause they hate Nickelback anyway, wonk wonk. The chord progression and verse-chorus-verse-chorus-break-minor retread of previous verse-chorus-outro structure is really the only thing that makes the songs sound similar. Otherwise, I think the notion that "Someday" and "Far Away" sound just like "How You Remind Me" is exaggerated to a fair extent. Unlike "How You Remind Me", "Someday" has a bridge solo and, as has been said, sounds more polished and refined along the edges, compared to the dirtier edge of "How You Remind Me". And the production in "Far Away" is easily distinguishable from that of both aforementioned tracks. If it wasn't, "How You Remind Me" would fit just right on AC radio now, wouldn't it? ;) Sincerely, Noah Eaton
|
|
|
Post by singingsparrow on Feb 4, 2009 15:26:39 GMT -5
True. They don't sound incredibly similar, but it wasn't different enough for me to not feel like i had heard it before. Which was the problem for me. I mean, I never fully hated them, but I never felt like they were anything spectacular either. The point is that they've always been a band out to prove that they've got nothing to prove, but simply want to write anthems that everyone can chant along to that are arena-ready. The problem with how a lot of reviewers approach Nickelback is that they evaluate their music compared to, say, work that is obviously far more artistic in intent, like TV On The Radio or the Arctic Monkeys or what have you, rather than evaluate it by how successful or unsuccessful the band is at living up to their intentions, or any signs of growth the band may display on their part in constructing these anthems. I don't think anyone is doubting that Nickelback are nothing original or groundbreaking, but the way this band gets chastised for just that often with such unimpeachable hate is absurd to me all the same. If that's the reason such vitriol is justifiable, then by their standards virtually ALL MOR artists should receive equally as much universal disgust like this. Nickelback are extraordinary successful as they are because Kroeger is more sharply intuitive than most when it comes to writing strong hooks. Most other artists haven't been as successful, not because their songs are worse, but because their hooks are not as potent as Kroeger's; whether it's because other songwriters try and grasp at melodrama too tightly to the point the hook can't size up to the sentiments of the song, or because the songwriter hasn't developed as keen an ear when it comes to rhythm, end and internal rhyming, scansion, etc......or because the singer's voice simply fails to channel such hooks as confidently as Kroeger. In the end, many may still hate Chad Kroeger, but also can't argue that he sure knows how to repeatedly write well-crafted hooks unlike most others. Sincerely, Noah Eaton
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 4, 2009 15:46:53 GMT -5
That was brilliant. I almost cried.
|
|
PHOBES
3x Platinum Member
Until We Have Faces (02-01-11)
Joined: February 2008
Posts: 3,317
|
Post by PHOBES on Feb 4, 2009 16:29:18 GMT -5
Remind me to start posting formal salutations at the end of my longer posts/rants. I can see how "Someday" and "How You Remind Me" are considered to be so similar, but I still can't figure out how anyone could say "Far Away" sounds like either of those. Even Chad's voice sounds different, one of the few times I think he's even realized what falsetto is.
|
|
Physical
Charting
probably knows you irl
Joined: March 2007
Posts: 480
|
Post by Physical on Feb 4, 2009 16:39:31 GMT -5
^Agreed. "Far Away" sounds NOTHING like those other two songs. I actually think out of all of their singles, only "How You Remind Me" and "Someday" sounds similar. I think the rest of their singles all sound distinguishable. Far Away, Rockstar, Photograph, Animals etc. all have something different to offer.
