Discussion in 'News' started by Hybrid, Nov 16, 2013.
Yeah that was an accident. I've fixed it.
Also, a belated congrats to Derek and the staff at LPA for this monumental achievement!
The reaction in this thread alone makes me wonder if we should've just kept it .
Don't look at the facebook comments.
I already did .
I wonder if STP is doing whatever it is Mike wants to be done in Rock Music.
I agree that his comments seem unexpected. Someone who makes "genre-busting" music and wears "genre is dead" shirts seems like he wouldn't care.
I can't say that you shouldn't still use words like "rock" to describe music, you've got to describe it somehow. Although there is a difference between using the words and labeling something with them. I think that's where a lot of argument is coming from. For example, you don't want LP to be labeled "Metal", because we can mostly all agree that they have more to offer in their discography. If someone asks you what LP is you can't just say a metal band (or nu-metal, rock, alternative, etc.) To tell someone what kind of music LP makes and say "Some of their songs are reminiscent of some metal bands" or "they have metal elements", then sure. Nothing wrong with that. So basically, labeling things is dead. Using the words to describe music because people know what they mean is not dead.
Question is, what happens in the future when people don't remember what genre words mean anymore? If everything sounded like Mumford and Sons for the next 30 years, what would the word "rock" entail? dun dun dun...
You hit the nail on the head Brandon. Linkin Park doesn't want to be labeled or have labels put on them, but if they have to be categorized somehow (even if it's a weak connection at best), well then the most prevalent genre in their music is "rock". There might be hip-hop, electronica, jungle, and [insert other influences] in their sound, but underneath it all...if you strip everything away that makes it Linkin Park, it's rock. 85-90% of Linkin Park's music is primarily rock driven.
So if Linkin Park are "rock", then that means that Linkin Park is also being grouped in with artists that Mike feels don't push the needle enough. So in response, Mike wants to strive to make the "rock" that he feels rock should be. He wants to strive to include what he feels is missing in rock right now, and make visceral and creative rock music that inspires him. I totally agree that Linkin Park shouldn't just be called rock...but when it's what the music industry labels them as, sometimes if the shoe fits...you gotta wear it.
But what you do in those shoes is what makes the real difference here.
This interview has caused quite the stir. I can now relate to this song. Thanks, haters!
Gotta say that was an excellent interview, it's always tough for an artist to answer questions without giving too much away. It seems like when we see other interviews they just ask the same questions but this one had variety and as a result we got good answers. Thumbs up to LPA/Altwire and Mike.
Catalyst overuses the techno.
No, it's actually from the Radiohead song.
I would say no thus far. Both the self-titled album with Scott and the EP with Chester - are some of the least cutting edge music I've ever heard. They're doing a lot of what people are complaining about current rock - deriving too much from older music instead of innovating.
I feel like this next album will sound like lost in the echo, but with heavier guitars. Old LP meets new LP
doubt it. You're comparing one song to a whole album. Just doesn't work like that, especially with LP.
Not to mention, Lost in the Echo is basically an old LP song, only with some refinement that reflects their growth since those first two albums.
Well, I think they are playing it safe for the first couple of albums. Changing the singer and they music they make would make a lot of fans pissed.
Separate names with a comma.