When people only like one type of music...

[† Emotional Outlet]

Why do you think it's a negative thing for a band to change the type of music they create? There are at least a few bands who got famous after changing up their musical style (like the Beastie Boys, who originally did punk). Not to mention you can't really expect people to never change and just keep doing the same thing over and over again. Creative minds live to grow and change, lul.

[Soul Z]

But when a band who has made his name by doing 1 type of music all of a sudden changes his style, it's disappointing.

Here are the Examples:

Linkin Park (1st. Album and the most successful is Nu-Metal => 10 millions of copies sold in a couple of weeks in U.S. only) now they are doing Electronic Rock and only half a million copies sold.

Korn (3rd. Album 100% Nu-Metal => 7 millions and now they are doing Mix of Nu-Metal and Dubstep => no info on how many copies have been sold)

I'm not telling I don't like their new way of making music, but they made their names by doing "this" not "that" and when I hear a word LP is playing "this" (for example) I always say that this is not LP I used to know, it's completely other band.

Edited September 5, 2012 by Mr.Z

[† Emotional Outlet]

I see.

There's an issue in the art community--particularly dA, but I'm sure it happens elsewhere--where people get "famous" for doing one type of art, and they never progress or experiment beyond that point. They just stick with that particular style because that's what brings in the comments and the favourites and the watches. They're too comfortable or maybe even too afraid to go beyond that style because it might make them unpopular.

Being disappointed that a band has changed its sound is understandable, but you also have to look at it from their viewpoint. Linkin Park formed in 1996. To be in the same band for 16 years--obviously they've had some member changes over the years--and to keep pumping out the same sound would be tiring for most any creative person. Shinoda was about 19 when the band formed--he's 35 now. I think a stylistic change is well-deserved for being in the band for so long, haha. I mean, even for me at 22, my taste in a lot of things since I was 19 has changed.

Korn seems to be a slightly older band, formed in 1993. All the more reason to experiment, haha. I'm not saying I know exactly why either band has shifted in what kind of music they make, but that seems the most logical to me. Interesting that you seem concerned with their sales, though, since a lot of people would find that a point of contention. The whole "They're not in it for the music, just the money" complaint and whatnot.

This reminds me of a Cracked article that came out not too long ago.

[Soul Z]

Maybe you're right about some of them being afraid and that people don't stay with the same point of view over time, but still, they must understand that by changing they leave their old fans behind . If you are a huge fan of LP (1st. one) wouldn't you be amazed or half dead cause of happiness if LP would go back to what they were doing from the beginning and release a second Hybrid Theory? I would. I really want to see Chester to sing and scream the old fashion way, Mike to rap like In The End, Mr.Hanh to have his best buddy Frogy by his side and use turntables like in With You.

Edited September 6, 2012 by Mr.Z

[xist]

Bands make music primarily for themselves, because they enjoy it. If the world likes it that's great, but the last thing i want are my favourite bands trying to churn out the same stuff they've done before. I want invention and something that's going to excite me...not songs similar to what are on their past albums.

Bands that don't evolve just die. There are about a bazillion other bands doing the scream sing thing.....just because Linkin Park don't do it any longer doesn't mean you're missing out...and in a topic opposed to listening to only one type of music, arguing that bands recycle their old sound ad nauseam, you're effectively siding with those who can't adapt to multiple different genre's.

[† Emotional Outlet]

I have something of a different viewpoint since I mostly follow indie artists. Being open to a lot of different genres definitely goes hand in hand with being open to the evolution and changes an individual band or artist goes through, as xist mentioned. The old songs and albums will always be there--not to mention that with how easy it is to find new music, you can probably find at least a handful of artists who have a similar sound.

One of my favourite artists, Josh Woodward, does a wide variety of songs and I love most all of them. He does slow, melancholy songs, more upbeat and poppy songs, heavier and angry songs, delightfully sarcastic social commentary in several flavours, and a lot of instrumentals. He posts songs in the "Reject Bin", which is where he puts his experimental songs that didn't pan out so well. While I wouldn't mind if Woodward only did one of those flavours, one of the things I love about him is he is always trying new things, that he does more than one type of music and does it well.

Most of the artists I listen to don't really stick to one distinct flavour of music, and I like that well enough.

