@@chrismcgovern1647 It’s hard to pin point, but yeah, that was about the time. Unfortunately, Do You Think I’m Sexy wasn’t his worst, it got worse than that. But Every Picture Tells A Story was a great album, and his stuff with the Faces was great. That early stuff is sadly overlooked.
He used to be nick named Rockin Rod. I saw him live in the early 80’s. Even though his records had started sucking, his live concert was great. Lots of guitar, lots of rock and roll. He ran around kicking soccer balls all over the place. He was great even then.
I still think that Every Picture Tells a Story is one of the great albums of all time. Never A Dull Moment was decent too. I mean Rod was a serious contender back then. I wish he would have carried on with that rock/folk/blues style. In a way, I don't blame him. He loves the rock and roll lifestyle, the excess, the success. Who wouldn't? He's still a great singer and personality having said that.
@@TastesLikeMusic No Line On The Horizon was good but also disappointing overall. I think the main reason was putting their album on everyone's phone, plus Songs Of Experience was the last one I bought as I didn't care for it.
To follow up on Kram’s theme of Bands that “Disappeared”… Between 1990 and 1997, The Sundays released three phenomenal 5 star albums and then quit. 😞 Harriet Wheeler, Where are you?
I would just say any 2000s band that started out using real instruments for the most part and progressively got more electro dance pop-y like Coldplay, Maroon 5, Fall Out Boy, Panic at the Disco, Thirty Seconds to Mars, etc etc. In summary, basically every band that started out with a rock and/or pop punk sound and lost it completely over time.
Good calls here. I'm surprised Kings of Leon didn't get a mention. I was so excited by their debut and then Aha Shake Heartbreak seemed to solidify the promise - loved that too, and despite the over-production of Only by the Night, it still had bangers and passion, but after that, the slide downward was brutal. I used to have this idea that a lot of rock bands turned bad the moment they turn into U2, which agrees with what Kramzer was saying about Coldplay (and I love U2s early albums up to and including Achtung Baby (although not Rattle and Hum). Also, re Kings of Leon, my remarks do come with a deal of sympathy for the personal tragedies and crises the band had to overcome re addiction issues. So my criticism is meant with good grace. Cheers from Blighty. :)
Smashing Pumpkins. After Mellon Collie (Adore is alright, but without their drummer it sounds like a different band), Corgan never really recaptured the magic.
I would argue Machina was the last great piece, it took me years to fully appreciate - i think Billy can still write the heck out of a song, a big issue is production and lack of the iconic tone
Like you, Kram, I'm going w/U2. They're my 3rd favorite band of all time. They used to be my 2nd until recently. I loved The Joshua Tree then was blown away by Achtung Baby. I love The Unforgettable Fire and War. Past Achtung Baby, I liked Zooropa but was slightly disappointed w/Pop. Then, things went downhill w/All You Can't Leave Behind. What a boring album!! Then, I gave them another chance w/How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb. I liked that one a lot but, they messed-up again w/No Line on the Horizon. I was done after that. Like you, I could care less about the next U2 album. I'm done!!! As far as their concerts go, I caught Zoo TV. in 1992 and spent $30 for a ticket. The night of the show, I waited three hours for them to get their butts on stage while mine was freezing, on a cold October night, at Arrowhead Stadium. A lot of the fans were pissed, and we booed everyone who wasn't U2 that came onstage! I'm not kidding!!! The show was alright. I saw INXS in 1988 and 1994 for less and they were 10xs better!! I'm not kidding!!! I saw U2 again in 1997 because one of my housemates had an extra ticket. That was $60 and it was worse than the first show. The good news is I didn't freeze my ass off!! Oh, and I saw INXS a month later at home for less and again, they were cheaper and better!!!!!!!!! So, no more U2 concerts after that one!!!!
Bjork. It seems she's lost all interest in catchy hooks or memorable songs. Homogenic and Vespertine are masterpieces. I would rate Vespertine higher than Kid A any day. Think I liked 2 songs on Medulla, gave up after Biophilia. All the melodies sound the same to me.
