Do you really want to be considered "Trendy"


I wish, I wish, I wish ;)
Aug 24, 2001
Hello ;)

I just wanted to say that during my time, since the late 80's as a music fan, and since '95 as a music industry person, I am saddened by the fact that the side of the UK music industry that represents rock/alternative/punk/ etc (I consider them as one) has not done enough to promote UK talent to the rest of the world, let alone the UK itself.

I have been lucky enough over the last 15 years or so to have seen 1000's of bands all over the world, from The Whisky-A-Go-Go (USA) to Wolverhampton Civic Hall (UK):p

I feel privalidged to have seen and met many many fantastic bands and people....but over the last 3 - 4 years I really haven't felt able to rave about any bands, from anywhere...that could be an age thing I don't know, but it seems that there has been nothing new or original out that has restored my faith in the alternative music scene...which I know some of you will come back and say "what about Limp Bizkit and Slipknot?"
Well...u see for me (I don't dislike either of those btw) but they aren't original or different. I feel like I have heard there styles before and seen the whole musicians fighting on stage thing before and seen the OTT fact most bands do one of those things...
(NB: best live band recently has been Coal Chamber - in my opinion).

I think the industry really does need to have faith in real musicians - by that I mean they should not be interested in what could earn some suited Record Label owner a million in 6 months, but pay some attention to developing unsigned acts and not rely on crowd pulling (one hit wonders) for a hit single...

Slipknot's record label are desperately trying to market slipknot into the mainstream....(i personally think they are already there), if they succeed it gives fans a sense of wrong timing...and they almost force you to accept that a band has reached its sell by date and you (the listener/and buyer) can go on to the next "BIG" thing...which is sad because that turns the fans into fashion victims................. do we really want to be considered...trendy???
I am only a music listener and keyboard player (never for a band), so my views are from the end users point-of-view.

Can any new band help but take a riff here, a sound there from other bands? There is so much music out there now (good and bad), that certain things must stick once heard, then it gets translated to the new bands music. In the end, the new music has many qualities of many other bands, thus rendering it unoriginal.

And, of course, business will come first, because for most bands in music, it is their livelihood, and money is needed to carry-on. Therefore, you need to decide on your listening audience, and get the widest acceptance possible, even if it means not being original. I love good music, and I usually listen to "less popular" (in the U.S.) music, such as Opeth, The Tea Party, Nevermore, and others. To me, great music, but well off the mainstream.

So, are mainstream bands like Korn, Metallica, etc. trendy? Yes, and successful and rich too. So who can blame them. Educated listeners (like myself) know enough to search out good music through various means, and to date, my listening experience has been a good one. So for those narrow-minded enough to only listen to the radio, it's welcome to the trendy world of music.
As an opposing point of view though, occasionally bands are misguided by their management and producers towards putting out records that have a more marketable, commercial sound. The highest-profile case of this I ever heard of was with Spineshank's first record, Strictly Diesel. Jonny Santos blames the failure of that album on the band's naivety in listening too closely to the producers and management pushing them towards a certain sound, which Santos later described as 'Spineshank-lite'.
Also, some bands are genuinely writing the kind of music that they want to write without outside influence at all, and external, non-musical factors can combine to make them commercially appealing. Slipknpot for example are musically the most non-commercial mainstream band at the moment, but their image and lyrical polemic have caught the imagination of the music-buying public. Result - instant mega-stardom.
I'm rambling a bit here because I've just come back from a party, and I'm nursing the most horrendous hangover I've ever suffered through. Nurse, the screens...
Dill not only are slipknot now commercial but they have been quoted in saying that they are going to enjoy all that going commercial brings, The only let down about slipknots new album is they were quoted in saying that anyone bringing a goat into a record shop will get the album for free that is not the kind of publicity slipknot need to survive..
The way I usually end up looking at it is that record companies are here to earn money. Apart from a limited few I doubt many actually consider the music the most important consideration when finding bands to sign. I think Slipknot are a promoters dream. The masks and attitude - all so gimickey and easy tgo merchandise. Nearly as bad as kiss.. I think it is impossible to write truly origonal music. No matter what you do it will be compared to someone. I feel the truly good bands are those who manage to mix genres and styles, until they become more origonal than their piers
GODISANATHIEST I agree with you totally...I just want to add something though...

I met Slipknot last year and have met all of the band unmasked and, as you say, the gimecky masks are a promoters dream, but if they unmask in the future they know and the record label know that they will definately lose a percentage of their fans (it will only be the girlies who feel disappointed when they realise that Slipknot are not cute and not fanciable) shallow I know, but true (and trust me when I say they aren't a cute bunch)!!! BUT the benefit will be (hopefully) Slipknot will appeal to a more mature group of listeners, (not saying they don't have alot of mature fans now, but realistically they do appeal to the younger audience).

