DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => General Music Discussion => Topic started by: KevShmev on June 07, 2018, 06:29:33 PM
-
Relative to the rest of their material.
Seems like the great majority of bands do their best work early on and their best album is often among the first few, but sometimes a band takes a while to really hit their stride.
In that regard, I will offer these bands whose first four albums aren't that great, based on my terms:
Pink Floyd
Styx
King Crimson
-
Journey maybe? I don't at all care for their first three but Infinity is where the goodness happens, so I'm conflicted.
-
The first Opeth album I have reasonably positive feelings for is Blackwater Park, tbh, so let's go with that
Thrice would be here if just the first three tho, but Vhiessu is great
-
The first 4 pink floyd albums do nothing for me.
I also don't like the first 4 anathema albums
-
Porcupine Tree, if Tarquin's Seaweed Farm and The Nostalgia Factory count as the first 2 albums. On the Sunday of Life and Up the Downstair do almost nothing for me.
-
Porcupine Tree. Things don't get interesting for me until Stupid Dream.
Dammit, beaten by a minute! Haha
-
I can't agree with Porcupine Tree. The Sky Moves Sideways (3rd studio album) and Signify (4th studio album) are both fantastic and could easily be argued as being amongst their best.
-
I'll buy Pink Floyd for a dollar. I do not agree with King Crimson, though. The first two albums I like very much, and the first is a classic.
Deep Purple missed it by THAT MUCH, unless you count the live Concerto album; I love all that stuff because I'm a Blackmore fanatic, but it doesn't hold a candle to In Rock through Stormbringer.
One could argue that the Beatles and the Rolling Stones fall into this category, unless you prefer the early albums, heavy with covers of classics and standards.
-
Thin Lizzy
-
Does Nirvana count?
EDIT: No, they only have three albums, and I don't want to count the MTV Unplugged disk, which is excellent.
-
Can't agree on King Crimson, the first is an absolute great record.
Pink Floyd certainly
Journey, I quite like the first records but with Steve Perry they are lifted to another level
and
.
.
.
Metallica *ducks and runs*
-
I can't agree with Porcupine Tree. The Sky Moves Sideways (3rd studio album) and Signify (4th studio album) are both fantastic and could easily be argued as being amongst their best.
Absolutely. Signify is my favourite PT album and TSMS is easily in the top 5. I also love Up the Downstair.
Does Nirvana count?
:lol
in that same vein: let me offer Guns 'n Roses.
-
Easy pick: Pantera? they were glam for the first records.
-
I disagree about Porcupine Tree. UTD, TSMS and Signify are top drawer, and OTSOL is not a bad album by any means. It's a diverse set of tracks, a 90s equivalent to The White Album.
-
Can't think of many bands I like where the first four aren't great. First couple maybe but not four.
I would have said Scorpions but recently I've found a big appreciation for the UK I years.
-
King Crimson, seriously? In The Court Of The Crimson King?? :rollin
Lizard was VERY weird but also a masterpiece for me.
I also don't agree with Pink Floyd. More is very underrated imo. Piper and Saucerful don't represent the band's later style, but they were released in 67/68!! To me, they are very good, experimental psychedelic pop albums.
The Beatles' first albums were good, but they got even better with their later ones.
Same with The Who.
-
Yeah, I didn't get the King Crimson nomination either.
-
I think King Geezy & the Leezy Deezy belong here. Most of their best material is on the albums they released last year + Nonagon Infinity
-
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.
-
Pink Floyd and Opeth.... although I do like MAYH more than Blackwater Park.
-
Tool
-
I think King Geezy & the Leezy Deezy belong here. Most of their best material is on the albums they released last year + Nonagon Infinity
I think this is broken by Float Along - Fill Your Lungs which is definitely one of their best albums (top5 easily) and has some really strong songs and one of their best - Head On/Pill. The first album is kinda alright, second album is my least favorite from them and then Oddments doesn't rank very highly for me either. So it's close, but I think because of the strength of Float Along they don't quite fit in here.
-
Tool
YESSSSSSS
-
Am I the first one who will say RUSH?!
Many people mentioned Pink Floyd here, but their debut and A Saucerful of Secrets can wipe the floor with Rush debut, Fly by Night or Caress of Steel anytime.
I always found 2112 an overrated album due to its mediocre and forgettable side 2(side 1 is great without a doubt, though). ;D
-
I knew I'd get some push back on King Crimson, but I have never considered the debut album to be that great. It is a good record, but I wouldn't put it in their top tier of records. And I have no use for their 2nd, 3rd and 4th albums.
-
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.
This post almost makes me angry ;D How can you say that, just generalizing it like that?
Tool
This post actually makes me angry ;D
Am I the first one who will say RUSH?!