@TastesLikeMusic. I do agree with some opinions. Although… I’m a very forgivable fan of Coldplay. Of course..their first 4 albums are amazing. I also like Ghost Stories and Everyday Life. Even though Music Of The Spheres is my least fav, at the very least of Coldplay, I think it’s an ‘ok’ effort. Weezer’s also one I think of. I like Blue ➡️ Maladroit. Those are classics. I also don’t mind Red Album, however, I’m not a huge defender. I think the only ones that really hurt are Ratitude, Pacific Daydream and Teal Album (just covers). Those records, I don’t like a single one. I still don’t like Make Believe, although I like at least a couple of songs. I do agree with Kings Of Leon. Personally their first record, Aha Shake Heartbreak, Only By The Night and Come Around Sundown are all great. Because Of The Times isn’t my fav, but this would be after those 4 albums, if I was ranking. Good vid, dudes 👍🤘
Oh, got a couple… Korn (after Follow The Leader) System Of A Down (after Toxicity) The Black Keys (after Brothers) Radiohead (after OK Computer), okay, kill me…
Bands or artists that disappointed me; 1. Morrissey - I love Morrissey and all his late 80s / 90s stuff was great. But after his promising comeback (You are the Quarry), things went sharply downhill. I feel he's recently making a bit of a return in terms of quality but it was really rough for a good decade. 2. Biffy Clyro - The first 6 albums ranged from amazing to good. But after that everything became bland crap. 3. R.E.M 1983 to 1992 R.I.P - I could say more but you know how it went. 4. Editors - First four albums hung on to post-punk promise by their fingertips before falling onto the jagged rocks of awfulness. 5. The Twilight Sad - An underground act that always seemed like they could do something great. Finally they made that a realization back in 2014 with the phenomenonal 'Nobody Wants to be Here and Nobody Wants to Leave'. But their follow up 'It Won't be this Way All The Time' suffered from increased expectation after gaining a lot of accolades and attention. Unfortunately the album turned out to be uniformly bland crap.
@Apathy&Exhaustion With the exception of Monster, I really hate the R.E.M albums you just mentioned. Especially Up. There's a special place in hell reserved for that one. Lol
@@shoogerkane dang that’s a hot opinion. Green and Automatic are top tier records imo which also seems to be a consensus with many casual and hardcore REM fans. Agree though Monster and New Adventures are not good though Up is very underrated.
@@tokyochuchu there are a lot of standalone good songs on Up just not enough tone variation to make it a goid album. Daysleeper, falls to climb, walk unafraid are up there with their best and at my most beautiful, diminished and parakeet not far off.
You gentleman are a lot younger than I am so I don't really know anything about some of the bands you mentioned EMO? I would definitely put both Nine Inch Nails and The Cure in the category of "Bands that went in disappointing directions. On "Fragile" it sounded like Reznor just kind of went ahead and released what he had been working on after the "Downward Spiral" because he didn't have any other choice. Clearly he was directionless, and mired in a lot of personal excesses over the years that did not translate into any worthwhile musical output. However, to Trent Reznor's credit he did have a good second run after the failure of "Fragile" with the albums "With Teeth", "Year Zero", and some parts of "The Slip' before sinking totally into the abyss hinted at on "Ghosts." The Cure really have nothing worth mentioning after "Disintegration" other than a couple of remix double albums. As far as "Wish" I might want to give the 2-lp set version a try, but there's certainly no rush.
I am going to make myself unpopular, right off…. I argue Radiohead. They are talented as hell, I am not saying that they are not. The first album is great, and man, The Bends is revelatory, completely perfect, in every way. I know that was part of their trajectory, and they didn’t really lose any steps, but it has always been curious to me, how they captured so much, after that, in the public eye. OK Computer is good. It is. But to me, it’s one of those albums that’s really impressive when you first hear it, and then you kind of just don’t really want to listen to it again, not because it’s bad, to the contrary, just it is not grabbing…. If I went to a party, or something social, I would not want to hear that, or anything after that, by them, for that matter. The music is challenging, and that’s cool, but it doesn’t make me want to challenge anything. KID A, I think is a better record, and I get why people like that one so much. That is the one, to me, that’s like the perfect balance of what they were and what they became…. Other than the novelty of the pricing, etc…. After that, they’re all kind of interchangeable after that for me. The one that really sticks out is In Rainbows, because of the pricing, and that whole thing…. The record itself though, was forgettable at best…. That first Thom Yorke solo album was pretty good, I think it is the best thing to come out of that post KID A batch. It’s short and sharp… the others honestly, I think they start to fall too far, too fast, into the rock for people who don’t really like rock, category… I don’t know, I guess I am simple….
Franz Ferdinand for me. I loved their first album so much and with every successive release it just went downhill. I didn't hate their subsequent albums but they weren't even in the same universe as their debut.
Yes, a classic example of a band unable to leave their debut album behind. What did it for me was a gig at the Barrowlands in Glasgow when they toured to promote either the second or third album. Most of the set was from the first album. I have rarely been so disappointed in a band being so trapped in audience expectations. Rarely listed to them since and would never go to see them play again.
I disagree a bit here. Thought their second album was great (AOTY 2005). For me the disappointment was Right Thoughts . . but the latest was a fine return to form.
@@NaughtyVampireGod I liked the second album but not nearly as much as the debut. I liked the third one, Tonight, as well. I thought Right Thoughts was okay, but after Nick McCarthy left I kind of abandoned them. I heard Always Ascending but wasn't impressed. I'll have to go back and give it another listen, though. Sometimes after I've been away from an album a while I go back and listen to it again and I'll actually like it.
