|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:23 pm
 |
|
|
 |
Ha ha. I'm kind of butting into a conversation here, sorry, but anyway,
I think both Fall Out Boy and Panic! have changed. In different ways, but both in good ways. Fall Out Boy changed more the content of their music, not quite the style, like Panic!. Panic changed more the style of their music, from Alt. & Punk to something more like, Rock & Pop, from what I've heard. [It's more bouncy/light than it used to be, or at least from the few songs they've played already.] Fall Out Boy changed more in the way that they added some orchestral instruments into certain songs, and the lyrics have changed a bit, but overall it's still the same style wise, it's still Pop Punk/Rock like it has been as far as I've seen.
Does anyone even get what I'm saying? xD
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:45 pm
|
Friendly Conversationalist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friendly Conversationalist
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:47 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:49 pm
|
|
|
|
MistressSunshine Ha ha. I'm kind of butting into a conversation here, sorry, but anyway, I think both Fall Out Boy and Panic! have changed. In different ways, but both in good ways. Fall Out Boy changed more the content of their music, not quite the style, like Panic!. Panic changed more the style of their music, from Alt. & Punk to something more like, Rock & Pop, from what I've heard. [It's more bouncy/light than it used to be, or at least from the few songs they've played already.] Fall Out Boy changed more in the way that they added some orchestral instruments into certain songs, and the lyrics have changed a bit, but overall it's still the same style wise, it's still Pop Punk/Rock like it has been as far as I've seen. Does anyone even get what I'm saying? xD |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friendly Conversationalist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 3:41 pm
|
|
|
|
~[girlygirl]~ Polyphonic Twilight IT WAS ICE CREAM HEADACHE AND SWEET AVALANCHE!
xd
That part made me laugh when I first heard that song.
But isn't that the only song? I can't think of any other ones either...
And even though there's screaming.. it's still different xp
The people who bitched about IOH aren't real fans! xp I hate how after the video for The Take Over, The Break's Over, a bunch of people were suddenly like "aww Pete, we still love you" even though 5 minutes earlier they were complaining about how FOB were sell-outs rolleyes
Tee hee. It's probably the only song. Though they do have Pete actually sing in Bang the Doldrums. xD I actually don't mind the change. It's still Fall Out Boy, it's just not broody FOB. I'm going to avoid using the term 'emo' because labels irritate me. stare
City: [it's kinda weird calling you that sweatdrop xp ]
I agree that they didn't change their style as much as Panic! seems to have (even though I don't really think you can define a band's style by only one album) but if you listen to any song off EOWYG and compare it to any song off IOH there is a huge difference musically.
Which is what I thought we were talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:27 pm
|
|
|
|
MistressSunshine Ha ha. I'm kind of butting into a conversation here, sorry, but anyway, I think both Fall Out Boy and Panic! have changed. In different ways, but both in good ways. Fall Out Boy changed more the content of their music, not quite the style, like Panic!. Panic changed more the style of their music, from Alt. & Punk to something more like, Rock & Pop, from what I've heard. [It's more bouncy/light than it used to be, or at least from the few songs they've played already.] Fall Out Boy changed more in the way that they added some orchestral instruments into certain songs, and the lyrics have changed a bit, but overall it's still the same style wise, it's still Pop Punk/Rock like it has been as far as I've seen. Does anyone even get what I'm saying? xD
I agree with you. 3nodding You make it sound good. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:29 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:37 pm
|
|
|
|
Polyphonic Twilight ~[girlygirl]~ Polyphonic Twilight IT WAS ICE CREAM HEADACHE AND SWEET AVALANCHE!
xd
That part made me laugh when I first heard that song.
But isn't that the only song? I can't think of any other ones either...
And even though there's screaming.. it's still different xp
The people who bitched about IOH aren't real fans! xp I hate how after the video for The Take Over, The Break's Over, a bunch of people were suddenly like "aww Pete, we still love you" even though 5 minutes earlier they were complaining about how FOB were sell-outs rolleyes
Tee hee. It's probably the only song. Though they do have Pete actually sing in Bang the Doldrums. xD I actually don't mind the change. It's still Fall Out Boy, it's just not broody FOB. I'm going to avoid using the term 'emo' because labels irritate me. stare
City: [it's kinda weird calling you that sweatdrop xp ]
I agree that they didn't change their style as much as Panic! seems to have (even though I don't really think you can define a band's style by only one album) but if you listen to any song off EOWYG and compare it to any song off IOH there is a huge difference musically.
Which is what I thought we were talking about.
You don't have to if you don't want to. xD It's weird getting used to reponding to that, actually. O.o I usually scroll through threads looking for "Primey" or "Ribby" or "Ribz" to see if someone is talking to me...now I'm look for "City." It's sort of odd, haha. But I'll get used to it.
I think you can define a band's sound by one album.
Think about it like this...
If Panic! At The Disco only ever created one album, (which would be highly depressing, but not the point), they just wouldn't have a sound...? That makes no sense.
