Originally posted by Hannu Mutanen
I think many of you, Hoser and Soul Forlorn in the forefront, pretty much put it the way it is. The border between 'serious' and 'pop' music is always measured by the artist's will and conviction to the initial motives for creating music, and needless to say, these motives transcend every other notion of genres and their characteristics but the one of the artist. If a group shifts from heavy, pummelling metal to a lighter approach it is not necessarily to imply that they are short on cash and hence going 'pop', or if a brit-pop group suddenly turns the knobs to eleven and gets noticeably darker it does not necessarily mean that they are trying to be 'hard' as a reaction to a popular loss of interest in nerds playing playful pop muzak. The common listener disregards artistical development because of being unable to view any progression from the artist's viewpoint. If one is able to do so, it makes it possible to see whether it is pretense or desire that motivates that shift in style and sound. Take Amorphis, for instance: what we hear in the music post-"Elegy" is simplification and stress on atmosphere. Much of the sound is derivative from the group's penchant for legendary psychedelic prog rockers Kingston Wall, whose heritage is clearly audible in a number of Finnish artists. In Amorphis' case, it is not about not wanting more money and consequently 'selling out'. Selling out would be to hold on to the sound they laid out on "Tales from the thousand lakes"; compromising the inner need to develop for the sake of keeping their fans happy. The importance of those who listen to the music is invaluable, but if the fulfilment of their expectations is set as the number one priority, it is the same as changing the name to Loverfish or whatever, shaving up and giving Max Martin full right to do whatever he wants. The target audience is different and the income shifts greatly in quantity, but they've lost what was true in their music. As of now, Amorphis are venerable for their choice of style since it is very true to their standards. True to what it needs to be.
We have to remember that the human mind, heart and soul are not static. Our psyche is in unending dynamic movement, a factor that affects every single second of our existence. When there are constantly great, rapid shifts in this movement, we are less in touch with ourselves. If someone is a black metal penguin on one day and a flegmatic yo-brotha-rapper on another, it is evident that this person has not yet found the thing he/she truly wants to be. When different sides are compromized, put into harmony, we may except the dynamo to settle down slightly and set forth on a more steady path of change. And as much as this applies to human beings, it does so in the case of bands as well. Bands have their time of self-exploration and border definition, and many of those that already have record deals have not yet passed beyond that stage. It leads to the band sounding different each time. But if the band has found the most fit style, it is most likely that the progression may aspire from the basis that is set upon discovering that which is 'true'. It will never go away, regardless of the further changes that will take place - even if they are seemingly drastic. I suppose many fail to hear that Paradise Lost have had the same tone to their music for ages, from "Shades of god" if I remember correctly to "Host" (I have not heard the new one much.) Granted, maybe it is not as heavy as it was, but you can not put them down for forsaking their original idea. The melodies are still very much Paradise Lost, only the context has changed. Even Theatre of Tragedy has something left from their previous albums, regardless of how much they have actually been listening to Kraftwerk (I personally hear a very strong influence).
Bands, as people, tend to go through times of crises as well. The changes in music reflect what happens within the artist at a given time. Metallica for sure had something of an identity-crises with "Load". They managed to pull it off and did an interesting album, even if their latter material has not been worth much. Opeth had a critical time after "Morningrise". The list goes on and on.
Nevertheless, changes are bound to happen and we should remember to consider why they happen - human beings are not perfect at birth, being the result of genes, psyche and enviroment. Why should bands be any different?
-------
N/P: Jethro Tull - Aqualung