Discussion in 'Linkin Park Chat' started by Filip, Feb 26, 2014.
That album sucks
Yeah...I can see you'll be around for a while.
Maybe Mike's ego is a little bigger than it was when they were playing for a hundred people a night. I think it has a right to be though. As a few people have stated, he has every right to hype up the music the band is working on. If he didn't, it'd be a little alarming. What band DOESN'T think highly of their next big release? Whether it's the type of "heavy" we associate with their first two albums remains to be seen. Honestly, when it comes to LP my interpretation of heavy is much different than if we're talking about other metal or rock bands. I can't see LP doing anything like that. Lies Greed Misery or Victimized seem more up LP's alley of what "heavy" means.
Regardless, I feel it's safe to say "heavy" means that the songs will have a lot of energy. Something to bounce to, and something you can really be blown away by. This is really good, in my opinion. As the band starts to get older it's nice to see they're not slowing down or opting for a more mellow or gentle sound. I love songs like Leave Out All the Rest or Burning in the Skies, but I'd be extremely let down by an entire album full of them.
Whether it's electronic, folk, rock, alternative, hip hop, or whatever...heavy will mean something completely different for Linkin Park. Once again, it's absolutely impossible to decipher the sound of the next album based on descriptions and words alone.
As long as the quality is good this time, Living Things sounds the same whether it's played through shitty earphones or hi-fi system which is why it got boring for me, sounded lower quality than music they made 10 years before, what was Rick Rubin thinking
So, first, you state your displeasure when Shinoda suggests that LP6 will probably be stylistically different from "Living Things" ... but, now, you suddenly don't like "Living Things"
Looks to me like he just misunderstood the sentence.
Linkin Park haven't repeated themselves in back-to-back albums since Hybrid Theory and Meteora. I cannot imagine they will put out an LT clone for LP6.
He's saying there is a possibility that their next album might not sound anything like their previous albums.
I'll be surprised if this album isn't a heavier version of ATS.
^ that would make everyone happy in theory...
Imagine something like blackout with heavy riffs.
Though I'd want said riffs to be creative and not just a simple strum of a drop D chord.
Thank God, sorry I skim readed that article and read that sentence wrong
Yeah something like Blackout again would make a good 2014 music
No. I don't want a copy of anything.
It wont be a copy it is just similar in sounds
Tallerstorm knows the factz
I'm not sure if half of you guys even read the article carefully. He doesn't mention anything about Rock getting mellow or not being heavy (In the traditional sense) of any sorts. In fact he never even uses the word 'heavy'. Sure, he mentions the lack of aggression, boldness and energy, but I doubt that has anything to do with the lack of 'heavy-ness'.
Because if he really did, that'd be quite ironic. But he didn't.
If you read carefully, the section where he compares the old and new Electronic artists musically is more of a reference to the lack of 'evolution' of Rock, the idea of blending styles, taking chances, while still maintaining that 'Rock feel' to it. And personally, I think they did that very well in A Thousand Suns. And it was definitely quite bold and quite a few moments on the album were energetic.
He's basically stating that Rock Music, or more appropriately, the general idea of Rock music, hasn't really changed or evolved. People aren't open to change, experimenting. But a lot of artists are constantly trying to (Muse, NIN, and now Coldplay too) do exactly that, but people and critics will bring it down, because it's not what they want (NIN got away with it, because well, it's NIN, everyone loves NIN). This is what prevents a lot of artists from pushing their limits, crossing their boundaries. And that's really what he's talking about when he mentions those bands (as a response to Ernest Baker's article about how Rock music sucks), which is also what he hinted when he talks about the popular radio not playing LP, or them being ignored by award shows not affecting them and their state of mind, because that's what seems to be the main focus right now.
On the contrary, his article was a response to another article about how Rock Music sucks and that it was depressing, which he addresses in the very beginning of the article. Hence why he mentions bands like Foo Fighters, Green Day etc, bands that stand for the general idea of Rock. Although Dave Grohl, on many occasions did mention that their next album is going to be unlike anything else, something that has never been done before. So that's that.
So, I don't think he's really bashing the state of Rock Music. He just has more of a two-sided opinion towards it.
That's my two 2 cents.
He mentions that "softnening process" in other interviews he has made though. And in one, he's quoted saying that heavy music isn't innovative enough and that almost everyone tends to lend on the other side of the spectrum, indie pop stuff. So the idea is quite there. Though you're right, it's not his only idea. There's also all the discussion about innovation and evolution in general.
And you would be right in not wanting one. What we actually need, is a copy of a copy of a copy.
Some would argue that would be "What I've Done Pt.4".
Yeah I was going to say this. He says nothing about wanting "harder" rock like AC/DC. "Rock" has basically been the same thing since the 90s.
Like Qwerty19 said, Mike has specifically mentioned "energy" or whatever other word he uses to imply heaviness in other interviews. He's said that a lot of the creative and interesting music being made recently isn't really heavy and/or what he considers to be "rock" music.
Separate names with a comma.