The Official Fiction

Anyone else bought it yet? I picked it up last week, and, dare I say, it's about as good as Echolalia... I like Kaplan/Thornhill, Asleep at the Wheel, Best Weapon, Souvenir and Light at the End of the Tunnel... gimme feedback!***



















***If y'all have no idea what I'm talking about, it's the new Something For Kate**** album.

****If y'all have no idea what I'm talking about...best. Band. Ever.

 

My brother likes it, but I have heard from a friend of mine that some of the older SFK fans don't (usual 'going mainstream' excuse). Then again, I wasn't the biggest fan of Echolalia. Instead, I got the Butterfly Effects debut .

 

Well, I jumped on board when Echolalia came out, loved that, then got Beautiful Sharks, which was also great, then TOF...and then, to get the full picture, bought Elsewhere for Eight Minutes.

It's crap. There's maybe, two good riffs on it, but not worth the $15 I paid. If 'going mainstream' means going from EFEM to Echolalia and TOF standard stuff, then, please, keep going mainstream!

 

I have a question to all the people who saying going mainstream sucks. If all the bands go off mainstream, wouldn't being off mainstream become a neo-mainstream, and therefore make every off mainstream band that rebels against mainstream shit, a mainstream band, and henceforth suck? But that would also mean that if Brittney Spears stayed mainstream, and mainstream shifted to neo-mainstream, would that make Brittney Spears rule, because she would no longer be mainstream?

 

Quoted for agreement.

It's not something worth worrying about. People should just like what they like. Some of the snobbiest music fans I've ever met were indie elitist types. Their hatred of anything mainstream seemed to have more to do with their need to feel serperate and above the common person who just likes what they like, and less with the actual quality of the music; As if the band turned to shit because "ucool"fans started enjoying it. What bullshit.

 

music is music, I like bands (I'll use this since it's the newest small band I've heard) like Haggard Knumb Skulls, who are tiny bar-auditorium bands (no offense Sleek) as much as I like big main-stream bands like the White Stripes and Evanesence. Why people obsesse over bands, and think that being 'main stream' is bad; is stupid.. you know why? because all the little bands get inspiration from main stream ones!!! If you think about it, the person (let's say... Jack), hates big bands b/c they get publicity and the small bands don't, but most of the small bands don't really care much about publicity because they are rockin out because they want to and because it's FUN for them... some small bands are all about getting big, but as long as they've got good music, who cares? why worry what band is getting big when someone else could? do you have any control over it? no! it's not an issue that is your to deal with... and yes, I do realize that my point was lost in a blur of words and thoughts... :lol: :roll: :lol:

Edit: I apologize if this message board wasn't about music, I'm pretty sure it is.. but I've been known to make mistakes... :lol:

 

I have a lot of fans who hate bands that sign to major labels because they think those bands are doing it for the money. i dont necessarily think thats a bad thing. i mean these people i am talking about are complete and utter anarchist punks, and its obvious that they would be against big corporations etc. and i completely understand (and agree with) hating bands that claim to be "punk rock" and then sign to aol-tim warner and start a stadium toor of the midwest. its ridiculous.

it comes down to whether or not the bands are being hypocritical in what they represent. a band like good charlotte is the epitome of hypocrisy. but i dont think Tool is selling out because anti-establishmentarianism isnt part of what they represent. rage against the machine is one i never really understood, because they seem so marxist, but then they go and play the letterman show, but the singer wore the free mumia shirt, but then there were comercials for tampons and ARRRG it made my head hurt.

besides, most of the time when a band signs to a major label their sound goes through some dramatic changes which is prolly what you guys are hearing with "something for kate" whoever they are. but that can still happen with indipendant artists. take AFI for example they were signed to Nitro Records (an independant label) for a long time, and still are, but the change they went through on their last album made them sound really really different, and thats just because butch vig produced it (hes the drummer in Garbage, and he also produced Nirvana's hit album Nevermind, and the first two Smashing Pumpkins albums, and numerous other fucking amazing recordings) and while they dont sound the way they did on the album that came before that one, there was already a huge difference between that album and their first 2/3 albums. so with these bands its really just a big progressive gradual march from what they sounded like when they were just starting to write music, to their final goal, which is what they've been hearing in their heads all along. which can of course, be unsettling for a lot of fans. look at Adore (smashing pumpkins) for example, they only sold about 250,000 copies of that the first year i think, where as the previous album sold 3-4 million, and this was all caused by the fact that fans were so shocked by their dramatic change in sound. (from hard rock, to synthy-electornic (but not electronica)-goth/cure type low rock seranades, and narrative ballads, and even an acoustic tribute to the singer/songwriter/guitarists dead mother) it was such a switch that people were immediately turned off by it because they were expecting something the band no longer felt they wanted to produce. so may be you should give Something For Kates new albums a chance (say 2 weeks of regular listening) before you really make up your mind about them.

