Forum menu
Bands and the law o...
 

[Closed] Bands and the law of diminshing returns. Who's the worst offender?

Posts: 364
Full Member
 

ChristoGinger, guess DezB is getting at the fact that Californication was their 6th (I think) album?

They were never better than Blood Sugar anyway


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 2:41 pm
 FG
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Absolutely disagree with whoever mentioned the Foo's - their first three albums were good, with the odd great song on the rest of the output.

Agreed about Coldplay, but I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Kaiser Chiefs yet.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 3:01 pm
Posts: 12
Free Member
 

Editors - unmitigated, derivative sh*te. Any band that has the arrogance to have a front man "playing" a guitar which isn't plugged in deserves a f***ing good shoe-ing.

AC/DC - anything after Back in Black.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 3:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

@ourmaininthenorth

Any band that has the arrogance to have a front man "playing" a guitar which isn't plugged in

I've not heard that before - what's the deal?


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 3:10 pm
Posts: 45
Free Member
 

Er the Chilis (that's one l you know?!) have evolved pretty well over the years IMO though the last album ain't great and they were funkier in the early days - my fave track is probably Scar Tissue. I saw them in 1990 - most fun ever as still playing in smallish venues.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 3:11 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Wah! tried to get around this problem by re-naming themselves many times, but still never got near their 1st album.

Blimey, is that true re Editors? That's dead funny!


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 3:21 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana, Nirvana.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 3:52 pm
 will
Posts: 44
Free Member
 

Totally disagree about the Foos, Their latest album is brilliant!

Bloc Party...


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:00 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Five Star


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:11 pm
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

[i]Totally disagree about the Foos, Their latest album is brilliant![/i]

Totally disagree about Bloc Party, Their latest album is brilliant!


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:12 pm
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

[i]ChristoGinger, guess DezB is getting at the fact that Californication was their 6th (I think) album?

They were never better than Blood Sugar anyway
[/i]

Precisely. Last album of theirs I bought was Blood Sugar.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:14 pm
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

mastiles_fanylion, are you saying Nirvana were never as good as Bleach?
I reckon In Utero is better than Nevermind.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:17 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

mastiles_fanylion says Nirvana?
Bleach was good but better than Nevermind or In Utero??!! Not in my book. I actually think In Utero stands up (nearly) as well as Nevermind.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:20 pm
 -m-
Posts: 697
Free Member
 

Back on topic, Ash must be a contender!

No, Ash is a band whose 'peak' was so abysmally bad that it should never have seen the light of day; never mind the repeated, regurgitated dirge that followed.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:21 pm
Posts: 12
Free Member
 

Saw the Editors supporting Franz Ferdinand* at MEN Arena (Manchester) about 3 years ago.

Apart from the sheer tedium of their music, the front man was giving it full well playing the guitar as if he was a riffing god, but it was clear that no sound was emanating from it. It clearly wasn't a kit malfunction, as he gave the same strained expression every bl**dy song.

I think it was because Edith Bowman was in the crowd watching them (wasn't one of them seeing her or something at the time).

Was quite amusing, TBH. About as entertaining as they managed all set.

*FF are another contender for bands who started brightly and faded rapidly. First album, two or three good songs; thereafter, sh*te.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:22 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Nirvana? In Utero is a masterpiece - better than Bleach by a long way. Although I love Bleach and it has some amazing tracks. It's all subjective anyway....


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:28 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

TWP

George Best = Ace

Tommy (Collected early singles) = Ace

Bizarro = Super Ace

Seamonsters = Dark Ace

Ukrainski Vistupi V Johna Peela = er . . . no!