[VolvoKing]

That reminds a long time ago I was sitting in a coffee shop listening to a young coloured kid telling his father and grand father how good rap is and that the beat relates to tribal background. I could see they were getting a little pissed offed. I looked over at the kid and said. Rap is nothing new back in your father's and grand father's day they called the blues. Give it a try and you'll see. Now the kid likes blues.

[Leviathan87]

change is good for some bands/solo artists. like serj tankian for insurance

[dante15324]

I am open to all genres, however I have a very strong preference about 1 or 2. I will give anything a try twice, but if by the end of that second time it hasn't even begun catching my attention, I won't listen to it again.

[† Emotional Outlet]

There's nothing wrong with that. I always end up going back to rock/pop at the end of the day--usually slower, more melodic songs that I can sing along with, which means I end up listening to Woodward's songs on repeat for nine trillion hours. It doesn't mean I don't like other genres or even other artists, it's just my default when I don't feel like digging around for something to listen to, haha. Musical comfort food, so to speak.

One of the things I like about having a large music collection (almost 21GB--pennies compared to a lot of others, haha) is even though I haven't actively listened to everything, when I leave it on shuffle and skip through the songs, I end up finding stuff I like that's been buried. Or, even better, I find stuff I really enjoy from an artist I already like but it's a song I haven't listened to yet because I have this habit of blindly downloading albums from artists who have proven their worth to me already, especially if they're going to give it away for free.

And I definitely have to be in the mood to listen to certain stuff. When I'm writing, I want instrumentals so I don't get distracted. When I'm annoyed, I actually don't always like to listen to angry stuff--I generally go with songs I can sing along with, songs that cheer me up instead of feed into my anger, haha.

[franko446]

yeah it really is annoying when some one only listens to one band or genre i like all kinds of music. music should be explored.

[hop1989]

i think most of the music genres are over saturated to a limit where labels dont care, they will sign anyone who can make a couple of hundred thousands youtube likes so i get the detest but for the reason that the individual has been listening to all kinds of genre and had enough. that's just me

[† Emotional Outlet]

Are genres really oversaturated, or is it because we're living in a more interconnected world? Before the Internet was a huge thing, I'd imagine it was harder for people to really get the word out about themselves and they needed record companies to do that work for them. But now it is easy for someone to put their things up on Youtube, on Bandcamp, on Soundcloud, and get known. Does it mean there are more musicians or does it mean these musicians have always been around but have been lacking the means to make themselves known?

Even if the advent of these things--Youtube, Soundcloud, &c--started creating more artists, I don't know that it's making people who otherwise had no interest in creating music want to do so. Nor do I think there's any real harm in taking a chance and posting a video of yourself strumming a guitar and singing a little ditty on Youtube or something similar.

Being signed by a label doesn't seem to be as important as it used to be. Same thing in the literary world. People are able to take their work and do the marketing themselves. People don't have to settle for bad deals because they need the help to sell their works. I've heard it more than a couple times--if you can't get in with the big names and make a ton of money, then stick to self-publishing, to doing the work yourself. At least that way you get most, if not all, of the proceeds and not a paltry cut.

I'm not certain I understand what you mean by the second half of your post, though.

i think most of the music genres are over saturated to a limit where labels dont care, they will sign anyone who can make a couple of hundred thousands youtube likes so i get the detest but for the reason that the individual has been listening to all kinds of genre and had enough.

Like, are you talking about being tired of certain genres? I guess I can understand that, but I'm having a hard time imagining people are incapable of changing the radio station or popping in a CD of their own or something. No one is forcing anyone to listen to certain types of music.

Unless you mean getting tired of a genre you used to like, but after some time no longer have any interest in--I don't think it's because there's too much of a certain type of music so much as it is because their tastes are simply changing through the times.

[Zanco]

I'm going to try to get my opinion out there with out any bias notions, but I can't make any promises. First off, there's no reason for any one to be annoyed by people who only listen to one genre, none. I can understand when the person bitches and moans that every thing else sucks when they hear it, but otherwise don't even FU-... Most to all people have one genre they're asphyxiated, and there's nothing wrong with that.

