Linkin Park

[Diageo]

I'm convinced that if they'd taken the 5 actual songs on the album, got rid of all the shit pointless parts they could have made a some what decent 5 track EP.

There's 9 actual songs in the album.

[ReZourceman]

So having listened to the album a lot now, I have formed a solid opinion.

 

Its fucking awesome. Like totally bad ass. I'd probably put it above Minutes to Midnight, theres some absolute tunes on there.

 

Their next single is awesome, and the video is pretty bad ass.

 

[nightwolf]

It's a good song, but I don't like that LP have gone this way.

[ShavenWolf]

[ReZourceman]

"Living Things" is their new album. It is out on June 26th.

 

 

Apparently it is a bit of a return to previous sounds whilst also combining elements from their four main albums. Which to me....sounds....god. Just godly. The first song I really liked after just one listen, which is unusual for me.

 

 

They also said the songs on the album are more about relationships and less politicky than previous outings.

 

So it sounds incredible basically.

[Ramar]

Just bought the single. After two listens, me likey.

[MindFreak]

Linkin Park has gone way too electronic for my taste. I like their old albums, Meteora and Hybrid Theory were great but Minutes to Midnight had only one song I like, namely No More Sorrow which was rather good.

[Jon]

Linkin Park has gone way too electronic for my taste. I like their old albums, Meteora and Hybrid Theory were great but Minutes to Midnight had only one song I like, namely No More Sorrow which was rather good.

 

Minutes to Midnight is probably my favourite LP album, Hands Held High is an inspirational song. Shadow of the Day and What I've Done are very decent too.

[bob]

 

Aaaaah, that's what that was!

 

I was trying to sleep one night, and the guy upstairs was listening to this song on repeat. I could barely hear it, but i knew that i quite liked it. Sounds even better when not heard through a ceiling.

 

Now i know.

 

I owned Meteora, Reanimation and Hybird Theory, but then i kind of forgot about Linkin Park.

 

Maybe i'll give this new album a listen.

[dan-likes-trees]

I love that game!

 

[The Bard]

Dude, Linking Park are the grossest antique of the early 00s. Why the fuck to people continue to try and make them relevant by bringing up their tired asses in conversation? It's literally just as bad as having a thread open talking about the merits and the emotional resonance of the Vengaboys.

 

Fuck you guys, you're the reason these dickpickles still put out albums.

[Jon]

Dude, Linking Park are the grossest antique of the early 00s. Why the fuck to people continue to try and make them relevant by bringing up their tired asses in conversation? It's literally just as bad as having a thread open talking about the merits and the emotional resonance of the Vengaboys.

 

Fuck you guys, you're the reason these dickpickles still put out albums.

 

LOLZ

 

 

You're the reason dickpickles like Vai keep releasing 70 minutes of self-obsessed, fit-as-many-techniques-into-one-song-as-possible, no emotional attachment possible bullshit.

[The Bard]

1. It was a joke.

 

2. I don't like Steve Vai, and I never have

 

3. Actually, I'm retconning my first point: Linkin Park are balls. They append juvenile, poorly worded lyrics to some of the most banal chord progressions you can imagine. Still, music is a relative process based on pattern recognition and therefore subjective. Nevertheless, pattern recognition is a faculty that reflects intelligence, so I can safely lambast your dumb ass for liking this heinous shit.

 

4. I'm still joking.

[Jon]

I was also joking, I've clearly no idea if you like Steve Vai (i'm satisfied you don't).

 

It does somewhat worry me that Linkin Park have recorded songs in the past without the knowledge of how to play them live. The more fucking about with effects, the worse the song generally is.

[Oxigen_Waste]

I think it was pretty much them and Limp Bizkit who started the whole thing.

 

late nineties early noughties... they were a few of the first "proper" mainstream "numetal" bands.

 

 

Korn. Single handedly. Sold millions and were unquestionably the first numetal band, pioneering the genre back in '93, and the first legitimate blockbuster album in the whole genre was their '98 album Follow The Leader. Although the first 2 had quite alot of success too.

 

Linkin Park was quite late to the party, they only became relevant well after the boom (98/99), as hybrid theory got released at the end of 2000 and only exploded in 2001. They were actually the last big player of the genre to surface, if we're being honest.

 

Not that it matters, the whole genre is mostly shit. Some redeemers here and there, but for the most part it's a brain dead culture that only really works on teenager minds... it surprises me that some of you people actually listened to them back in the day and still do 10 years down the road. How is that even possible? The most fucking barren soundscapes ever.

 

They did have a couple of good ideas, but predictably enough they were always drowned out by generorock. I get the nostalgia factor, but come on people... grow the fuck up, here.

[ReZourceman]

Oxigen, what happens in life is, some people have different tastes and so not everyone likes the same things. You will learn when you grow up.

[Oxigen_Waste]

Oxigen, what happens in life is, some people have different tastes and so not everyone likes the same things. You will learn when you grow up.

 

What you say is very true. But this is music designed for kids and teenagers. Outgrowing this is almost inevitable. There's obviously gonna be exceptions but the only thing that amounts to is lack of exposure. Trust me, the only reason you're still listening to this type of music gladly nowdays is because you haven't beed feeding yourself with anything better. I used to love these bands, I really did... sometimes I still listen to their songs nowdays, and enjoy them, even if it's for nostalgia's sake. Sadly, now when I do listen to them, the flaws are obvious. And the only reason you don't see them is because you don't know any better. Ignorance is indeed bliss, as you can enjoy many more songs than I can.

 

Sometimes you get tired of a particular genre or just loose interest. But when you come back to it after a breather, the magic is still there. Not the case here. At all.

I love to revisit Marshal Matters LP because of that same reason... turns out it's actually good, it wasn't just a phase or this thing I liked because I was a teenager, no... it remains a great album, to this day. There's something actually there. Unlike LP and the whole Numetal crew. It's just afterbirth.

 

It's why the genre absolutely and completely died. Because it failed to captivate any significant audiences outside of it's main appeal groups, there's no depth to these songs. The music is of a repetitive breed. The same formulaic principle applies to each and every song by pretty much all the bands. And as the fans grew older and more exposed, they all lost interest. The kids were already into the next big thing, and the old fans all lost interest.

 

I get what you're saying, I really do. And it's very much true. But when an entire genre just completely ceases to exist, there's just no excuse. This is infantile crap. It's "music for beginners".

 

As opposed to something like Nickelback, which I hate and defend is absolute crap, but whose crappyness is very much open to debate and opinion, as they dabble in genericness, but they do so in a medium which actually has merit. The whole numetal genre is pretty much unrefutable.

 

 

EDIT:

 

Massive Disclaimer: I'm basing everything about the whole old LP sound, I know nothing of their post-Meteora sound, and I realise it's probably much more acceptable, but I'm mostly refering to the fact that you guys can still enjoy their old tunes today.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Oxigen_Waste

[The Bard]

Even in a subjective field, it really irks me when people present the ubiquity of divergent tastes as a reason to avoid debate and discussion. Like, seriously, grow a fucking critical faculty, otherwise you're obviously going to be percieved as being vacuous.

[ReZourceman]

I'm not discussing because I don't care. :p

[The Bard]

You evidently do to some degree, otherwise you wouldn't be posting at all brah.

[Jon]

Nu-metal was a fad created by the media, not the bands. It died when they moved on to whatever became cool next.

 

I don't know what sort of music you guys are into but do post so I can mock away.

[ReZourceman]

You evidently do to some degree, otherwise you wouldn't be posting at all brah.

 

Well...this post in itself is debatable, but I will clarify. I dont care what kind of assumptuious, self worshipping, convuluted and over analysed piece of shit Oxigen ,pulls out of his arse that explains why I like X, as it isnt going to mean anything to me or hinder my enjoyment. If he was a reasonable individual I might indulge him with a proper response, but its a pointless activity and a waste of time.

[Diageo]

Even in a subjective field, it really irks me when people present the ubiquity of divergent tastes as a reason to avoid debate and discussion. Like, seriously, grow a fucking critical faculty, otherwise you're obviously going to be percieved as being vacuous.

Maybe you should realise that arguing over musical tastes has as much merit as arguing over how bushy a bush is. A critical faculty doesn't work on something that appeals to people on an emotional level, which is in itself, not logical, and not viable for critical analysis.

 

I don't understand why you feel the need to make yourself appear superior to everyone else by belittling their taste and indirectly or directly insulting them. This applies to Oxygen as well, who says that pattern recognition is based on superior intelligence. I'm not sure but do I remember a thread where Oxygen said an IQ test said he was of average intelligence? Is this why you are doing this? To insult others in an attempt to make yourself feel smarter?

[The Bard]

Those might have been two of the most revealing/ interesting things you guys have ever posted on here

. As to your question Diago: that's why I (occasionally) goad people; to get a rise and have someone tell me the way they see it, which is always also an avenue for better understanding how you yourself feel about the topic, by way of contrast.

 

When one says that something is "subjective," it still nevertheless pertains to the common ground we share as human beings, and doesn't mean that there is a full on rampant relativism that means anything goes. Our perception of music is rooted in a global mental process that is confined by our shared biology. Another point is that Linkin Parks music isn't wholly abstract in the sense that "true" music is, because it contains ideational aspects in the lyrics. Secondly, I would also contend that no music in contemporary understanding is truly abstract since it has a cultural existence; the popular music of any given decade in the last 100 years has been attached to an ideology or system of values which has given it weight in peoples eyes.

 

David Hume (yes, I'm bringing in the big dawgs) sees "good taste" as having a sense of granularity in the things we perceive; the ability to pick up on minute details, and the breadth of our observational skills. Of course this creates another problem; if these things differ from person to person, what good is a standard that homogenises them and imposes an alien sense of appreciation upon a person? Hume basically believes the fact of the matter is that underneath layers of differentiation effected by cultural barriers across space and time, as well as various physical ailments, there really isn’t all that much to distinguish one person from another, and because of this, the truly great work of art will be validated by “the uniform consent and experience of ages and nations.”

 

I don't necessarily buy into it wholesale, but there is definitely merit in the idea that there are certain overlaps in our perception of beauty in art. For example, there was a time when I liked Linkin Park, even though it was simple, I hadn't encountered those musical patterns before, and I was young enough not to find the lyrics embarrassing. Once you internalise any given musical pattern though, it becomes boring to you; listening to simple music is the law of diminishing returns, which is why the best music always has an elusive, somewhat frustrating capacity that keeps the mystery alive while also being gratifying enough to sate your need to recognise patterns.

 

PS: That stuff about pattern recognition was said in the context of a joke . Nevertheless, I do in some way feel that IQ has an effect in that it allows you to have what Hume would call more of a "delicacy of taste." But then, there's an obvious distinction between fluid intelligence and crystallised intelligence right, which means that irrespective of your fluid capcities for perception, the person who spends more time and has more experience in any given field is going to have a greater depth of insight. Although maybe my feelings are just a result of knowing that my IQ isn't average

 

I don't want to bag on you for liking Linkin Park, it's totally cool that you do, and I seriously don't respect you any less for it or anything, I was just in the mood to shoot the shit / bring out some of the old Bard rage, looks like you guys fell for it .

[ReZourceman]

looks like you guys fell for it[/i] .

 

Pffft. You're my brah. Everything I said was directed at Oxigen.