indie/scenester question

the cave in live songs on that site i posted not too long ago were kinda.. boring. and the harsh vocals sounded forced, and weren't even stephen i think- they sounded like caleb?

it was neet to hear some of the older stuff like juggernaut tho.
 
whatever, Mudvayne have some of the smartest compositions I've heard from any metal band in a long time. It's like the groove of Pantera, plus the rhythmic know-how of Tool, plus a fuckin metal version of Stanley Clarke on bass.

fuck labels and image and sellouts and bullshit...I like whatever I think sounds cool.
 
I agree with Azal.

Cave In sorta sucked from the get-go so what is the big deal?

Everybody in this business is trying to make money to release another record. I understand the artisitic urge to get something out but as soon as you paid the recording of a record by yourself, you don't want to do it again. If there is somebody out there willing to pay you to release a record I don't see anybody turning it down if the conditions are right (meaning creative control is in the right place and other factors). As independant as some artist are, they still want to make enough money off a release so that they can pay for the next one. I don't buy the "losing creative fire" theory because you are comfortable to record without having to worry about paying your bills. A lot of artists have had money in their pockets for their whole careers and still researched and expanded their sound for many years (see Robert Fripp, Elvis Costello etc..) It is a matter of personnal discipline and creativity. Bands and people change all the time, selling out and evolution are totally different things. A band softening their sound is not a garantee of selling out (this is especially true in metal where the phrase is used every which way when a band elvoves into something else).

I have more on that but it will have to wait...
 
My whole thing is that if it's sincere it's cool.
I don't have to like it, but I'm cool with it.

If dudes get together and sincerely enjoy playing pop rock then it's all good.

What I don't like is bands created by labels, songs made by "hit-makers" being played by bands, and other industry garbage that ruins the whole idea of creating music and being creative.
 
i dunno, i've lived the losing creative fire thing myself- the whole time early on, we had no money and no label, & we were writing really well and working really hard. then, once the label and support was there, i found i had personally kind of lost interest in the style and wanted to do something else. losing that creative fire really had nothing to do with worrying about paying bills with the money from the band- the band was pretty much always a money pit (right, paul?).

probably no one will agree w/ me, but i'll hypothesize a bit: some artists, in their lives, will go through a series what i'll call "creative phases", and a single "phase" (or interest in style/type of music) is probably good for about 2-3 records' worth of solid material before they start creating stale, repetitive, uninspired music. my point was that sometimes, by the time the rest of the world catches up and labels get interested, those 2-3 records' worth of good, original material are spent and the new material created for the big record contract is more forced and less interesting.

man i'm babbling. i just want to have another phase, and am afraid i won't.
 
chupe666 said:
i dunno, i've lived the losing creative fire thing myself- the whole time early on, we had no money and no label, & we were writing really well and working really hard. then, once the label and support was there, i found i had personally kind of lost interest in the style and wanted to do something else. losing that creative fire really had nothing to do with worrying about paying bills with the money from the band- the band was pretty much always a money pit (right, paul?).

probably no one will agree w/ me, but i'll hypothesize a bit: some artists, in their lives, will go through a series what i'll call "creative phases", and a single "phase" (or interest in style/type of music) is probably good for about 2-3 records' worth of solid material before they start creating stale, repetitive, uninspired music. my point was that sometimes, by the time the rest of the world catches up and labels get interested, those 2-3 records' worth of good, original material are spent and the new material created for the big record contract is more forced and less interesting.

man i'm babbling. i just want to have another phase, and am afraid i won't.
Click to expand...
Said like that I would agree a lot more than saying that you lose creative fire because you have label support. I don't see how having a particular phase and changing to another is losing creative fire though, you just evolve into something else. The problem with that is that nobody really has the same evolution and it can be a drastic thing from one thing to the other in a very small amount of time, which fans usually don't understand. Some evolve slowly to something different, yet these are probably less likely to be called sellouts.

I see the first record of an artist to be very telling in the evolution they have had: Sometimes they are good but you clearly see that it needs work and sometimes it is brilliant and will never be better, the band spends the rest of their carreer trying to write that first gem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MetalAges
VELVET REVOLVER, AEROSMITH Among Acts Contributing To Anti-Hunger Album
Replies
0
Views
252
Metal News 2
MetalAges
M
MetalAges
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE Donates Art
Replies
0
Views
460
Metal News 2
MetalAges
M
minxnim
ok. i need to make and save $ like, fast.
Replies
22
Views
348
Kayo Dot
Steve
S
Sudifice
Modest Mouse
Replies
1
Views
393
Non-Metal
Lost_Orchid
L
L
Would Would Opeth Selling-Out Sound Like?
Replies
32
Views
2K
Opeth (Archived)
Alteredmindeath
A
Top Bottom
Back