Why do people do this?

[nailz]

Dear [name of band]: I love your early stuff, but the [new style of music] that you've been playing is not exactly the same as you've played before. I [assume to be] speaking for every old fan of your music when I ask "When will you start playing [old style of music] again?" If you don't, I'll stop listening. - A real fan.

 

[Diabolik]

well...bands change for the better and the worse. I know lots of bands that improve with each disc but there are bands who grow worse or change thier sound to a not so good direction. It is everyone's right to not listen and discuss it online on a forum. That is what forums are....where people discuss and debate idea's and opinions.

Right now I am not liking where Elvenking is heading. Thier last few outputs have let me down. Same with Sabaton. I feel they are more a live band than a band that is great to hear on disc. I have dropped more bands this year alone than ever due to bands getting bland and releasing the same thing over and over or bands that seem to change thier sound to something that is going towards a more mainstream sound or a sound that isnt anything like what they are known for playing.

Most bands have to expect this. That is why I love all these older bands who have gone through many line up changes and sound and style changes suddenly doing their "classic album" tours and shows. Basically a "we miss playing in front of energetic crowds so now we will play the songs everyone wanted us to play for 10 years but we wouldnt since we tried to change but no one liked us then".

I have no problems with bands growing and changing....one of my favorite bands is VoiVod....a band that evolves constantly with style. Not every era is amazing stuff but it is never a rehash of the same disc over and over like what some bands do. I think live bands need to realize that even though they have a new style or changed up thier sound....most of the people at a live show do want to hear some classic songs.

This is one of those debates where there definetly be lines drawn.

 

[adaher]

It's a pretty complex issue and every band's situation is unique. On one hand, I don't have much patience for bands that got popular playing what the masses like, and then all of a sudden they want to be taken seriously as artists. That's what side projects or solo albums are for. At some point,when a band gets big enough it becomes a corporation with a brand. When they start putting out completely different music under that brand, they shouldn't be surprised when the customer base reacts negatively.

On the other hand, many bands had artistic integrity when they started and fans should expect constant evolution. Of course, fans are perfectly within their rights to prefer this or that era of a band's work. But one thing that bugs me a great deal are fans who love a band when they are popular, but then completely ignore the stuff they write later which is of equal quality and don't even have any interest in hearing it or giving it a chance.

But of course every band is unique. I have to confess I don't know why Elvenking is doing what they are doing. Personally, I like their new album best of all, but I also understand they have a very loyal and fanatical fanbase for the folk metal stuff. So it's a strange decision they've made.

When you've got bands like Sonata Arctica, Edguy, and Elvenking, who reign at or near the top of their respective genres, and then they decide to delve into territory where they aren't as adept, it seems strange. I've said before, Edguy can either be an A-list power metal band, or a B-list hard rock group. The melodicrock.com crowd weren't rushing out to get Tinnitus Sanctus, they were rushing out to get WET and Allen/Lande and Place Vendome. I don't think Elvenking's going to break into this crowd either. and Sonata, I don't see them reigning atop the prog/power heap either with their recent output. Circus Maximus and Pagan's Mind are just better at it.

 

[MartinW]

It's weird that people mention Elvenking, because I have never even liked them before this new album, which I unexpectedly find quite awesome. The vocalist especially sounds much, much better than he has ever done, I think.

I completely disagree that this is a "complex issue". It really, really isn't. No band owes their fanbase to play the music they want. The fans don't owe the band to buy the music they don't like. That's it. If the band wants to risk their fanbase to change style, they're free, and should be free, to do so. If the reception isn't warm enough, they'll either go back to the old style or don't give a shit and continue to make the music they want. If they choose the second alternative, the fans have several options: 1) Listen to the old stuff and ignore the new. 2) Move on to another band. 3) Start your own band in the old style. 4) Whine, bitch and moan on the internet. And risk looking like a giant asswaffle.

 

[adaher]

I agree about Elvenking, I only sort of liked their previous work, this new album is really good. So maybe this change of direction will work out for them.

I completely disagree that this is a "complex issue". It really, really isn't. No band owes their fanbase to play the music they want. The fans don't owe the band to buy the music they don't like. That's it. If the band wants to risk their fanbase to change style, they're free, and should be free, to do so.

If you reduce it down to the fact that bands(and companies) are free to change their product if they wish, then you're absolutely right, it's simple as hell. And I would never question a band's right to play whatever they want to play.

The reason I think it's a little more complex than that is because most bands don't just play whatever they want to play once they get to a certain level of fame. Often, they play what they have to to keep their fanbase. Other times, they make calculated changes which they think will bring them more commercial success. And other times, they just want to play something different.

The complexity comes in when you consider the nexus between a band's direction change, the motives for it, and the fan reaction to it. It can all be rather unpredictable. Sometimes bands experiment, and realizing their mistake, jump right back to the old sound.

 

[Cheiron]

When you fall in love with a band you might be at a similar mental state as they are. But that doesn't mean that they won't continue on a different path than you do, so it is very easy for you to no longer enjoy their current material, and want something either nostalgic or representative of where you still are.

 

[nailz]

but isn't that what older albums are for?

 

[Magius]

If a band puts out an album with the same style and formula as previous efforts, half their fans will like it, and half will criticize for being redundant.

If they put out an album with a different style and formula, half their fans will like it, and half will hate the new direction.

What ya gonna do?

 

[ratanda]

Dear [name of band]: I love your early stuff, but the [new style of music] that you've been playing is not exactly the same as you've played before. I [assume to be] speaking for every old fan of your music when I ask "When will you start playing [old style of music] again?" If you don't, I'll stop listening. - A real fan.

I guess people do it because they want to express their opinion. And if they're actually writing that to the bands, I guess they're doing it to share that opinion with that band.

 

[BenMech]

Here's what I think the letter is trying to say:

"Dear band I liked:

When I got into the music you played a long time ago, I was a youth with not so many responsibilities. I have had to move my attention span elsewhere while you've kept going with a career, or working some kind of 9 to 5 until the genre becomes fashionable again to perform and release new material. I let you go, and so I don't recognize what you've been doing for 10-15 years. Because of this, I say "You Suck." It's just easier that way than getting to know what you guys (and it's almost never gals) went through during the unfashionable years.

Now that you're here again, I want this perception of my youth back. It's not realistic, but it's not my fault things didn't work out. I want to be 13-21 again and 'party' as hard as I did before my body and mind changed. So don't be you now. Be you from before, because I'm too fat/stupid/drunk/ugly/poor/rich/thin/distracted/bored/damaged to be that guy/gal anymore

Signed,

A Typical audience member from long ago"

 

[J. Golden]

I love when bands of old start to write new material with the idea of trying to sound "modern" and it never works. And their idea of modern is usually two trends behind the times anyway. I see this all the time, that is why I think bands should stick with what they do well. Hard rock and the hair band elk is the best example of bands who do this "modern " thing and it is always terrible and funny.

 

[TwizstedJesus]

Here's what I think the letter is trying to say:

"Dear band I liked:

When I got into the music you played a long time ago, I was a youth with not so many responsibilities. I have had to move my attention span elsewhere while you've kept going with a career, or working some kind of 9 to 5 until the genre becomes fashionable again to perform and release new material. I let you go, and so I don't recognize what you've been doing for 10-15 years. Because of this, I say "You Suck." It's just easier that way than getting to know what you guys (and it's almost never gals) went through during the unfashionable years.

Now that you're here again, I want this perception of my youth back. It's not realistic, but it's not my fault things didn't work out. I want to be 13-21 again and 'party' as hard as I did before my body and mind changed. So don't be you now. Be you from before, because I'm too fat/stupid/drunk/ugly/poor/rich/thin/distracted/bored/damaged to be that guy/gal anymore

Signed,

A Typical audience member from long ago"

Wow, Ben! Thats hitting hard! In some cases I will agree with you, but there are so many cases where that is not the truth. Fates Warning, for instance. While I have stayed a fan and grown right besides them, many have jumped ship due to different directions. Compare "No Exit" to "X". Hell, compare "APSOG" to "Inside Out"! Its not even similiar in style. As the band progressed, they changed a little bit every disc. This is a case of a band changing their style and many people choosing to not continue to support them. Its not the bands fault nor is it the former fans fault, it is what it is.

 

[BenMech]

Actually, it IS the former fans's fault.

 

[nomisofsiman]

I'm guessing the creation of this thread was in direct response to the Tank thread.

Anyways, this is actually a complex issue. I could go on and on like some of you, but I'm gonna try to make this as short as I can. It honestly depends on the band. For example, a band like Tank, Motorhead, AC/DC or even Sabaton have always stuck to a formula and stayed there and they're good at what they do. If they started to expand their sound too much they wouldn't sound like them. I honestly don't want the aforementioned bands to alter their sound as it just doesn't make sense with the band.

However, on the other side of things I look at bands like Celtic Frost, Voivod, Therion and Enslaved. All of these bands have always been about an evolution of sound for the most part. To change things up makes sense as they are experimental in trying new things and don't want to stick to a formula.

So, honestly it just depends on the band. The one thing most people say and I tend to agree is not liking a band that sacrifices artistic integrity for popularity. I will agree with this as most don't want their beloved bands sounding like run of the mill, generic bs. As far as bands sounding current though, I know I am probably bias in saying this, but I think Judas Priest (besides Nostradamus even though I did like it) did this change better than anyone. When they came out with Painkiller and they came out with Angel of Retribution, or hell even when Halford came out with Crucible the transition was seamless. However, you look at a band like Metallica and they did the "Load" albums or "St. Anger" and it didn't work whatsoever. That's my 2 cents anyways.

 

[Corsair]

^ This.

Will you please stop posting things before I get the chance to post them myself?

 

[AngraRULES]

Never thought I'd say this but...


Simon Wins.
Fatality.

Now can we please end this thread?

 

[nomisofsiman]

Never thought I'd say this but...


Simon Wins.
Fatality.

Now can we please end this thread?

 

[dcowboys311]

Actually, it IS the former fans's fault.

Nah.

 

[AngraRULES]

Actually, it IS the former fans's fault.

I'd love to hear your rationale behind this statement before I respond to it.

 

[General Zod]

If a band puts out an album with the same style and formula as previous efforts, half their fans will like it, and half will criticize for being redundant.

If they put out an album with a different style and formula, half their fans will like it, and half will hate the new direction.

What ya gonna do?

What bands should do, is whatever pleases them as musicians and as artists.

Bands owe fans nothing, when it comes to new releases. The creation and subsequent purchase of a CD is not a legally binding contract that obligates the artist to write music stylistically similar to initially purchased disc.

Some bands evolve for the better... good.

Some bands devolve to a less state... bad.

As someone else noted, it's not really a complex issue. I think bands often screw themselves by being disingenuous when describing new material. How many times have we read that a new release will be a return to a certain style, when clearly it isn't? Or when a band states that this is our heaviest disc so far, when clearly it isn't? Why not just come out and say, this is a complete departure, when that's what it is?