PDA

View Full Version : Are The Offspring progressing musically?



endlesst0m
05-18-2006, 09:29 AM
Do you think that The Offspring have progressed musically over thier career? Do you think the next album will be more complex musically? Do you want it to be more complex musically?

Besides getting tighter and tighter drumming with each album, and eventually getting Atom, I don't think they've progressed musically at all. I think it would be nice to see a few tracks that show some progress on the new album.

no_way
05-18-2006, 09:38 AM
I don't know if it's just me, but I think I like better their latest albums since ixnay. I didn't like Smash at all, dexter sounds like if he was stoned. self-titled is actually a good album, but it's not their best work. Ignition... I don't know I haven't heard it that much :D

Sinister
05-18-2006, 10:03 AM
I don't know if it's just me, but I think I like better their latest albums since ixnay.

It's just you.
It seems to me that The Offspring are actually on a musical regression.

HeadAroundU
05-18-2006, 10:13 AM
They are simplistic-powerfull-constant quality band. It would be nice to see them progressing like AFI but I don't think that's what they want to do.

DexterWannabe
05-18-2006, 10:25 AM
It's just you.
It seems to me that The Offspring are actually on a musical regression.
yep, true words

HeadAroundU
05-18-2006, 10:29 AM
bullshit. :)

endlesst0m
05-18-2006, 12:33 PM
It's just you.
It seems to me that The Offspring are actually on a musical regression.

I think they have gotten tighter and more accurate, but less creative and technical. And obviously, production has gotten better. That's the best way I can put it.

rlplaymaker
05-18-2006, 02:28 PM
It's just you.
It seems to me that The Offspring are actually on a musical regression.


no, i like the offsprings newer stuff alot.........smash may be my least fav. album actually. ignition is their only pre-ixnay album i actually like, and i LOVED Splinter! scroo anyone who didnt

rlplaymaker
05-18-2006, 02:29 PM
They are simplistic-powerfull-constant quality band. It would be nice to see them progressing like AFI but I don't think that's what they want to do.


and AFI sucks

F@ BANKZ
05-18-2006, 02:32 PM
I think they have progressed in that they can play many more different styles of music definately, they were pretty good to start with though, i think they have progressed alot, i mean you are likely to after 15 odd years of fame as a band

no_way
05-18-2006, 02:35 PM
no, i like the offsprings newer stuff alot.........smash may be my least fav. album actually. ignition is their only pre-ixnay album i actually like, and i LOVED Splinter! scroo anyone who didnt

i agree, I love Splinter, but there are some songs i'd like to take out of it, so it's not my favourite.

That_Guy91
05-18-2006, 02:49 PM
Splinter would be great if it didn't have The Worst Hangover Ever, Spare Me the Details, or When You're in Prison. But then it would be a really short album.

endlesst0m
05-18-2006, 03:14 PM
I think they have progressed in that they can play many more different styles of music definately, they were pretty good to start with though, i think they have progressed alot, i mean you are likely to after 15 odd years of fame as a band

I was waiting for someone to say this, and to to be honest, I disagree. The fact that they play more different styles of music nowadays makes them more diverse, but not more technical. I'd like to see them attempt more technical things on the upcoming album. In fact, by now, that's the only way they could really surprise the fans and give them something new.

That_Guy91
05-18-2006, 03:18 PM
I actually think that they were more technical before, individually speaking. The music seems to have become more based around Dexter. I mean that it seems to be more based on vocals and rhythm guitar than it used to be.

HeadAroundU
05-18-2006, 03:39 PM
and AFI sucks
o rly?o rly?o rly? :D

Ninty Man
05-18-2006, 07:45 PM
I actually think that they were more technical before, individually speaking. The music seems to have become more based around Dexter. I mean that it seems to be more based on vocals and rhythm guitar than it used to be.


Well... Dexter plays more guitar in the newest albums... but in Splinter... drums recover their importance, that they lost since ... well... I guess that since Americana or Ixnay

Apathy
05-18-2006, 09:37 PM
Compare, Singles from albums.


I'll Be Waiting
Kick Him When He's down
Self-Esteem
I Choose
Pretty Fly (For A White Guy)
Original Prankster
Hit That

Progression? More like Regressing actually. But they sure have changed if that's what you mean.

Ninty Man
05-18-2006, 09:57 PM
Compare, Singles from albums.


I'll Be Waiting
Kick Him When He's down
Self-Esteem
I Choose
Pretty Fly (For A White Guy)
Original Prankster
Hit That

Progression? More like Regressing actually. But they sure have changed if that's what you mean.

Singles??? they were maybe too much for your pseudo punk wannabe ass... dude... shut up

Llamas
05-18-2006, 10:32 PM
I don't think they've progressed musically. They've branched out their musical style (every song on s/t and ignition is the same style... no two songs on splinter are the same style). Besides branching out their style, they've gotten progressively more produced, which I hate. The only reason they've gotten more accurate and tight is due to production. I don't think it's cause they've progressed. Ixnay is my favorite album, and it's well produced without being overboard like co1. Also, it's stylistically diverse without being too much so like splinter.

Preocupado
05-19-2006, 02:40 AM
Splinter would be great if it didn't have The Worst Hangover Ever, Spare Me the Details, or When You're in Prison. But then it would be a really short album.

Except for When You're in Prison, i agree.

And, yes, i see progress independently of the distance from the punk scene and... stuff. I like how the sound quality have become more consistent throught time.

That_Guy91
05-19-2006, 04:40 AM
Except for When You're in Prison, i agree.
I thought it was funny the first time, but I don't think it was really worth putting on the album.

defyu
05-19-2006, 05:22 AM
there just not scared to try new things in there music because they anit fussed about there fan bass they just do what they want 2 try in music

N8theGr8
05-19-2006, 06:59 AM
Well look at their first album the solo's and such the octave power chord intros and all kinds of crazy drumming. Being in a band and playing guitar I can tell you right now that playing newer stuff is way eaiser. I know preaty much all their songs but when it comes to the first album solo's and stuff its just hard. The song structure and way the song flows is just weird some of the guitaring is just weird with the lyrics but it works. They may play easier now but its the catchyness that makes them a good band. Look at the the Ramones they use the same drum beat and sometimes same chords and yet crank out 20 songs that are the same but are diffrent songs. The Offspring make their music work. I do miss the solo's and wouldnt mind hearing noodles shred on the guitar. I know he can. They all have the ability to do really hard and cool stuff. They just dont do it.

Lupin
05-19-2006, 07:50 AM
I get the feeling that on guitar (and drums in some cases) the s/t was kinda improvised at times making it a bit harder to pick up and start jamming to. But agree with 'N8theGr8.' They played better musically about 12-15 years ago than they have in recent years.
________
GLASS BONG (http://glassbongs.org/)

Dexter_H
05-19-2006, 08:14 AM
I think everyone would agree with that.

jacknife737
05-19-2006, 08:24 AM
Splinter would be great if it didn't have The Worst Hangover Ever, Spare Me the Details, or When You're in Prison. But then it would be a really short album.

I don't know, lyrics aside i still think Spare Me the Details is a good song.

