Ahah yup, I don't really do song rating thingies that often but I tried to challenge what would have been my pre-established ranking - almost the same but reverting HT and ATS, and LT and OML. So I knew it was going to be similar, but not THAT similar
People interepret rating scales differently too. I hate rating things in general, so if you were to look at my RateMyMusic account the vast majority of stuff winds up in 3.5/5 land because I like it but wouldn't call it a dear favorite. "Oh I liked that album, I'd like to revisit it some time, but not immediately!" *instant 3.5, no deeper thought put in* I don't even use that site for the ratings honestly. It just has a lot of good crate diggers who find cool stuff, which is why I stick around. But because of the site mechanics I have to rate to catalog my listens lol.
As someone who absolutely hates some albums, this is an absolute L take. Some people just really enjoy music non-critically. Nothing cringe about just ENJOYING music (unless it's Meteora).
Cringeworthy was an overreaction, and I absolutely agree. Nothing wrong about enjoying music. I love all their albums, but I can't call them all perfect.
Close, but thankfully there was Meteora slander to keep it from happening Actually I disagree anyway because we know not everything is S Tier, and if you're going to put everything in S, why even make a tier list?
Oh boy my rankings keep shifting again and again. One More Light finally clicked for me, and the recency bias for From Zero wore off. A Thousand Suns (9.9/10) Living Things (9.5/10) The Hunting Party (9.1/10) Minutes to Midnight (9/10) One More Light (8.8/10) Hybrid Theory (8.5/10) Meteora (8.3/10) From Zero (8/10) From Zero is a well made project and all but it just doesn't really hit me like the previous LP albums. There's obviously no nostalgia factor, and every time I listen to it it just... doesn't feel the same without Chester. None of the songs bring me that connection that LP generally brings me. I think the fact that it is sort of a combination of every LP sound makes it feel diluted, like it doesn't really succeed at being anything and sits awkwardly in the middle, with the added disadvantage of having Emily instead of Chester (who I like less and less the more I listen, except for in IGYEIH which grew on me exponentially).
I can see a point being made in both elements here - the combination of every LP sound, and having Emily instead of Chester. Funnily enough, if there ever had to be an eponymous record, I think From Zero would have been the perfect candidate for it - with the obvious omission of Chester. But otherwise, the record is clearly a love letter to their past sounds, and an amalgamation of it all, with a stronger emphasis on the nu-metal days than in the past 20 years. Now, I believe this is a situation where you can see the glass half-full or half-empty. From day one, I have seen multiple critics - mostly outside the LP fanbase, as I was curious of non-fans opinions - negatively speaking of the multiple Easter eggs on the record, with the main argument being that "From Zero" spend most of its runtime rehashing the past instead of trying something new. And to be honest, I think that's a totally fair perspective to have. If I was to change my mind on the record, that's one I would probably endorse. However, I think this is adopting the "half-empty" vision, and I personally look at it the other way. When I hear "From Zero", I hear a celebration of multiple sounds and ideas that made me fall in love with this band, and the unexpected nature of the celebration - the fact it could never have happened and the fact I didn't believe in it happening - make it all feel like a surprise birthday party. Something overwhelming positive. On top of it, I believe the execution has been absolutely great, with a sense of renewed energy and inspiration I haven't heard in their sound since ATS. Not everyone will give it as much praise, but I do believe the album is really solid from start to finish, and pretty much a perfect come-back album. Regarding Emily, I think it's totally fair to have had a stronger connection with Chester vocals. His iconic voice was one of the main reasons the band's music connected with so many people. I will say that the definitive nature of the circumstances that brought Emily into the band really helps me to separate their story into 2 distinct, separate eras. It may seem paradoxical, but I really see this new iteration as both the same band, and a new band. Chester was absolutely amazing, but unfortunately, the old iteration just can't carry on. From there on, it's either nothing, or something.. different. While I think all of us agree it's great to have something new, it is unavoidable that it will resonate more with some people than others - and that include the very new voice of the band. Luckily enough for me, I am happy to say - and I know this is very subjective and I'll probably be in a minority on this - that I think From Zero is the first LP record to be strongly supported by the performances of the lead singer since...ATS. Don't get me wrong, I have always loved Chester voice. Yet, to me, there is a small split between his legendary performances on the first 4 records, and his really good performances on the last three. One of the main thing I like about Emily is how I think all of her performances enhance the tracks on From Zero - a prime example of that would be TEM. On the entire spectrum, I would put her somewhere in the middle - it's hard to touch on Chester abilities from HT to ATS, but if I'm being honest, I probably enjoy her input a bit more than a few performances on LT/THP/OML. This is not an attempt at comparing them, and more like paying tribute to them both. Having a singer that could even come close to Chester was something I didn't think was possible - yet here we are.
Yeah this has been the way I've looked at it. It's undeniable that Chester had very special talent that we will always miss going forward, but he was probably a one-in-a-generation singer. It's hard to think of many singers that could ever come close to capturing both his raw talent and his feel for emoting when singing. It was so unique to him. And the band knows that, so in the new stuff Emily has taken her own approach. It's also worth noting that for both of them, Mike has been the one to help them find their vocal "sound." Mike had to sit and hash out Chester's vocal technique with him because he was always emulating grunge and rock singers he liked rather than finding his own thing. Emily has said Mike helped her to find her singing voice. That's one of the things that really encourages me about it all, even if I miss Chester's legendary voice. I also don't disagree with some of this, with the exception of maybe the last part. With the hype wearing off I don't feel called back to From Zero a lot. It does feel very different without Chester, and I think I will always really prefer that era of the band deep down. But that's in the past, and I still support this new era; I feel that Emily is doing a great job so far. For me, I appreciate this new music for what it is, and try not to let the idea of what it isn't mar that.
Exactly. People shouldn't complain that the new vocalist isn't as good as Chester because it's very hard to find someone that is
While I understand what you're saying, the newest and riskiest thing they've ever done was bring on a new singer. And she knocked it out of the park. Emily elevates From Zero, not the other way around. This is what I was getting at: the pointlessness of it. But apparently I ruffled some feathers.