I wouldn't really include any bands that changed sound due to changes of significant members (Fleetwood Mac, AC/DC, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Van Halen, etc.).
As mentioned above, Metallica changed a lot (not for the better IMO), same for Heart.
Suicidal Tendencies morphed quite a bit from pure punk to mostly metal.
There's so much negativity on the internet these days that most fans consider evolving as selling out at least when it comes to rock/metal. All I ever hear is comments like "first x albums were their best and then they went to ####". Metallica always comes to mind in this discussion. They constantly evolved as the first album was speed metal then they evolved to thrash and in the back half of their catalogue more metal. I wouldn't say they sold out and more that they just evolved as they aged and you can debate if they were better for it. I certainly preferred their early stuff but I can't fault any musicians that actually want to make new music and not the same album over and over but it doesn't always work out. Linkin Park for example lost me when they turned into a pop band.
I certainly don't agree with AC/DC. Their sound changed slightly after Bon Scott passed but everything after that is basically the same album over and over again.
As far as bands go I would have to say In Flames has to be the one that's changed the most as from 1994 to today they have probably covered almost every major genre in metal from death metal, melodic death metal, nu-metal, metalcore, metal, to rock. I have never heard such a varied discography from any band in the rock/metal genre.
The Following User Says Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
There's so much negativity on the internet these days that most fans consider evolving as selling out at least when it comes to rock/metal. All I ever hear is comments like "first x albums were their best and then they went to ####". Metallica always comes to mind in this discussion. They constantly evolved as the first album was speed metal then they evolved to thrash and in the back half of their catalogue more metal. I wouldn't say they sold out and more that they just evolved as they aged and you can debate if they were better for it. I certainly preferred their early stuff but I can't fault any musicians that actually want to make new music and not the same album over and over but it doesn't always work out. Linkin Park for example lost me when they turned into a pop band.
I certainly don't agree with AC/DC. Their sound changed slightly after Bon Scott passed but everything after that is basically the same album over and over again.
As far as bands go I would have to say In Flames has to be the one that's changed the most as from 1994 to today they have probably covered almost every major genre in metal from death metal, melodic death metal, nu-metal, metalcore, metal, to rock. I have never heard such a varied discography from any band in the rock/metal genre.
LOL
__________________
"You know, that's kinda why I came here, to show that I don't suck that much" ~ Devin Cooley, Professional Goaltender
The Following User Says Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
I guess I should have caught on. I always see how high AC/DC ranks on spotify monthly listeners and wonder how many times people can handle listening to the same song over and over and over.
I'm going to add the Beastie Boys here. They were a punk band, then obviously more of a rap group and they changed pretty significantly from their earlier albums. I would say that Bowie is the best example here though.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Slava For This Useful Post:
I'm going to add the Beastie Boys here. They were a punk band, then obviously more of a rap group and they changed pretty significantly from their earlier albums. I would say that Bowie is the best example here though.
For sure Bowie. He is the example. Thread should be Bands/Artists that bowied
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to fotze2 For This Useful Post:
There's so much negativity on the internet these days that most fans consider evolving as selling out at least when it comes to rock/metal. All I ever hear is comments like "first x albums were their best and then they went to ####".
This whole notion of selling out is BS in my mind and reflects the fans' view of the band. The artists themselves change and grow, and may get tired of playing the same stuff. Good on them for trying something different, even if some of their fans don't like it.
Even if they deliberately go more commercial that's a valid career choice, like any of us moving to less challenging/enjoyable job to make more money. Or maybe they just like making pop music even though they started in death metal. They're the artists, who are we to judge?
I used to laugh at the old geezers touring until they drop but what else is a musician going to do? Their life is making music and if they can enjoy and/or make money performing into their eighties, why not?
There are definitely many instances of bands abandoning their ideals - i don't think Roger Daltrey actually wishes he had died before he grew old - but don't we all?
The 2 guys who left At the Drive-in and formed the Mars Volta made a pretty big change. Going from 2-3 minute long punk songs to 15-30 minute prog rock songs.
Man, saw these guys at fort calgary like 15 years ago now... Really great show. He was singing while crowd surfing in a giant zorb ball. He was definitely still singing because at one point he ate #### and we heard him swear as he went down. Also lots of confetti and naked women on stage. Great time!
The Following User Says Thank You to Monahammer For This Useful Post:
Bad Religion started off with their iconic Self Titled debut, then came back with some weird 80's space rock album called "Into the Unknown".
Luckily they realized how badly it sucked and came straight back with "Suffer".
Not sure if that counts as evolving, but I sure wish Metallica followed their lead after the junk they released post And Justice. I could never (and still can't) appreciate much of it.
This whole notion of selling out is BS in my mind and reflects the fans' view of the band. The artists themselves change and grow, and may get tired of playing the same stuff. Good on them for trying something different, even if some of their fans don't like it.
Even if they deliberately go more commercial that's a valid career choice, like any of us moving to less challenging/enjoyable job to make more money. Or maybe they just like making pop music even though they started in death metal. They're the artists, who are we to judge?
I used to laugh at the old geezers touring until they drop but what else is a musician going to do? Their life is making music and if they can enjoy and/or make money performing into their eighties, why not?
There are definitely many instances of bands abandoning their ideals - i don't think Roger Daltrey actually wishes he had died before he grew old - but don't we all?
People don't like change. I used Linkin Park as an example as I was a huge fan of their first handful of albums which were nu-metal but once they evolved into more of a pop band, I stopped listening to them. I never really held it against them because it's their life and profession. It's ridiculously selfish to expect a band to not venture into a different direction artistically or more mainstream to profit if that's what they want to do with their career as everyone should be free to pursue the career direction they wish. I will always find other bands/artists to listen to. A lot of metal fans rag on Metallica for the Black album but that's the album that paved the way for their immense success and massive fortune as they are estimated to be worth 1 billion dollars. Slayer, Megadeth and Anthrax combined aren't worth $100 million. They never sold out. They succeeded and became the biggest metal band ever. If there's one thing that the internet has taught me is that catering to fanboys is how business go bankrupt and artists become poor.