Aerosmith. From being one of Americas classic rock bands of the 70's to becoming the world sensation in the 80's. I don't mind that but later on they didn't return to the classic stuff and they tried to keep being relevant.. But for who? The 70's fans didn't care. The 80's fans didn't care.. Would the hiphop/post grunge crowd care? So what is Nine Lives, Just Push Play and Music From Another Dimension! about? Who exactly are the records directed against? I don't hate the albums and there are some decent songs on them but overall... Just too over-produced, long and pointless attempts of being relevant. Def Leppard. One of the biggest acts of the 80's who decided do to anything but their peers and so much is just forgettable. I don't hate it.. I don't feel anything really about 90 % of what they did after Hysteria. Some minor gems perhaps but overall a band that lives on their live-acts and biggest selling albums over 30 years ago. AC/DC. Changing by not changing. I understand that the concept for the band is to make something that will please the fans but really.. How many fans sit and listen to all their albums? I'm guessing that 98 % of everyone with their entire catalog has several albums they haven't played for years and years. At some point I would have liked them to branch out. Just a little bit. Making some of the albums more memorable. I mean.. The difference between Let There Be Rock and Highway to Hell is rather big. Why not try something similar later on as well?
I agree with your comments on Aerosmith. Man, "Music from Another Dimension" is BORING and totally forgettable...... Come on 'smith....get back to where you once belonged.....Def Leppard kind of started to lose it after the 3rd album.....in fact, they REALLY changed after the 2nd album (which was GREAT by the way).
Def Leppard I absolutely love, but yeah after Hysteria very hit or miss. Pyromania, Hysteria, High n Dry, On Through the Night, awesome. Their 2015 album was pretty decent I felt as well. Aerosmith really needs to get a producer like Brendan O'Brien who actually grew up listening to 70s Aerosmith and who can get them back into shape and have them sounding like Toys in the Attic/Rocks. They need someone to hunker down and make them focus on being a sleazy, dirty, raunchy bluesey hard rock band that has borderline proto-metal influences without the cheesy power ballads. One ballad is fine as a concession. Because Steven Tyler can still sing very well so they have enough in the tank for one more classic album. Or at least an album that's not embarrassing. AC/DC - I mean they've become a singles band after Back in Black. The general public seems to not care that they change so I guess they have no incentive.
As atrocious as later Coldplay is, I don't understand being so disappointed that a mediocre band just started to suck more as time went by. Their first two records are pleasant, tuneful and consistent but we're not talking about anything close to mind-blowing here...
I think the disappointment is aggravated by their enormous popularity. They set out to be in the category of REM (ok, that's generous) and ended up between somewhere between Ed Sheeran and Richard Clayderman. And they became the most popular band in the world.
@@Captain_Rhodes I do think their two most recent albums Walk Between Worlds and Big Music have good songs. I do think their covers album Neon Lights is actually quite good. The rest, not so much. I like Real Life too and pretty much everything before that.
@@179rich real life is quite enjoyable but I think they are a band whos best work was all made before they became well known. A lot of bands drop off in quality but the public often knows what the good stuff is like. In the case of simple minds they are almost unknown in their peak years, especially these days. Anyway ill have a listen to the recent stuff. Real life was the first one I heard when it came out so I have a soft spot for that one ;-)
Genesis, Mike Oldfield, U2, Liz Phair... and more recently, Sleater-Kinney, Arcade Fire, Sharon Van Etten, Margaret Glaspy (good call Jason. Me too, I am hoping that that third album will get her back on the right track)
The Mars Volta for me was the big heart breaker. Their Tremulant EP was very good, followed by two truly great albums, the first in my top five: Deloused and Frances the Mute. But then they lost control of their editor, lost Jon Theodore the drummer, added way too many extra sounds beyond the core group, and went ham on the vocal layerings. They went from dark and heavy to uber-proggy. They could take what should be a terrific track - like Viscera Eyes or Goliath - and just kind of overdo it all instead of keeping it to the bones. I sometimes just wish they had stayed with Rick Rubin. He tried to simplify what they did, and it ended up as Deloused, one of the best records ever made.
There are tons of bands that go in a dissapointing direction or become lacklustre, but I feel that it is very common for a band to go that way, especially over a long period of time. There are very few bands that can keep it at a high level all the time. But to name a few in general, smashing pumpkins (i guess it was hard to follow up a classic in melloncollie and the infinite sadness), Kings of Leon (had a unique sound that slowly morphed into bland alt rock and semi U2isms), Morrissey (he lost his lyrical wit amongst other things), R.E.M (played it safe at the end), Oasis (steered towards a more rockier, more boring sound) Green Day (became the thing that they did not set out to become, with playing it safe and becoming too poppy and mainstream - feel the same happened to Offspring).
Modest Mouse. Their last 2 albums are really disappointing, I think Long Drive and Lonesome Crowded are 5 stars albums, The Moon and Antartica's songwriting is really good too; really disappointing they lost their energy and Spirit, ever since their 3rd album it al goes on a Downward Spiral
I'd say Green Day fits this bill. Their first 4 albums were amazing and even tho I love American Idiot, it was a sign of them selling out to corporatism and becoming too political. Everything after American Idiot (minus a few songs) is really just garbage.
