• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

New Nickelback album

#61
T.O.Bass said:
He means this:

http://www.thewebshite.net/nickelback.htm
Click to expand...

that's funny. (THREAD HIJACK) Reminds me of a track that I did once that was

4 songs of Sepultura
4 songs of Miles Davis
4 songs of Weather Report
and 4 songs of Praxis

what I did was had four different CD players going at the same time with the different songs - and recorded each one of the artists on to a separate track - then mixed them together. I called it Cacophany.

back to the thread...
I like Nickleback, but I can see why people HATE them. Some of their music gets played so much on radio stations that I think people just get sick of it. I know that when I first got into them not long ago, I got sick of it as well. Some of their songs are catchy. Business wise, they have done really well over the last 8 years, so I'll give them that.
 
#62
I think the problem a lot of people have with Nickelback is how intensely average they are. They're the epitomy of mediocrity. It seems like they strive to be forgettable in every possible aspect, which I believe is why they are so popular.... their lack of any defining characteristic allows them to be palatable background music for nearly anyone. THAT is why they are impressive, they're ability to be perfectly bland.

That being said, is dude's bass tone significantly different than on previous albums?(What I've heard previously falls well within the confines of my statements above)
 
#63
baalroo said:
I think the problem a lot of people have with Nickelback is how intensely average they are. They're the epitomy of mediocrity. It seems like they strive to be forgettable in every possible aspect, which I believe is why they are so popular.... their lack of any defining characteristic allows them to be palatable background music for nearly anyone. THAT is why they are impressive, they're ability to be perfectly bland.

That being said, is dude's bass tone significantly different than on previous albums?(What I've heard previously falls well within the confines of my statements above)
Click to expand...

As a bassist, that is simply not true. Go listen to Mike's bass versus, let's say, the guy from the foo fighters. Who stands out more?
 
#64
LCMBassist said:
As a bassist, that is simply not true. Go listen to Mike's bass versus, let's say, the guy from the foo fighters. Who stands out more?
Click to expand...

I assume your answer is that it's the same as previous albums then? I'm sorry but comparing the "stand-out-edness" of Nickelback to the Foo Fighters is like comparing the colorfulness of grey to slate. I really don't have the patience to listen to both of those bands back-to-back. I guess I could just turn on my radio and listen for about 20 minutes...nah.
 
#65
The very first time I heard Nickelback, which was the song "hard to swallow"?, I thought it was o.k., but everything I've heard since then sounds like bland, generic, cheese rock. I respect them for finding their niche and appealing to a mass audience, I'm just not in that crowd. To me they're forever destined for "Now that's what I call mediocre rock!" compilations.
 
#67
Delicious Bass said:
The very first time I heard Nickelback, which was the song "hard to swallow"?, I thought it was o.k., but everything I've heard since then sounds like bland, generic, cheese rock. I respect them for finding their niche and appealing to a mass audience, I'm just not in that crowd. To me they're forever destined for "Now that's what I call mediocre rock!" compilations.
Click to expand...


Totally Hits 15?

or Kids Tunes 6?
 
#69
baalroo said:
I think the problem a lot of people have with Nickelback is how intensely average they are. They're the epitomy of mediocrity. It seems like they strive to be forgettable in every possible aspect, which I believe is why they are so popular.... their lack of any defining characteristic allows them to be palatable background music for nearly anyone. THAT is why they are impressive, they're ability to be perfectly bland.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree with this, and I think this is a great deal of the reason that Nickelback rubs so many people the wrong way (myself included). Because many of us are working extremely hard to craft out a unique sound and find our own musical voices, and Nickelback continues to put out album after album of similar, if not identical, sounding material, and getting success (used in the most broad sense of the word). So seeing an utterly mediocre band like Nickelback sustain their equally mediocre sound, but continue to get exposure and whatnot, seems to be almost a slap in the face to those of us who are truly working at music.

/IMO, YMMV, etc.
 
#70
atheos said:
What comes to the tone... It's the same as every AOR band, I really can't find anything special from that. I mean, it's as generic as it can be, it lacks personality pretty much in every manner. Yeah, it sounds good in general but gets lost in the majority. Nickelback, Creed, Seether... You name it. Sometimes I can't even tell the difference. That's really sad.
Click to expand...

You should really learn what words mean before you use them ;)
AOR refers to Album Oriented Rock, playing deep cuts and longer versions of songs instead of just singles.
 
#71
Ben Lesser said:
I'm inclined to agree with this, and I think this is a great deal of the reason that Nickelback rubs so many people the wrong way (myself included). Because many of us are working extremely hard to craft out a unique sound and find our own musical voices, and Nickelback continues to put out album after album of similar, if not identical, sounding material, and getting success (used in the most broad sense of the word). So seeing an utterly mediocre band like Nickelback sustain their equally mediocre sound, but continue to get exposure and whatnot, seems to be almost a slap in the face to those of us who are truly working at music.

/IMO, YMMV, etc.
Click to expand...

Fact remains that your unique sound may not appeal to the average Joe who's human ears pickup on certain chord progressions etc as being catchy and memorable. Band that try to be too unique annoy me....they usually end up being crap.
 
#72
LCMBassist said:
Fact remains that your unique sound may not appeal to the average Joe who's human ears pickup on certain chord progressions etc as being catchy and memorable. Band that try to be too unique annoy me....they usually end up being crap.
Click to expand...


When did mediocrity and banality become a good image? I want my children listening to people who rocked! I don't care if they died in puddles of their own vomit, I want someone who plays from his heart.


Serious Language Warning, but the point is something I agree with entirely.
 
#77
LCMBassist said:
And I don't rate Hendrix? I actually really dislike most of his playing. Give me some Satriani, Hackett, or Rothery over his mishmash solos, thankyou.
Click to expand...


Now I know you don't have a problem with taste! You have NONE!

Carry on. :ninja: :D




No offense, but saying Hendrix isn't a great player is like saying Pete Wentz is in your top 10 list of bassists. You will get odd stares for either one.
 
#78
fenderhutz said:
Now I know you don't have a problem with taste! You have NONE!

Carry on. :ninja: :D




No offense, but saying Hendrix isn't a great player is like saying Pete Wentz is in your top 10 list of bassists. You will get odd stares for either one.
Click to expand...

He's technically not very good. All this 'play from your soul' doesn't cut it with me, if it sounds like mush, and most of his playing DID. I much prefer someone like Gilmour. Ten times the guitarist in terms of soulfulness.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back