of becoming a totally different band from what a band first did? Like Codeseven, specifically. They don't write ANY hard stuff anymore. But i mean, they were good at it...why just write pop friendly, indie rock stuff now? It's fine to do a concept album, it's fine to write some songs that aren't the same old same old, but to ABANDON what you once did? That's freaky.

Well, for one, some bands do it for money. And some do it cause personal taste changes. Look at Cave In. They started out really heavy, but are now more Indie than anything. I'm still a fan, but some people aren't because the went "emo". Who cares, people change. In what rule book does it say that bands have to stay "heavy". Let them do what they want. If you don't like it, you don't like it.

but exclusively?

it's fine to change, but when you go the complete other end of the spectrum, and then never even touch your roots again or explore them, that's just as weird as never progressing in the first place.

Granted, I know nothing of Codeseven, but I feel that a band doesn't have to explain to anyone why they write the music they write. As for "never touching your roots again", is their career over? Are they done writing music? No. They're just trying something different. Nothing wrong with that.

i totally agree. codeseven totally turned around on that. cave in did the same thing for a long ass time, only now are they starting to put heavy elements in their music again.

a natural evolution?

succubus said:

Zacklys what she said. Sometimes a band wants to try other things, you grow older, your intrests change, or perhaps in this case they wanted to make more money so they changed their style to suite more record label intrest.

just look at metallica. theyre so old they play country tunes now.

I don't know, I think if a band completely changes their sound they should change their name because it's not the same band anymore. If Suffocation turned into an emo band, would people have more to say about that then they do about Cave In changing their sound to emo? I personally never liked anything Cave In did, so I could care less. I am not really a big suffocation fan either, but just to use them as an example.

cave in didnt go 'emo.' they went space rock. and i dont think that its a natural evolution when a band totally shuns what they once were. you have to accept your past to move on. if youre totally ignoring something that was, then youre just cheating yourself and the fans you made on the way.

blue nli said:

Exactly why they should change their name if they do that. I only used the term emo because moran did. I don't think I've ever heard anything Cave In did that wasn't heavy.

thats why I hated when Carcass and Entombed went....whatever they went. rock? hippie metal? I dunno what its called, but they were respected death metal bands, until they pulled that shit. where are they now?

carcass got lucky though and is still revered by metalheads, except swansong. entombed definetly got the shaft though, people barely care anymore.

yeah, but there is a difference between a band changing their sound and still being good...and a band changing their sound and sucking.

i like swan song. that album is good. it's definitely not the carcass everyone grew to love from the beginning, but i enjoy that album.

i think it's ok if a band gradually evolves into something barely recognizable to their early stuff. look at katatonia. you can still hear some riffs that are similar to their old shit, but the band is pretty different now than they were when they recorded dance of december souls. i like katatonia's newer sound better. it is way more unique.

Dreaded Silence sold out.

i know, look at all that money we are making now. i could buy and sell you ten times over today. notcommon records will be bought and liquidated.

case in point: Celtic Frost

Tragic.

litacore said:

Tragic serenades?

litacore said:

no way! i think about the video for cherry orchards on cold winter nights. it cuts down on the gas bill. seriously though, i love that shit.