Many people mentioned Pink Floyd here, but their debut and A Saucerful of Secrets can wipe the floor with Rush debut, Fly by Night or Caress of Steel anytime.
I always found 2112 an overrated album due to its mediocre and forgettable side 2(side 1 is great without a doubt, though). ;D
And I wish I had written this post. Yes, why didn't I think of that?? I personally (*preparing to get tracked down and beaten up*) don't find the first side of 2112 THAT great. It is a good track, but imo it has nothing, and I mean NOTHING, on tunes like Close To The Edge, Tarkus, Supper's Ready, or even Hemispheres.
-
Rush's first 4 albums are freaking fantastic, wtf :omg:
The debut is fantastic. Fly By Night has like two songs that aren't that hot. Caress of Steel is the best of the first 4. 2112 is the weakest of them all easily, but far from bad (it's leagues ahead of AFTK, that's for sure).
-
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.
This post almost makes me angry ;D How can you say that, just generalizing it like that?
Name one song that gets any airtime in classic rock radio stations. Until Meddle, they were an obscure prog band at best. Outside of the UK, they made no impact. And would anyone say they'd rather listen to any of the first 4 (or 7) in the discography before pretty much any album in the DSOTM-Division Bell run? RIAA certifications were all over the place for the first 7 albums (the first three weren't even RIAA certified); EVERY album from DSOTM on was multi-Platinum. I could go on if you'd like.
Name me another band that made such a MONUMENTAL jump in one album (DSOTM), and then sustained it for the next 6 albums (The Final Cut notwithstanding).
-
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.
This post almost makes me angry ;D How can you say that, just generalizing it like that?
Name one song that gets any airtime in classic rock radio stations. Until Meddle, they were an obscure prog band at best. Outside of the UK, they made no impact.
in the Netherlands, 'See Emily Play', which was only released as a single and not even on an album
and from their first couple of albums there's quite some songs that touch a soft spot with fans (Astronomy Domine, Bike, One of These Days etc.)
-
King Crimson, seriously? In The Court Of The Crimson King?? :rollin
Lizard was VERY weird but also a masterpiece for me.
I also don't agree with Pink Floyd. More is very underrated imo. Piper and Saucerful don't represent the band's later style, but they were released in 67/68!! To me, they are very good, experimental psychedelic pop albums.
The Beatles' first albums were good, but they got even better with their later ones.
Same with The Who.
The problem with The Who is that people don't realize how FEW studio albums they really have. Tommy is their fourth album. I agree on their first one, but I kinda like "A Quick One" and "Who Sell Out" is a really underrated masterpiece. I find that to be far more creative and interesting than Tommy, even if Tommy is more cogent and streamlined as a story. (Plus you can argue that "Sell Out" has the seeds of "The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway").
I bought a "Who" lot on eBay, 10 or so disks, and man oh, man, I had NO idea they were that influential. I listened chronologically, starting with A Quick One, then Sell Out then Odds and Sods then Tommy... just about every other song I was like "Wow, so THAT'S where So-and-so got that!"
-
If some sissy says Anathema, I will punch him in the face. I'm waiting... ;D
I can't think of a band whose first four albums I don't enjoy.
And whoever said Pink Floyd: please die! :tup
-
The problem with Floyd is that if you're not into Syd's thing - and I am most certainly not - then it's not really appealing. I like the early instrumentals, but almost always when expounded upon by Gilmour later. The first Floyd song I really, truly love is "Let There Be More Light", and the first album that really grabbed me was "More" (I LOVE "The Nile Song"). Ummagumma would have made an awesome stand alone live album, but the studio tracks, eh.
-
I have never been more confused by a band than when I first heard Floyd's earliest stuff. I was sure I got the wrong band. That is some weird music, and not in a good way for me. It's incredible how much they transformed.
-
If some sissy says Anathema, I will punch him in the face. I'm waiting... ;D
Yeah. I haven't familiarized myself with all their early material yet, but The Silent Enigma is insane.
-
If some sissy says Anathema, I will punch him in the face. I'm waiting... ;D
I can't think of a band whose first four albums I don't enjoy.
And whoever said Pink Floyd: please die! :tup
I'm your huckleberry.
-
Journey maybe? I don't at all care for their first three but Infinity is where the goodness happens, so I'm conflicted.
Wow, interesting take. I'm going to reluctantly agree. And I say "reluctantly" simply because I think those albums are actually pretty good. But I and most others would have overlooked them as a band if not for the change that bringing Perry in brought about. Good call, and one I wouldn't have thought of if you hadn't posted it.
