Bands that "sell out"...or do they?

[JayKeeley]

I was reading the recent Rolling Stone article on the top 100 albums of all time (as voted by the readers) and I was nicely surprised to see that The Beatles still manage to get to the #1 spot (and a few other albums in the top ten).

In any case, it got me thinking about how much The Beatles transformed themselves almost year by year - if you think about it, "Help"('65) - "Revolver"('66) - "Sgt Peppers" ('67)- "White Album"('68) came out in those consecutive years. What an evolution!

So to the point: Why is it that In Flames should get ripped to pieces (by their own fans) for making an album like Reroute to Remain. It still has the In Flames 'sound' and yet they've added some more melody. The title track makes just as much an impact as, say, 'Metaphor'. In my opinion, R2R could be their best album yet.

If the Beatles were allowed to evolve and still make a top 100 list with classic timeless albums, I find it astounding that other bands of today are some how forcibly restricted by their own fan base to keep churning out the same album over and over. What a shame - especially in a situation where bands want to get out of the underground and venture towards a wider audience.

If they're professional musicians (case in point In Flames), and music is the way they make a living, aren't they allowed to pursue new interests and themes in their art? What do you guys think?

 

[chibitotoro]

I agree entirely. It seems like a case of damned if you do/damned if you don't. If a band follows the fans, and doesn't really change, they are bashed by the media. If a band changes and tries to improve upon themselves, they are hated by their hardcore fans. This all doesn't hold true 100% of the time (the Beatles changed and everyone still loved them), but it does hold true frequently enough to be a bit of a probelm.

 

[Imajica]

Very well put. Reroute To Remain is my favorite In Flames CD. I have been a fan of theirs from day one. I can't beleive the way people are attacking them. I wish my all time favorite band (King Diamond )would take a page from them. I love them to death, but I am getting tired of every CD sounding just like the last one. Change is a good thing. Most people accuse a band of selling out when they change their sound a little and sell more albums. They are not ture fans if they are not willing to let a band grow.

 

[JayKeeley]

Agreed. I definitely think the big discrepancy here is the interpretation of what should remain underground and what becomes 'manufactured'. I think it's obnoxious for anyone to even demand that a band maintains the same mould for each album release. If that is the case, aren't the fans (and their 'demands') just substituting what a big record label demands from, say, a manufactured band like N'Sync?!

I just hate the way fans demand their own restrictions on the artists - as if they have some god forsaken right. Some In Flames fans are now complaining that you can buy "In Flames" t-shirts in the mall. (This also applies to some Opeth fans as well). How ridiculous is that?

I read an article on metal-rules.com about In Flames selling out, and the author even complained about the fact that they changed their logo from the Jester Race days. What next? That they should grow their hair longer, wear bullet belts and corpse paint? What does it take!?

Seems like the integrity and enjoyment of the music is no longer the attraction - even in the 'underground'.

 

[rhavin2112]

The problem is fan's are selfish. Look at what happened to Dark Tranqulity when they released Projecter! Kay every point you make is exactly the way I have felt for years!

you should do some writing for me!

 

[JayKeeley]

Originally posted by rhavin2112

you should do some writing for me!

No worries.

 

[General Zod]

I'm a long time fan of In Flames, and I like their new CD, but I’d like to play devil's advocate for a moment. Although, before I submit my counter argument, let me just say that Rolling Stone is total crap. They are a worthless rag, whose writers are completely clueless about music. I would put more stock in a list of the Top 100 CDs of All-Time from any poster on this board.

While it's true that the Beatles changed their sound from disc to disc, they were a pop band, who continued to be a pop band. If anything, they displayed a willingness to abandon their large audience, for a smaller group of fans who "got" what it was they wanted to do artistically. In Flames is coming at this from the opposite end of the spectrum. They have a fanatically loyal, albeit small, fan base, who "gets" what it is they have always done artistically. However, some of that loyal fan base PERCEIVES that In Flames isn't trying to stretch their creative wings with "Reroute to Remain", but instead is attempting to water down the purity of their artistic vision for the sake of selling more records and more seats. I think that this group of fans feels somewhat betrayed. They feel like they have supported the band loyally; bought the CDs, bought the t-shirts, and bought the show tickets. And now In Flames feels that they would prefer a Korn-sized audience, and is willing to say goodbye to that loyal fan base, for a larger one, that is loyal only to whatever MTV dictates is the hot band of the day.