For instance, I have a rock hard ten inch dick record for Classic Rock, and it's most of all I listen to but it doesn't mean it's all I listen too. As is with most people who enjoy listening to one genre. But this doesn't mean that I am "annoying" or "Infuriating", if you even use that word on a commonly basis. Judging by your perfect grammar and literacy, I'd say you totally do. ... How does some one get offended, by that!? I- On what grounds!? There is no possible premise for your argument! It's just words bundled together for the sake of being angry!

You're not the only one though, there's a fucking army of people like you lined up to insult me every chance they get. I've been baffled by congress after congress of idiots who think that every one has to listen to every thing. Hell- I shouldn't even be trying to be holding back bias opinion because that's all you have on your grounds to support YOUR opinion. It's the worst thing any one can do, to any one who loves music, and that's just about every one. It's insulting, to me, honestly I am insulted. I can't even relate to you or try to make a fair theorem about the matter because how unfair the question is!

-Ex-hails- I'm not trying to offend you, you have a right to your emotions and the right to question whatever you want no matter how stupid it maybe. After all, it's not my place to judge, but next time you want to start a topic, write with a little more consideration and input. To me it just sounds like you're trying to get people mad because you're mad about some thing your friend said to you. Along with that it doesn't even sound like you really care. I'm not saying you should write a fucking novel, just put some damn effort into your opinion. Take pride in your idealistic values, and pop-culture mentality. Otherwise you'll just be getting a bunch of words laced with feces coming out of my pixels straight into your eyes.

[Pinkie Pie]

I listen to way too many musical genres to stick to just one all the time. Instead, I binge on artists/genres. I have 55 gigs of music. There's definitely something there that will fit my mood. Shuffle just has to get there first. It's possible for me to go on weeks long binges just on one or two genres, and then have it snapped in half when i get a song that wasn't those genres and was something entirely different.

I have no problems with people who listen to one genre only. It's their decision, even though I don't exactly support it. I don't really see the point in being closed-minded musically because there are so many genres and sub-genres out there that it's ridiculous to not have at least a couple that they enjoy listening to.

[Zanco]

Just because you only listen to one genre doesn't mean that it's all one would enjoy. I've got just under thirty gigs of music in total, and it's not all Classic Rock. Over the years I've passed through all the other genres (I really do mean ALL) and I've finally made a stop on Classic Rock, but it doesn't mean I don't mind listening to some Electronic or Rap every now and then. What I'm trying to say is that just because some one only listens to one thing, doesn't mean they won't listen to any thing else.

[† Emotional Outlet]

Haha, OP hasn't been on the site since August. I don't think their issue is with people who just happen to listen to only one genre, but people who steadfastly refuse to try anything new and automatically label anything outside of their comfort zone as garbage. They even mention...

they think w/e they listen to is the best and only thing worth listening to

So what you say here, Zanco...

I can understand when the person bitches and moans that every thing else sucks when they hear it

... is what the topic is about. (That's my best guess, anyway.)

What people do privately is none of my business and I don't care because I don't have the time or money to spy on everyone. When they start being vocal about how "all rap is crap" or "all pop music is stupid", that's when it starts getting annoying. I'm not going to sit there and start shoving Youtube videos at them, trying to disprove them because, as I mentioned earlier in the thread (also applicable to music and everything else in the world)...

... it's hard for me to really get into any really popular books or movies because there's always that one person waiting for me to say I liked it so they can screech, "I TOLD YOU SO!"

And I don't want to be that person, haha.

But I do like exchanging recommendations with people and will listen to most every song people suggest I listen to--as long as it's not under the pretense of "you said you don't like a thing so I'm gonna disprove you".

[Blackcat]

I listen to music depending on my current mood But i dont have any specific favorite genre of music because i like all types

[AurionEmblem]

I don't wander too far beyond my interests, but I do listen to other things when they stumble across my path. Also, am I the only one whose music interests are like craters, really tall (high liking) on the outskirts/extremes, while stuff which is between genres usually being a lot lower (in terms of liking)?

[† Emotional Outlet]

I'm not certain I understand what you mean by that. Do you mean you prefer songs that are strictly within a single genre, while other, more genre bending songs, don't sound as nice to you? Or do you mean you prefer songs that are less mainstream?