Not really, since "Disneyfield indie pop" is still condescending towards other artists, no matter how you put it. And the examples he gave weren't exactly artists that I'd call "lazy" or anything like that. Not that he calls them that but putting them up there with "Disney commercial music" or "Nick Jr music" just... no. Even if he would say "we're guilty of this as well", his examples still wouldn't make much sense. Now, take that namecalling away and we'd have a better argument because there may very well be an oversaturation of the so called "indie music". Also, it's pretty ironic that they're trying to get away from the "oversaturated indie music" by going back to music that I'm sure was oversaturated 10-20 years ago. The whole "we're doing something new" just doesn't add up.
To be honest, Mike made his best argument for why he was making the music he was making in his Pigeon and Planes article. It didn't namedrop any bands (except those he considered rock), nor did it point any fingers. Instead, it talked about how rock as a genre has refused to take chances and grow in the way that EDM, Hip-Hop and other genres have. And he was exactly correct there. To me, that article was a far better explanation for the album than any of the interviews that followed. It was the best example of why the band decided to make the album they did, and it didn't accidentally piss off any fans or bands in the process. He should've just told people to go read that article if they wanted to know his thoughts.
^See, Derek, I'd totally agree... if The Hunting Party represented a growth in any way. It isn't innovative, and therefore Mike can't really stand behind that argument. Meaning even though his latter comments were stupid, they were more suitable.
If your not as sophisticated as mike you could easily take what he says the wrong way. Like the interviewer that was asking chvrches about mikes comment she had an IQ of a potato to the point of getting what mike said about how bands convert from genuinely making music, to making pop radio friendly music and making that like mike was dissing chvrches. In relation it doesn't take much intellect to understand what mike is saying he is just simply just stating the reason why he made THP from a different context.
Maybe Mike is going through a midlife crisis and is trying to be a "carnivore" and tell his band what to do so that he gets "what he wants" instead of "being a herbivore." Maybe he also bought a motorcycle.
This whole thread has been a very interesting read. While I thought I understood what Mike had been getting at in the interviews, this thread has now left me uncertain. Was he really being disrespectful to other bands just by name-dropping? I, too, think that his "Nick Jr." and "Commercial Disney" comments were poorly worded. I just hope he wasn't bashing the bands he had actually called out. It just doesn't seem like him to do this, even in the midst of an album cycle.
The thing is, it all boils down to opinion once again. The reason I'm ok with mikes recent statements is that I 100% agree with them and I agree and relate to all the bands he name drops I regularly watch the UK music program "Later... with Jools Holland" it's one of the few live music program's left and Jools regularly picks new, popular and classic bands and artists to perform one or two songs. And it's true. All the new and popular artists mostly sound the same. True there are a few standouts. But nowhere near enough. Every singer/songwriter wants to be the next Ed Sheeran or James blunt , while every band wants to be the next Mumford and Sons or Kings of Leon. I totally get mikes argument. Sure he shouldn't really be name dropping but he's saying what he believes in. And I stand by it. So I guess that makes me a scumbag too?
No, I mean, what did you take Shinoda's statement to mean? If you think that everyone misinterpreted it, what's the correct interpretation to you?
I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but Lauren Mayberry of CHVRCHES actually responded to some of what Mike said. http://www.nme.com/news/chvrches/78273 Tbh, some of the stuff Mike's been saying, or at least the way it's being interpreted is more likely to damage his reputation then enhance it. If he's not careful he's going to be seen as a desperate has-been, trying to stay relevant by bashing other bands, which i'm certain is not the image he wants to portray. He's not Fred Durst. By all means make the music you want to hear, but live and let live. There are far worse genres out there then indie, which at least involves bands who write and play their own music.
WHOA! This is a super-controversial opinion here that has never, ever been expressed by anyone on LPA. SHINODA IS GOD I'd watch yourself if I were you. /s JK LOL
At this point, I don't even see how Mike could be misinterpreted. He's essentially been saying the same things the same way for months now. He clearly feels that the best way to make people excited about his new music is to shit on other kinds of music. And no amount of, "oh, but I actually like that kind of music" is going to make it come across any differently. Personally, I'm not a fan of trashing other bands, but he certainly wouldn't be the first musician to be kind of tactless when it comes to expressing his opinion on music (Bruce Dickinson comes to mind). It's not that big of a deal. But I'd rather he just own up to it instead of blaming music blogs for making him sound like an asshole.
I'll just repost my reply from another thread. Some of you here are acting like The Sun and the The Daily Mail. Blowing stuff out of proportion . Before anyone implies that I'm defending him just for defending's sake, this guy basically said the same shit I said. http://www.chartattack.com/features/interviews/2014/05/08/owen-pallett-interview/ What I find funny is that people love to parrot the tagline about how "opinions are assholes" and everyone has a right to them, except if you're some famous guy in a band. Who would have thought?