Well, I read this post and would like to state my own personal opinions.
Like some of the others have mentioned, I myself find it quite difficult to understand how someone can say they like a band such as Opeth, and Korn at the same time. I mean on the one hand you have a band that is committed to writing music, not soley for the fans, but more so for themselves. And the fact that they have such a big fan base(from Opeths point of view I would imagine) would just be one of the glorious perks that come with the territory of being in a band of such a high standard and musical integrity. Mikael and the rest of Opeth have stayed stead fast in their vision of what they want the band to represent, and what they want it to acheive from day one, and this I truly respect them for because we all Know they could be one of the biggest bands in the world if the decided to drop the "DEATH" vocals, and concentrate on the melodic stuff, with some riffing to complement. But the fact is they haven't, they have continued to write how they want to write, and continually strive to acheieve what they want to acheive, and as I stated earlier I respect them all so much for that, and thank them too. Opeth just wouldn't be the same without the mellow to heavy to mellow contrasts that they are so famous for, taking the listener on a miriad of virtual mindscapes with such emotionally charged songs.
Then we Have Korn, who when they started, started out reasonably heavy. Striving to come accross as agressive and with some degree of hostility about them. With each album, they have slowly but surely hitched a ride on the coporate band wagon, destined for the mainstream money making machine. Their ideals and vision has constantly changed along the way, no doubt to attract a bigger market, and I mean, if you are in a position like they are, too reach as many people as they can, and make as much money as they can, I can understand why they would do that. But is saddens me at the same time because they obviousley place more value on making money, and belonging to certain trends, rather than actually picking a path or an idea to follow, and progressing and developing themselves as artists, musicians, songwriters as they go along.
Now, understand that this is not an "Anti change" argument by any stretch of the imagination, and please don't think it is. There are literally hundreds of my favourite bands who have either with subtelty, or extremity, changed style and direction from where they originally started out. But I think you will find in most cases still maintain some of their original vision in their new found style, and should just be seen as it being the medium that they are choosing to express said medium now. I can think of plenty of bands who have done this over the last 5 years, and can also think when their new albums have come out, and friends of mine bagging them out because they have changed, or aren't doing something the same as they were once famous for. Take for instance "Prometheus the discipline of fire and demise", The Magnum Opus from the Late and very great Emperor(r.i.p). I have a friend who bagged it, and his reason was because "they have a fucking drum warrior like Trym who is sitting there doing nothing". I find this sad, as musically I think it's Emperor's most diverse masterpiece to date. And Isahn's vison obviousley called for the drumming to be more minimal than prior efforts to complement his riffs they way he saw they had to be. Yes it was a change from the last albums, but if you ask me, if you listen to 1X Equilibrium, then listen to Prometheus, in my opinion, the themes, and direction Isahn chose to explore on that album appear to be nothing but a logical progression from where 1X left off. In the nightside Eclipse was awesome, adhearing more toward the black metal that was dominating the early 90's. Anthems To the Welkin At Dusk saw them break away from that mould and create something that went beyond the norms of "Blackmetal", and if you asked me was the turning point for Emperor where they couldn't care whether they were classed as "Blackmetal" or not anymore. They just wanted to write metal that was Emperor, no one else. Then we have 1X Equilibrium which saw them loose a lot of fans to start with, but also gain a lot of new ones, who could apreciate the complexity of the ideas and the structuring, and later on seeing a lot of those old fans return upon realising all the points that made that album so strong. If you listen to Equilibrium, then listen to In the Nightside Eclipse, it's hard to tell it's even the same band. Equilibrium is so Bizzarre in comparrison, and the songs on it explore so many different areas of emotion, and create a vast variety of mood changes. So then, when hearing how Diverse and in a lot of cases Bizzarre, the song writing, and structuring on Prometheus is, I can only see it as Isahns natural Progression from where Equilibrium left off. And if you ask me, a brilliant way to end a brilliant carrer.
Immortal are another one. I won't go into the details of how much they have changed, but from the start to where they find themselves now, the change is pretty big for those of you who aren't familiar with their music. And I think anyone who brands their new stuff as crap, because it isn't Battles In the North are close minded, and unwilling to hear all the areas of where their writing, and playing, and general musianship has progressed, and matured, because their last 3 albums have been fucking sick!!
So as I said earlier, I am not against change at all. I am all for it if it brings with it progression, and maturity to the songs. And this is Why I find the difficulties in understanding how someone can say they like Opeth, and Korn at the same time. I am not having a go at anyone who fits into that category, because I appreciate that everyone likes different types of music for different reasons. But I just find it odd, but that is just my opinion.
I myself listen to someone like Nile, and Tori Amos at the same time. I don't listen to Tori Amos very much, and own none of her albums, but I respect her, and like a lot of her work. Some of it I hate, but I do like a lot. Because I think she is extremely aware of where she wants her songs to be going, every song has it's own unique feel, a lot of it's very moody which is another reason why I like it. And I just think her music is well executed, thought out, and mature. The mindscapes she is able to create through her music is pretty amazing, and this is why I respect her.
With Korn on the other hand, I am able to see nothing but posers with their guitars strapped down to their ankles, playing as the international spokes people for Adidas. Their songs have not progressed at all over their last 3 or 4 albums. They sound terribly stagnant, and it's hard to hear the difference between one song to the next. The lyrics seem rushed and un thought out. And basically, I can only see them as a coporate money making machine, that has got to where they have entirely on Gimmicks.
And I was told the other day that one of the guitarist said in an interview that the only reason they play with their guitars down so low is because they have to do it to reach the chord positions they play, cause their chords are so "crazy and bent". That's crap, and I find it insulting. I see it only as a way to try and make people think there is a purpose to them doing that, so they won't be made fun of for doing it, and a lot of people do send them up for playing with their guitars so low too. If they could be bothered to practice at having better technique their so called chord difficulties would be solved.
Anyway, that's my say. I respect that someone could like Opeth and Korn at the same time, because they are obviousley getting something from it, I just can't see what that would be.
Now that is funny!