|
|
aTunes
9x Platinum Member
Bow
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 9,166
|
Post by aTunes on Feb 4, 2009 20:56:18 GMT -5
True. They don't sound incredibly similar, but it wasn't different enough for me to not feel like i had heard it before. Which was the problem for me. I mean, I never fully hated them, but I never felt like they were anything spectacular either. The point is that they've always been a band out to prove that they've got nothing to prove, but simply want to write anthems that everyone can chant along to that are arena-ready. The problem with how a lot of reviewers approach Nickelback is that they evaluate their music compared to, say, work that is obviously far more artistic in intent, like TV On The Radio or the Arctic Monkeys or what have you, rather than evaluate it by how successful or unsuccessful the band is at living up to their intentions, or any signs of growth the band may display on their part in constructing these anthems. I don't think anyone is doubting that Nickelback are nothing original or groundbreaking, but the way this band gets chastised for just that often with such unimpeachable hate is absurd to me all the same. If that's the reason such vitriol is justifiable, then by their standards virtually ALL MOR artists should receive equally as much universal disgust like this. Nickelback are extraordinary successful as they are because Kroeger is more sharply intuitive than most when it comes to writing strong hooks. Most other artists haven't been as successful, not because their songs are worse, but because their hooks are not as potent as Kroeger's; whether it's because other songwriters try and grasp at melodrama too tightly to the point the hook can't size up to the sentiments of the song, or because the songwriter hasn't developed as keen an ear when it comes to rhythm, end and internal rhyming, scansion, etc......or because the singer's voice simply fails to channel such hooks as confidently as Kroeger. In the end, many may still hate Chad Kroeger, but also can't argue that he sure knows how to repeatedly write well-crafted hooks unlike most others. Sincerely, Noah Eaton Hats off to you sir! This is what I've always said about Nb (though not as well worded). Kroeger is brilliant when it comes to crafting hooks and catchy melodies, just not as much in originality. So why shouldn't they be praised for that? Making hit after hit is just as much of a talent as a finger shredding guitar solo. With how fickle radio and the general audience is, it takes skill to be able to create those songs with the right hooks that will sell to the mainstream. It's time they get some appreciation for their ability in that category. And, yeah the HYRM similarities have been blown way out of proportion. Someday bears a resemblance yes, but is still very much it's own song, and FA I've never even heard much similarity to HYRM, so I don't know how that one got started.
|
|
jvandyck87
5x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 5,213
|
Post by jvandyck87 on Feb 4, 2009 22:07:41 GMT -5
Nickelback is way less guilty of cloning themselves than Saliva. Honestly, "Ladies & Gentleman" and "Family Reunion" are the same song, and "King Of The Stereo" isn't far away either. And all three of these are trying to be the next "Click Click Boom." Guilty.
|
|
Cody
6x Platinum Member
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 6,692
|
Post by Cody on Feb 4, 2009 22:19:47 GMT -5
Nickelback is way less guilty of cloning themselves than Saliva. Honestly, "Ladies & Gentleman" and "Family Reunion" are the same song, and "King Of The Stereo" isn't far away either. And all three of these are trying to be the next "Click Click Boom." Guilty. Yeah I agree. And sadly Saliva's best era is the one where they tried something different. "Back Into Your System" had ridiculously great singles. All 3 of them, "Always" most specifically, were really good
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 4, 2009 22:45:01 GMT -5
Nickelback is way less guilty of cloning themselves than Saliva. Honestly, "Ladies & Gentleman" and "Family Reunion" are the same song, and "King Of The Stereo" isn't far away either. And all three of these are trying to be the next "Click Click Boom." Guilty. Yeah I agree. And sadly Saliva's best era is the one where they tried something different. "Back Into Your System" had ridiculously great singles. All 3 of them, "Always" most specifically, were really good I wouldn't really say Back Into Your System was all that different, it felt more like a natural extension of where they were headed. Survival Of The Sickest felt more different to me, because that was where they really showed all their influences and really pushed for the sound that they obviously really wanted to hit. And then that album did poorly so they had to retread.
|
|
Pipa
Diamond Member
Sinner
1 week at #1: Of Monsters and Men - Alligator
Joined: December 2004
Posts: 10,448
My Charts
|
Post by Pipa on Feb 5, 2009 9:34:39 GMT -5
Disturbed is also guilty of doing the same song since 2001, but for some reason I find they've been getting better in quality. I don't understand it.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 5, 2009 11:24:39 GMT -5
Disturbed is also guilty of doing the same song since 2001, but for some reason I find they've been getting better in quality. I don't understand it. I don't agree with that either. Personally I think Disturbed originally started out very much a rhythm-danceable-based metal band and starting with Believe and continuing through Ten Thousand Fists, began becoming more of a modern metal band in line with classic metal techniques. The Sickness is very much a different kind of album from Believe, Ten Thousand Fists, and Indestructible. But that's me.
|
|
PHOBES
3x Platinum Member
Until We Have Faces (02-01-11)
Joined: February 2008
Posts: 3,317
|
Post by PHOBES on Feb 5, 2009 13:11:53 GMT -5
Disturbed is also guilty of doing the same song since 2001, but for some reason I find they've been getting better in quality. I don't understand it. I agree, but instead of saying they're getting better in quality I'd probably say their getting more polished. But even that I'm not sure of, Disturbed is somewhat of an anomaly to me. In that, they typically sound the same from song to song, yet not really. Regardless, I'd say they're more guilty of this than Nickelback. It's just cool to make fun of Nickelback at the moment, and thus, the bandwagon effect has taken over.