I am going to perhaps be a bit controversial and go with Megadeth as well. They technically don't fit because their 4th album is Rust, and that was the beginning of their "classic" era, as far as I'm concerned. I love that album. But the first three, they were a different band, and I didn't care for that material as well. Rust really is a transition album between the old sound and what they would become after that. But taken collectively, yeah, I guess their first four "aren't that great" because the first three drag that era down for me (only my personal tastes--I know others love those albums).
Scorpions is another. I got into their "classic" era in the '80s, but they had a long career in the '70s that doesn't move me at all.
Whitesnake also fits that mold, for the same reason as Scorpions. I really liked both bands' output during the same '80s period, and their earlier stuff similarly didn't do much for me.
-
That's a shame, bosk. I think Megadeth's first four are actually their best! :2metal:
About Journey, to be fair, I don't think they're bad per se, just severely eclipsed by what came after Steve Perry joined.
-
That's a shame, bosk. I think Megadeth's first four are actually their best! :2metal:
That's cool. I just never liked "old-school thrash." Same reason I don't like Kill 'Em All, or earlier albums from other thrash bands that I otherwise think had some great later output (e.g. Flotsam & Jetsam and Testament). And that sound was Megadeth's wheelhouse for those first four. Just, for some reason, it really worked and clicked with me on Rust. Mid-'80s to early-'90s is when Thrash evolved to a point, and my tastes evolved to a point, where the two were compatible.
About Journey, to be fair, I don't think they're bad per se, just severely eclipsed by what came after Steve Perry joined.
Yeah, exactly. For me, there is a lot that is good about those early albums. But I never would have discovered them if not for the Perry era stuff that pulled me in in the first place. Even if I heard those early albums now, I would never have said, "Hey, that group is pretty awesome. I need to get all their stuff." I got their stuff by going back and listening to it with the Perry stuff already firmly in my "love it" column. And I enjoy it on the rare listen.
-
I have never been more confused by a band than when I first heard Floyd's earliest stuff. I was sure I got the wrong band. That is some weird music, and not in a good way for me. It's incredible how much they transformed.
You take the first four records, plus "Zabriskie Point", plus the non-album singles, and in my estimation there's a really good, double CD there.
-
Scorpions is another. I got into their "classic" era in the '80s, but they had a long career in the '70s that doesn't move me at all.
Whitesnake also fits that mold, for the same reason as Scorpions. I really liked both bands' output during the same '80s period, and their earlier stuff similarly didn't do much for me.
I happen to like the early phases of both better, but that's not the point; I think you're spot on that both bands sort of transformed themselves later in their career to the point that someone who LOVED "In Trance" or "Snakebite" wouldn't care at all for "Blackout" or "1987", and vice versa.
-
Sufjan Stevens (Michigan has its moments I suppose)
1st 3:
Savatage
Silverchair
-
Scorpions is another. I got into their "classic" era in the '80s, but they had a long career in the '70s that doesn't move me at all.
Whitesnake also fits that mold, for the same reason as Scorpions. I really liked both bands' output during the same '80s period, and their earlier stuff similarly didn't do much for me.
I happen to like the early phases of both better, but that's not the point; I think you're spot on that both bands sort of transformed themselves later in their career to the point that someone who LOVED "In Trance" or "Snakebite" wouldn't care at all for "Blackout" or "1987", and vice versa.
Yeah, exactly. All of my examples are really bands that had that sort of transformation. It isn't really an issue of "quality" as much as it is the band changing and remaking its sound, and me as the listener not really liking that earlier sound. It's easy to point to band's whose first and even second album may have suffered from the quality of the songwriting simply because they just weren't very good at it yet. But it's hard to find many bands whose first four albums really suffered from a quality standpoint.
-
Am I the first one who will say RUSH?!
Many people mentioned Pink Floyd here, but their debut and A Saucerful of Secrets can wipe the floor with Rush debut, Fly by Night or Caress of Steel anytime.
I always found 2112 an overrated album due to its mediocre and forgettable side 2(side 1 is great without a doubt, though). ;D
Rush is sort of middling in this regard. The debut has Working Man, Finding My Way and In the Mood, and the rest is largely forgettable (many may say that In the Mood is also forgettable, but I have a place for it in my heart, and it's just kinds of silly fun). Rush was a band still trying to find its own sound, and that album would have gone nowhere without Working Man. Fly by Night is excellent. Rivendell is the only song I consistently skip. Caress of Steel is the weakest of the bunch, although 3/4 of side 1 is good to excellent. CoS was also a necessary prerequisite to 2112. Side 1 was a game changer at the time, and I've said before that side 2 is comparatively weak.
I agree with Kev about Styx. The debut is almost completely forgettable. Lady was a minor hit twice, but Styx II also largely nondescript (although you can start to hear the "classic" Styx sound on a couple of songs). There's nothing remarkable about The Serpent is Rising (unless you find some entertainment value in Plexiglass Toilet). Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs, but Styx really didn't get its legs under it until Equinox.