Once again, this isn't my perception, I'm just throwing it out there for the sake of an interesting debate. Although, while I would agree that it is every artist's right to change their sound as often as they like, it is a fan’s right to change their opinion of said artist just as frequently.

GZ

 

[JayKeeley]

Originally posted by General Zod
let me just say that Rolling Stone is total crap. They are a worthless rag, whose writers are completely clueless about music. I would put more stock in a list of the Top 100 CDs of All-Time from any poster on this board.

Agreed - but it was a readers vote, so Rolling Stone just brokered the results out to the public by publishing the results. It doesn't matter which journal delivered the results, the importance is in the fact that the general public still believe that The Beatles are probably the most important band ever to grace the earth. Fair enough right?

While it's true that the Beatles changed their sound from disc to disc, they were a pop band, who continued to be a pop band. If anything, they displayed a willingness to abandon their large audience, for a smaller group of fans who "got" what it was they wanted to do artistically.

They were a pop band in an era where freedom of expression was slightly more restricted than that of today. Indeed, when John Lennon mentioned that The Beatles were "bigger than Jesus Christ", he was largely ostricized. I wasn't around for the release of Sgt Peppers or Let it Be, but I can imagine that the fan base from the days of Help and Can't Buy Me Love morphed into the new music scene, grew their hair out, and expressed free love. It might all be considered pop now, but back then, it was a revolutionary change from rock'n roll pop to psychadelia and flower power. It was a sign of the times.

And now In Flames feels that they would prefer a Korn-sized audience, and is willing to say goodbye to that loyal fan base, for a larger one, that is loyal only to whatever MTV dictates is the hot band of the day.

I know you're being devils advocate, but why does anyone have to say "goodbye" in this equation? Why is it impossible to enjoy a band with a wider audience? And don't all 'big bands' have to start small at some point in their career?

I think the argument would hold more water if In Flames became country. Or started doing the Kid Rock rap thing. Far from it - I understand the small community of fans feel abandoned perhaps, but rather than resent it, perhaps we should all embrace it instead. I, for one, miss the day when metal festivals would garner an audience of 100,000 gig to gig. I just think that the talent deserves a wider audience, so I wholeheartedly support In Flames in wanting to write better music, which is what R2R reflects IMO. It just happens to coincide with the fact that more people will now show an interest.

 

[Se7enChurches]

Originally posted by JayKeeley
Indeed, when Paul McCartney mentioned that The Beatles were "bigger than Jesus Christ", he was largely ostricized.

John Lennon

Ryan

 

[JayKeeley]

Originally posted by Se7enChurches
John Lennon

Ryan

merci.

 

[J.]

Excellent topic. And I'm amazed that it hasn't turned into a name-calling fest. Good form.

Here's my 2 cents....

I can't say much about the Beatles as I wasn't alive when they were the hot thing, and I was only 3 when Lennon was killed. So, I will not debate the Beatles.

In Flames on the other hand, is a whole other story. Being a fan of the band for some time now, I have been disappointed by their recent outputs. Colony was their last quality record. Clayman was a step towards a wider audience. I even remember hearing Clayman when it first came out and then telling my girlfriend that In Flames would be the next in a long line to replace musical integrity for the ever powerful dollar. I was somewhat correct.

Seriously people, can you honestly tell me R2R has better songwriting than Jester Race or Subterranean? No. R2R is an obvious attempt at more commerciality. Clean vocals, no solos= a more accessible sound.

As far as IF fanboys go, they are morons. These people are blind. They are more about supporting the band members than actually enjoying the music. IF could put out limp bizkit induced numetal and these fanboys would still by it. Opeth fanboys are the same way.