From Kerplunk to American Idiot, Green Day had such a winning streak. A legitimate punk band with strong pop influences that unfournately spawned a whole lotta crap in the 2000s. Then after that, I have no idea what the fuck happened but the band just became total dogshit. I get the vibe that Billie and the rest of the guys kinda stopped wanting to be a punk band and more of a traditional rock band but they can't really break out of the pop punk sound since their fans expect them to be a pop punk band forever. Like you said, some good songs here and there, but never a good album. 21st Century Breakdown is meh, the trilogy is terrible, Revolution Radio is just tired and formulaic. I'll give ...Father of All credit in that they sound actually excited to do the album and the 70s glam rock/power pop influences are interesting but it doesn't work as a whole and the marketing of the album gave off major boomer vibes.
Bowie being so lame in the 80's after the amazing streak from Hunky Dory through the Berlin Trilogy and Scary Monsters was such a drag. The Beatles pushing aside their brilliant producer George Martin to musically strip down for Let it Be was a wrong turn - what a rebound though. It's probably not easy being a rock star - fans expect change - just not too much.
Not sure if this counts, but I remember hating that Elvis Costello and Joe Jackson weren't still playing the edgy pop music they were known for in the late 70s and I was bored with them for similar reasons, but my feelings about their more mature sounding catalogs have changed over the years.
Genesis was doing alright when Steve Hackett left, but when Phil brought in Pop, it went to Crap. Other Bands that went to wrong direction ZZ Top (But Rythmeen brought it back) Steve Miller Band (Circle of Love isn't that Bad) Scorpions (I love Crazy World though) Yes (But Union kinda brought it back) Def Leppard (Adrenalize is Great) Supertramp (I'm talking about after Brother where You Bound) The Doobie Brothers The Doors Grateful Dead (The last 3 Studio Albums) Queen (After A Day at the Races) Queensryche (After Empire, but the Todd Era is Amazing) And, who could forget- Emerson, Lake, and Palmer Why? Just Why for Love Beach?
I think there's a distinction between an artist that goes in an undesirable direction and one that simply runs out of gas and has nothing left to offer. Some writers have only one book in them and some bands have only one album.
Queen is king o this sh!t Hot Space took me decades to get past before I even realized that they bounced back to put out much better material post Hod spice
Part of Whitney Houston's sad story is the incredibly high bar she set with that amazing first album. After that, everything had to be a disappointment. A good case could be made for Rod Stewart going downhill after the Every Picture Tells a Story album, although he made a lot of entertaining music in the 1970s. But really, no one can sustain greatness forever. Over the last 50 years, I've watched the arcs of many careers, and always thankful when someone makes a comeback, but I try to manage my expectations.
I thought the same thing about Whitney when black Twitter went on that crazy debate on who the queen of pop music is ( Janet or madonna). A lot of folks realized that her career (while it was good), didn't really reach that far. It seems like a lot of contemporaries surpassed her.
I don't mind artists making a left turn. They don't own me anything, and sometimes it even works for the better. But there are of course many acts that I love that develop into earache. My least favorite left turns has to be ROD STEWART, DEF LEPPARD, CHICAGO, GENESIS, NEIL YOUNG (in the 80s).
Good points. My 2 cents would be that any artist who takes chances and tries new things will eventually go in a direction you're not thrilled with. I still prefer those kinds of artists to the ones who regurgitate the same thing over and over again, cookie-cutter style.
Just listening to Nothing’s gonna stop us now by Starship… nuff said But the real winner is Chicago. Even though I do like their later work. Their first decade was just so sublime and they did change direction and sound not just became less good.
This video cracks me up. I agree with you guys on a lot with a lot of the bands you guys talked about. I’ll check out some of your artist's picks. Also,I'm a big fan of these artists which is what disappoints me a little bit haha.
Janet Jackson’, Jay Z, U2, Aerosmith, and Weezer, have been disappointing. I was a big fan of their earlier music but their new stuff doesn’t sound as good. Also, the Aracade fire sort of fell off. That our lady peace reference took me back lol.
So many of my favorite bands have a ‘Bell curve’: They have some solid (but not necessarily top) early stuff like EPs/singles and debut albums, then peak after their first few albums, then fall from there. Examples: -Depeche Mode. Although I like Ultra, by and large the albums before Alan Wilder joined, and the albums after he left, weren’t nearly as good as the stuff he was there for. -REM. Some ‘decent’ early stuff, but they really hit their stride with Document, Green, ( not so much Out of Time) and Automatic for the People. Monster started the downward slide. -U2. Already discussed quite a bit here. I don’t *hate* any album (they are my favorite band, overall). But their last 2 albums only reach C tier for me, whereas October, War, Unforgettable Fire, The Joshua Tree and Actung Baby are all S tier for me. Pop was one of my most disappointing albums of all time-not that i think it sucks--only disappointing. -Toad the Wet Sprocket. Their first two albums (Bread & Circus and Pale) are solid early entries, but they absolutely knocked it out of the park with ‘Fear’ and ‘Dulcinea’. However, their comeback stuff--including their new album, are fairly uninteresting, which I find disappointing. -Weezer. I actually like the ‘Red’ album, but most of their stuff the past 2 decades has been ‘quantity over quality’ unfortunately. Pearl Jam and Coldplay don’t really follow the ‘bell curve’ as I consider their first two albums to be their best ones, and then a (mostly) taper with some exception; I really like No Code and Viva La Vida. Coldplay fell much farther than Pearl Jam, tho, so I don’t consider them to have gone in a ‘disappointing direction’ more just their songs are not quite as awesome as the earlier stuff. The Samples are another band like this--first two albums are awesome, then big taper. Band of Horses I consider a one-and-done.