-
Thin Lizzy
I think most people would agree with this, although I adore the first three records with Eric Bell.
Pink Floyd is an obvious choice, but not because those albums are bad (well, the first two aren't), but due to the fact that they reached their creative peak much later. It's similar with Porcupine Tree. Honestly, I would have easily picked Rush if it weren't for 2112.
-
I agree with Kev about Styx. The debut is almost completely forgettable. Lady was a minor hit twice, but Styx II also largely nondescript (although you can start to hear the "classic" Styx sound on a couple of songs). There's nothing remarkable about The Serpent is Rising (unless you find some entertainment value in Plexiglass Toilet). Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs, but Styx really didn't get its legs under it until Equinox.
There are some gems on those early albums:
Father O.S.A.
The Grove of Eglantine
Winner Take All
Best Thing
You Need Love
I'm Gonna Make You Feel It
Man of Miracles
But yeah, none of those albums compare to the ones that came after them in the 70's.
-
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.
This post almost makes me angry ;D How can you say that, just generalizing it like that?
Name one song that gets any airtime in classic rock radio stations. Until Meddle, they were an obscure prog band at best. Outside of the UK, they made no impact. And would anyone say they'd rather listen to any of the first 4 (or 7) in the discography before pretty much any album in the DSOTM-Division Bell run? RIAA certifications were all over the place for the first 7 albums (the first three weren't even RIAA certified); EVERY album from DSOTM on was multi-Platinum. I could go on if you'd like.
Name me another band that made such a MONUMENTAL jump in one album (DSOTM), and then sustained it for the next 6 albums (The Final Cut notwithstanding).
What has airtime on classic rock radio stations to do with quality of music? We are posting in a Dream Theater forum, since when has radio airplay to do with anything?
A few of the greatest albums I know only contain songs that have never played on any radio station so I really don't understand where you're going with this argument. What's wrong with being an "obscure prog band"?
And YES, I bet there's thousands of people who would rather listen to A Saucerful Of Secrets than to A Momentary Lapse Of Reason. It's great that Pink Floyd had such a huge success with their music 1973-1994, but when it comes to the music itself, I don't give a crap about sales or platinum- etc. certifications.
-
Personal opinions aside, classic rock radio airtime (back then, and now), along with RIAA certifications, is a fair barometer of quality of music - and I recognize that "quality" is 100% subjective. There may be 000s of people that would rather listen to SFoS, but there's probably MILLIONS of people who have never even heard of it - but know DSOTM, WYWH, and The Wall at a minimum. Hell, before I got to DTF, I knew of Piper at the Gates of Dawn, but had never heard a single track in my 35 years of existence, nor had I even heard of SFoS, More, Umma, or Atom Heart Mother.
:dunno:
-
There are a surprising number of people who think Piper is the best thing Floyd ever did, which I will never get, but then again, I think the vast majority of Piper is unlistenable psychedelic crap. I do like A Saucerful of Secrets quite a bit, however.
That said, I think Pink Floyd is a great example for this thread. Dark Side through The Wall is considered their peak era by a large percentage Floyd fans. Outside of maybe a random fan doing shrooms in a flat somewhere in London :P, does anybody think More or Ummagumma (disc 2, the studio disc) is a Floyd highlight?
-
Hell, yeah I LOVE UmmaGumma :lol Both the live album AND the studio album.
Personal opinions aside, classic rock radio airtime (back then, and now), along with RIAA certifications, is a fair barometer of quality of music
I still don't get it... by that logic this would mean that every hit ELO has ever put out is better than any song Gentle Giant have recorded. Any AOR rock tune that get's played on a classic rock radio station is better than any song by any Neo-, Retro-Prog or Jazz fusion band and Aerosmith and Boston are the greatest bands alive.
:huh:
-
Well, to be perfectly frank, it doesn't take much to be better than a Gentle Giant song. That is a pretty low bar to clear.
-
Well, to be perfectly frank, it doesn't take much to be better than a Gentle Giant song. That is a pretty low bar to clear.
:corn
-
Hell, yeah I LOVE UmmaGumma :lol Both the live album AND the studio album.
Personal opinions aside, classic rock radio airtime (back then, and now), along with RIAA certifications, is a fair barometer of quality of music
I still don't get it... by that logic this would mean that every hit ELO has ever put out is better than any song Gentle Giant have recorded. Any AOR rock tune that get's played on a classic rock radio station is better than any song by any Neo-, Retro-Prog or Jazz fusion band and Aerosmith and Boston are the greatest bands alive.
