Linkin Park new album "The Hunting Party"

[Coach]

Originally Posted by strombad

Plus NSYNC is #2.

#groundbreaking

Stuff like this kind of bothers me. Just because the music isn't necessarily quality or to your taste doesn't mean it didn't have an impact. NSYNC and Backstreet Boys definitely had a massive impact on music and the industry as a whole. Whether or not it was a GOOD impact is up for debate.

I would think its a stretch to put LP in that category, although I didn't know much about the industry during their peak, but I was definitely one of the only kids who listened to them regularly. And anyone else who did likely heard them first from me. I loved Linkin Park as a teenager. Hybrid Theory didn't leave my discman really, but I don't think I bought any other LP albums. Their stuff all started to sound the same and got too poppy. But combining Linkin Park with my love of DBZ and all the fan videos that people made with DBZ highlights and LP sound tracks were awesome to me. I'll check out the album and see how I like it.

[Incogneto]

Love it....Can't wait.

[Senator Clay Davis]

But this is where "having an impact" and "being ground breaking" are two completely different things. They simply streamlined several genres into one that sounds essentially like the cleaned up version of those genres. They didn't innovate in any way, they simply made music similar to others but cleaner and with a couple more hooks. They streamlined a sound, they didn't break ground on anything new whatsoever. Did they have an impact? Only if record sales are the basis of impact. And if that's the basis of impact, you have to say NSYNC is more impactful to music than Judas Priest. Ummm, no.

[DownhillGoat]

Nm. Beaten to it.

[troutman]

Hard to get scores this consistently low:

http://www.metacritic.com/person/linkin-park

Yellow grades are rare on Metacritic. They have 4 out of 6.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by troutman

Hard to get scores this consistently low:

http://www.metacritic.com/person/linkin-park

Yellow grades are rare on Metacritic. They have 4 out of 6.

And yet they have outlasted just about every band mentioned in this thread and are still going strong. Hard to argue with that.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Igster

Completely disagree. See? Some people think so while others don't. I do believe they are groundbreaking and have had a huge influence on the industry and music in general. They are a significant band IMO.

Actually, whether or not a band is significant in the musical landscape is not an opinion based thing. It just is or isn't.

The Beatles, Elvis, the Rolling Stones, Jay Z, Talking Heads, Nine Inch Nails, Beastie Boys, U2, Bob Dylan, etc.
All bands that can be called significant or ground breaking.

There are plenty of bands that are in fact "significant" and have a tangible effect on music in general. LP wasn't one of them. They did what other bands were doing and they made a career out of it. Was their impact on music significant? No. Did they break ground? No. Whether they're good or not is entirely subjective of course, but that's obviously not what I'm talking about.

There are plenty of bands I love, some in particular that have been around longer and put out more albums than LP. Would I call them significant or groundbreaking? No. And that's OK.

Maybe it's just semantics and a difference in how the phrase is being used, but I'm just looking at it from the most objective angle.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by strombad

Actually, whether or not a band is significant in the musical landscape is not an opinion based thing. It just is or isn't.

I'm not going to lie, I'm biased, as I am a huge Linkin Park fan, but I seriously believe they have had an influence on music in general and have done some pretty impressive things with rap/rock and melodies. I bet you would find a lot of bands who would consider Linkin Park influential.

And for fun...

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthi...ntial-rock-ban

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Igster

And yet they have outlasted just about every band mentioned in this thread and are still going strong. Hard to argue with that.

This argument absolutely sucks because again, that means every rock band of the last 15 years is bowing down to Nickelback. Really, really hard to argue for that. Longevity and record sales are relevant to popularity, not impact on music or ground broke.

That's all really. That's mine and other's issue in this thread. Linkin Park can be your favourite band ever, you can think of them as being 1,000 times better than the Beatles. Love them all you want, just don't think of them as ground breaking, because factually speaking, they aren't. Nothing they did was original, and nothing they did sparked a significant change in music.

And for fun, an outstanding review of Linkin Park's "ground breaking" albums.