I'm not sure if U2 can ever come back after three such disappointing albums. It didn't help that they were so many years apart as well. How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb was the last one that I really liked, and it was 17 years ago. Sad!
I'm glad you said How to Dismantle a Atom Bomb as a "liked" album. That is strange story with me, i loathed that album for soooo long, primary because of the sound of Vertigo, but years later revisiting it, then revisiting it again, it REALLY grew on me in a major way, there are some fantastic songs on there that i listen to quite frequently. I think HTDAAB is the last album where U2 felt connected to the music (firing on all cylinders), it's the last album without a gimmick, or the "guess we need to make a album, right" type vibe
REM. Anything after Monster I couldn’t get into, and I started listening to them with Fables, saw them live in the 80’s, and bought every album the week of release until the early 2000s. .
Can’t help but feeling a bit cynical about The Edge being mentioned about his appeareance in It Might Get Loud… In defense of The Edge, when was the last time Jimmy Page released something worthwhile? Just an opinion, guys. Keep up the good work! 👍
Jimmy sure as hell didn't care as he never struck me as an elitist. They didn't go there to watch each other play solos. The edge gets a ton of flak because of all of the effects and pedals such. I appreciate what he's done. Page is my favorite guitarist from a composition point of view, but the dude was sloppy as hell live even when he wasn't drugged up.
I am wondering if there are that many acts, who have released at least 8 albums, whose albums are generally considered to be better in the second half of their discography than the first? I have said 8 because quite a few acts take 3 or 4 albums to hit their stride, so the last 3 of a total of 6 would probably be better.
I'd argue the second half of The Beatles career is better than the first half. But it's a rare thing, for sure. There are quite a few bands whose first 6-to-8 albums are all great- but getting into double digit territory seems to be prohibitively difficult.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 don't know if I'd rank the Beatles albums before Help or Rubber Soul as albums since at the time albums weren't really considered as a singular work of art so much as a collection of songs. If you grant me that caveat (you don't have to, of course) then the question of front half versus the back half becomes quite interesting.
@@edgustafson Fleetwood Mac makes me wonder if bands with with big lineup changes should even be eligible for this discussion. If we're being honest, Buckingham-Nicks era Mac is a completely different band than Peter Green era Mac. (Btw, I think Then Play On is fantastic and gives Rumours a run for its money.)
I could not agree more about Our Lady Peace, Joe! They were such a big deal here in Canada in the 90s. The singles off Clumsy especially were inescapable and I loved them so much. I still have a lot of love for that album and Naveed as well. But at some point they just got sooooo bad. So very disappointing. Definitely agree about Live too. Forgot all about them but they used to be so good too.
My family had a lake house in Canada where my grandma was born / raised so I spent a fair amount of time up there. Must be where I picked up the OLP love. - Joe
@@bengalgangster Oh definitely, I agree lots of great Canadian bands in the 70s and 80s too. I am CD and record collector and one thing I love collecting is forgotten Canadian bands (as long as I like the music of course - it's not all good).
Barenaked Ladies is the big one for me. From 1988 to 2003, they put out pure alternative gold. Some cracks appeared on Everything to Everyone, they put out a horrendous stream of themed albums and the final blow came with Steven leaving the band. The four piece BNL is just...wow. I hate it. From my favorite band to unlistenable.
Here’s a deep cut answer. Scott Walker started off the 60s with some incredible psych-pop crooner albums. But as he got more experimental in the following decades, his music became very challenging and difficult to listen to. I respect what he was going for and for doing something different, but most of his 90s and beyond albums are just way too much for me.
Kings of Leon (post-Because of the Times), Gomez (post-In Our Gun), The Offspring (Americana and onward). Conversely, best direction changers: Beck, Tom Waits, David Bowie (consistently); Arctic Monkeys (Tranquility).
Brit pop had a year of the bad follow up albums when a lot of leaders of the movement discovered cocaine but it cost them in ceativitivity - the most well known example is Oasis's Be Here Now album but the one that hurt the most is Pulp's This Is Hardcore, Garbage's second album is a major step down from the first, lesser known example were Kenekie's second album. Another example Faith No More's last record wasn't great - they finally got a band where they all got along but at the expense of their creativity.
Used to love Our Lady Peace! I actually didn’t mind Gravity, but it definitely was not the same sound anymore with the departure of guitarist Mike Turner. Oh well…
@@garrettredd2541 Spiritual Machines was probably their peak, their attempt at a Radiohead-ish concept album. In no way am I saying it’s as good as OK Computer, but the similarities are there. Raine’s voice is not for everyone, I get it. But for a few albums there I thought they were quite good and a little left of the already left of center…
@@garrettredd2541 Clumsy is a popular one, and solid from start to finish. I love all of their first four albums, and would just listen to them in order: - Naveed - Clumsy - Happiness... - Spiritual Machines
I know they were never very good, but Imagine Dragons. When I first heard "Radioactive" on the radio, I thought this could be a legitimately interesting new direction for radio friendly rock music that might help bring rock back into the spotlight. I thought "It's Time" and "Demons" were pretty great too. I bought the album and already had my hopes dashed, as nothing on that album outisde of the singles is interesting, but at least none of it is a crime against humanity. And so they've gone from "hmm" to "one of the worst offenses to music ever" with their recent stuff, which really should have been in your "Badness" tournament. They got my hopes up for a split second and since then have been relentlessly punishing me for ever even having had that thought.
I think a better question might be who DIDN'T go into a disappointing direction. Pretty much all of my favorite artists/bands are former shells of themselves. Rush, the Beatles, Bowie, Tom Petty, Radiohead - they had careers that didn't disappoint me. I'll even give Led Zeppelin "In Through The Out Door" because half of that album is excellent...I'm having a hard time figuring out who else DIDN'T disappoint. But a ton of my favorite bands either diminished or disappointed: The Who, U2, REM, Pink Floyd, Elvis Costello and Genesis are my favorite bands who disappointed. (That said, I watched footage of the Who performing at the 9-11 concert last night and that was one of the greatest live performances I've ever watched. They still have the live chops.)
@@threestringsomg I fully agree with your assessment of A Moon Shaped Pool. Wasn't a big fan of The King of Limbs, but pretty much everything else they've ever done has been pretty great. Some better than others. A Moon Shaped Pool is upper echelon, even for them.
Nah, I’m in the “Radiohead went the wrong direction” pool. I really liked The Bends and they peaked OK Computer, Kid A gets props for experimentation. I still really liked ‘In Rainbows’ but I my mind their newer stuff is not nearly as good as the stuff from 1995-2000.
@@mrp4242 I'm in that camp as well. That doesn't mean Radiohead's albums post Kid A are necessarily bad- they're not, for the most part. They're just not nearly as good as their '90s stuff. In Rainbows is probably the best of them but even that one's a little overrated in the grand scheme of things.
@@chrisdelisle3954 absolutely....it's a psychedelic masterpiece....and the final track is for me their best ever last track on any album. I end listening to Moonshaped with a little tear of appreciation....😢😂 A beauty...
I love U2 and I've long been clamoring for a countdown from you guys (in spite of Jason's hatred of them). I guess I should brace myself for what Kramzer will say when you guys cover their discography. He REALLY doesn't like post-Achtung U2. Never again would they have a whole-better-than-the-sum-of-its-parts album, but they have had some wonderful songs. All That You Can't Leave Behind and How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb were comprised of many great tracks (to me). I know you don't want to do all of the big, legacy bands all at once ... but I do hope you guys get to U2 in December. I can't wait to hear it.
Zooropa and Pop are not classic albums but I think they do deserve points for being experimental. It's really only after Pop that U2's albums start to get a little boring.
I love Pop, but it was the first album of theirs to have bad material (well, one song in particular). When All That You Can't Leave Behind came out, for the first time I was quite disappointed with a U2 album. I even sold my CD copy to a friend. But I think they redeemed themselves with No Line on the Horizon.
@@TastesLikeMusic first of all, “spoiler” warning indicates to me you have a U2 countdown on the horizon. 🤞 Secondly, I wondered whether more listens would mean you’d start to like the album cuts on Achtung a bit more. I know you like the singles, Joe. I guess this answers my question. Thanks for the reply. Love the content you guys provide.
Sadly, some of my favorite artists of all time fall into this category big time lol: U2- everything after Pop is pretty much U2 on autopilot. Pop wasn't good but it was interesting and after it bombed they never took any artistic risks ever again R.E.M.- their post-2000 discography falls on the bland side for me The Rolling Stones- starting with 'It's Only Rock and Roll' their albums become extremely hit or miss but there's still some great songs occasionally. Tattoo You is the last really great Stones album for me, everything after that isn't terrible, but a bit generic for them Can- the second half of their discography is extremely disappointing compared to how unique and creative their first few albums are. Mid to late 70s Can albums have sloppily reused song ideas from earlier albums and no interesting frontperson to distinguish themselves The Byrds- honestly McGuinn should have gone solo after Dr. Byrds and Mr. Hyde. I like Chestnut Mare but the quality of some of the songs and performances on their final albums are sometimes appalling for a major label band The Kinks- they transitioned into the 70s and 80s better than most other 60s bands but I miss the range of musical influences and songwriting in their 60s material compared to the hard rock sound they went for. Not really a fan of 70s-80s Kinks albums but there are still a lot of great songs in them Arcade Fire- I agree with Kramzer Vampire Weekend- Really liked the debut when I first heard but I've enjoyed each subsequent release less and less. It also doesn't help that their overall aesthetic has aged poorly for me and I've found myself not really interested in them that much these days The Who- they lost me after Quadrophenia and even then I liked the movie better Pixies- Love the first 2 albums, the next 2 are good, and the reunion ones are meh. Frank Black's solo albums are more interesting to me and i'd rather listen to those most of the time
mostly agree. i like all Pixies albums though. never liked Vampire weekend - too light for my taste. The kinks 70s output is great!. Arcade Fire's debut is righteous, but nothing since. same thoutghts regarding The who.
Agree about Pop. They were GOING FOR IT. After that it wasn't the same. Despite some flaws I do like Pop and greatly prefer it to ATYCLB. And with The Stones I feel like Undercover is kind of their Pop. It's interesting and staves off the generic.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 I love Monster, though I was lukewarm on it at the time. Now, it's one of my favorite R.E.M. albums -- I think I had it at #2 on the R.E.M. Listography episode, and I stand by it.
Paul McCartney: Mac1 had its charm, Ram & Wild Life had some moments, but for the exception of 3 or 4 songs from Band On the Run, the rest of the catalog had too many misses. Silly Love Song & My Love miss the barn by a mile.
I have always liked My Love. Silly Love Songs is kinda cute and a bit cheesy. It's a feel good song. For that kind of tune, it's kind of long. Around 6 minutes. Like, enough already, at the three minute mark. And it keeps going and going. My Love though, jeez, I always thought it was a tender homage to Linda. It's a good Paul song. It would have made a great Beatles track. For contrast in Paul's writing style, Admiral Halsey would have too. Cheers.
I think after 1982/3, mccartney's albums haven't been that great. But he's still capable of making good catchy numbers - great numbers on Flowers in the Dirt, driving rain, chaos and creation.
JJ&K will disagree but for me Rush mid-80s onwards. That definitely is a change of direction for a band (although it still worked stunningly on Signals) - around Power Windows they start getting barely listenable to me. A couple of albums killed by the 80s production, and then the ability to actually write memorable songs with actual melodies completely dies.
Simple Minds peaked with New Gold Dream. I was into them around the time of Sparkle in the Rain and Once Upon a Time as I was in my mid teens. After then, nothing, but I still listen to stuff from Real to Real Cacophony to NGD. Smashing Pumpkins' debut was good and I bought Siamese Dream but that was it.
It hurts me to say it but when I want to hear some Tom Petty, I don’t play Mojo or Hypnotic Eye. Also, does anyone listen to any Boston album after the first two?
I like Third Stage a lot. Don’t get yourself too hot, don’t get yourself too high, if we don’t take it easy we can kiss it all good bye. Cool the engines. Poetry man, poetry. 😜
I'm a little surprised that Dylan wasn't mention nor has his name come up much in the Comments. This guy has had so many 'left turns', it's a wonder he didn't screw himself into the ground. That said, a lot of his fans either forgave or caught up so it wasn't exactly as if too many hearts were broken. Maybe his fan base is used to it by now. However, I think his multi-album foray into the Great American Songbook was as weird as Rod the Mod's. What a time to be tackling these classics, when your voice has collapsed! I'd also mention Dylan's 'Christian' phase as a lot of his lyrics turned trite and/or offensive. On the other hand, "Every Grain of Sand" came out of that time so it wasn't a complete lost period. Dylan's '80s albums are a tough listen but not necessarily a 'left turn'.
He has his minor albums and his major albums. I don't bother with his minor albums much. Fortunately though he's recorded a ****-load of minor albums he's still doing the majors as well. I absolutely adore Rough and Rowdy Ways, I think it stands amongst his best.
I have been a longtime fan of My Morning Jacket, but i admit somewhere around Circuital they kinda fell slightly, Evil Urges certainly leaned into a different direction but i actually like that album quite a bit, but they took all the weird elements to that album and kind of just kept going in those directions. Also, James' voice altered somehow .... his singing on everything has been i don't know, just different, i have a lot of trouble connecting now, GREAT band, but there's just been something altered about their sound - maybe James' solo outings changed something about his song development within the band, who knows
Yeah it rarely goes the other way does it? Nothing will defeat you as easily as success. I think Sick Boy's unifying theory of everything from Trainspotting might actually be a natural law.
Every band has a dip....I like Everything Now. It's an 8/10 for me and Reflector is about 8.5/10 but it is a dip of sorts. No way are those two 3 star albums K...🧐
Sturgill Simpson is the one that immediately came to mind. Jason's thoughts are pretty much dead on with my disappointment. Leon Bridges is another one. His debut "Coming Home" and its throwback old school soul and R&B was so refreshing. His stuff since then has strayed gradually away from that and is not nearly as interesting.
I agree with Sturgill’s later records but I’m a big fan of A Sailor’s Guide to Earth. Love those Stax-esque horns. Everything else has been pretty m’eh though. Didn’t mind the bluegrass albums because I like those songs but they weren’t adding anything.