That's like saying, a band could release a country album and then for their next album they could release a hip-hop album, and it'd be completely normal...simply because their band's "sound" wasn't defined yet.
Uhh. O.o
I was mostly talking about the way they sound in general. FOB just sounds similar now to what they did when they started to me. But that's based off of the songs I know. I honestly don't even have a say in this conversation. xD I don't know them well enough to even be speaking up right now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 5:30 pm
|
|
|
|
~[girlygirl]~ Polyphonic Twilight IT WAS ICE CREAM HEADACHE AND SWEET AVALANCHE!
xd
That part made me laugh when I first heard that song.
But isn't that the only song? I can't think of any other ones either...
And even though there's screaming.. it's still different xp
The people who bitched about IOH aren't real fans! xp I hate how after the video for The Take Over, The Break's Over, a bunch of people were suddenly like "aww Pete, we still love you" even though 5 minutes earlier they were complaining about how FOB were sell-outs rolleyes
Tee hee. It's probably the only song. Though they do have Pete actually sing in Bang the Doldrums. xD I actually don't mind the change. It's still Fall Out Boy, it's just not broody FOB. I'm going to avoid using the term 'emo' because labels irritate me. stare
Pete sings in Bang the Doldrums! I didn't know that! Like, actually sing a line or two, or just backup and stuff, like he sometimes does?
-Okay, I don't even remember which post I read this in [I'm pretty sure it was this thread, though] or who posted it, so I'll just respond in this post.
I agree with whoever said IOH is a masterpiece. I think IOH is Fall Out Boys best album yet. The stupid fans who think they are sell outs for it have an awful taste in music, because the album is amazing. When I first got the album, I had it memorized in about a week. It's fabulous. Whoever hasn't listened to it yet should go out and buy a copy, I can almost guarantee anyone who likes Panic! would love it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 5:34 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 4:47 am
|
|
|
|
CityScene You don't have to if you don't want to. xD It's weird getting used to reponding to that, actually. O.o I usually scroll through threads looking for "Primey" or "Ribby" or "Ribz" to see if someone is talking to me...now I'm look for "City." It's sort of odd, haha. But I'll get used to it.
I think you can define a band's sound by one album.
Think about it like this...
If Panic! At The Disco only ever created one album, (which would be highly depressing, but not the point), they just wouldn't have a sound...? That makes no sense.
That's like saying, a band could release a country album and then for their next album they could release a hip-hop album, and it'd be completely normal...simply because their band's "sound" wasn't defined yet.
Uhh. O.o
I was mostly talking about the way they sound in general. FOB just sounds similar now to what they did when they started to me. But that's based off of the songs I know. I honestly don't even have a say in this conversation. xD I don't know them well enough to even be speaking up right now.
And when you put it like that, I'm like "okay yeah she's right." Because it would definitely be weird if a country band then released a hiphop album xp And of course a band has a sound, even if they only release one album xp So I guess what I'm saying doesn't really make 100% sense...
But if there's a band that has like 10 albums or more, they most likely will have changed quite a bit and then it'd be hard to say which album pinpoints their sound.
And I guess with a new band, that only has one album, I don't like to think like oh, that's their sound and if their music changes at all for the next album, they changed their sound. Because it's normal for bands to grow and change, I think especially when they're still just starting because if you write an album when you're a new, unexperienced band and then write your next album after a year of success and touring, of course you're going to have a different approach to things..
I guess to me "their sound" seems like labeling a band, or trying to fit them into a neat little box. Which I just don't really think you can do. Even with Panic!, if A Fever was their sound, how would you explain the covers they chose to do? Eleanor Rigby doesn't exactly fit in with the techno-punk-dance-cabaret theme.
I don't know. I get your point, but I also get mine xp |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:23 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:53 am
|
|
|
|
Polyphonic Twilight CityScene You don't have to if you don't want to. xD It's weird getting used to reponding to that, actually. O.o I usually scroll through threads looking for "Primey" or "Ribby" or "Ribz" to see if someone is talking to me...now I'm look for "City." It's sort of odd, haha. But I'll get used to it.
I think you can define a band's sound by one album.
Think about it like this...
If Panic! At The Disco only ever created one album, (which would be highly depressing, but not the point), they just wouldn't have a sound...? That makes no sense.
That's like saying, a band could release a country album and then for their next album they could release a hip-hop album, and it'd be completely normal...simply because their band's "sound" wasn't defined yet.
Uhh. O.o
I was mostly talking about the way they sound in general. FOB just sounds similar now to what they did when they started to me. But that's based off of the songs I know. I honestly don't even have a say in this conversation. xD I don't know them well enough to even be speaking up right now.
And when you put it like that, I'm like "okay yeah she's right." Because it would definitely be weird if a country band then released a hiphop album xp And of course a band has a sound, even if they only release one album xp So I guess what I'm saying doesn't really make 100% sense...
But if there's a band that has like 10 albums or more, they most likely will have changed quite a bit and then it'd be hard to say which album pinpoints their sound.
And I guess with a new band, that only has one album, I don't like to think like oh, that's their sound and if their music changes at all for the next album, they changed their sound. Because it's normal for bands to grow and change, I think especially when they're still just starting because if you write an album when you're a new, unexperienced band and then write your next album after a year of success and touring, of course you're going to have a different approach to things..
I guess to me "their sound" seems like labeling a band, or trying to fit them into a neat little box. Which I just don't really think you can do. Even with Panic!, if A Fever was their sound, how would you explain the covers they chose to do? Eleanor Rigby doesn't exactly fit in with the techno-punk-dance-cabaret theme.
I don't know. I get your point, but I also get mine xp
Of course a band will change after ten albums! But so did their sound. It's not like you'd base the way a band sounds off of a record they wrote five years ago, but the most current one.
Eleanor Rigby was a song of their choice that they wanted to play. It's not like it's on their album, so it shouldn't even be included into thought when trying to define their sound. Just because they played it, it doesn't mean they wrote it. They can like songs that they didn't write.
And I understand what you're trying to say as well. 3nodding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:32 am
|
|
|
|
CityScene Polyphonic Twilight I guess we'll all just have to get used to it xp
And when you put it like that, I'm like "okay yeah she's right." Because it would definitely be weird if a country band then released a hiphop album xp And of course a band has a sound, even if they only release one album xp So I guess what I'm saying doesn't really make 100% sense...
But if there's a band that has like 10 albums or more, they most likely will have changed quite a bit and then it'd be hard to say which album pinpoints their sound.
And I guess with a new band, that only has one album, I don't like to think like oh, that's their sound and if their music changes at all for the next album, they changed their sound. Because it's normal for bands to grow and change, I think especially when they're still just starting because if you write an album when you're a new, unexperienced band and then write your next album after a year of success and touring, of course you're going to have a different approach to things..
I guess to me "their sound" seems like labeling a band, or trying to fit them into a neat little box. Which I just don't really think you can do. Even with Panic!, if A Fever was their sound, how would you explain the covers they chose to do? Eleanor Rigby doesn't exactly fit in with the techno-punk-dance-cabaret theme.
I don't know. I get your point, but I also get mine xp Of course a band will change after ten albums! But so did their sound. It's not like you'd base the way a band sounds off of a record they wrote five years ago, but the most current one.
Eleanor Rigby was a song of their choice that they wanted to play. It's not like it's on their album, so it shouldn't even be included into thought when trying to define their sound. Just because they played it, it doesn't mean they wrote it. They can like songs that they didn't write.
And I understand what you're trying to say as well. 3nodding
I think you can include covers in a band's sound, even if they're not their album. What if a band released an EP with pop music, but at all their live performances they covered hardcore punk songs. And all over youtube and the internet you were more likely to find their covers than their actual songs. So the band would have done a hundred or so hardcore songs, compared to the 5 or 6 pop songs they wrote and recorded. Would their sound still be pop? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 12:17 pm
|
|
|
|
Polyphonic Twilight CityScene Polyphonic Twilight I guess we'll all just have to get used to it xp
And when you put it like that, I'm like "okay yeah she's right." Because it would definitely be weird if a country band then released a hiphop album xp And of course a band has a sound, even if they only release one album xp So I guess what I'm saying doesn't really make 100% sense...
But if there's a band that has like 10 albums or more, they most likely will have changed quite a bit and then it'd be hard to say which album pinpoints their sound.
And I guess with a new band, that only has one album, I don't like to think like oh, that's their sound and if their music changes at all for the next album, they changed their sound. Because it's normal for bands to grow and change, I think especially when they're still just starting because if you write an album when you're a new, unexperienced band and then write your next album after a year of success and touring, of course you're going to have a different approach to things..
I guess to me "their sound" seems like labeling a band, or trying to fit them into a neat little box. Which I just don't really think you can do. Even with Panic!, if A Fever was their sound, how would you explain the covers they chose to do? Eleanor Rigby doesn't exactly fit in with the techno-punk-dance-cabaret theme.
I don't know. I get your point, but I also get mine xp Of course a band will change after ten albums! But so did their sound. It's not like you'd base the way a band sounds off of a record they wrote five years ago, but the most current one.
Eleanor Rigby was a song of their choice that they wanted to play. It's not like it's on their album, so it shouldn't even be included into thought when trying to define their sound. Just because they played it, it doesn't mean they wrote it. They can like songs that they didn't write.
And I understand what you're trying to say as well. 3nodding
I think you can include covers in a band's sound, even if they're not their album. What if a band released an EP with pop music, but at all their live performances they covered hardcore punk songs. And all over youtube and the internet you were more likely to find their covers than their actual songs. So the band would have done a hundred or so hardcore songs, compared to the 5 or 6 pop songs they wrote and recorded. Would their sound still be pop?
Poly, what band did that? What band is more well known for their covers than their actual music? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