Hit parade = Ace in parts

Watusi = hmmm couple of Ace songs

Saturnalia = poor

Take Fountain = nearly Ace

El Rey = Ace in parts


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:38 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Oh dear. Epic fail. He's still getting it on with Bowman, they've just had a kid


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 4:50 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

REM, Coldplay, Eric Clapton too, although not a band ... should have given up long ago. 461 Ocean Boulevard ...awesome .... August, nononono


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 5:02 pm
Posts: 45
Free Member
 

They were never better than Blood Sugar anyway

Hmmm...I find that although there are some good tracks - such as I could have lied and give it away - I listen to it less than the others.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 35041
Full Member
 

Smashing Pumpkins.

If ever there was a band that had one good album in them...


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 5:57 pm
Posts: 5909
Free Member
 

Weezer. Well, kind of. Their debut album every track could have been a single, the follow up was equally fantastic in a different sort of way, and then they made three godawful records.

The new one is a step back up though.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 11:17 pm
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

Smashing Pumpkins? Which one then? Gish? Siamese Dream? or Mellon Collie?
All quality albums


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 11:31 pm
Posts: 6947
Full Member
 

Queens of the Stone Age were very very good for 3 albums, seem to be on a slow slide now. Their last two albums would be career peaks for 90% of bands, but they're not in the same street as their first one, Rated R, or songs for the deaf.

QOTSA seem to have a Bez effect going on - Josh Homme handles all the singing, songwriting, playing the instruments business. Nick covers the getting your johnson out on stage duties plus occasional bass fill in. But when Nick leaves they start going downhill.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 11:50 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

not so much dimishing returns.. but what about Metallica, patchy since the black album.

And why do bands when promoting new albums always say it's a return to form?


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 11:50 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

[i]Sex Pistols[/i]

eh?

they only [i]did[/i] one album!

The rest was rehashed rereleased single after single after single. Talk about Flogging A Dead Horse. They weren't wrong there.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 11:51 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

oh & black eyed peas.


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 11:54 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Smashing pumpkins? man... their first three albums were gold (gish, siamese dream and pisces iscariot) and they peaked with Melan collie for sure... so that's four great albums in a row!

How about Sonic Youth perhaps?


 
Posted : 28/01/2009 11:56 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

U2 - A sin wave that rose sharply, peeked higher than Everest at Joshua Tree and has been falling ever since with only a few brief spikes, latest stuff sounds utter B$%£cks.

Chillis - Flatliners !! end of.

Stones Roses, Editors, Maximo, Killers I agree with most of previous posts, that is an initial peek with first albums but then OH OH !!!

I have hopes for second helpings from Vampire Weekend, The Courteners and even The View...


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 12:34 am
 Mr_C
Posts: 10
Free Member
 

REM only fit in this category if your knowledge of their releases starts at Automatic for the People. Prior to this there were 6 fantastic albums, and I don't include Out of Time as this was where the downhill slide started. They managed to pull it back with Automatic but it's been an inexorable slide album wise ever since.

Stereophonics - there's a band who have never even come close to matching the songwriting on their first album. Word Gets Around is one of the few albums I still listen from start to finish, anything after that is utter carp.


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 2:57 am
Posts: 173
Free Member
 

+1 for U2. The Joshua Tree was stunning, lots of good stuff (and some pap) before, after? Achtung Baby was decent, not many highlights otherwise.


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 9:34 am
 hora
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Anyone mentioned Prince yet?

A-ha IMO actually improved the less commercial their work became. Very introspective.


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 10:23 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

The Dickies never surpassed the Incredible Shrinking Dickies album


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 10:56 am
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

[i]+1 for U2. The Joshua Tree was stunning, lots of good stuff (and some pap) before, after? Achtung Baby was decent, not many highlights otherwise.[/i]

The OP was asking about bands who never surpassed their DEBUT album.. Joshua Tree was the [i]5th[/i] album!

Stereophonics - good call. I can't believe I bought Word Gets Around when I hear them now.


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 11:07 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Don't agree with the person who said The Eels, their output since their debut has been quality.
Haven't heard albums by Kooks/ Razorlight/ Kaiser Chiefs/ Editors etc etc etc but what do you expect?! Landfill indie rubbish. They should release their possibly catchy first single then **** off from whence they came.