Again, we could argue that this approach is again clever promotion and marketing - but I think this is a strategy that will give recognition to their somewhat originality of songwriting and credit where credit is due.

Regarding originality...I, for many many years, have thought Nine Inch Nails had the edge on original music, I have never faulted NiN on their music or even the remixes that have been produced...UNTIL THE FRAGILE, but I am sorry to say that album did nothing for me...I felt let down by Trent Reznor for writing an album that (to me) seemed soooo below par, and for not producing something as fantastic as his previous works...

But Hey...thats just my opinion and lets face it - it doesn't mean shit to anyone else... :loco:
Hey, what use would this forum be if people couldn't express their opinions? I'm with both you and GODISANATHEIST totally on Slipknot - I personally would feel more comfortable if more column inches and publicity were given to the fact that Slipknot actually write decent songs than the fact that they wear masks and occasionally hit each other. :)
As for The Fragile - maybe it's just me being something of an industrial music newbie, but I really love that album! I like music to have something of a grandiose, sweeping feel to it across an entire album. I like albums that seem structured and the songs follow on and take the listener through moods as the album progresses. So, in that respect, I think The Fragile is a triumph. Taken as individual songs, however, the pieces on The Fragile are less satisfying than songs on Pretty Hate Machine. I feel TF is an album that has to be listened to as a whole, in one sitting. This can work to its detriment, of course.
Hey, this thread's getting better, isn't it! :)
ah...Dill Dill Dill Dill Dill....*go on AIM*

That is exactly what I have to get from an album....a feeling of a story linked by each song, telling me a story (maybe The Downward Spiral did that too well)? Anyway...for me The Fragile was all over the place so I couldn't grasp any emotion or knowledge from it...don't get me wrong - I don' t hate it I just prefer The D'Ward Sp and PHM and Broken and god dammit even FIXED!!!! *guess I am a big NIN fan*

Anyway....get online ya' fish :loco:
*feesh...poneee...heep...heep hop....heeeponaonamouse...*

Anyway...hewwo!! yeppy I agree Deep is the biggest pile of shite I have heard in a while....

where is Trent Reznors head these days...

Nice post at K! btw;)
Fashions come and go. It just seems that Metal is, once again, flavour of the month. There's nothing particularly bad about any of this this. On the downside, you'll get fairly ordinary kids encroaching on "our" territory, but that won't last long. Next year it'll be something else. It's not worth getting annoyed about.

On the plus side, if only 5% of these kids stick with it and end up digging a bit further than the mainstream then that's a big boost for underground bands and labels.

The last time that Metal was so popular (in the UK at least. In somewhere like Finland bands like Emperor regularly make the top 10 charts) was when Iron Maiden were having No1 albums and appearing on Top Of The Pops. It was maybe even bigger then than it is now? It certainly didn't hurt the scene in any case.

It'll blow over, and hopefully some of the kids wearing the Linkin park shirts will end up swapping 'em for Nevermore or Opeth ones...

Lee B
Thaat is true most kids now are into metal because its become the fashon i hope it does die off soon because i dont like oneabees....

by the way visit my new chat forum....

:p :rolleyes: :D :heh: :loco:
Originally posted by Lee_B
On the plus side, if only 5% of these kids stick with it and end up digging a bit further than the mainstream then that's a big boost for underground bands and labels.

It'll blow over, and hopefully some of the kids wearing the Linkin park shirts will end up swapping 'em for Nevermore or Opeth ones...

Lee B

That would be quite excellent. The popularity of metal seems to go in ten year cycles... in the 70s it was uncool, in the 80s it was more acceptable (with IM in the charts and all), in the 90s grunge was the thing, and now metal (in a more commercially palatable form) is in the charts. However, as Lee B. said, if some of these kids stick with it for longer than it is fashionable for, then they may bolster the underground scene. Hmm... maybe Opeth and Katatonia could be doing arena tours this time next year... :)
Metal in America has pretty much always been a joke.

The "metal" of the mid to late 80's, sometimes referred to as the "hair bands" such as Poison, Whitesnake, Winger made a small impact for a short period of time. But rap kicked the crap out of 'em.

My feeling is Metallica's Black album broke metal truely into the mainstream, and bands like Megadeth followed in their shadow. Since the days of Led Zeppelin (my 1st real metal listening pleasure), there hasn't been too much non-underground airplay for the harder stuff. What was the highest Led Zeppelin ever got on the charts - did any of their songs even crack the top ten? I guess then my tastes have always been underground.