I own R2R, and while it certainly isn't the worst (Whoracle gets that honor), R2R won't get much playing time. It has like 4 good songs. That country sounding song is an abomination.

When General Zod was playing devil's advocate he pretty much summed up my whole viewpoint on the issue.

What really irks me about metal is the path that most bands follow. Notice I said most, not all. Most bands start off with a few really quality albums and they are usually the most brutal. Then slowly we see the band attempt to sell more records by getting softer and mellower. Metallica, Megadeth, Dark Tranquillity, Opeth, In Flames, Carcass, and many more.

If these bands want to change so much, get harder and more brutal. Look at At the Gates. SotS was much more punishing than anything they had done before and it is hailed as classic. Oh yeah, I forgot, no money in brutality. Stupid me.

 

[JayKeeley]

Originally posted by Dreamlord

Seriously people, can you honestly tell me R2R has better songwriting than Jester Race or Subterranean? No. R2R is an obvious attempt at more commerciality. Clean vocals, no solos= a more accessible sound.

Depends on your perspective I guess. I mean, if you are into power or prog on a normal basis, then even R2R will sound aggressive for the most part. I would say that 70% of R2R is still 'extreme-sounding', unless your usual intake of music is Immortal or Hate Eternal etc.

I admit Jester Race is a classic, but the single most difficult aspect of death metal to get used to is the vocals. Hence, R2R provides a "bridge" for metal fans who normally sway away from screams or growls.

What really irks me about metal is the path that most bands follow. Notice I said most, not all. Most bands start off with a few really quality albums and they are usually the most brutal. Then slowly we see the band attempt to sell more records by getting softer and mellower. Metallica, Megadeth, Dark Tranquillity, Opeth, In Flames, Carcass, and many more.

Yeah but just because they mellow out over time, it doesn't negate their earlier efforts does it? I bet seeing Metallica today doing Battery and Creeping Death is still as incredible as it was in '86.

Perhaps going mellow does lead to extra $$ value, and perhaps bands also tire of the same style over and over and feel the need to widen their horizon.

Hey - why would you say Whoracle is the worst IF release out of interest?

 

[J.]

Originally posted by JayKeeley
Hey - why would you say Whoracle is the worst IF release out of interest?

ugh...don't even get me started on WHoracle. A review of Whoracle will be posted at www.appropriateapocalypse.com at the beginning of November.

Here's some of what has been written in the Whoracle review:



What is the deal with “Episode 666”? It is regarded as one of the band’s strongest songs and is still part of the band’s live set. This is the most overrated In Flames song on any of their discography. The reason I think everyone likes it is because of the title. “Woah, it has 666 in the title, it must be an evil song. Kewl. And if I act like I like this song, it makes me evil too.” Horseshit. “Episode 666” is nothing new. If you want to listen to fast, thrashy songs done the right way, listen to Subterranean and The Jester Race.

The last real song is a cover of “Everything Counts”. Why do bands feel the need to redo crappy 80’s pop songs? All they ever do is replace the synths with guitars and replace the cheesy 80’s vocals with a more aggressive voice. Wow, really groundbreaking stuff there, duder. I remember hating the original version and the cover isn’t much better. Whoracle ends with a short little outro type piece with Enya type vocals. I hate Enya.

Fanboys will tell you that Whoracle “iz In Flames at their best. It rockzerz, dude”. Don’t listen to them. I mean c’mon, these are people who would lick the band member’s assholes if they ask them. Trust me, avoid Whoracle.

 

[General Zod]

Originally posted by JayKeeley
Agreed - but it was a readers vote, so Rolling Stone just brokered the results out to the public by publishing the results. It doesn't matter which journal delivered the results, the importance is in the fact that the general public still believe that The Beatles are probably the most important band ever to grace the earth. Fair enough right?

Fair enough. However, I'd say it's equally as irrelevant. The general public is musically illiterate. And that probably goes double for those who assign any musical value to a publication which routinely features scantily clad female pop stars on its cover.