of course i never expect a band like blink 182, good charlotte, or NSYNC to change, there isnt enough talent involved. blink used the same chord form for every guitar note played on their first two albums, after i learned the rhythm i could play every song they ever wrote if i wanted to, but i dont because i'm not a fucking idiot (for the most part)

 

Wat I'm saying is, if everyone is anti-establishment, and they all flock to the independent labels, the independants will become the establishments, and time-warner won't be, so then Brittney Spears, and the Backstreet Boys are going to end up inadvertantly on the new independant companies. Will that automatically make tham cool? If a band sounds good, who the fuck cares if they are on mainstream or not? What the fuck is wrong with money? If you just want to play music, fine, don't sign a label, but if you want the money, is that wrong? These bands that sign have obviously earned it, thaey must have some inkling of talent. If the band's sound changes, or they get worse, that's a reason to start disliking a band, but if a band signs and they stay good, who cares? They are still maintaining their level of good music, they are just being compensated for it.

 

I'm with you Blink, that's a hella good point... who cares about if they are big or not? music is music! love it or hate it!

 

just because a label is small doesnt make it independant, and just because a label is big doesnt mean its not "independant." what and independant label is is a label is owned and managed by wholey within itself. if time-warner lost all of its money on britney speares it would still be a conglomerate, and have stockholders and CEO's etc. and if that did happen, the big companies would probably just buy the smaller labels out, instantly making them corprorate. and britney and nsync would be doing stip mall grand openings and county fairs.

 

Blinky said:

and:

these are both most excellent examples of the truth(and the second reminds of something I would say :lol: )

what does it matter? we are not them, and so it does not make a difference what they do. If the music changes and you do not like it then have your little pity-party and a tear or two and get on with your life, for they sure as hell will! They have their reasons for doing or not doing, what they do or don't. Since we are not the ones who make the $, or lose it, then what the hell is there to bitch about? It is no concern of ours other than that we might save $15 now that we no longer like their music. Lets just let them be the same normal people that we are and not make them deal with all the bullshit that we throw at them for making choices in their lives or careers that they saw as right to them at the time those choices/decisions were made!

 

Rp, you fight the good fight... if only we could convince everyone else to think in a similar matter... well, when it comes to that issue... but other ones I wouldn't be so keen on having everyone agree with you on... I dunno why, but this sense of foreboding tells me a world of RPs isn't good

 

"Something For Kate"?!


Never heard of. :-?

 

Thanks for that wonderful contribution to the conversation, fucknuckle.

I also have a message for people who object to bands going 'mainstream': Stop fucking whinging. Do you really think that the bands are making music for your personal enjoyment? Hell no! Most of them are in it to make money, and if that requires pandering to a certain set of values, then they're going to do it. A band is a business, whatever else you may think of it. Yes, they are doing it because they enjoy making and playing music, but they're ALSO doing it because if you become popular you also become fucking rich. It's all about the money...even for my beloved Pink Floyd.

 

My, Jarinor. You're a Pink Floyd fan?

Hooray! A kindred spirit on this board!

 

Yep, I have Animals, The Wall (on DVD as well), Wish You Were Here, Dark Side of the Moon, The Division Bell and Pulse. My collection could be more complete, I know. Still, the live ~9:30 rendition of Comfortably Numb on Pulse is the greatest song on the planet - anyone who disagrees hasn't heard it.

 

I find it interesting I'm posting seven hours later than it is... or maybe more... but anywho, Jar, I don't think anyone here was complaining about bands going mainstream, most of this arguement has been AGIANST people like that...

 

i'm against bands going mainstream if they represent politics opposed to mainstream organizations. i'm also opposed to everything sounding like linkin park, or blink 182, and most of the bands i listen to are independant. so whatever, i'm just passive aggresive when it comes to big music corporations. i dont complain, but i dont buy.

 

And all I'm saying is Time-Warner doesn't make Brittney suck, she does that buy herself. If she was on an independant label she would still have no talent, so why would anyone like her more for being independant? Jar makes a good point, a band might have views on politics, but they are still a business, they have to make money. Besides, views change too, I know that I have certain preconceptions about big business, but if I started working in a large corporation, I might get a second look, and revise some of my opinions.


Pink Floyd, all the way man!!!! I've got a dark side of the moon, wizard of oz meld playing right now, and you guys got me in the mood for it!!!

 

Pah! You call yourselves Pink Floyd fans? What about The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn? :-x