Discussion in 'Linkin Park Chat' started by Hybrid, Jun 7, 2013.
Famous last words?
True, but I think Twitter just doesn't offer the kind of in-depth and personal insight those studio updates conveyed.
It's just not the same when different band members sit down and formulate a short text about what they did in the studio every few days than when Mike posts 140 letters, linking to his instagram or making a joke.
I'm not trying to criticize their social activities - I am happy they post comments or pictures every now and then. But I really like what they did in the days of Meteora - now after discovering it - and wouldn't have thought they did something like that back then.
But you are right - times have just changed, and the platforms, too. Back then it was common to write texts on message boards - today other services are the way to go - and they often deliver a more visual way of communicating oneself (videos or photos). The band are just up to date regarding technology, like they always were.
This is how I feel for In My Remains. Take out the guitars and just let the electronics breathe and I think it would sound amazing.
In my remains is one of my favorite song from LT(after Castle of Glass and Roads Untraveled). Dunno why but I always loved Chester's vocals in that song. Very dramatic and emotional. The synths in the song are also another great aspect of it.
I second that. I love IMR too, especially the synths in it.
It's cool to see Mike singing, I am not as militant as Jesse or others when it comes to expecting Mike to sing more or rap less but his voice does sound great. From what is presented so far I think the next album is going to be much more mellow.
Man, I am a bit out of touch with LP interviews but I can't wait till LP7's cycle starts and Mike starts spouting his entertaining crazy statements at interviews. Wonder what's in store for us this time.
"We are sick of all these shitty pop musicans and their bad skills. We will show the world, how you make soft sounds and make it good. We will change the game in it." - Mike Shinoda
You remove the Kappa there and still doesn't look out of place.
Posted by LP's studio engineer, Ethan Mates. I don't know if it really is LP, but it's worth mentioning. We might be seeing the first working title, "El Chopo".
I can see that the band are still using Live.
I'd guess the vinyls at bottom left are used for sampling?
Could anyone identify them?
There's a setup for sampling with the MPC, yes, but the band could also simply be using it to listen to music from the vinyl collection as well.
Well, this board really looks like the one they 'always' use.
El Chopo new Pictureboard
1. Painting fingernails?
2. What's that tattoo on the finger?
#SoulfulLP2016. Move over, Adele, and let the true kings of soul music take your breath away lol; but in all seriousness, I hope this album, whatever it may sound like, gets them at least a 70% average on Metacritic. Not a single album has reached the 70's so it would be nice for them to get more recognition; but unfortunately, they carry the nu-metal stigma to this day, therefore quite a few review publications such as Rolling Stone, bash them right out the gate without giving a thorough and intelligent review with valid points. Their review for THP was flat out biased and unprofessional.
Which is why using music critics to gauge whether an album is good or not in an age when you can just go listen to the damn album yourself at the touch of a button is a bit daft.
EDIT: Because I feel like having a little rant about this.
Music critics have become nearly obsolete, and couldn't be happier. The number of music critics who are completely full of shit with their completely biased and sometimes ignorant opinions outnumber the ones who actually know a little bit about what they're talking about ten to one. There are only two reasons I'll ever read a music review. If the album hasn't released yet and I really want to know what's on it, and if the critic can give an insightful and interesting look into the aspects of the music that I, as an amateur, might not pick up on. The second reason is really important. The problem is that so few critics actually do that. The vast, vast, vast majority of music critics simplify their reviews to the point where you don't get anything insightful at all out of reading it. Read any review of any album. Chances are, it consists of nothing more than "this track contains this, that track contains that", with a little bit of "I like this" and "I don't like this" and way too many references to other bands in order to "solidify" their point. Even if they said why they don't like it, then I'd be happy, but no, that would be far too much work for them, so they use phrases like "so and so doesn't work", or "so and so doesn't fit. Not a bit of real analysis. Nothing I couldn't get by just listening to the album. Music reviews should tell me things that the average listener mightn't notice. How many reviews mention the change in chord progression at the end of Wastelands? None. How many mention that Mike raps on Wastelands? Every. Single. One. Soooo insightful, right? I get that making their reviews easier to read would make less people want to read them, but I'd love if music reviews consisted of more than just simply describing the music, spending way too long describing the lyrics, and throwing out the occasional baseless opinion without stating any reason for said opinion. Worse, most reviews review the lyrics more than the music. Yes, lyrics are important, but they shouldn't take up 90% of the actual critiquing being done. It's lazy. Anyone can critique lyrics, they're not exactly complicated in Linkin Park's case. You actually have to understand a thing or two about music to analyse music, and I'm not sure if these "critics" actually do.
This is the first result when you look up reviews for The Hunting Party.
Let's look at the first 3 tracks, so I don't spend too long on this.
Literally a description of the song. Not a bit of insight. Next!
Another description, with even less detail this time. A bit of a comment on the lyrics, and back to descriptions.
Descriptions, descriptions, descriptions. Time better spent actually listening to the song and forming my own opinions.
I'll leave that review there. Have a flick through it, literally the only thing that the review consists of is 1. describing the music, and 2. making fun of the lyrics. So insightful, right?
Let's have a look at the second review that comes up when you look for reviews! Maybe we just got off to a bad start! Rollingstone are a respected company, right!
...do I even need to begin explaining what's wrong with this? Aside from the painfully-cringey bashing of the artists and not even the music they've presented, I'm not even sure if this "critic" has even listened to the album. Literally the only information that this "review" contains is information I could get myself by reading the back of the box. And that's the entire review. Pathetic.
While I agree with you, that isn't the point of my post. Sadly, publications like Rolling Stone manifest a lot of power over the general public and award shows. Garnering well received reviews from them and others help to give artists the recognition they deserve from their work. I know MANY of you here don't care whether or not the next album receives a 0 or a 100, but I do. I want the band to get recognized and showered in awards if they deserve it. I've always felt that way, and will continue to do, while also enjoying the music. I personally do not let reviews of any form of media sway me, just to make that clear.
Separate names with a comma.