The only thing about concept albums are they become way to preachy, and go into stuff that a lot of people get offended by.
I'd go so far as to say that "another ATS" would have to sound like anything BUT ATS in order to be consistent with what they set out to achieve with that album.
Rick Rubin for the 4th time again?? I'd rather to see the band produce the new album by themselves not just by Mike Shinoda alone but the band as a whole.. like what they did with Meteora, yet it was co-produced by Gilmore... I want Brad Delson to be key role in production again just like what he did on Meteora..
All I saw was "I want another Meteora" :/ (But that probably, /maybe/ wasn't what you meant, but, reading the post, it's... A bit dubous.) Because that went so well the first time. But it would be interesting to see a self produced album without the ties and trials Meteora had.
LOL I don't want another Meteora.. hahah But seriously, If the band aimed to be more different on the next record then self-producing would be interesting..
Yeah!! Or a producer that is open to LP's diversity approach in music that let them explore and experiment more..
The biggest person they need to drop is Brian "Big Bass" Gardner when working on the next album. The mastering on both ATS and LT were lacking horribly. I don't mind them working with Rick Rubin, since he pretty much just lets the band do whatever they want, with minimal input.
ATS was not mastered by Gardner.. It was Vlado Meller.. ATS mixing & mastering was fine for me.. except for LT, its pretty messed up by Marroquin...
Well, then, this is what I'd probably be most excited by. An album full of material where the band takes their music to places it's never gone before. On the whole, I think it sounds great, but, IMO, there's something wrong with how "The Catalyst" is mixed. I think that the drums are a bit too loud or something EDIT: the sampled drums, I mean
A few responses, answer the one that speaks to you the most. 1) Spoken like someone who only has the vaguest idea of what a concept album is. 2) Which specific part of your ass did you pull this gem from? 3) One must not suffer the unclean likes of the Who, Janelle Monae and the Roots to live. 4) All art must be sunshine, lollipops and rainbows and never explore the entire gamut of the human experience. 5) There are reasons why I'm not open about being a Linkin Park fan on the internet.
That'd be tough to pull off considering they never made a concept album, how could they make another?
In a sense. The songs are connected by various vague "concepts" and sonic elements but they aren't exactly tied to a plotline or anything like that by most interpretations
A concept album doesn't necessarily have to have a plotline or story. It just needs to have a concept, or overarching theme across the songs. In typical Linkin Park style, they won't explicitly state their whole story cliff-notes style because they want the listener to have room to intrepret and feel out the album for themselves. Besides, spelling everything out is no fun. The band spelled it out for us that it is about a society going nuclear. And then they left us to fill in the blanks for each song. I personally interpret it as the stages different parts of society goes through as it gets nuclearly obliviated. There is also some double meaning disguising some songs as classical LP songs. So like by themselves as a single, a particular song works standalone with its own vague theme, but in context of the whole album, the song takes on a completely new meaning. I think it was smart.