:huh:
Better is a matter of perspective and subjectivity. Remember, the thread title is "aren't that great". Relative to PF's latter discography, the first four "aren't that great".
-
Hell, yeah I LOVE UmmaGumma :lol Both the live album AND the studio album.
Personal opinions aside, classic rock radio airtime (back then, and now), along with RIAA certifications, is a fair barometer of quality of music
I still don't get it... by that logic this would mean that every hit ELO has ever put out is better than any song Gentle Giant have recorded. Any AOR rock tune that get's played on a classic rock radio station is better than any song by any Neo-, Retro-Prog or Jazz fusion band and Aerosmith and Boston are the greatest bands alive.
:huh:
Better is a matter of perspective and subjectivity. Remember, the thread title is "aren't that great". Relative to PF's latter discography, the first four "aren't that great".
That depends what you like more, the experimental psychedelic rock from the first albums or the bluesy, puffed up AOR on the last ones. I personally like both (although of course I agree with you that their Dark Side - Wall phase is the best). And I think that - although they aren't really comparable - their first albums are not at all worse than their first ones. Just very different.
Well, to be perfectly frank, it doesn't take much to be better than a Gentle Giant song. That is a pretty low bar to clear.
How dare you :omg: :lol
-
Floyd was my initial thought, and still a good option for me, though the more I think about it, Saucerful of Secrets is rather good for a sophomore effort coming off the drug-induced hazy mess of Piper, especially considering they were undergoing a change in their line-up and writing focus.
Styx is another good submission.
-
Well, to be perfectly frank, it doesn't take much to be better than a Gentle Giant song. That is a pretty low bar to clear.
How dare you :omg: :lol
I stand behind my comment. :biggrin:
-
That's cool. I just never liked "old-school thrash." Same reason I don't like Kill 'Em All, or earlier albums from other thrash bands that I otherwise think had some great later output (e.g. Flotsam & Jetsam and Testament). And that sound was Megadeth's wheelhouse for those first four. Just, for some reason, it really worked and clicked with me on Rust. Mid-'80s to early-'90s is when Thrash evolved to a point, and my tastes evolved to a point, where the two were compatible.
Fair to say that you like thrash influenced metal, more than thrash metal..?
Kill 'Em All, F&J's 2nd and 3rd albums, and SFSGSW are 4 of my all time favorite albums.
-
Pantera.
-
The problem with The Who is that people don't realize how FEW studio albums they really have. Tommy is their fourth album. I agree on their first one, but I kinda like "A Quick One" and "Who Sell Out" is a really underrated masterpiece. I find that to be far more creative and interesting than Tommy, even if Tommy is more cogent and streamlined as a story.
Good post. They didn't take long to develop their sound, style, and presence. Their debut has two of their landmark songs, songs that hold up to this day and are still popular and critically acclaimed. The next two don't have the radio hits and concert staples that subsequent albums would have, but they are quite good. And then you get right in to Tommy/Who's Next, Quadrophenia, as good of a three album run any band could hope to have, showcasing Pete's creative genius crafting three unique albums each with its own sound and narrative, and establishing themselves as one of the top live bands around. Then an outtakes/rarities album (solid), and two more before Keith's death. Then two more to finish out their recording career, and the odd final act 24 years later.
-
classic rock radio airtime (back then, and now), along with RIAA certifications, is a fair barometer of quality of music
dafuq.
-
I'd say Kamelot, but The Fourth Legacy is pretty good.
-
Personal opinions aside, classic rock radio airtime (back then, and now), along with RIAA certifications, is a fair barometer of quality of music - and I recognize that "quality" is 100% subjective.
I don't agree at all. Speaking about success in the USA, for example Journey has sold a way more albums than Deep Purple and they have much more songs on classic rock radio, but objectively a quality of Journey music is not in the same ballpark with Deep Purple from a musical aspect.
-
Wildranger, stick to OP's. You're not supposed to actually post. ;D
Not sure how you can say what you just said about Journey. That's crazy talk.
-
Personal opinions aside, classic rock radio airtime (back then, and now), along with RIAA certifications, is a fair barometer of quality of music - and I recognize that "quality" is 100% subjective.
I don't agree at all. Speaking about success in the USA, for example Journey has sold a way more albums than Deep Purple and they have much more songs on classic rock radio, but objectively a quality of Journey music is not in the same ballpark with Deep Purple from a musical aspect.
Or you can compare the sales of Iron Maiden and Metallica albums from the 21st century in the US.
According ot RIAA none of Maiden albums didn't reach even Gold, while all Metallica albums (even St. Anger) have at least one Platinum. But quality-wise Metallica albums ain't got shit on those Maiden albums (although they are not that good compared to their 80's releases).