Dexter_H
05-19-2006, 08:27 AM
I don't know, lyrics aside i still think Spare Me the Details is a good song.
How I hate that song. The music is the worst part.

muddymascot
05-19-2006, 09:11 AM
Fuck you, there's nothing bad to say about "spare me the details" except for the fact that you don't find good tabs for it on the internet

muddymascot
05-19-2006, 09:14 AM
I would say it's really cool that the album's quality hasn't become worse
but just like someone of you said,
the music is more around dexter, especially the lyrics.
listening to smash or offspring, you'll find a lot of political stuff, but now it's all
just "i got this problem" or "i got that problem"

But don't think i don't like their new albums

ShutUpYouFuckingMime
05-19-2006, 01:30 PM
no, i like the offsprings newer stuff alot.........smash may be my least fav. album actually. ignition is their only pre-ixnay album i actually like, and i LOVED Splinter! scroo anyone who didnt

You hate Smash......you LOVED Splinter.....and you hate AFI..

I think this pretty much sums up that your opinion is not valid at all.


The Offspring are definitely on a musical regression. I still like them lots, but their albums are getting worse and worse.

N8theGr8
05-19-2006, 01:42 PM
I dont think they are regressing I just think that they are not playing like they used to. Look at Smash compared to Self Titled and Ignition. Smash was the big hit so I dont think they wanted to change the way the played and made songs. They found the winning ticket and kept on going and it worked for awhile Smash, Ixnay, Americana but when they got to CO1 and Splinter It just lost that special touch. Now I am not saying that those albums are bad. I think they should take stuff like Americana and Ixnay and then add that special little touch to it from Self Titled. Want an example. "I Choose" or "The Kid Arnt Alright" do stuff like that. But no matter what they put out its still good to me.

nameless
05-19-2006, 05:14 PM
they seem to stick to their tried and tested method but they have a sound that works for them!

Vulture
05-19-2006, 06:24 PM
Seriously, read the headline. Have you even listened to the B-sides on any album? Obviously the radio play stuff is fairly similar, just like any other headlining rock band. But Pay The Man? Vultures? Spare Me The Details? These are only a few of the progressive musicianship of the band. They only redefined what a punk rock band is. Sorry, but bad question.

endlesst0m
05-20-2006, 09:40 AM
Seriously, read the headline. Have you even listened to the B-sides on any album? Obviously the radio play stuff is fairly similar, just like any other headlining rock band. But Pay The Man? Vultures? Spare Me The Details? These are only a few of the progressive musicianship of the band. They only redefined what a punk rock band is. Sorry, but bad question.

Pay the Man is the only song from that list that I believe shows progress, and they haven't released anything remotely similar to it since Americana. In fact, Vultures sounds a lot like Dirty Magic.

Jakebert
05-20-2006, 09:56 AM
I'm glad some people here finally agree with me.

Anyway, I think Self-titled to Ignition, and Ignition to Smash there was some progression and growth, moving more towards a definite style and sound instead of a more generic punk rock sound, but everything after that basically used that same formula, with only slight variations. Not to say everything after Smash was bad, but I think a lot of it started to just get dull because it kind of is "same old Offspring".

CO1 showed no progression as musicians at all, as all of the songs are the simplist rock songs you can find. Splinter does give me a little hope, because despite garbage like "Race Against Myself" and "Worst Hangover Ever", some of the songs did get a little better written technically, especially drum-wise. I have no idea if they'll continue to grow, but I really hope so, or else I'll have lost a lot of faith in them.

HeadAroundU
05-20-2006, 10:16 AM
I'm glad some people here finally agree with me.
Well this is not the most intelligent place in the world. :D

The offspring is NOT about musical progression. It's all about the bigger riffs, styles and catchiness.
There is no fucking musical difference between "No hero" and "Lightning rod". They maintain constant quality. I love it, they love it and I don't think they are going to change it.

btw What's the definition of "musical regression"?

Hypodermic_89
05-20-2006, 10:28 AM
. Ignition... I don't know I haven't heard it that much :D
You should really take some time to listen through the whole cd a couple of times.. AWESOME album, I dare say one of the best punk albums ever.

Jakebert
05-20-2006, 10:50 AM
btw What's the definition of "musical regression"?

Musical regression means they're going backwards and dumbing their sound down instead of getting better.

HeadAroundU
05-20-2006, 11:11 AM
hmmm.....like I said they maintain constant quality so they are not regressing musicaly.

Thomas
05-20-2006, 12:01 PM
IMO, The Offspring kinda hit a musical slump in Americana and Co1, but that was only because they tried being trendy. Up to Ixnay, all of their albums, musically, got progressively better, but these two albums, except for tracks like Pay the Man and Dammit, I Changed Again, were very simple musically and weren't as diverse and original as their other abums. Splinter, on the other hand, showed great progression in their music, especially their drums. Although some songs were complete crap, most of Splinter was their most powerful music to date.

HeadAroundU
05-20-2006, 12:20 PM
IMO, The Offspring kinda hit a musical slump in Americana and Co1, but that was only because they tried being trendy.
Fuck NO!
What about TKAA or MMA?!
There is no musical slamp, sorry.

Jakebert
05-20-2006, 01:26 PM
hmmm.....like I said they maintain constant quality so they are not regressing musicaly.

How can you say that CO1 isn't lesser quality than Smash or Ixnay? I'm not saying you can't like it, but as a whole, there's nothing surprising or amazing on any of those albums.

HeadAroundU
05-20-2006, 01:57 PM
I think you don't see the difference between quality and popularity. Last two albums didn't sell as good as Americana or Smash. So they are not that popular and you tend to think the quality is lesser. The offspring's albums are all the same "shit", it's just the time when something is more popular and something less.

MMA is one of their best songs! then Living in chaos, Denial,revisited, Vultures, Come out swinging...
Rolling stone gave 3 and half stars to CO1, the same as Ixnay on the hombre. Smash and Americana has 3 stars only!

Thomas
05-20-2006, 06:50 PM
Fuck NO!
What about TKAA or MMA?!
There is no musical slamp, sorry.

I didn't mean to say that those two songs were the only good ones on the albums. Both albums are really REALLY good albums, but, musically, they don't compare to the albums before them and Splinter (mostly, at least).

Vulture
05-21-2006, 01:21 AM
Oh really? you see, I am new, its been awhile since I've been around, and I completely forgot that the comprehension skills of some of our friends sits in the lowlands. But forgive me, if you will, for being a rabid fan as well as a musician and so forth a critic. You say that the musicianship of some of the songs are not very different? Welcome to punk rock. This band, however is prolific in creating feelings, ambiences, and quality not seen in much punk products. THIS is progression, anyway you cut the bastard

Marco
05-21-2006, 02:52 AM
Do you think that The Offspring have progressed musically over thier career? Do you think the next album will be more complex musically? Do you want it to be more complex musically?

Besides getting tighter and tighter drumming with each album, and eventually getting Atom, I don't think they've progressed musically at all. I think it would be nice to see a few tracks that show some progress on the new album.
Huh? I dont know..........

