Started By
Message
locked post

Why do most bands start off strong and then fade?

Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:10 pm
Posted by RidiculousHype
St. George, LA
Member since Sep 2007
10193 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:10 pm
Silverchair's Frogstomp was great, then every subsequent album was worse than the one before it.

Linkin Park's Hybrid Theory was their strongest work.

Pearl Jam's Ten.

Third Eye Blind self-titled.

You get the point.

I hate to admit it but Coldplay's newest work isn't close to their earlier stuff.

Do they get creatively lazy after they reach monetary success?
Do they get busier with wives and kids as they get older? Less time to write great songs?
Spend more time touring once they become a "name" and less time in the studio?
Posted by bagNdrag
Member since Dec 2010
1906 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:16 pm to
Probably all three combined of what you mentioned. Also, its tough to consistanly write great music. Only the best can do it.
Posted by TheDrunkenTigah
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2011
17314 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:23 pm to
First album is often the result of a decade of focus and rejection, plenty of time to throw out the filler. Second album is usually the result of a record company saying "that shite was awesome, when you get back from touring that album, write and record something just as awesome in a month's time and we'll release it three weeks later."
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
260171 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:24 pm to
Only so much creativity to go around? I am shocked if a band can put out one good solid album start to finish, much less multiple albums. The sound gets old, it all starts to sound similar after a while.
Posted by Black Card
Member since Aug 2012
105 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:30 pm to
Most bands = bands you hear on the radio?

Pavement started off great and actually got better towards the end before realizing it was time to cut it off.

Yo La Tengo continues to put out amazing material with every new album over the past 20 years.

Guided By Voices is the epitome of continued, unrelenting success as far as strong albums go. Every album over the past 20+ years is above average, at least.
Posted by AlxTgr
Kyre Banorg
Member since Oct 2003
81608 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:40 pm to
Very very few of my favorite albums are later than 2nd or 3rd. Best late coming album I can think of is Aja.
Posted by island
Remlap
Member since Jul 2011
1196 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:41 pm to
Interpol is another example. Their debut is absolutely amazing but the rest of thier works fail to live up to that album IMO
Posted by Freauxzen
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
37253 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:44 pm to
quote:

Only so much creativity to go around? I am shocked if a band can put out one good solid album start to finish, much less multiple albums. The sound gets old, it all starts to sound similar after a while.


This x1000. If you have ever undertaken a creative art, you'd understand.
Posted by Baloo
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
49645 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:46 pm to
I can't believe those are the examples you came up with for great opening albums, Pearl Jam excepted. But whatever.

Rock is a young man's game. It requires a certain anger, swagger, aggression, and sexuality that seems ridiculous to a 35 year old. Some artists successfully grow older by re-inventing themselves or by simply laying the conflict out for everyone to see, but it's a hard trick to pull. There are some artists who have great late periods, like Neil Young, but mainly people get successful and just get fat and lazy.

But even though the classic example of a band that should've hung it up is the Stones, and they were great up until the early 80s. That's a 20 year run before they became a travelling nostalgia show. That's a hell of a run.
Posted by TheDoc
doc is no more
Member since Dec 2005
99297 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 2:57 pm to
quote:

Why do most bands start off strong and then fade?


Most bands?
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34257 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 4:18 pm to
quote:

Silverchair's Frogstomp was great, then every subsequent album was worse than the one before it.




Sorry, but this is silly. Frogstomp was solid for 15 year olds, but that's about it. 2, maybe 3 memorable songs. Their later music is fantastically written. Diorama and Neon Ballroom both blow Frogstomp out of the water. Freak Show is even better, in my opinion.
Posted by brgfather129
Los Angeles, CA
Member since Jul 2009
17099 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 8:03 pm to
quote:

But even though the classic example of a band that should've hung it up is the Stones, and they were great up until the early 80s.