Originally posted by JayKeeley
I know you're being devils advocate, but why does anyone have to say "goodbye" in this equation? Why is it impossible to enjoy a band with a wider audience? And don't all 'big bands' have to start small at some point in their career?

A wider audience is usually predicated on a more accessible sound. A more accessible sound is predicated on less complicated, less aggressive music. Less complex, less aggressive music is not what the folks who originally went for a ride on the In Flames bandwagon signed up for. Sure, some of the folks who listen to In Flames, who have a wider taste in music, will stick around. But I have no problem with those fans who feel like their beloved In Flames has turned their back on them.

Originally posted by JayKeeley
I think the argument would hold more water if In Flames became country. Or started doing the Kid Rock rap thing.

It's ironic you should say that, as that's exactly what some of their fans believe they've done. I've read positive reviews that have suggested that "Metaphor" has a country feel. I've also read positive reviews that have noted the Kornesque feel to both "Freefall" and "Transparent". Now maybe you draw a wide line in the sand between Korn and Kid Rock, but I don't think the average fan of Death Metal does.

Originally posted by JayKeeley
Far from it - I understand the small community of fans feel abandoned perhaps, but rather than resent it, perhaps we should all embrace it instead.

Embrace it? Why would they embrace music they don't like? Why not "embrace" Nsynch? I'm sure why you would expect someone to change their musical tastes.

Originally posted by JayKeeley
I, for one, miss the day when metal festivals would garner an audience of 100,000 gig to gig. I just think that the talent deserves a wider audience, so I wholeheartedly support In Flames in wanting to write better music, which is what R2R reflects IMO. It just happens to coincide with the fact that more people will now show an interest.

I agree and disagree. I would like to see the musicians whose music I love be able to reap the benefits of their sucess. However, I recognize that sucess usually dampens the fires that drive Metal musicians to create the music that I love.

GZ

 

[JayKeeley]

I would like to see the musicians whose music I love be able to reap the benefits of their sucess. However, I recognize that sucess usually dampens the fires that drive Metal musicians to create the music that I love.

To be fair, I have not been listening to In Flames from day one. As a side point, I guess I can see an analogy with Metallica here, who I had listened to since '83, but personally I thought Load/Reload was MUCH more of a departure from, say, Puppets, compared to R2R and, say, Colony. To me, R2R is still VERY aggressive in its own right and still hits all the right notes.

It's a shame you might think success dampens the fire of metal music because metal was probably at its peak in the mid to late 80's. Not only in succesful terms ($), but also in talent. Perhaps this is a matter of opinion, but it would be hard to imagine anyone think otherwise?

And I stick by the fans embracing metal in all shape or form - otherwise you get sorry situations of today where bands like Slayer just about sell out a bar in NJ compared to when they sold out huge arena's night after night 12-15 years ago. Where did those fans go?

The point being, there just aren't enough metal fans today to get it back to where it once was, so I'm more than happy to follow bands I like regardless of who they're target audience is, or how much money they make. It's all about how good the music sounds, and to me R2R sounds awesome.

 

[General Zod]

Originally posted by JayKeeley
The point being, there just aren't enough metal fans today to get it back to where it once was, so I'm more than happy to follow bands I like regardless of who they're target audience is, or how much money they make. It's all about how good the music sounds, and to me R2R sounds awesome.

Well, how it sounds to you, is all it's about.

If you want to know where all the Metal fans from the 80s have gone; they've gone no where. They're still listening to Metal. If you're asking where all the people who filled the stadiums for Metal shows went; they've jumped on the latest bandwagon. They were never really Metal fans. They were simply mindless music drones, listening to what Lord MTV told them to listen to. They've since been informed that Metal is no longer cool, and if they want to be hip, they need to go out and purchase the latest releases by Alisha Keys and Creed.