HeadAroundU
05-21-2006, 07:21 AM
If you don't know, don't post then!

endlesst0m
05-21-2006, 02:01 PM
Oh really? you see, I am new, its been awhile since I've been around, and I completely forgot that the comprehension skills of some of our friends sits in the lowlands. But forgive me, if you will, for being a rabid fan as well as a musician and so forth a critic.

Pass the caviar, please.

Sure, Offspring create feelings, ambiences, and quality that is superior compared to what a lot of other punk bands are doing, but that doesn't mean they are progressing themselves. Ixnay sounded far different from any other album they've ever released before it in that it was more diverse, but not more technical. I haven't heard any songs (especially after Ixnay) that make me think "Wow, this band has balls to try that...they are really becoming better and more creative musicians". The Offspring have not attempted to write more technical songs. Period.

ofsmurfsandpixies
05-21-2006, 02:08 PM
I don't know if it's just me, but I think I like better their latest albums since ixnay. I didn't like Smash at all, dexter sounds like if he was stoned. self-titled is actually a good album, but it's not their best work. Ignition... I don't know I haven't heard it that much :D

heresy!.....

Jakebert
05-21-2006, 02:19 PM
I think you don't see the difference between quality and popularity. Last two albums didn't sell as good as Americana or Smash. So they are not that popular and you tend to think the quality is lesser. The offspring's albums are all the same "shit", it's just the time when something is more popular and something less.

MMA is one of their best songs! then Living in chaos, Denial,revisited, Vultures, Come out swinging...
Rolling stone gave 3 and half stars to CO1, the same as Ixnay on the hombre. Smash and Americana has 3 stars only!

What? Where the hell do you get the idea that popularity influences my opinion? That has nothing to do with it. The simple fact is that Americana and CO1 show almost no musical progression, and Splinter really only shows a tiny bit. Almost all of the songs stick to some kind of basic formula and are fairly simple songs. And like you said, all of the Offspring's albums are the same "shit", so, you just admitted yourself that there's really no progression.

And I don't care what Rolling Stone has to say. They arn't the end-all opinion on music.

Thomas
05-21-2006, 02:32 PM
Oh really? you see, I am new, its been awhile since I've been around, and I completely forgot that the comprehension skills of some of our friends sits in the lowlands. But forgive me, if you will, for being a rabid fan as well as a musician and so forth a critic. You say that the musicianship of some of the songs are not very different? Welcome to punk rock. This band, however is prolific in creating feelings, ambiences, and quality not seen in much punk products. THIS is progression, anyway you cut the bastard
But The Offspring aren't a regular punk band. They are part punk, part pop, part metal, and part alternative. Their style should allow much musical freedom and growth, but they haven't grown as much as they could have over the years.

ofsmurfsandpixies
05-21-2006, 03:11 PM
Rolling stone gave 3 and half stars to CO1, the same as Ixnay on the hombre. Smash and Americana has 3 stars only!

since when has the rolling stone known what it was on about-did you see their best 100 albums list?

Ninty Man
05-21-2006, 07:39 PM
since when has the rolling stone known what it was on about-did you see their best 100 albums list?


PWNED

Yeah.. I don't believe too much in Rolling Stone... but... I always think they have evolution... evolve??? in every album... yeah... EVERY

OffspringPhreak
05-21-2006, 11:43 PM
I think they've progressed pretty good. They lost some of the technical stuff for more simplistic sounding stuff, but there's nothing wrong with that. Suprisingly the better production quality didn't hurt them(at least in my opinion it hasn't, though I love the gritty sounds of their older stuff, Smash in particular).

They're having fun with their stuff, and try to balance out what they want to do with what they hear the fans want. That's pretty awesome for a band that's been around as long as they have(and are as big as they are). They should just keep on rocking out because they kick ass at it.

offspringer24
05-22-2006, 07:24 AM
im sure they just write songs they like and think fans will like and NOT stupid ass songs with a half hour of solo's through em! im sure the offspring could write 35minute bore's if they wanted to but it's not their thing, thats my opinion anyways :)

HeadAroundU
05-22-2006, 01:18 PM
What? Where the hell do you get the idea that popularity influences my opinion? That has nothing to do with it. The simple fact is that Americana and CO1 show almost no musical progression, and Splinter really only shows a tiny bit. Almost all of the songs stick to some kind of basic formula and are fairly simple songs. And like you said, all of the Offspring's albums are the same "shit", so, you just admitted yourself that there's really no progression.

And I don't care what Rolling Stone has to say. They aren't the end-all opinion on music.
I'm saying that the are NOT regressing and they mantain constant musical quality. Yeah I admit to myself that there is no musical progression.

So Americana and CO1 are NOT musically inferior.

bouncingcoles
05-22-2006, 04:23 PM
of course they have been progressing musically, they have been playing together for 20 years. but the time they progressed musically the most was from smash to ixnay. because offspring didnt start touring non stop until smash started to get huge and when you tour that much you are bound to get very good at playing.

muddymascot
05-23-2006, 07:20 AM
I think they've progressed pretty good. They lost some of the technical stuff for more simplistic sounding stuff, but there's nothing wrong with that. Suprisingly the better production quality didn't hurt them(at least in my opinion it hasn't, though I love the gritty sounds of their older stuff, Smash in particular).

They're having fun with their stuff, and try to balance out what they want to do with what they hear the fans want. That's pretty awesome for a band that's been around as long as they have(and are as big as they are). They should just keep on rocking out because they kick ass at it.

yeah, you're right, there's nothing wrong with writing easy songs as long they sound cool.
fuck you critical persons, offspring are progressing and they're great.
their music became varied, don't you call this progress?

HeadAroundU
05-23-2006, 04:43 PM
yeah, you're right, there's nothing wrong with writing easy songs as long they sound cool.
fuck you critical persons, offspring are progressing and they're great.
their music became varied, don't you call this progress?
Yeah there is nothing wrong with it. I'm sure they have progressed musically (in their private) but you can't see it on the albums. Maybe here and there, Pay the man , Million miles away and Defy you. Look at AFI's first records and last records, that's what I call a musical progress. When you look at The offspring, the first and last record are equally good and that's phenomenal. They have been born with the huge talent! Sure, their records are different but that's not a musical progress.

scream
05-23-2006, 05:00 PM
I can't believe people don't think The Offspring have progressed. All their albums sound different. Compare Splinter to Ixnay, Conspiracy of One to Smash. And HAH at AFI "progressing" all their songs sound the same.

HeadAroundU
05-23-2006, 07:38 PM
And HAH at AFI "progressing" all their songs sound the same.
Are you serious?
yeah there is no difference between "Answer and stay fashonable" and "Decemberunderground". :rolleyes:

That_Guy91
05-23-2006, 08:16 PM
I can't believe people don't think The Offspring have progressed. All their albums sound different.
Not all change is progress.

Llamas
05-24-2006, 02:54 AM
I've read some great posts in this thread, and some horribly ignorant posts as well.

musical progression = becoming more talented at the music you play. writing songs that are "different" doesn't mean progression, unless the songs are harder. "worst hangover ever" and "spare me the details" are SUUUUUUCH easy songs... you can't talk about the drumming progression after co1, cause ron welty did not progress into josh freese, haha.