|
|
aTunes
9x Platinum Member
Bow
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 9,166
|
Post by aTunes on Feb 6, 2009 6:05:34 GMT -5
Disturbed is also guilty of doing the same song since 2001, but for some reason I find they've been getting better in quality. I don't understand it. I agree, but instead of saying they're getting better in quality I'd probably say their getting more polished. But even that I'm not sure of, Disturbed is somewhat of an anomaly to me. In that, they typically sound the same from song to song, yet not really. Regardless, I'd say they're more guilty of this than Nickelback. It's just cool to make fun of Nickelback at the moment, and thus, the bandwagon effect has taken over. Except it's been "cool" to make fun of Nickelback for about 8 years now.
|
|
jdmasta289
3x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 3,700
|
Post by jdmasta289 on Feb 6, 2009 12:22:42 GMT -5
Trying to resurrect the ranking of singles! :)
Leader Of Men: B+ Breathe: B Old Enough: n/h How You Remind Me: B- Too Bad: C+ Never Again: B- Someday: C Figured You Out: C- Feelin' Way Too Damn Good: D+ Because Of You: C+ Photograph: C+ Animals: D+ Savin' Me: B- If Everyone Cared: B- Far Away: C+ Rockstar: C Side Of A Bullet: C+ Gotta Be Somebody: B- Something In Your Mouth: D+
Some of these grades are probably friendly, but I'll always support a rock band like Nickelback over, say, Miley Cyrus or Britney Spears, who undoubtedly would earn almost exclusively D's and F's for their quote-unquote musical endeavors.
|
|
crash46
7x Platinum Member
Inspired Mediasource
Ones who does not have Triforce can't go in.
Joined: November 2005
Posts: 7,224
|
Post by crash46 on Feb 6, 2009 13:24:23 GMT -5
Except it's been "cool" to make fun of Nickelback for about 8 years now. You know, I was in a Hot Topic store a month ago (for work, not shopping), and their manager had a phone conversation I was overhearing with his boss. He's talking about how the day went, and he told a story about "more Nickelback bashing". And it made me wonder: Is it really cool to bash Nickelback anymore? I mean, in the grand scheme of things, Nickelback is fucking, The Beatles, compared to current Johnnies-come-lately like Saving Abel and Theory of a Deadman (but yes, Chad Kroeger's feet do need to be held to the fire for them because he's the one who first said "ToaD is entertainment, let's sign them", when they're deplorable). Nothing that anyone has said about Nickelback has ever affected the band in any way. They do their thing, they're the biggest pop band in the world, they sell tons of tickets and crank out hits. Compare that to a band like Staind, who listened to its critics and changed for the worse, likely beyond repair. Congratulations, Staind; you're average now. I don't find Nickelback's music to be the slightest bit interesting, but their existence doesn't bother me anymore, and it's pretty pointless to be still ridiculing them at this point.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 6, 2009 13:32:22 GMT -5
I think, if we're going to compare any kind of popular band out there to the Beatles, it should probably be U2. At the very least Coldplay. It's funny because Absolute Punk is having a discussion exactly like this on their own forums. A lot of them are saying Radiohead, and maybe in terms of artistic merit that might be true, but I don't agree with them having the same mass appeal and widespread influence that the Beatles had. Of course there are arguments that can be made to the contrary, I'm sure. Nickelback though, I don't really see them on par with the Beatles. Maybe Led Zeppelin. Or Motley Crue.
|
|
crash46
7x Platinum Member
Inspired Mediasource
Ones who does not have Triforce can't go in.
Joined: November 2005
Posts: 7,224
|
Post by crash46 on Feb 6, 2009 13:57:23 GMT -5
I wasn't exactly comparing Nickelback to The Beatles; they're obviously nowhere in that league. I was saying that next to Saving Abel and Theory of a Deadman, Nickelback might as well be just as great as The Beatles.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 6, 2009 14:20:36 GMT -5
Yeah, I figured that out after I posted but then I thought, why ruin a springboard to a great conversation?