-
ffs people... I said "fair barometer". I didn't say it was the be all and end all to measure quality (which is 100% subjective anyway). I was also trying to infer it as it related to music from the 20th Century - with the interwebz and different outlets for people to consume music, radio play and RIAA is by NO MEANS a way to measure quality.
-
I don't at all agree that radio play is indicative of any sort of quality. Popularity, maybe. But if it's quality, you need to explain why Five Finger Death Punch gets radio play. :lol
-
Did you read Chad's (jingle.boy) last post?
-
Did you read Chad's (jingle.boy) last post?
Nope. /sarcasm
But even in the 90s I would say it wasn't a fair indicator of quality. I don't think radio has been for a very long time (if ever) for a number of reasons, not simply when the Internet came around. Fucking Kate Bush, for example, and that was in '78.
-
I don't at all agree that radio play is indicative of any sort of quality. Popularity, maybe. But if it's quality, you need to explain why Five Finger Death Punch gets radio play. :lol
I can't believe Sham Pain (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbaQ9xnoMGQ) isn't a huge meme yet, easily the most embarassing and cringy thing to come out of the 'metal' industry this year. I used to be able to laugh at FFDP's ridiculousness but this has gotten out of hand man
SHAM PAIN :metardica:
-
what's that about fucking Kate Bush in '78?
-
:lol
I don't at all agree that radio play is indicative of any sort of quality. Popularity, maybe. But if it's quality, you need to explain why Five Finger Death Punch gets radio play. :lol
I can't believe Sham Pain (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbaQ9xnoMGQ) isn't a huge meme yet, easily the most embarassing and cringy thing to come out of the 'metal' industry this year. I used to be able to laugh at FFDP's ridiculousness but this has gotten out of hand man
SHAM PAIN :metardica:
This is the worst damn thing I have seen since the ICP video about miracles.
-
:lol
I don't at all agree that radio play is indicative of any sort of quality. Popularity, maybe. But if it's quality, you need to explain why Five Finger Death Punch gets radio play. :lol
I can't believe Sham Pain (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbaQ9xnoMGQ) isn't a huge meme yet, easily the most embarassing and cringy thing to come out of the 'metal' industry this year. I used to be able to laugh at FFDP's ridiculousness but this has gotten out of hand man
SHAM PAIN :metardica:
This is the worst damn thing I have seen since the ICP video about miracles.
You have to wonder what their intentions were here. If they were parodying Nickelback's Rockstar, they're 10 years too late. On top of that, Rockstar is already a satire, and FFDP managed to make a worse song than Rockstar. Was it on purpose? They were clearly taking the piss, but it was executed TERRIBLY. I should know. :neverusethis:
-
Metallica *ducks and runs*
Rightly ignored for the first two pages of the thread.
Get out, sunshine :lol
-
A couple of these might ruffle feathers, but it’s just my opinions.
Symphony X - Granted, Divine Wings is a decent album, but it still never gripped me the way V, The Odyssey, and Paradise Lost did.
Skillet - I don’t expect this will kick up a lot of discussion given their subject material and I never see them mentioned here. But a look into their past revealed to me their first four albums were industrial shite, and it wasn’t until Collide/Comatose that they became the guitar-oriented, riff driven band they are today.
Threshold - Psychedelicatessen was decent, and Clone was a good transition into the Mac era, but Damien’s delivery on Wounded Land and Extinct Instinct is just something I still can’t tolerate. It isn’t until we get to Hypothetical onward that each release is solid to stellar (except maybe For the Journey, but I enjoy even that one too).
-
Skillet - I don’t expect this will kick up a lot of discussion given their subject material and I never see them mentioned here. But a look into their past revealed to me their first four albums were industrial shite, and it wasn’t until Collide/Comatose that they became the guitar-oriented, riff driven band they are today.
I mean I like Alien Youth, despite the industrial vibe at times, but yeah, with Collide and especially, Comatose, that's when they really hit their stride.
-
Savatage. Paul O'Neill really brought them to another level with Hall of the Mountain King.
-
Savatage. Paul O'Neill really brought them to another level with Hall of the Mountain King.
Not gonna argue with that, but there are so many kickass songs on those first three albums (Fight for the Rock indeed sucks).
-
Symphony X - Granted, Divine Wings is a decent album, but it still never gripped me the way V, The Odyssey, and Paradise Lost did.
I think I might agree with that. I've just been in the midst of a grand CD cull and the only one of the first four Symphony X albums I ended up hanging onto was Divine Wings and I definitely eyed that CD up with a degree of suspicion. With the rest I think I really only liked about one or two songs per album.
-
I'll jump in the bandwagon with Pink Floyd and Porcupine Tree. And I will mention Anathema in spite of the threats...
IQ is another band I would name. Their first 4 aren't bad but what comes after is waaay better.