Meh. If someone would have told the Glimmer Twins to cut out the filler..."Voodoo Lounge", "Bridges to Babylon", and "A Bigger Bang" would all be excellent. Instead, they are just too damn long. Plenty of great material on all those albums though.
Posted by CottonWasKing
4,8,15,16,23,42
Member since Jun 2011
28602 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 8:21 pm to
You have a lifetime to write your first album and only a year or two to write your second.
Posted by OldTigahFot
Drinkin' with the rocket scientists
Member since Jan 2012
10500 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 8:40 pm to
quote:

Do they get creatively lazy after they reach monetary success?

quote:

Spend more time touring once they become a "name" and less time in the studio?


These two in particular. If young musicians learn anything from the Beatles it should be that creativity flourishes where there are no distractions, i.e.screaming fans, traveling, etc. It's hard to write good stuff in the hotel room.

Posted by CottonWasKing
4,8,15,16,23,42
Member since Jun 2011
28602 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 8:48 pm to
quote:

. If young musicians learn anything from the Beatles it should be that creativity flourishes where there are no distractions, i.e.screaming fans, traveling, etc. It's hard to write good stuff in the hotel room.





the vast majority of musicians would starve if they didn't tour.

Starving=distractions

The beatles were allowed to not tour because they were the fricking beatles
Posted by Dandy Lion
Member since Feb 2010
50248 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 8:52 pm to
quote:

Best late coming album I can think of is Aja.

Exile on Mainstreet is the quintessential late album, but yeah, Aja was really great.
Posted by brewhan davey
Audubon Place
Member since Sep 2010
32782 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 8:53 pm to
quote:

Pearl Jam's Ten.


One of my all-time favorites
Posted by OldTigahFot
Drinkin' with the rocket scientists
Member since Jan 2012
10500 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 9:20 pm to
quote:

The beatles were allowed to not tour because they were the fricking beatles


quote:

The Beatles built their reputation playing clubs in Liverpool and Hamburg over a three-year period from 1960. Moulded into a professional act by manager Brian Epstein, the creativity of producer George Martin enhanced their musical potential. They gained popularity in the United Kingdom after their first single, "Love Me Do", became a modest hit in late 1962. They acquired the nickname the "Fab Four" as Beatlemania grew in Britain over the following year, and by early 1964 they had become international stars, leading the "British Invasion" of the United States pop market. The group toured extensively around the world until August 1966, when they performed their final commercial concert. From 1966 on, they produced what many critics consider their finest material, including the innovative and widely influential albums Revolver (1966), Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967), The Beatles (1968), and Abbey Road (1969).


LINK

They recognized when it was time to stop making money the hard way and start making music.
Posted by CottonWasKing
4,8,15,16,23,42
Member since Jun 2011
28602 posts
Posted on 8/23/12 at 9:51 pm to
quote:

They recognized when it was time to stop making money the hard way and start making music.




I understand what you're trying to say and I agree that a band should be able to make better music if their sole worry is to write songs. However pretty much zero modern bands could feasibly quit touring without starving to death. You do realize that musicians make very very little money off album sales in this day and age right?

A musician makes his living by playing live shows, If most bands quit touring then they would be forced to find a day job and cease being a musician.

The Beatles formula just isn't feasible for the vast majority of bands.
This post was edited on 8/23/12 at 9:52 pm
Posted by hobotiger
Asbury Park, NJ
Member since Nov 2007
5194 posts
Posted on 8/24/12 at 7:51 am to
And it also has to do with your taste. Artists change and you may not change with them. Springsteen I just can't get into his new stuff but his old stuff I love. Muse I loved the first album but after that not so much.
Pearl Jam I still love but that first album I can't even begin to count the number of times I listened to it for a year when it came out.
Certain music means something at a certain time of your life and an artist may sum that up for you in an album.

And someone said it earlier, young struggling guys have something to say and they are usually pissed about it. Once they get successful it's a little harder for them to write sounds with the same feeling and it's just hard in general to keep that level up
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram