What is your favourite thing about Linkin Park? Why are you a fan of them?

My favorite thing about LP is they are hard to categorize. Each song probably has a unique reason why I like it. You look at the difference between the frantic apocalyptic tone of The Catalyst and contrast it to the beautiful progression leading to that epic harmonization in The Little Things Give You Away. I find myself cycling through the albums, and by the time I go through every album the first album feels fresh again.

 

Reading over this thread

Sure maybe LP regressed with LT but there is nothing to say that LP can't continue experimentation while also going heavy. Derek did day most of the songs don't go heavy for the sake of being heavy but they go heavy while also having creative writing. It sounds like this album will have the experimentation side. But also with the heavy side brought back.

 

I've loved them since the first listen of ITE. They've just grown really close to me since then, I guess. There are days when I feel like they're not doing anything amazing, but then I'll listen to their discography, and every single track blows me away. Hell, I liked Recharged yesterday.

So yeah, it's just easier to find things I don't like, 'cause there's fewer of them.

 

Honestly? The hair styles, man! I swear to god, Chester and Mike have had every colour of the rainbow at one time or another! That shit is early 2000s GOLD!
Mohawks, Phohawks, Spikes. Red, Blue, Blonde, Black... That shit is dope.

 

I love Linkin Park for their outstanding music and personality. They never let fame get to their heads and are humble. Each band member is down to earth and charitable. Mike and Chester are both amazing behind the mic.

 

their musical versatility. they can do pretty much anything. Chester has a great voice to boot. wish I heard more from Shinoda ala Iridescent/Castle of Glass.

 

Okay I REALLY don't understand why people are complaining about Verse/Chorus/Verse Structures when literally almost everyone does that. It's cool when a song has a cool structure. Some of my other favorite bands such as Nine Inch Nails and Radiohead have plenty of songs with these structure and those bands are arguably some of the best rock acts of our generation. Even on Kid A, an album cited here, songs like How to Disappear Completely and Optimistic have that structure.

I just don't see why some of you guys think having a different structure would make for a good song when it ultimately comes down to what you make of it. We haven't heard what this album will be AS AN ALBUM, yet due to the heavy nature of the album many are already looking down on it.

There can be such thing as innovation in heavy music, and while I am of the camp that A Thousand Suns is their best work, it still had songs like Iridescent, Wretches and Kings, and The Messenger. You can say that Iridescent had the gang vocals, you can say Wretches and Kings had the Mario Savio speech, and you can say that The Messenger was their take on a pure acoustic guitar song, but in the end kappa you can easily make an argument those songs don't bring much innovation to the table on its own.

 

Because they still can provide catchy choruses and yet still provide left-field music

But mostly ATS. I was 13 when that album came out, and it drew me into the rest of their discography. And mostly music in general.

 

Basically this. However, I'm actually looking forward to some real rock with this upcoming album.

 

I've got some questions for you because I kind of hate your opinion lol Nothing against you personnaly, but...Anyway, I'd very much like to hear your answer to those. If you can do it on an objective basis, then I'd maybe consider your prior arguments. For now, I just think you're subjective as fuck because of your mellow musical tastes.

1)"LP is lazy and stopped experimenting".

Does that mean that Rob making the most difficult album he ever had to record on drums is lazy?

Does that mean than scrapping the Indie demos and starting from scratch was lazy?

Does that mean that self-production is lazy?

Does that mean that LP making a record heavier than everything they have done in the last 10 years is not experimenting with something different?

Does that mean that making a heavy record that probably won't appeal to radios is lazy?

Does that mean that including guests for the first time ever in a studio release is lazy?

2) "Making music that sounds predictable".

Aside from the structure, would you have predicated that kind of sound after MTM, ATS, and Living Things?

3) "One more crazy album like ATS".

Are you sure you're being honest with yourself? Are you really sure you want something crazy, or is that just a way to say that you want ballads? Because if LP made a Death Metal record, which would be the most crazy thing ever, I think you'd hate it.

4) "Fuck the whiners who want nu metal back".

What you're doing right now, isn't that whining too? You want "experimental" (read: ballads) from LP back as much as die hard nu metal fans want nu-metal back. And it sounds as annoying to me.

5) I saw in another thread your favorite 10 LP songs are basically their 10 softest one. Would you praise an album full of Irridescent or Roads Untraveled, calling it "innovative" and "experimental", and that even if LP has already made songs like these? Even Chester said they can write 1000 Irridescent. THAT would be lazy.

 

Again people stating opinions as facts.
I personally loved GATS and that song is IMO more experimental(for Linkin Park) than most of ATS(OMG he is talking about the masterpiece). Iridescent, Burning In The Skies, W&K and The Messenger all have parts that we have heard before from LP(while being better than most of their stuff.)
So far I am feeling this album will be solid. It probably won't knock down ATS as my favorite record but will hopefully steal the second or third place.

What I like most about them is their unpredictable nature. NO I am not saying that every song is totally unique but before an album comes out you never know what you truly are going to get. But people claiming that they are lazy and uncreative needs to get off their high horse. They act like all they listen to is so innovate that every song invents a new genre. Jesus you guys do know that Linkin Park got popular for a reason right? They have always been pretty accessible.
The hipster community is really growing in the LPA

Other than that of cause the strongest part of LP has always been the vocals IMO. Chester and Mike compliment each other so nicely and the dynamics they bring to the table is hard to find anywhere else.

 

Fucking this!

IMO, GATS is more surprising than at least half of ATS. It has so much uncommon things for the band, especially seeing their last 3 records. Yet, there are members like Comstock that always bring up that THP has not offered anything experimental yet? I mean...what. the. fuck?

Does a song need to be electronic/mellow to be experimental, or what? Because if one think so, he's just wrong.

Fucking this! (again)

 

- The diversity of their music
- Chester's voice
- Their personalities (down to earth, humble, kind, funny, smart)
- The way they treat their fans
- Mike and Chester as a duo
- Their work for charity
- Their live act

If I had to pick one favorite thing it would probably be the diversity of their music.

 

What made me a fan? The hard edged combination of mike's philosophical raps and Chester's demonic screams. However, songs like Papercut were the one to drive it home for me. Absolutely nailed it.

Why am I still a fan? Their musical catalogue is so diverse these days that there really just about is a song for every mood. I'm less inclined to be angsty myself these days, but I still love a good heavy LP track. What other bands can boast having a song like LOATR straight after a song like GU, and then switch to BIO and SOTD.

 

Reanimation is what got me really into Linkin Park. Everything after that kind of sucks to be honest. Not sure why i still follow them. I did like A Thousand Suns also, everything post ATS has been disappointing though.

 

What the fuck is up with Linkin Park fans and the word "experimenting"? That's just become a word for making the music they want. LT isn't seen as experimental by most because half the album apparently sounds too similar to older work. Is blending old with new not experimenting? Does "experimental" really have to be 100% new? And the thing about "changing genres" ... Apparently Led Zeppelin was a shitty band because they never changed from "rock" and Pink Floyd were shit because they never dropped their "progressive/psychedelic rock" act.

 

...

I never said the patter couldn't work, only that, in my opinion, LP doesn't do much with it.

I don't think anyone here said otherwise. Just because I feel that LP's strengths are in their soft music, doesn't mean they can't write a good heavy song (which they already have in the past). I'm sure they could "innovate" on their heavy side if they really wanted to. but as of yet, they really haven't.

The difference with those bands is that they brought something new to the plate with each album, or, just has superbly written songs with each release, something LP has failed to do on either aspects IMO. Even those those bands are "groundbreaking," just like any other band, they also have releases which aren't too good. Some bands reach their peak sooner than others. I feel LP peaked with ATS. Buy hey, maybe The Hunting Party will surprise me.

 

Exactly what i feel about them

 

I added that argument to support exactly that; that bands don't need to "change genre" just to make ground-breaking music. I feel ATS was really a fluke, and that they won't be making anything that surpasses it, honestly.

 

My bad then.