-
That's cool. I just never liked "old-school thrash." Same reason I don't like Kill 'Em All, or earlier albums from other thrash bands that I otherwise think had some great later output (e.g. Flotsam & Jetsam and Testament). And that sound was Megadeth's wheelhouse for those first four. Just, for some reason, it really worked and clicked with me on Rust. Mid-'80s to early-'90s is when Thrash evolved to a point, and my tastes evolved to a point, where the two were compatible.
Fair to say that you like thrash influenced metal, more than thrash metal..?
Maybe. But I'm not sure specifically what you are referring to when you say "thrash influenced metal." If you are talking about modern metal bands that were influenced by, say, Metallica and others, like Dream Theater, Epica, and on and on, then yes. But can you elaborate?
Symphony X - Granted, Divine Wings is a decent album, but it still never gripped me the way V, The Odyssey, and Paradise Lost did.
Yes! GREAT call! For my tastes, this band may as well have had V be their debut. I pretty much ignore everything before.
-
I agree with Kev about Styx. The debut is almost completely forgettable. Lady was a minor hit twice, but Styx II also largely nondescript (although you can start to hear the "classic" Styx sound on a couple of songs). There's nothing remarkable about The Serpent is Rising (unless you find some entertainment value in Plexiglass Toilet). Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs, but Styx really didn't get its legs under it until Equinox.
There are some gems on those early albums:
Father O.S.A.
The Grove of Eglantine
Winner Take All
Best Thing
You Need Love
I'm Gonna Make You Feel It
Man of Miracles
Your list of songs encompasses at least three of the songs I was thinking about when I said that "you can start to hear the 'classic' Styx sound on a couple of songs" on Styx II and "Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs." A lot of it has to do with Wooden Nickel being a shitty record company, but there was really very little on those first four albums that foretold what was coming. The funny thing about it is that the only real change was swapping out Curulewski for Shaw. Maybe the real impetus was the band acting as its own producer, which is a rather remarkable thing for an otherwise relatively unknown band with virtually no solid track record signing onto a major label.
-
Your list of songs encompasses at least three of the songs I was thinking about when I said that "you can start to hear the 'classic' Styx sound on a couple of songs" on Styx II and "Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs." A lot of it has to do with Wooden Nickel being a shitty record company, but there was really very little on those first four albums that foretold what was coming. The funny thing about it is that the only real change was swapping out Curulewski for Shaw. Maybe the real impetus was the band acting as its own producer, which is a rather remarkable thing for an otherwise relatively unknown band with virtually no solid track record signing onto a major label.
I've always said that Styx would occasionally stick their feet into the prog pool during their heyday, but on those first four albums they were leaving them in a bit longer, and I do wonder if they had stayed on the most "artsy" path had those early albums done well, aside from Lady. Equinox, the last album with Curulewski, was a departure from those first four albums in several major ways, yet history now shows it as the first in their classic albums run.
-
I agree with Kev about Styx. The debut is almost completely forgettable. Lady was a minor hit twice, but Styx II also largely nondescript (although you can start to hear the "classic" Styx sound on a couple of songs). There's nothing remarkable about The Serpent is Rising (unless you find some entertainment value in Plexiglass Toilet). Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs, but Styx really didn't get its legs under it until Equinox.
There are some gems on those early albums:
Father O.S.A.
The Grove of Eglantine
Winner Take All
Best Thing
You Need Love
I'm Gonna Make You Feel It
Man of Miracles
Your list of songs encompasses at least three of the songs I was thinking about when I said that "you can start to hear the 'classic' Styx sound on a couple of songs" on Styx II and "Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs." A lot of it has to do with Wooden Nickel being a shitty record company, but there was really very little on those first four albums that foretold what was coming. The funny thing about it is that the only real change was swapping out Curulewski for Shaw. Maybe the real impetus was the band acting as its own producer, which is a rather remarkable thing for an otherwise relatively unknown band with virtually no solid track record signing onto a major label.
Well, Shaw is a beast, so I don't know if that's a minor change (I'm not a huge Styx fan, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).
Honest question, though: what did Wooden Nickel have to do with the music? Were they telling the band what they could and could not release? Again, honest question, not trying to be sarcastic here; I've already said, not much of a Styx fan.
-
I agree with Kev about Styx. The debut is almost completely forgettable. Lady was a minor hit twice, but Styx II also largely nondescript (although you can start to hear the "classic" Styx sound on a couple of songs). There's nothing remarkable about The Serpent is Rising (unless you find some entertainment value in Plexiglass Toilet). Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs, but Styx really didn't get its legs under it until Equinox.
There are some gems on those early albums:
Father O.S.A.