|
|
|
Post by singingsparrow on Feb 6, 2009 14:49:27 GMT -5
Except it's been "cool" to make fun of Nickelback for about 8 years now. You know, I was in a Hot Topic store a month ago (for work, not shopping), and their manager had a phone conversation I was overhearing with his boss. He's talking about how the day went, and he told a story about "more Nickelback bashing". And it made me wonder: Is it really cool to bash Nickelback anymore? I mean, in the grand scheme of things, Nickelback is f**king, The Beatles, compared to current Johnnies-come-lately like Saving Abel and Theory of a Deadman (but yes, Chad Kroeger's feet do need to be held to the fire for them because he's the one who first said "ToaD is entertainment, let's sign them", when they're deplorable). Nothing that anyone has said about Nickelback has ever affected the band in any way. They do their thing, they're the biggest pop band in the world, they sell tons of tickets and crank out hits. Compare that to a band like Staind, who listened to its critics and changed for the worse, likely beyond repair. Congratulations, Staind; you're average now. I don't find Nickelback's music to be the slightest bit interesting, but their existence doesn't bother me anymore, and it's pretty pointless to be still ridiculing them at this point. Well, when you have two Facebook groups combining to roughly half a million in size that are all about hating Nickelback, it's hard to see such a thing as being cool at all. It's simply a bizarre, visceral feeling that some will have and others will not, I suppose, unlike any other we've seen in the music scene this decade. Kroeger used to be more thin-skinned when it came to critics lashing at him, but I think he's developed an increasingly thicker skin each album era ever since he wrote about his critics in "Hangnail". I read this comment on one Nickelback group that was mentioning that, basically, Kroeger should write a new anthem about his critics, do something like they did for "If Everyone Cared" where all proceeds for single sales go to a child hospice or some other charity, and then write in a wide press release: "We'd like to thank the critics for the inspiration of this song. We will NOT be thinking of you when we purchase an island in the South Pacific with the thirty million in total album sales we've made, and rather be with our families and friends.......and maybe some of our fans too! Cheers!"How I'd love to see the face of someone at pay-no-mind-to-me-not-reviewing-the-album-look-at-how-well-I-can-write Pitchfork reading that! ;) Sincerely, Noah Eaton
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 6, 2009 14:56:59 GMT -5
Kroeger sounds like a nice name for an island.
|
|
PHOBES
3x Platinum Member
Until We Have Faces (02-01-11)
Joined: February 2008
Posts: 3,317
|
Post by PHOBES on Feb 6, 2009 15:10:34 GMT -5
Kroeger sounds like a nice name for an island. ...Or a chain of grocery stores
|
|
Nicholas2.0
6x Platinum Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 6,666
|
Post by Nicholas2.0 on Feb 6, 2009 15:41:33 GMT -5
Hell, switch the "o" to a "u," let the "r" fall off the side of the building due to negligence (you're not too worried about it), and it sounds like one of those old-time car horns: K-OO-ger! Disturbed is also guilty of doing the same song since 2001. I agree with this, generally speaking. Personally I think Disturbed originally started out very much a rhythm-danceable-based metal band and starting with Believe and continuing through Ten Thousand Fists, began becoming more of a modern metal band in line with classic metal techniques. The Sickness is very much a different kind of album from Believe, Ten Thousand Fists, and Indestructible. I also happen to agree with this... Instead of saying they're getting better in quality I'd probably say their getting more polished. ...As well as this.
|
|
Ragin
6x Platinum Member
Everybody Wants a Piece of the Action!!!
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 6,487
|
Post by Ragin on Feb 7, 2009 11:25:11 GMT -5
I think, if we're going to compare any kind of popular band out there to the Beatles, it should probably be U2. At the very least Coldplay. It's funny because Absolute Punk is having a discussion exactly like this on their own forums. A lot of them are saying Radiohead, and maybe in terms of artistic merit that might be true, but I don't agree with them having the same mass appeal and widespread influence that the Beatles had. Of course there are arguments that can be made to the contrary, I'm sure. Nickelback though, I don't really see them on par with the Beatles. Maybe Led Zeppelin. Or Motley Crue. Okay a few points of order here. The Foo fighters are today's Led Zeppelin, instant classic rock with respect. In fact Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones played with the Foos at Wembley, so there's no mistaking what the actual members of Led Zeppelin would say. The Beatles were pop mass appeal with rock crossover, but way too innovative to be compared to Nickelback. Motely Crue was way more popular in rock circles than pop circles, they had like one album that got pop love and that's it. Motely Crue just weren't good song writers either in my opinion. Nickelback is already much bigger than Motley Crue ever was. Nickelback is more like a CCR or something. Some rock respect, but some rock criticism, mass appeal, and music that I believe will hold up over time if HYRM is any indication. They have a finger on the pulse of music lovers, there is just something about their music that resonates. CCR didn't have the best vocals, nor the best lyrics, but they resonated. That is, if you even want to bring a comparison in.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Feb 7, 2009 11:30:52 GMT -5
Creedence Clearwater Revival, huh?