GZ

 

[Saruman]

Of course a band is free to do as they like, but fans are free to listen to whom they wish as well. I fail to see why people are surprised when a metal band loses some of its fanbase when it begins to merge with the mainstream. One has to face the fact that to gain commercial success, in almost every instance, a simplification and/or commercialization of the music is necessary. This is what I feel has happened with In Flames, though to be honest I really don't care for any of their work after Jester Race. They have followed the same beaten path of many once-great bands--namely, Metallica, Megadeth, Slayer. I downloaded a few songs of R2R a few days ago to see what the fuss was about, and I can confidently say that it is a WEAK release. The vocals have degenerated into nu-metalesque yelling, the melodies are poor, etc. There's no point in listing all the specifics. Read an objective review of it and you'll find most of what I'm saying.

 

[General Zod]

Saruman-

Speaking as someone who has been with In Flames since the beginning, I would say you should give "Reroute to Remain" a chance to win you over. Is it as good as "Whoracle"? No. But plenty of great CDs aren't as good as "Whoracle". Did they change directions on this disc? Somewhat. However, this disc actually contains some of their most brutal music. It just so happens that it also contains some of their most accessible. I think too many In Flames fans are getting scared off by the hype, and are prejudging this disc. Download the whole thing, and let it spin a few times. I think it may sneak up on you.

GZ

 

[JayKeeley]

Originally posted by Saruman
I downloaded a few songs of R2R a few days ago to see what the fuss was about, and I can confidently say that it is a WEAK release. The vocals have degenerated into nu-metalesque yelling, the melodies are poor, etc. There's no point in listing all the specifics. Read an objective review of it and you'll find most of what I'm saying.

With all due respect, you don't have to list out specifics because I have the CD already. And reviews only get it right 50% of the time.

I listened to R2R several times, and it grew on me with each listen. Now I rank it as one of the best In Flames CD's - if not, the best. Of course these are all just my opinions.

There is nothing wrong with change. Going full circle here, The Beatles went from "Help" to "White Album" in four releases. That is incredible, and I'm sure there were people whining about the morphing then too. Thank god The Beatles did their own thing at the end of the day.

Iron Maiden were ripped to pieces by the 'fans' for using keyboards and synths on Somewhere in Time. I think it's probably their best album ever. Likewise, Slayer were quickly dismissed after releasing South of Heaven for slowing down after Reign in Blood. Again, this is a classic thrash album IMO.

These things work in cycles - and the fans forget the simple basics: if it sounds good, then it's good enough. End of story. Doesn't matter if it's on tv, and a few more people have bought the CD.

Now if you don't like the music, then fine. That is every persons prerogative, but for one to complain about how another chooses to make a living is just obnoxious.

P.S. Melodies on R2R are classic. I would go so far to say that parts of it sound like Ziggy Stardust.

 

[JayKeeley]

Originally posted by General Zod

If you want to know where all the Metal fans from the 80s have gone; they've gone no where. They're still listening to Metal. If you're asking where all the people who filled the stadiums for Metal shows went; they've jumped on the latest bandwagon. They were never really Metal fans. They were simply mindless music drones, listening to what Lord MTV told them to listen to. They've since been informed that Metal is no longer cool, and if they want to be hip, they need to go out and purchase the latest releases by Alisha Keys and Creed.

GZ

Ahh come on GZ - that is a bleak reflection of society and one that only works for the huge geographic disparity of the USA.

MTV did not even exist in Europe until the 90's, but metal still faded out. It had nothing to do with following trends, it had more to do with the fact that the music became saturated and weak. At Monsters of Rock shows, Sepultura fans were rubbing shoulders with Poison fans, and people were sensing the loss of camaradarie and walked away. They inevitably regrouped a year later at a Nirvana gig.

And on the other hand, if you take a country like Japan where Western marketing trends are forced down your throat every second of the day, The Scorpions will still sell out The Budokan in a matter of hours year after year.

The point being, there's nothing wrong with more than just 200 other people listening to the same band as yourself. I'm not advocating the concept of "selling out" - (my definition of selling out would be, as example, for James Hetfield to start wearing cowboy hats and covering Waylon Jennings songs...heh) - but I do feel generous enough to wish for talented bands to reach beyond the boundaries of the underground.