Linkin Park originally called itself Hybrid Theory, a name they retained for the title of their debut album. The "hybrid" in question is the overly familiar one of rap and metal, to which the group has little new to add. The guitars and drums lock into standard thrash patterns, over which singer Chester Bennington and rapper Mike Shinoda alternate in furious expressions of rage and frustration. "One Step Closer," the track released to radio in advance of the album's release, is a typical effort, with lyrics like "Everything you say to me/Takes me one step closer to the edge/And I'm about to break." It might be easier to believe in all this angst if the group members didn't take such pains to thank their families in the lengthy acknowledgments in the booklet, followed by an extensive list of product endorsements. But even without the fine print to undermine its sincerity, Linkin Park sounds like a Johnny-come-lately to an already overdone musical style.

Perhaps if the cut-'n'-paste remix record Reanimation hadn't appeared as a stopgap measure in the summer of 2002, Linkin Park's second record, Meteora, would merely have been seen as a continuation of their 2000 debut, Hybrid Theory, instead of a retreat to familiar ground. Then again, Reanimation wasn't much more than a way to buy time (along with maybe a little credibility), so it's unfair to say that its dabbling in electronica and hip-hop truly pointed toward a new direction for the group, but it did provide a more interesting listening experience than Meteora, which is nothing more and nothing less than a Hybrid Theory part two. Which isn't to say that Linkin Park didn't put any effort into the record, since it does demonstrate that the group does stand apart from the pack by having the foresight to smash all nu-metal trademarks -- buzzing guitars, lumbering rhythms, angsty screaming, buried scratching, rapped verses -- into one accessible sound which suggests hooks instead of offering them. More importantly, the group has discipline and editing skills, keeping this record at a tight 36 minutes and 41 seconds, a move that makes it considerably more listenable than its peers and, by extension, more powerful, since they know where to focus their energy, something that many nu-metal bands simply do not. (It must be said that there will surely be consumers out there that will question paying a $19.99 retail for a 36-minute-and-41-second record, though some may prefer getting a tight, listenable record at that price instead of a meandering 70-minute mess.) So, it must be said that Meteora does deliver on the most basic level -- it gives the fans what they want, and it does so with energy and without fuss. It's also without surprises, either, which again gives the album a static feeling -- suggesting not a holding pattern for the band, but rather the limits of their chosen genre, which remains so stylistically rigid and formulaic that even with a band who follows the blueprint well, like Linkin Park, it winds up sounding a little samey and insular. Since this is only their second go-round, this is hardly a fatal flaw, but the similarity of Meteora to Hybrid Theorydoes not only raise the question of where do they go from here, but whether there is a place for them to go at all.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

But this is where "having an impact" and "being ground breaking" are two completely different things. They simply streamlined several genres into one that sounds essentially like the cleaned up version of those genres. They didn't innovate in any way, they simply made music similar to others but cleaner and with a couple more hooks. They streamlined a sound, they didn't break ground on anything new whatsoever. Did they have an impact? Only if record sales are the basis of impact. And if that's the basis of impact, you have to say NSYNC is more impactful to music than Judas Priest. Ummm, no.

I would agree with everything but your last sentence. If LP only stream lined and mixed genres into something different, wouldn't Judas Preist fall into the same category of mixing operatic rock with heavy metal? Does that diminish their overall impact or quality? I don't think so. Everyone is constantly improving and mixing stuff from what they heard before, that's how music evolves. That's how Delta blues turns into Muddy Waters and Chuck Berry and then into Rolling Stones and Beatles and then into Zeppelin and Sabbath and so on. Some evolutions are good and some are bad. I don't know how much of an impact LP had at all on the music industry, but I don't think you can say that they didn't come up with something different. You could say it was similar to Limp Bizkit, Papa Roach or Korn, but I honestly don't think that's accurate as I personally see quite a few differences between those bands. Some people might not see the difference between the Stones and Beatles, but people more educated on that type of music would obviously disagree.

And yes I would argue NSYNC (combined with Backstreet Boys) was more impactful to music than Judas Priest. Obviously not more impactful to evolution of the strain of music you personally enjoy, but to the industry as a whole, yes, boy bands had a massive impact on how the industry worked and what it promoted going forward. And again, the quality of that impact can definitely be debated, but I don't think the extent can.

