Discussion in 'News' started by minuteforce, Mar 7, 2017.
Man he looks kinda creepy here
Wait why is everyone talking about sorry for now? Did I miss something...
Yea u missed this
I'm not sure if anyone saw, but there's a slightly longer Talking To Myself clip out there uploaded by Strangerz92 on YouTube which has a brief clip of the bridge at the end. I can't post it as YouTube is blocked at my work, but Chester hits some INCREDIBLE notes at the end, and we hear some new lyrics too: 'I keep acting like the sky is falling...'
If someone could post it in here it would be great, but hearing those notes Chester did, I am pumped for this song hardcore.
*EDIT* Got the link:
Totally dig that longer version!
Especially on the close up he looks like a painting (best I can explain it)
Sounds somewhat like a DBS track. Totally dig the note change at the end..
Didn't you said that you won't spoiling?
I was skeptical about the initial bit we got for Talking to Myself, but that extra bit totally made a difference. Now I'm kinda looking forward to it!
I wasn't spoiling the title track of OML.
....which I ended up doing anyways .
I am disappointed
A lot of Minutes to Midnight has this as a theme - Leave Out All the Rest, Shadow of the Day, Valentine's Day, Little Things Give You Away (chorus, "six feet underground")
I don't really consider Leave Out or Shadow to be subtle nods to the death theme either. Same for Valentine's Day. Directly speaking, Valentine's Day touches on the loss of a loved one, much the way One More Light, as they've said, is about a friend of theirs who worked with them who was diagnosed with cancer and then died soon after.
Yeah, of all the things that came to mind for people, One Republic is the only one I've really agreed with and kind of heard myself. I don't mind One Republic but let's just say I hope Linkin Park doesn't sound like them (or honestly, anybody) too much or too often. I find it kind of strange honestly when people say they hope the new music sounds like so and so (I've heard Arcade Fire, Taylor Swift)...for one I feel it's kind of generalizing how any one artist or band sounds, and for two... regardless of me being a fan of their work or not, I just don't want Linkin Park to sound like anybody but Linkin Park. I like Incubus, 30 Seconds to Mars, Chevelle... and I don't want Linkin Park to sound like any of them.
Yeah like you said, they have found other ways to talk about it, and done well with it. But it's a bit funny you mention that they should be more subtle about it, less blunt... because that's exactly what I said lol. A few threads before this I was saying how I'm iffy about Halfway Right, being that they directly said "I used to get high" and I referenced the way LP would sing about death on Minutes to Midnight (Leave Out All the Rest, Shadow of the Day, Valentine's Day, etc) and how they would be talking about death, and it wouldn't exactly be hard to glean that from listening, but I liked and preferred how they were less blunt about it, and I referenced "Crash" by Sum 41 and "White Sparrows" by Billy Talent as examples that were very blunt with their lyrics. While I enjoy those songs, I preferred the Minutes to Midnight approach, and so I was iffy and had mild concerns about all of this talk that Linkin Park is apparently more direct and more obvious about things on the forthcoming One More Light album.
So I agree with you there, I just think, like you do, there's an art to being subtle. It shows creativity, etc. But that being said... I honestly can't think of a time where Linkin Park said "promises" or "lies" and I've felt like it didn't fit, was forced, was lazy, etc. I also really can't imagine otherwise liking a song, then having it ruined or tainted by use of those words. Sounds like an extreme or exaggerated example but sometimes I have to wonder with the way people talk about it being "such a problem" if it seriously ruins songs for them. No offense to anybody in this boat, but I find that silly. Take Powerless for example... "10,000 promises, 10,000 ways to lose"...for 1 : Was there really any other or any better way to say that? I don't think so. For 2 : I love that song, and I can't wrap my head around the idea of anybody else who liked/loved it, saying "ah damnit" by them saying "promises"... I've honestly never gotten tired of it, and I don't feel at all like the band overuses them, or really anything else.
I also would say most Linkin Park songs aren't "blunt and literal" and instead are the opposite that you and I prefer.
Agreed with just about all of this. Well said. When I really think about it, yeah, I'd probably also say Lost in the Echo is their best opener ever. Papercut would probably be the only challenger, and then I'd put Keys to the Kingdom in third.
Warning: This comment is stupidly long, but I've written it out and I'm not bothered making it more compact. Read at your own peril.
Just to add to your point (and you might agree with this, you might not), I'd like to point out is that there's a very big difference between being 'blunt' and being 'specific' (and conversely, there's a big difference between being 'subtle' and being 'vague'). IMO bluntness (in this context) is the act of making it immediately clear what the subject matter of the song is, whereas specificity is the act of referring to specific images, places or events. Likewise, subtlety is the act of not making the subject matter immediately clear, whereas vagueness is the act of not referring to specific details and events. For example, the line from Halfway Right is both specific and blunt (not going to argue the pros and cons, I'll do that below), whereas the line from Powerless is vague (ie. it's not referring to a specific event, and can be easily related to any similar situation), but equally blunt (the meaning of the line is immediately clear).
The reason why I'm bringing this up is because I completely agree with you that there's an art to being subtle, but I do disagree that most LP songs are subtle in their meaning. Of course, this depends entirely on how you define these words, so there's no right or wrong answer (and my definition above is by no means the only valid one), but I'd argue that most Linkin Park songs, especially from the first two albums are very, very vague (so that everyone can relate to them), but few are subtle (ie. every line is blunt about its meaning). Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that a subtle song has to be hard to decipher, I'm just saying that a subtle song shouldn't have lines like "everything you say to me takes me one step closer to the edge, and I'm about to break", or "I tried so hard and got so far, but in the end it doesn't even matter", which literally sum up the entire meaning of the song directly.
To use another LP song as an example, take Burning In The Skies. I'd consider that song both vague (can be applied to anything, doesn't mention specific details) and subtle (it uses strong imagery instead of stating its meaning directly). As mentioned, that doesn't mean the song's meaning is hard to decipher, but it doesn't literally state it in plain English, which I like. This is why I have a problem with the band's love of using such blunt phrasing so often. I'd argue that there are far more interesting and beautiful ways to say "10,000 promises, 10,000 ways to lose", rather than literally stating what the line is about. Think "symphonies of blinding light" instead of "10,000 mushroom clouds". Now, I'm not so picky that that line will ruin the entire song for me, as no one line will (usually ), but it's more the fact that the band state their song meanings directly so frequently, rather than me taking issue with the words "lies" and "promises" in and of themselves. It's just personal taste, and I totally understand if you don't agree, but that's just what I like in lyricism.
(By the way, I'm not saying the entire song has to be subtle, there can be a handful of more clear lines thrown in (I'm not that picky ), but I just prefer when the number of blunt lines is kept to an absolute minimum (although I accept that having no clear lines can cloud the meaning to the point of indecipherability)).
So that brings us to specificity, which is what I feel like will be the big change in OML. I actually love specificity (which is why I'm making the distinction between it and bluntness), since it adds life and character to a more generalised emotion or idea. LP rarely use specifics in their music, but to keep it LP related I'll use an example from Fort Minor's 'Right Now', namely Mike's opening verse (it's long so I won't copy and paste it here). This verse is as specific as it gets and it's one of my favourite verses (in terms of lyrics) from the guy. The verse perfectly uses specific examples and imagery to highlight the exact meaning of the song. The verse isn't vague at all, by virtue of containing very descriptive and specific images, and yet I'd still call it subtle, since it never overtly states the meaning. The meaning is clear from the stories and details (and in other song's cases, metaphors, analogies etc.). Another example that just popped into my mind is the monologue in Steven Wilson's 'Perfect Life', which contain highly specific lines like this, which create a very clear mood and emotional backdrop (without overtly explaining why this is important):
We'd listen to her mix tapes; Dead Can Dance, Felt, This Mortal Coil
She introduced me to her favorite books, gave me clothes and my first cigarette
Sometimes we would head down to Blackbirds Moor to watch the barges on Grand Union in the twilight
She said, "The water has no memory"
In fact, interestingly, Wilson removed the line which made the meaning of the song clearer from the final draft (if you're interested, look up the Grand Union Mix), which IMO makes the song even stronger by avoiding bluntness.
Basically, what I'm trying to say in a very, very roundabout and convoluted way (and props to you if you've read all of it, I have a tendency of making my comments far, far too wordy...) is that I'd love to see that band reference specific details and stories (fictional or non-fictional), since to me, they make songs far more personal, unique, engaging and emotional, but as you mentioned, I also think it's really important to be subtle with your words and make the meaning not immediately clear. Maybe it's a stupid distinction between specificity and bluntness, and maybe you'll agree, maybe you'll disagree, maybe I'll disagree with myself in a week's time, I genuinely don't know, but that's probably the first and only time I'll write a post this long about lyrics, so fuck it. They're my unedited, unfiltered thoughts on what you said. And just to be clear, none of this is arguing against what you said, because even if I disagree with the conclusion I totally see where you're coming from and what you mean, but anyway, enough rambling haha.
@lopia Oooh weeee That is a long post I agree that I do wish LP was a bit more wordier in the verses and I also wish they would write longer ones too. That's one of the reasons I like Fort Minor is that Mike avoided vagueness for most of the songs on The Rising Tied.
Totally agree, and that's exactly what I was clumsily trying to get at: I'd love the band to use more analogies, metaphors, stories, imagery, you name it, and use less of "getting directly to the point".
See, I knew this would be the case. "Heavy" would be the song I wasn't going to like just like in The Hunting Party it was "Until It's Gone" BUT I am certain that "Heavy" will make absolutely more sense when hearing the entire album from beginning to end. The sound in direction seem interesting, not typical but I can get jiggy with it.
Now, I am still reserving judgment if Linkin Park (within the context of sound in this album) are able to pull out something that will wow me in the same fashion Iron Maiden did with The Book of Souls - "Empire Of The Clouds". If Linkin Park manages to do that, they got my money for vinyl. Just on these 2 snippets and the 1 song we do have.. it's worth a listen and I think it won't be as "OMG, this sucks, this isn't LP this is the end" doomsday scenario I see on social media (not here in the forum, but obviously the rest of the internet lol) forseeing.
I don't know what it is, but as we begin to hear more song snippets and get more of an idea of what this album is all about...I feel myself being the most excited I've been for an LP record since A Thousand Suns. Perhaps it's the fact that the band seems to be dipping into uncharted territory (a full pop record), or maybe it's the fact that Chester has been experimenting with his voice, but something just feels special about this record.
For m its that i dont know what to expect
This! If you really think about it, THP and LT really didn't have much of a surprise to them. Because of the often repeated buzz words the band used throughout the entire process, you kinda had a generalized idea what the record would sound like.
This album? Every song we've heard is a different style of pop. It's kind of like how MTM had every song with a different genre.
Late to the party but LOL @ that dude doing a psychological and Freudian evaluation of Mike Shinoda. Trying to tell us the band is faking it with this album and doesn't really want it.
Separate names with a comma.