|
|
Pipa
Diamond Member
Sinner
1 week at #1: Of Monsters and Men - Alligator
Joined: December 2004
Posts: 10,448
My Charts
|
Post by Pipa on Feb 7, 2009 11:41:07 GMT -5
I always thought Nickelback were more like Journey: they can great a slick piece of pop-rock, but they aren't critically acclaimed.
|
|
Ragin
6x Platinum Member
Everybody Wants a Piece of the Action!!!
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 6,487
|
Post by Ragin on Feb 7, 2009 14:08:36 GMT -5
I always thought Nickelback were more like Journey: they can great a slick piece of pop-rock, but they aren't critically acclaimed. Journey isn't rock, by any standard.
|
|
Ragin
6x Platinum Member
Everybody Wants a Piece of the Action!!!
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 6,487
|
Post by Ragin on Feb 7, 2009 14:09:44 GMT -5
Creedence Clearwater Revival, huh? the closest I can really come. Either the band had more longevity than Nickelback has had, more acclaim, or was too soft. There really hasn't been a Nickelback in my opinion. They still manage to play to both audiences.
|
|
jvandyck87
5x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 5,213
|
Post by jvandyck87 on Feb 7, 2009 14:31:22 GMT -5
Leader Of Men: B Breathe: B Old Enough: n/h How You Remind Me: B Too Bad: B- Never Again: C- Someday: D+ Figured You Out: C- Feelin' Way Too Damn Good: C+ Because Of You: A- Photograph: C Animals: B- Savin' Me: B If Everyone Cared: C- Far Away: D Rockstar: C Side Of A Bullet: B Gotta Be Somebody: C Something In Your Mouth: C+
I gave them ONE A-range grade. On one of their least successful singles. I woulda given a couple of their album tracks A-range grades as well. "Believe It Or Not," "Little Friend," and "Follow You Home" are all pretty solid.
|
|
PHOBES
3x Platinum Member
Until We Have Faces (02-01-11)
Joined: February 2008
Posts: 3,317
|
Post by PHOBES on Feb 7, 2009 15:20:36 GMT -5
I always thought Nickelback were more like Journey: they can great a slick piece of pop-rock, but they aren't critically acclaimed. Journey isn't rock, by any standard. Says the guy who considers CCR and The Beatles rock. Please, Neal Schon put together some of the greatest riffs and solos ever (yes, I said ever). You're just judging them on Steve Perry's vocals. The Beatles, Journey, and CCR were all rock during their time.
|
|
|
Post by singingsparrow on Feb 7, 2009 16:02:59 GMT -5
I think, if we're going to compare any kind of popular band out there to the Beatles, it should probably be U2. At the very least Coldplay. It's funny because Absolute Punk is having a discussion exactly like this on their own forums. A lot of them are saying Radiohead, and maybe in terms of artistic merit that might be true, but I don't agree with them having the same mass appeal and widespread influence that the Beatles had. Of course there are arguments that can be made to the contrary, I'm sure. Nickelback though, I don't really see them on par with the Beatles. Maybe Led Zeppelin. Or Motley Crue. Okay a few points of order here. The Foo fighters are today's Led Zeppelin, instant classic rock with respect. In fact Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones played with the Foos at Wembley, so there's no mistaking what the actual members of Led Zeppelin would say. The Beatles were pop mass appeal with rock crossover, but way too innovative to be compared to Nickelback. Motely Crue was way more popular in rock circles than pop circles, they had like one album that got pop love and that's it. Motely Crue just weren't good song writers either in my opinion. Nickelback is already much bigger than Motley Crue ever was. Nickelback is more like a CCR or something. Some rock respect, but some rock criticism, mass appeal, and music that I believe will hold up over time if HYRM is any indication. They have a finger on the pulse of music lovers, there is just something about their music that resonates. CCR didn't have the best vocals, nor the best lyrics, but they resonated. That is, if you even want to bring a comparison in. Even Nickelback themselves seem to recognize that, if citing CCR in "This Afternoon" is any indication! ;) Sincerely, Noah Eaton
|
|