The band became more diverse by trying different song styles, but at the same time they narrowed down their diversity. They focused into one fundamental sound around the time of ixnay/americana, and have not once departed from it. Ixnay and earlier (and pay the man), there were a lot of songs that if you weren't a fan, you could hear and not know it was offspring. Anything off co1 and splinter is very obviously them. They fell into a slough, and splinter shows that they might try to musically progress with the next album. At the same time, what do we really expect from them? What pop/punk bands ever truly progress musically? The point of punk is simplicity, and that anyone on their brother can play it. What matters is the emotion behind it.

On that level, they've matured lyrically, in that their topics have atleast ditched the "I'm not a trendy asshole" and "me and my old lady" ideas, but have started to run out of ideas for song topics. So they've started to revisit old topics (never gonna find me, long way home), hit generic topics (race against myself, the noose), and pick up lame/joky topics (spare me the details, worst hangover ever).

Llamas
05-24-2006, 02:56 AM
Are you serious?
yeah there is no difference between "Answer and stay fashonable" and "Decemberunderground". :rolleyes:

One of the first arguments I really agree with you on. However, you think decemberunderground is progression? IMO, AFI progressed amazingly up through "Art of Drowning". "Sing the Sorrow" was very good in its own way, but it was a step away from the progression. The new album doesn't even sound like them. Especially songs like "Miss Murder". They ditched their guitar heavy punk sound, led by davey's amazing vocals, to something more emo-driven with experimental and electronic sounds (which we heard the start of in "death of seasons"). It barely sounds like AFI anymore, and the only thing that keeps me knowing it's them is Davey's voice... which in some songs, is indistinguishable.

Apathy
05-24-2006, 05:36 AM
Singles??? they were maybe too much for your pseudo punk wannabe ass... dude... shut up

I honestly have no idea what you are on about.

Are you upset because I said the offspring were Regressing, not Progressing?

Dave666
06-03-2006, 11:51 AM
I can't think of a shit Offspring song, let alone a shit Offspring album!
'The Offspring' is the sound of a young hungry band just going for it, which led to a natural evolution with 'Ignition'!
Then came 'Smash' and totally blew everything else out of the water.
After 'Smash', pop punk, and the like of Blink 182 were gaining popularity and ever since 'Ixnay On The Hombre', they have just gone down the pop punk route more and more.
The new album should kick ass, 'Blink 182' by Blink kicked ass, 'American Idiot' by Green Day is STILL huge, and 'Chuck' by Sum 41, showed them getting more metal, so The Offspring need to release a kick ass album to reclaim there place as the top punk band away from Billie Joe, Mike and Tre Cool!

Jakebert
06-03-2006, 02:30 PM
I can't believe people don't think The Offspring have progressed. All their albums sound different. Compare Splinter to Ixnay, Conspiracy of One to Smash. And HAH at AFI "progressing" all their songs sound the same.

Do you even read posts beyond their first line? The Offspring have not shown any overall progression on any album, except for maybe the jumps between Self-titled to Ignition and Ignition to Smash. Also, the only real reason that the albums sound different is because of production. The basic formula for their music remains the same on all of their albums.

And ilovellamas:

1.) An album not sounding like the band that made it would be considered progression. It takes more musical talent to write an album unlike anything you've ever done, then to do something that sounds a lot like something you've done.

2.) The stuff AFI has done on their most recent album is the most complex, layered material they've ever written. It takes a lot more talent to compose songs like that than the songs they wrote for "Black Sails". This = progression. It's more progression than if they would have just expanded on their trademark sound by adding more solos or doing a ballad.

3.) Davey singing more than yelling is without any doubt a progression in his vocals. It proves that he's growing as a vocalist and can now do things that he couldn't do before.

4.) A lot of pop-punk bands progress. Ever hear of the Descendents? Listen to Milo Goes to College then listen to Through Being Cool. Totally different, one is a lot more musical than the other.

That_Guy91
06-03-2006, 06:31 PM
4.) A lot of pop-punk bands progress. Ever hear of the Descendents? Listen to Milo Goes to College then listen to Through Being Cool. Totally different, one is a lot more musical than the other.
*cough*Cool To Be You*cough*

Fifty-Four Forty or Fight
06-03-2006, 06:37 PM
I think thier lyrics have progressed somewhat. Like in American and Conspiracy of One, (the songs not the whole albums in general), these songs are political, I guess.

Llamas
06-04-2006, 03:48 AM
Do you even read posts beyond their first line? The Offspring have not shown any overall progression on any album, except for maybe the jumps between Self-titled to Ignition and Ignition to Smash. Also, the only real reason that the albums sound different is because of production. The basic formula for their music remains the same on all of their albums.

And ilovellamas:

1.) An album not sounding like the band that made it would be considered progression. It takes more musical talent to write an album unlike anything you've ever done, then to do something that sounds a lot like something you've done.

2.) The stuff AFI has done on their most recent album is the most complex, layered material they've ever written. It takes a lot more talent to compose songs like that than the songs they wrote for "Black Sails". This = progression. It's more progression than if they would have just expanded on their trademark sound by adding more solos or doing a ballad.

3.) Davey singing more than yelling is without any doubt a progression in his vocals. It proves that he's growing as a vocalist and can now do things that he couldn't do before.

4.) A lot of pop-punk bands progress. Ever hear of the Descendents? Listen to Milo Goes to College then listen to Through Being Cool. Totally different, one is a lot more musical than the other.


I definitely see your point, but I think there are two sides to the discussion.

1) I actually think that putting out hundreds of songs of a similar sound and style, and doing it all very successfully, takes more talent than switching styles every album (eg: barenaked ladies vs. madonna ;) no, that's not a serious example). However, it does depend on the individual situation. Nelly Furtado released her first album as a poppy princess album, and it was very generic- her next album was very portugese sounding, and very cultural: something very new that was a strong musical progression- her newest album was produced or co-written or something by missy elliot, I think, and sounds like a generic hip hop album: musical change, doesn't sound like her either, but not a progression.

2) I don't think I'm seeing eye-to-eye with you on the new music being layered and complex... I think maybe here we're just differing on opinion of types of music that take more talent. I personally have heard more music that sounds more like the new album, than stuff that sounds like black sails. more people can do what decemberunderground does than black sails... I think that says something. but again, differing opinions.

3) again I disagree.. davey could always sing. He's sung since atleast black sails. usually bands with screaming leads cool it as they get older, and as they realize their voices can't stand to be strained like that. Many screaming lead vocalists have to have surgery and such because it's so bad for them, so they often times switch more or less to singing because they sort of "have to".

4) oh yes, pop-punk bands *do* progress. I think lagwagon has come a long way from "hoss" and "double plaidinum" to "blaze" and "resolve". If I implied or said that pop-punk bands couldn't progress, I don't know what I was thinking, and I take it back.

Jakebert
06-04-2006, 09:58 AM
Dude, lots of bands have done stuff similiar to AFI's middle range albums. Decemberundergound is very, very complex compared to theit older stuff in the way it was written and recorded with layers of instrumentation that wasn't there before.That takes talent to be able to write songs like that that are that good if you've never done it before. And just because a lot of bands do similar styles, doesn't mean it's not hard to play. There's a lot of Led Zeppelin cover bands, but that doesn't mean that they didn't write complex songs.