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 11:45 am
Posts: 173
Free Member
 

The OP was asking about bands who never surpassed their DEBUT album.. Joshua Tree was the 5th album!

Um, no. He wasn't. Did you even read the first post? He was talking about bands pumping out pap well past their peak.


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 6:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

votchy - Member
Agree with comments about [b]Pearl Jam[/b], Stone Roses, RATM. Other bands for nomination include Soul II Soul, [b]Alice in Chains [/b]

POSTED 1 DAY AGO #

For all the people saying Pearl Jam, have any of you actually listened to some of their recent albums? I think they've done some cracking stuff since vitalogy.

Alice in Chains? Seriously ? Although they didnt deliver as solid an overall "album feel" as facelift they did some brilliant work. One of the most under-appreciated bands ever imo.

binners - Member
Most bands seem to have a creative peak, normally the first album
Then they seem to go downhill fast with subsequent releases. Very few maintain a decent standard.

Who represents the worst case scenario here?

ourmaninthenorth - Member

AC/DC - anything after Back in Black.

Aye...just never mind the five immense albums before that and then the death of the lead singer 🙄
Also Razors Edge, Ballbreaker, and Stiff Upper Lip all have great tracks, even Black Ice does. But then again Im a fan so my opinion probably doesnt count.


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 7:10 pm
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

Yes, Stevo, I read it: [i]Most bands seem to have a creative peak, normally the first album[/i]
Did you?


 
Posted : 29/01/2009 10:45 pm
Posts: 33973
Full Member
 

King Crimson.


 
Posted : 30/01/2009 1:17 am
Posts: 460
Free Member
 

Yeah Stereophonics springs to mind - WGA is a grea album, up until Pull the Pin its been average at best
Oasis
One band who constantly improve are the Proclaimers ! 😀


 
Posted : 30/01/2009 4:02 am
 jwt
Posts: 284
Free Member
 

Not sure if it was the debut album, but 'Primal Scream' peaked with screamadelica.......................


 
Posted : 30/01/2009 9:43 am
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

They sure did, but it definitely wasn't!


 
Posted : 30/01/2009 10:06 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

King Crimson, damn, I havent heard of them for a while ... time to listen to 21st century schizoid man & not the April Wine follow on version either.


 
Posted : 30/01/2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 0
 

Someone mentioned Snow Patrol. I have to disagree there. Final Straw, their third album, was really their breakout, and the two subsequent albums have been great.

Coldplay: One of my favorites (not ashamed of it, either). X&Y had some great tracks, but the overall wasn't their best. Viva La Vida seems to have put them back on track.

As much as it pains me to say it, I'm not all that jazzed by Keane's new album. The previous two were great, and the sound seems to have completely changed on the new one. I'm not even sure who's singing on most of the tracks.

All just my opinion, of course.


 
Posted : 30/01/2009 5:47 pm
Posts: 13
Free Member
 

Funny, listened to screamadelica today on the ipod at work.

To be fair the OP did say, a creative peak [i]normally[/i] the first album, so the joshua tree comments do stand.

The Second Coming is under-rated IMO, it's just that The Stone Roses, like Psychocandy, was just so sublime that it was always going to be a hard act to follow. And it has to be said it wasn't the Roses first attempt at a first album (I Wanna be Adored and This is the One had been previously recorded with another label)If any other band had made the Second Coming it would, rightly, be hailed as a classic.
Given the frequent early '90's nostalgia on here surprised not to see The Eight Legged Groove Machine or Liquidiser mentioned. Both fine first albums wich subsequent offerings failed to build on.

Perhaps a more difficult question would be, are there any bands who consistently put out albums as good as the last (Goldfrapp maybe?)

Oasis, Coldplay, manic street preachers and many more deserve their own thread entitled "Bands that constantly churn out the same old cr@p (but still sell by the shedload)" 😉


 
Posted : 30/01/2009 7:21 pm
Page 2 / 3