Either way, this thread is about LP and I'm interested to see what they have done.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

This argument absolutely sucks because again, that means every rock band of the last 15 years is bowing down to Nickelback. Really, really hard to argue for that. Longevity and record sales are relevant to popularity, not impact on music or ground broke.

The point was, they outlasted bands that they were being compared to as not groundbreaking or different and that they were not a very good band or well liked, yet they are still around and are still selling albums.

Say what you want about Nickelback, but they have sold a ton or records, have a huge number of hits and have influenced many bands as well. Am I a fan, nope, but you can't discount the effect they have had on the industry as well.

Spoiler!

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Igster

The point was, they outlasted bands that they were being compared to as not groundbreaking or different and that they were not a very good band or well liked, yet they are still around and are still selling albums.

Say what you want about Nickelback, but they have sold a ton or records, have a huge number of hits and have influenced many bands as well. Am I a fan, nope, but you can't discount the effect they have had on the industry as well.

Agreed, they've had a massive negative affect on the music industry, and the quality of mainstream music since the mid to late 1990's. Same with Linkin Park. It ushered in a whole new era of crap. Groundbreaking indeed.

[Igster]

lol...see image above.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Igster

The point was, they outlasted bands that they were being compared to as not groundbreaking or different and that they were not a very good band or well liked, yet they are still around and are still selling albums.

Say what you want about Nickelback, but they have sold a ton or records, have a huge number of hits and have influenced many bands as well. Am I a fan, nope, but you can't discount the effect they have had on the industry as well.

Generic, corporate #### rock existed before Nickelback, and will contiue to exist forever. So no, they had no impact on music or the industry, other than to answer the question "How many times can a band write a slightly different variation of the exact same song, and still make it a hit?". Congrats on still being around and relevant, but so is Slipknot.

But using album sales is extremely dangerous, because did you know Air Supply is more impactful than Linkin Park (they sold more records, more top 10 hits)? Yeah, don't ever use record sales as a basis for anything other than that: record sales. Otherwise, Baby Genuises (box office of $51 million adjusted for inflation) is more impactful than Citizen Kane (box office of $25 million adjusted for inflation)

[Igster]

Meh, I've said my peace. I'm not going to continue to argue with people who obviously don't like Linkin Park, but insist on posting in a thread about Linkin Park.

[Igottago]

I kind of feel bad for entering this thread just to bash the band though. Personally I can't stand Linkin Park or any of the stuff from what I see as a derivitive "rap-rock" era, but I'm beyond the point of convincing people not to like it. Thread should be reserved for Linkin Park fans to talk about the new album. If they are groundbreaking in your mind then that's what counts. I will apologetically leave the thread and let you enjoy your music.

[Igster]

Awesome post Igottago.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Igottago

Agreed, they've had a massive negative affect on the music industry, and the quality of mainstream music since the mid to late 1990's. Same with Linkin Park. It ushered in a whole new era of crap. Groundbreaking indeed.

Again, just because you don't like it doesn't mean it didn't have an impact. And yes the value of the impact (positive or negative) is definitely up for debate, but it doesn't change the fact that they had an impact. Britney Spears and Chirstina Aguilera had a large impact too, that doesn't mean they didn't/don't suck. But the quality is irrelavent because it's completely subjective.

[Looch City]

Similar to the X-fest thread: people have very different tastes in music, there's no point in debating it.

Back on topic, I'm a fan of LP and looking forward to this album. Thanks for posting the details!

[Senator Clay Davis]

Look I have no big issues with Linkin Park, other than it's insulting to actual ground breaking musical acts to call them ground breaking. That's all. If you think they are, that's nice, just understand you are in the extreme minority with that opinion. You can feel free to love Linkin Park to your hearts content, I just think calling them ground breaking undermines so many truly ground breaking musical acts. I'm not even sure why a new Linkin Park album deserves its own thread, there's a thread already in existence for new music releases (and there's a music of 2014 thread as well). This could have gone in there instead and probably wouldn't result in what this thread turned into.