As for Davey's vocals, his range was never as strong as it is now. Before, to show emotion he just yelled but now he uses subtleties in the way he sings instead.

Punk-Freak
06-04-2006, 10:40 AM
I'm not sure that they are in progress musically. I think Dexters voice is getting better, but i think they are getting too pop'd some times :confused: . I love the songs were they sound kind of angry or has a fast/heavy punk sound.

Ceejio21
06-04-2006, 12:56 PM
I personally think they have been diversifying over the past couple of albums. Whether they are progressing musically is down to your own interpretation.

Dexter has reiterated many times (especially in relation to producing Ixnay following the Smash explosion) that it has always been a priority not to just produce a 'repeat' album but to go off in a slightly different direction.

So as musicians they are consistently creating a new sound for themselves.

But guaranteed with The Offspring is that they will always have a strong tie to where they came from (musically) and wherever they take their future there will always be a strong relation back to their original sound (E.g. The Noose, Never Gonna Find Me, Lightning Rod).

Perhaps that sounds like crap, but hopefully you get the point I'm trying to make.

For me, as a fan of The Offspring, I will always love what they produce and support them in their work.

Jakebert
06-04-2006, 02:00 PM
I'm not sure that they are in progress musically. I think Dexters voice is getting better, but i think they are getting too pop'd some times :confused: . I love the songs were they sound kind of angry or has a fast/heavy punk sound.

Yeah, I hate pop it sucks. I like punk because punk is fast good. Are you tru punx too?

German Andres
06-04-2006, 03:53 PM
I'm not sure that they are in progress musically. I think Dexters voice is getting better, but i think they are getting too pop'd some times :confused: . I love the songs were they sound kind of angry or has a fast/heavy punk sound.


I totally agree with you, bro. Hope the new album sound more punk, like Ignition, the best in my opinion. But I think they have progressed a lot from their first album, and they have covered all the styles.The Offspring rocks!

no_way
06-04-2006, 04:17 PM
ha... tru punx...

Well, The Offspring is a pop/punk band, so they should actually make... pop/punk music. When you say "progressing", it doesn't mean creating pop songs, but be better at any kind of music they make. I personally prefer the energy they put on the two first albums, some solos were awesome, but the latest albums are also good, with more studio work and variety. If they could only combine them two, it would be great.

The point is: The Offspring is progressing musically? Yes, it their own kind of way. Maybe the musica they make now is more "soft" and comercial than the old sound, but that means it's just different, neither better nor worse. That doesn't mean I don't miss the old sound though, I really do.

noodle654
06-04-2006, 04:22 PM
Are they progressing?? Yes and no.

HeadAroundU
06-04-2006, 04:28 PM
Are they progressing?? Yes and no.
Go to play paintball. :D

offspring kid
06-04-2006, 04:52 PM
I love the old school offspring but the new stuff like splinter, it's just awesome it has a certain kind of Energy(punk rock),Specially the drums.
If the new album has the same energy and effort it will be a Great Hit, i think

Ninty Man
06-04-2006, 09:15 PM
I love the old school offspring but the new stuff like splinter, it's just awesome it has a certain kind of Energy(punk rock),Specially the drums.
If the new album has the same energy and effort it will be a Great Hit, i think


Ejem???

It's me... or Splinter it's more like a try of rock, or heavy metal...???

endlesst0m
06-04-2006, 09:54 PM
Yeah, I hate pop it sucks. I like punk because punk is fast good. Are you tru punx too?

Pop(almost ALWAYS) sucks. I hate how everyone tries to defend it on this board, just to be unlike the "tru punx". Just cause the "true punx" don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't actually balls. (I'm drunk, for all you grammer fags)

NMHFBD
06-07-2006, 06:46 AM
Pop(almost ALWAYS) sucks. I hate how everyone tries to defend it on this board, just to be unlike the "tru punx". Just cause the "true punx" don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't actually balls. (I'm drunk, for all you grammer fags)


I hate when The Offspring are being called pop punk, coz they're not only pop punk.Sure they have some pop punk songs but they also have very fast and angry punk songs.I always thought of POP not as term that's used to describe popularity of a band but as a term to describe sound of the band in general.For example when i hear someone saying pop punk the first thing that comes to my mind is some shitty band like Simple plan with soft poppy sound.

Jakebert
06-07-2006, 10:20 AM
Pop(almost ALWAYS) sucks. I hate how everyone tries to defend it on this board, just to be unlike the "tru punx". Just cause the "true punx" don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't actually balls. (I'm drunk, for all you grammer fags)

It has nothing to do with not being tru punx, it has to do with me liking pop bands like Sugar, Bob Mould, R.E.M., and Goo Goo Dolls. It has to do with people being that stupidly closed minded to think an entire genere of music sucks just because the main stuff you hear on the radio sucks. Most mainstream rock sucks ass too, but you don't hear me saying "OMG ROCK SUCKS!" One second you're trying to be smart and intelligent and the next second your posting stupid things like this. Which is it?

Amiralanal
06-07-2006, 01:30 PM
i wish the next album will be more hadcore punkish like ixnay and ignition.

HeadAroundU
06-07-2006, 02:40 PM
I hate when The Offspring are being called pop punk, coz they're not only pop punk.Sure they have some pop punk songs but they also have very fast and angry punk songs.I always thought of POP not as term that's used to describe popularity of a band but as a term to describe sound of the band in general.For example when i hear someone saying pop punk the first thing that comes to my mind is some shitty band like Simple plan with soft poppy sound.
Tell them this:
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll
Alternative Pop/ Rock
Punk Revival
Post-Grunge
Punk-Pop
Hard Rock
Punk

endlesst0m
06-07-2006, 03:44 PM
It has nothing to do with not being tru punx, it has to do with me liking pop bands like Sugar, Bob Mould, R.E.M., and Goo Goo Dolls. It has to do with people being that stupidly closed minded to think an entire genere of music sucks just because the main stuff you hear on the radio sucks. Most mainstream rock sucks ass too, but you don't hear me saying "OMG ROCK SUCKS!" One second you're trying to be smart and intelligent and the next second your posting stupid things like this. Which is it?

First of all, those bands you listed are ROCK/pop. Second of all, I said it "almost" always sucks, so sometimes I even enjoy it. I just hate when people defend it just for attention.

DeAtHsTaR
06-07-2006, 04:41 PM
i wish the next album will be more hadcore punkish like ixnay and ignition.
Those albums weren't hardcore. Ixnay was the best album, but I myself consider it to be post-grunge for the most part.

Jakebert
06-07-2006, 09:02 PM
First of all, those bands you listed are ROCK/pop. Second of all, I said it "almost" always sucks, so sometimes I even enjoy it. I just hate when people defend it just for attention.

ROCK/pop is still a kind of pop, even if it is infused with rock. This is exactly why I stick up for pop like I do because "pop" isn't just Brittany Spears and Black Eyed Peas. I consider all of those bands to be primarily pop bands, especially R.E.M. (seriously, listen to Up and Reveal and tell me those have more rock than pop) and Bob Mould.

