Which is what LP did not do on Living Things, they basically backed out of their balls-to-the-wall experimentation and said: "Okay guys, we agree.. A Thousand Suns was bonkers." Then made what they thought the public wanted LP to sound like, and they were totally wrong. Living Things was 3 steps back for Linkin Park, if they'd have released that instead of Minutes To Midnight it would have been fine, but in 2012 after two creatively mature albums, it just came across as the band's mid-life crisis. Which really fucked with my respect for the band along with the Steve Aoki crap, and that god-awful remix album "Recharged" Album 6 is their chance at redemption.
Actually, I think Meteora just amplities the flaws in Hybrid Theory, meaning it's aged even LESS well than Hybrid Theory has. A classic though it may be, Hybrid Theory really has not aged well and is most certainly a product of it's time. Meteora falls into the flaws Hybrid Theory has and makes them even more exposed, which also in turn makes the flaws of the prior album much more apparent in comparision. It's a bad album. But I like to think of it as the "Fast food" of Linkin Park albums. ATS is the Linkin Park album which has the greater chance of standing on it's own through time because it's got a cohesive whole that doesn't rely on one sound or feel or emotion, and certainly doesn't rely on teenage angst to get feelings and points across.
I'm 28 and I still Bump HT, even when im driving call me a loser but lol #noshame, its just that HT is special and i still can relate to it and always will it has full of energy and it never gets old till today IMO
Hybrid Theory's a solid and enjoyable album, but it can be enjoyable and still sound dated. I love HT, even on it's own merits as opposed to nostalgia, but in spite of that, it still sounds like an early 2000's album. Which isn't bad, necessarily, but noticeable all the same.
I am unaware that there is an "early 2000 album" sound. Perhaps is sounds that way because that is when it came out?
Oh wow a smartass I see. Yes, as it turns out most people routinely describe music based on the fads and trends of that time. Liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiike, if someone were to say "early 90's rock", it would probably invoke thoughts of Nirvana and R.E.M. I know, isn't it weird?!
I think ATS went through a lot of crap when it released, but it finally took a good 2 years before everyone realized it was actually good, since we just killed our ears listening to LT.
HT and Meteora, I cannot consider underrated. Too many people that I know stopped listening to LP once they put MTM out, and consider the first two albums to be their pinnacle (I disagree). For MTM: I think it was a stunning release considering what had preceded. Take What I've Done on it's own, and you have their growth in a single song. But then add the mix of sweetly short songs such as Given Up and In Pieces that are amazing and get to the point, with songs such as The Little Things Give you Away, LOATR and SOTD that expand their sound and lyrical palette, and this album is all the more impressive. ATS: With the amount of 'filler' songs that bridged between main songs, and the further change in sound, yes this album was probably even more divisive. However those who liked it seemed to like it more than MTM, heralding it as the new Sgt Pepper's. I wouldn't go as far by any stretch of the imagination, but it was an impressively ambitious album, considering how the music industry is, it was a bit of a risk going for a concept album like this. Some hated it, some loved it, too many for it to be underrated in my opinion. LT: This album was so highly anticipated. Everybody was expecting a beautiful hybrid of ATS' ambition with the more concise earlier songs from the first two albums. What we got instead was a good album that tried to please too many people, and ended up being a bit blander than their previous album. Sure, the opening double whammy of LITE and IMR is superb, and Powerless is a beautiful song. But like many people have said, it doesn't have the same lasting appeal as their previous album. I do not think it is underrated, for the simple reason that i don't think it deserves much more praise than it has received. So overall: MTM is the most underrated album. Hated by too many simply because 'It wasn't like Hybrid Theory', these people blinded themselves from the lyrical and sonic beauties that this album gave us. If you had to make a Linkin Park best of, I would put Bleed It Out, What I've Done, Shadow of the day, and The Little Things Give You Away without hesitation.
I voted to MTM. I know lots of people hated ATS, but I voted to MTM because there are great songs (Specially in lyrics) like "No More Sorrow", "In Pieces" and "The Little Things Give You Away" in this album but people didn't pay much attention to them. I think MTM is Underrated.
I've always been told that it is better to be a smart ass than to be a dumb ass... In all seriousness though, I have never heard of an "Early 2000's" sound. I've heard of Nu-Metal and the likes, but never as big of a generalization as you just said. To add onto that, is there some unwritten rule somewhere that "early 2000" music sounds bad? Cause the way that you said "it still sounds like an early 2000's album. Which isn't bad, necessarily, but noticeable all the same." makes it sound like everything from that era is bad.
Not bad, but distinct. And not something that had a very good reputation for growth. This can be seen when LP tried to "expand" in 2007, and seemingly had no solid idea where they wanted to expand to.