The Grove of Eglantine
Winner Take All
Best Thing
You Need Love
I'm Gonna Make You Feel It
Man of Miracles
Your list of songs encompasses at least three of the songs I was thinking about when I said that "you can start to hear the 'classic' Styx sound on a couple of songs" on Styx II and "Man of Miracles has a couple of good songs." A lot of it has to do with Wooden Nickel being a shitty record company, but there was really very little on those first four albums that foretold what was coming. The funny thing about it is that the only real change was swapping out Curulewski for Shaw. Maybe the real impetus was the band acting as its own producer, which is a rather remarkable thing for an otherwise relatively unknown band with virtually no solid track record signing onto a major label.
Well, Shaw is a beast, so I don't know if that's a minor change (I'm not a huge Styx fan, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).
Honest question, though: what did Wooden Nickel have to do with the music? Were they telling the band what they could and could not release? Again, honest question, not trying to be sarcastic here; I've already said, not much of a Styx fan.
In hindsight, Shaw coming on board was obviously huge since many of the band's best known and most highly regarded songs are his. At the time, it was no big deal, and Shaw was a last minute replacement for Curulewski. I'll have to try and dig up what I read about Wooden Nickel, but I recall having read disparaging comments about Wooden Nickel by DeYoung, Young and Shaw.
-
Savatage. Paul O'Neill really brought them to another level with Hall of the Mountain King.
Not gonna argue with that, but there are so many kickass songs on those first three albums (Fight for the Rock indeed sucks).
Well, the OP is about bands whose first four albums aren't THAT GREAT, so yeah, lots of kickass songs on those good albums. :D
-
I'd say Savatage's first four, middle four, and last four weren't that great. ;D
-
I'd say Savatage's first four, middle four, and last four weren't that great. ;D
I think you typed Saxon wrong.
-
Queensryche
(ok not really lol)
-
I'd say Savatage's first four, middle four, and last four weren't that great. ;D
I think you typed Saxon wrong.
I thought he meant "Slayer". My bad.
-
I'd say Savatage's first four, middle four, and last four weren't that great. ;D
I think you typed Saxon wrong.
I thought he meant "Slayer". My bad.
Potato ... potahto
-
Pantera.
Yup.
I agree with Styx as well.
-
As groundbreaking as they were, and even if you include their non LP 45s......The Beatles. Even if one does include their non LP 45s, just because of 'For Sale', one would have to include their first four offerings as 'not so great'.
Kind of an interesting division, depending on who one talks to, in regards to Journey. 'Next', their third LP, became quite a hit to many of us once the band hit it big. Those who love Steve Perry would consider their first two (or three) releases weak. Some people think those three offerings were their strongest. Hmmmm?
-
Compared to what came later, you probably could say the Beatles, but it feels odd to say them since those early album are loaded with so many pop classics.
I would throw XTC in as a band that fits this thread well. To me, they didn't hit their stride to their 4th album. I have little to no use for the first three. But albums 4 through 14 (counting The Dukes) are mostly money.
-
I'd say Savatage's first four, middle four, and last four weren't that great. ;D
I think you typed Saxon wrong.
Saxon >>> Savatage
-
Not actually sure if this is correct as I’ve never heard their first four albums but would Amorphis fit into this category? My collection only runs from Eclipse onwards and I have all their albums since but never got the impression that I need to go back and listen to their earlier stuff. Like I said though, I’ve never actually heard any of it so I could be very wrong!
-
Not actually sure if this is correct as I’ve never heard their first four albums but would Amorphis fit into this category?
No chance. Tales from the Thousand Lakes in particular is a melodeath classic, and Elegy is just as good as the Joutsen albums too.
-
The first four Tyrannosaurus Rex albums were so poor they had to change name to T-Rex.
The following four were all kinds of fabolous.
-
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.
Yup. Rush would fit this category too if 2112 wasn't so great.
-
I think Pink Floyd and Porcupine Tree jump to mind. There are some gems among those records but they are few.
-
Symphony X - Granted, Divine Wings is a decent album, but it still never gripped me the way V, The Odyssey, and Paradise Lost did.
Threshold - Psychedelicatessen was decent, and Clone was a good transition into the Mac era, but Damien’s delivery on Wounded Land and Extinct Instinct is just something I still can’t tolerate. It isn’t until we get to Hypothetical onward that each release is solid to stellar (except maybe For the Journey, but I enjoy even that one too).
I actually agree with these. I don't really like pre-Paradise Lost Symphony X (even V and The Odyssey), and Threshold... well, I like Psych, but it's not excellent, and everything else I've heard is just not that compelling. Dead Reckoning and Legends of the Shires, however, are fantastic.
-
Wow. This is the craziest thread I've read in a while.
Pink Floyd?
King Crimson?
Journey?
Rush?
Seriously?