And I'm not defending it for attention at all, it's just that the blind ignorance of people that think all pop music sucks pisses me off. The label of "pop" is one of the single most wide, expansive labels in music, even bigger than "rock", and saying everything pop sucks is as dumb as saying everything rock sucks. It's such a blanket term that could apply to everything. I mean, rock applies to Blink 182 just as much as it does to Slayer. Pop musics definition is just as wide, possibly more.

endlesst0m
06-07-2006, 09:48 PM
ROCK/pop is still a kind of pop, even if it is infused with rock. This is exactly why I stick up for pop like I do because "pop" isn't just Brittany Spears and Black Eyed Peas. I consider all of those bands to be primarily pop bands, especially R.E.M. (seriously, listen to Up and Reveal and tell me those have more rock than pop) and Bob Mould.

And I'm not defending it for attention at all, it's just that the blind ignorance of people that think all pop music sucks pisses me off. The label of "pop" is one of the single most wide, expansive labels in music, even bigger than "rock", and saying everything pop sucks is as dumb as saying everything rock sucks. It's such a blanket term that could apply to everything. I mean, rock applies to Blink 182 just as much as it does to Slayer. Pop musics definition is just as wide, possibly more.

I know what you mean, and it's all technically true, but it's just strange to me that people would actually defend a genre that they don't even listen to unless its infused with like 3 other genres.

It seems like pop has grown to be a more specific sound even though I know what you mean when you say it's a very wide and expansive label. Micheal Jackson's music wasn't amanzingly diverse, and people call him "The King of Pop", and I think this proves my point.

Jakebert
06-07-2006, 10:04 PM
But I listen to straight pop. Like I said, R.E.M.'s Up and Reveal are both basically straight pop, and Up especially is one of my favorite CD's. To me, there's not single genre except for maybe country which I can rule out completely because if a musician does it well enough, any genre can be good.

Plus, a lot of that labeling of "rock/pop" or "folk/pop" or whatever is just dumb nit-picking. I just straight out consider those pop because essentially that's what it is. That's like when kids try to say there's a huge difference between "emo" and "emo-core".

Llamas
06-08-2006, 02:58 AM
pop doesn't really get infused... to me, pop is any music that follows the idea of having vocals, a drumset, bass guitar, and regular guitar (might add a few other instruments to that lineup, but those are very important)... follows the verse/chorus/verse/chorus type song style... that's what I consider to be pop. because that's what's popular. to me, even if a band isn't popular itself, it can still be pop. But someone can be popular and not be pop... like kenny g (yes, he sucks, but he's not pop in my mind).

At any rate, even the way jakebert defines pop, I like pop. I get annoyed with certain things, but hell my favorite bands include those like offspring, red hot chili peppers, collective soul, better than ezra, alkaline trio... those are all groups with heavy pop sounds. I make anti-pop comments sometimes, but they're never to an entire genre.

I personally can't rule out any genre of music. Certainly I like more punk and rock bands than rnb and country, but it's unjustified to rule out a genre unless you've made the effort to go out and hear a great deal more than what's on the radio.


Pop(almost ALWAYS) sucks. I hate how everyone tries to defend it on this board, just to be unlike the "tru punx". Just cause the "true punx" don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't actually balls. (I'm drunk, for all you grammer fags)

that is mindless bullcrap...


it's just strange to me that people would actually defend a genre that they don't even listen to unless its infused with like 3 other genres.
there is a VERY SMALL minute percentage of music that isn't more than one genre. I can't even think of any. Could you please name 10 bands for me that only fit into one genre?

endlesst0m
06-08-2006, 07:40 AM
to me, pop is any music that follows the idea of having vocals, a drumset, bass guitar, and regular guitar (might add a few other instruments to that lineup, but those are very important)... follows the verse/chorus/verse/chorus type song style... that's what I consider to be pop.

there is a VERY SMALL minute percentage of music that isn't more than one genre. I can't even think of any. Could you please name 10 bands for me that only fit into one genre?

Your description of pop is the description of rock. That's why anything that goes beyond that is "progressive rock". Rock is known for being simple. Pop is just stupidly simple.

10 bands? Micheal Jackson was considered pure pop, along with all the boy and girl bands from the 90's.

Technically,you're all right, the label pop is definatley placed on too many different sounds to say that all the bands related to pop usually suck, but I still said it, because I don't see why people would defend the genre just because "pop" is slapped on at the ass end of a genre description of one or two bands they listen to(like when a band is considered Rock/Alternative/Punk/Pop).http://www.myspace.com/rem - Rem doesn't even consider themselves pop. But in the end, I guess I just usually don't think of pop in the really, really broad, technical way that it can be used, but more in the way most people think of pop since Micheal Jackson and the boy bands.

Jakebert
06-08-2006, 09:41 AM
Technically,you're all right, the label pop is definatley placed on too many different sounds to say that all the bands related to pop usually suck, but I still said it, because I don't see why people would defend the genre just because "pop" is slapped on at the ass end of a genre description of one or two bands they listen to(like when a band is considered Rock/Alternative/Punk/Pop).http://www.myspace.com/rem - Rem doesn't even consider themselves pop. But in the end, I guess I just usually don't think of pop in the really, really broad, technical way that it can be used, but more in the way most people think of pop since Micheal Jackson and the boy bands.

Yes, R.E.M. may not call themselves pop, but I still do because with their more recent stuff, that's definitetly what it is.

Those people who think Michael Jackson and boy bands when they think pop really just don't know much about music because those "artists" are so far removed from what pop started out as, and if they knew it's roots, they'd understand exactly how Goo Goo Dolls or a band like that is considered pop. What they're thinking of I usually call "corporate pop" or "teenie pop", which is essentially what it is.

And I know where you're coming from because for the longest time I thought the same thing, but then as I got deeper into music I kind of realized that just because a few shitty boy bands want to call themselves pop, that doesn't mean that everything with that label sucks.


pop doesn't really get infused... to me, pop is any music that follows the idea of having vocals, a drumset, bass guitar, and regular guitar (might add a few other instruments to that lineup, but those are very important)... follows the verse/chorus/verse/chorus type song style... that's what I consider to be pop. because that's what's popular. to me, even if a band isn't popular itself, it can still be pop. But someone can be popular and not be pop... like kenny g (yes, he sucks, but he's not pop in my mind).

What? By your definition, the Misfits are pop. I'm trying to defend something here, please stop killing my argument.

Llamas
06-08-2006, 07:55 PM
Your description of pop is the description of rock. That's why anything that goes beyond that is "progressive rock". Rock is known for being simple. Pop is just stupidly simple.

10 bands? Micheal Jackson was considered pure pop, along with all the boy and girl bands from the 90's.

Technically,you're all right, the label pop is definatley placed on too many different sounds to say that all the bands related to pop usually suck, but I still said it, because I don't see why people would defend the genre just because "pop" is slapped on at the ass end of a genre description of one or two bands they listen to(like when a band is considered Rock/Alternative/Punk/Pop).http://www.myspace.com/rem - Rem doesn't even consider themselves pop. But in the end, I guess I just usually don't think of pop in the really, really broad, technical way that it can be used, but more in the way most people think of pop since Micheal Jackson and the boy bands.


False. If what I described is rock, then what are groups like Hanson? Hanson is pop, not rock, and they fit the description I gave exactly. Vanessa carlton fits that description, and she's not rock.

False. Michael Jackson is NOT purely pop!!! He's dance, he's RnB, he's motown, he's funk, he's club, he's urban, and he's pop. Nsync was dance, pop, adult contemporary and euro-dance. britney spears was dance, pop, adult contemporary, and even some places consider her rock. But you were WAY uneducated in calling Michael Jackson purely pop.

Jakebert
06-08-2006, 08:46 PM
pop doesn't really get infused... to me, pop is any music that follows the idea of having vocals, a drumset, bass guitar, and regular guitar (might add a few other instruments to that lineup, but those are very important)... follows the verse/chorus/verse/chorus type song style... that's what I consider to be pop.

Dude, the Misfits, Bad Religion, Minor Threat, and Black Flag could all fit that description you gave. Those bands arn't pop bands. What you described was a band in general.

Llamas
06-08-2006, 10:47 PM
umm no. there are TONS of bands that don't fit that description at all. To me- and remember that pop doesn't have a stone definition, it's all opinion- those bands you listed can be listed under pop as one of their genres.

Jakebert
06-08-2006, 10:56 PM
If you think you can put a band like Minor Threat into a pop genre than you're just an idiot.

And you're correct, pop doesn't have a set definition, but to say any band that has a bass player, guitar player, vocalist, and drummer is a pop band is beyond even your normal stupidity. Most bands have this set-up. Yes, some bands add a keyboard player or a sax player or something, and some bands even skip having a bassist, but most bands are made up from that formula. And not every band out there is a pop band.

Venom Symbiote
06-08-2006, 11:46 PM
R.E.M.
Goo Goo Dolls
Matchbox 20
Alanis Morrisette
Everclear
Fountains of Wayne
Nickelback (I hate to say it...hah)
Evanescence
Lit



A couple of random "pop-rock" bands that, in addition to The Offspring, kick total arse. Enough of the bickering, hmm?

Llamas
06-09-2006, 12:18 AM
If you think you can put a band like Minor Threat into a pop genre than you're just an idiot.

And you're correct, pop doesn't have a set definition, but to say any band that has a bass player, guitar player, vocalist, and drummer is a pop band is beyond even your normal stupidity. Most bands have this set-up. Yes, some bands add a keyboard player or a sax player or something, and some bands even skip having a bassist, but most bands are made up from that formula. And not every band out there is a pop band.

You must have very limited taste in music if you think most bands have that setup... try branching out the genres you listen to a little. Also, just cause a band has that setup of instrumentation doesn't alone mean it's pop... that type of instrumentation + that song style setup = pop.

A *few* music styles and genres that are almost never pop:
rap
electronic
rnb (both the modern kind and the 1920s kind)
jazz
classical
dixie
bluegrass
a capella
swing (some styles)
techno
dance/house

shakermaker
06-09-2006, 02:16 AM
pop isnt any specific type of music....i mean its short for the word popular. whatever is popular is pop.

Venom Symbiote
06-09-2006, 04:07 AM
^ Wrong. Nice try, but you suck, and must go away now. Shoo.

To ILoveLlamas, are you kidding? Rap, R&B, Techno and Dance can't be "pop"? I mean, along with emo bands and pseudo-70's imitation rock (Wolfmother, The White Stripes, Jet etc) they're about the only genres I see on MTV right about now. Not all rap is "pop", but a great fucking deal of it is. Will Smith, Chingy, even Fiddy Cent and P Daddy Dizzle Diddy or whatever the fuck he's calling himself these days, all "pop". All of those are indisputably pop (or "pop-rap" whatever you want to call it).

People like The Chemical Brothers and Public Domain are electronic, but they're pop.

A Simple Plan are shit, I mean...rock (to use the term lightly), but are they a pop band? You bet your mother's erect nipples they're pop.

DeAtHsTaR
06-09-2006, 08:02 AM
You must have very limited taste in music if you think most bands have that setup... try branching out the genres you listen to a little. Also, just cause a band has that setup of instrumentation doesn't alone mean it's pop... that type of instrumentation + that song style setup = pop.

A *few* music styles and genres that are almost never pop:


rnb (modern kind)

dance/house
Those two are the most common on the local pop top 40 station.

Jakebert
06-09-2006, 09:57 AM
You must have very limited taste in music if you think most bands have that setup... try branching out the genres you listen to a little. Also, just cause a band has that setup of instrumentation doesn't alone mean it's pop... that type of instrumentation + that song style setup = pop.

A *few* music styles and genres that are almost never pop:
rap
electronic
rnb (both the modern kind and the 1920s kind)
jazz
classical
dixie
bluegrass
a capella
swing (some styles)
techno
dance/house

Again, Minor Threat and Black Flag have that set up and if you think they're pop bands, you're just plain retarded. All of those bands songs (well, not Black Flag's later material, but all of their early stuff) was set up with those instruments and the verse/chorus/verse style. Again, try to tell me they're pop.

Most rock bands have that set up, the only difference is some rock bands do stray form the verse/chorus/verse set up with instrumentation, but still the majority of rock bands keep that format, which is what I was getting at. I wasn't talking about rap, techno, or anything like that. But now that you've brought it up...

R'nb is never infused with pop? Rap is never infused with pop? Have you ever fucking listened to a top 40 station? Ever watch MTV when you're skimming around the channels? That's almost all it is, and it's very pop because there's no way they're going to play non-watered down rap and r'nb. Same goes for electronic. Let's go back to R.E.M. even. They did an album with heavy electronics that is bascially a pop album. There's tons of electronic stuff that could be considered pop.

Guillermo90
06-09-2006, 12:18 PM
Well ima do an outline on theyre albums lets see:

The Offspring (s/t) - Composition was great in this album, but the songwriting wasn't very well constructed. Its a great start no doubt, comin so strongly. When i say composition i mean like musical composition, i mean its instrumentally great but songwriting includes lyrics nd just good songs. I like the album a lot but its not a very attractive record.

Ignition - Songwriting has majored totally in this album. Composition has eased just a tad, they still played very tough but Noodle's seems to be leaving his little licks that have been on the first album. I think this is one of Ron's best albums.

Smash - Songwriting is at its peak. Composition though went down. Althugh some good tracks like Come out and play has great composition as well as songwriting obviously. Lyrics have gotten better aswell, much more concious and a bit more poetic. Guitars are simpler.

Ixnay - Composition has lowered just a bit from Smash. Theyre kind of at the same level. But its pretty low. Songwriting has actually improved to me, but its an underrated album. Dexters lyrics are more personal but havent dropped to any notches :P.

Americana - I actually think that their songwriting abilities went off the roof with this one. I actually think its better than smash. They got great sogs like Why dont you get a job? which is well written, and Starin at the Sun, it actually just goes through the whole song. Composition, probably the best since S/F. I mean, Pay The Man?? Kids Arent Alright, great cover arrangements on Feelings! Dexters lyrics are very balanced here, very concious bout adolescence and the world, he manages to mix both the inside world and the outside world in this record in a beautiful way. This is the type of effort i like to see from Offspring, makes me proud to be a fan.

The REST!! - I think after Americana it just went downhill, Conspiracy of One has bad composition throughout everything, songwriting is just in a normal level, they experiment but its nothing too exciting. As well as Splinter, they do a bit of a comeback with the great punk songs that are in there which have better composition than CO1 and better songwriting but it seems like poor effort compared to the other records.

noodlesfan
06-09-2006, 01:27 PM
when you look at their older songs, and compare them to their newer ones, the old ones were a little more sophistocated guitar wise, now it's mostly power chords ansd stuff like that

Llamas
06-09-2006, 08:08 PM
^ Wrong. Nice try, but you suck, and must go away now. Shoo.

To ILoveLlamas, are you kidding? Rap, R&B, Techno and Dance can't be "pop"? I mean, along with emo bands and pseudo-70's imitation rock (Wolfmother, The White Stripes, Jet etc) they're about the only genres I see on MTV right about now. Not all rap is "pop", but a great fucking deal of it is. Will Smith, Chingy, even Fiddy Cent and P Daddy Dizzle Diddy or whatever the fuck he's calling himself these days, all "pop". All of those are indisputably pop (or "pop-rap" whatever you want to call it).

People like The Chemical Brothers and Public Domain are electronic, but they're pop.

A Simple Plan are shit, I mean...rock (to use the term lightly), but are they a pop band? You bet your mother's erect nipples they're pop.


I didn't ever once say that those genres can't be pop... they can stand alone very easily without being pop. big difference.

Llamas
06-09-2006, 08:11 PM
Again, Minor Threat and Black Flag have that set up and if you think they're pop bands, you're just plain retarded. All of those bands songs (well, not Black Flag's later material, but all of their early stuff) was set up with those instruments and the verse/chorus/verse style. Again, try to tell me they're pop.

Most rock bands have that set up, the only difference is some rock bands do stray form the verse/chorus/verse set up with instrumentation, but still the majority of rock bands keep that format, which is what I was getting at. I wasn't talking about rap, techno, or anything like that. But now that you've brought it up...

R'nb is never infused with pop? Rap is never infused with pop? Have you ever fucking listened to a top 40 station? Ever watch MTV when you're skimming around the channels? That's almost all it is, and it's very pop because there's no way they're going to play non-watered down rap and r'nb. Same goes for electronic. Let's go back to R.E.M. even. They did an album with heavy electronics that is bascially a pop album. There's tons of electronic stuff that could be considered pop.


AGAIN, I NEVER said NEVER. You made the same ignorant assumption that venom made, only you chose to act like a dick about it. I said those genres can stand alone without being pop. YES, I do believe that bands like minor threat and black flag can be classified as pop in a sense. Get off your high horse, your opinion on what pop is is no more valid than anyone else's.

Venom Symbiote
06-10-2006, 02:54 AM
Shit, he's right. If you consider Black Flag and Minor Threat (hey, I hate the bands, so don't retort with something stupid about "blatant fanboyism" or whatever) to be even partially "pop", you're a goddamn 'tard.

And yes, those genres can "stand alone" without being "pop", but hell, these days it isn't very often. Most rap today is pop, like it or not. At least the stuff that anyone's heard of. Most electronic is underground still (damn ravers), but not as much as it used to be. Techno definitely has a strong pop following.

Hell, even Jazz stuff was incorporated by Incubus and stuff later on (hey, I like Incubus, but they're still a pop-rock band).

Punk was thrown into the mainstream yet again with a 4th wave early this decade with Sum 41 and all. The Offspring are still plugging away at the pop-punk single sound.

Who cares, right? The Offspring are still my favourite band, but they're a pop-rock group now. People need to deal.

And I'll even go as far as to say this: most "hardcore underground" bands are "hardcore" and "underground" for a reason: they're bad. They're bad and not many people want to listen to them. Sure, there are exceptions to the rule, but the good underground indie bands are not a majority. 90% of the "true" and "arty" indie stuff is shit, just as 90% of the corporate muscle-work machine is.

Ocupation: Offspring
06-10-2006, 09:55 AM
I don't think The Offfspring are progressing musicaly, They haven't had any concerts lately but i have herd some rumors that a new album will becomming out in Spring of '07. But if the Album will come out then they are progressing musicaly.

endlesst0m
06-10-2006, 10:02 AM
Hell, even Jazz stuff was incorporated by Incubus and stuff later on (hey, I like Incubus, but they're still a pop-rock band).

No fucking way. Incubus is not a pop-rock band.

Jakebert
06-10-2006, 11:04 AM
AGAIN, I NEVER said NEVER. You made the same ignorant assumption that venom made, only you chose to act like a dick about it. I said those genres can stand alone without being pop. YES, I do believe that bands like minor threat and black flag can be classified as pop in a sense. Get off your high horse, your opinion on what pop is is no more valid than anyone else's.

Again, if you seriously think Minor Threat or Black Flag could be considered pop bands, then you're just dumb. That's even worse than thinking the Beatles were German.

And dude, I respect opinions that arn't completely ridiculous. endlesst0m, for example. He made sense, and I respect it even though I disagree. Yours is just dumb.

Venom Symbiote
06-10-2006, 10:46 PM
Incubus are mainstream in the same way that The Offspring are. Get over it. I like Incubus, so yeah...don't take it the wrong way. I also friggin' love The Offspring, yet classify them as - God forbid! - a mainstream popular rock band. "Oh noes!11!!!"

:rolleyes:

You've gotta understand, this "pop-punk" definition of pop punk bands is pretty recent (what we know of it now, anyway...Green Day and The Offspring were slightly different when they rose up). 5 years ago, Incubus were the MCR or the Ataris or the Yellowcard of the world. When "Make Yourself" came out, for example? You couldn't get bigger, pop-friendlier rock bands than Incubus. They were motherfucking everywhere.

Just because their electronic-funk-rock stylings aren't "in" anymore, and have been replaced by depressive makeup-glam-hardcore, doesn't change that fact.

Llamas
06-11-2006, 12:26 AM
Again, if you seriously think Minor Threat or Black Flag could be considered pop bands, then you're just dumb. That's even worse than thinking the Beatles were German.

And dude, I respect opinions that arn't completely ridiculous. endlesst0m, for example. He made sense, and I respect it even though I disagree. Yours is just dumb.

Oh my god I NEVER thought the beatles were german. I knew they were british. I just heard several songs by them in german, and had been told that their songs were FIRST RECORDED in german. There's a huge difference. get your facts straight before you point fingers.

Venom Symbiote
06-11-2006, 02:47 AM
Before they were signed, The Beatles played a lot of shows in Germany as they were getting their start, rather than in Britain.

That's about as far as their links go.

Llamas
06-11-2006, 05:07 AM
right, they also recorded some songs in german. I was misinformed and told that they recorded an album in german before they did anything in english, but I guess they only did a few songs.