I cannot see any further than Roxy Music. I would stand their first three albums against any artists first second and third, and then they fell off a cliff for me.
I can see a point here but I disagree. My ranking of Roxy Music would simply be in chronological order with the debut being the best. After the first two albums and Eno leaving they could have gone a number of directions. They did not go where I would have expected them to go BUT I am not disappointed with what they did instead. Compare the band output to the Ferry solo stuff and there is a significant difference (from Manzanera, Mackay). Even their final album is a good record, even if they ended at a point I would never have expected when I embarked on the journey in 1972. The trip was worth it all the way.
Modest Mouse, The Shins, Jimmy Eat World, and Foo Fighters are a few bands who's first few albums are absolutely amazing then they just become so boring to me.
I was disappointed when The Strokes decided to work with Rick Rubin. The Weezer albums after Maladroit feel like a can of worms you're hesitant to open. And when did it all start to go wrong? Well, they decided to work with Rick Rubin.
Rick Rubin rarely makes good records. He should have a much higher batting average given the caliber of artists he works with. I don’t get the way people worship him. -Jason
@@TastesLikeMusic I don't understand it either. It's like good artists are just working with him based on who he worked with in the past. Not the actual albums. Unless, unfortunately, they're just looking at sales.
I'd have to agree very much w/ Kramzer on Arcade Fire. That is definitely the 1st name that popped in my head. It is puzzling that a band that good, could become so trivial, and disposable. If there had been a massive line-up shakeup, it would be easier to understand. Maybe they needed to wait a lot longer in between albums. The other name is Kings of Leon. And I think of AF and KOL together often; they were part of a new rush around'04. KOL first 3 albums are stellar! Some of the best rock'n roll I have ever heard. Now they are in this formula. (And side-note: KOL have got to be the most boring band live EVER!) Going way back I'd say Rod Stewart. He was so freakin good early on. The Faces were tops! And his solo albums pure gold. We all know what came after. Humble Pie, are part of that same class, and also were supposed to end up much better , I think. In a weird way I have to name two of my absolute favorite artists of all time: Tom Waits and Lucinda Williams. it's not that their work ever got lame. Not at all. But they hit this plateau. So their albums in a strange way became a disappointment. Always very good, 4 stars, but never a surprise anymore. I;m trying to think of other eras. Could we say the Clash became a disappointment? Yes, but was it even the Clash anymore? I would also name JayZ. Edit - Queen. Oh, and Genesis. Another one of my alltime favorite bands, while w/ Gabriel. After Hackett left too, they lost the plot. Edit 2 - whoever named the Frames - great call!
Eh not a big enough fall. I love the 2010 release, and it's really just a matter of not being as good as the debut. They haven't changed so much to dishearten me... If they did a bluegrass album unplugged...I'd be mad
I also noticed Mr T. Edge's lack of humility with Page in that film. When Page suddenly broke into the riff for Whole Lotta Love, Josh White, in contrast, reflexively put down his guitar and just listened.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 Maybe Page could've whipped out a riff more complicated than Whole Lotta Love to impress two professional guitar players. The Edge was probably like, "Yeah, we learned that one right after 'Smoke on the Water' and 'Iron Man', Jim."
@@edgustafson I've watched It Might Get Loud and it seemed to me like Edge was pleased when Page whipped out the Whole Lotta Love riff. Can't deny Page is the ultimate riff master, even if some of Zep's songs are not exactly original compositions.
John Grant. I still think Queen of Denmark is one of the best albums of the last 20 years, but apart from a few tracks here and there just haven’t got into the whole electro shift he made after that.
Agree with this but think Pale Green Ghosts is excellent also. GMF, Glacier, Ernest Borgnine, I Hate This Town. I have a lot of love for that album as well but everything else, as you say a few tracks here and there, isn’t something I’m into. He still writes very funny and frank lyrics though so I haven’t written him off just yet!
All I’m trying to do, Mark, is help you understand that The Name of The Rose is merely a blip on an otherwise uninterrupted downward trajectory. Metallica, gold medal winners.
Rod Stewart was awesome for the first few years (solo and Faces), then it all went...disappointing!
Yup, he was great at one time.
@@danh9764 I'm guessing 'Do ya Think I'm Sexy" was the jump-the-shark moment
@@chrismcgovern1647 It’s hard to pin point, but yeah, that was about the time. Unfortunately, Do You Think I’m Sexy wasn’t his worst, it got worse than that. But Every Picture Tells A Story was a great album, and his stuff with the Faces was great. That early stuff is sadly overlooked.
He used to be nick named Rockin Rod. I saw him live in the early 80’s. Even though his records had started sucking, his live concert was great. Lots of guitar, lots of rock and roll. He ran around kicking soccer balls all over the place. He was great even then.
I still think that Every Picture Tells a Story is one of the great albums of all time. Never A Dull Moment was decent too. I mean Rod was a serious contender back then. I wish he would have carried on with that rock/folk/blues style. In a way, I don't blame him. He loves the rock and roll lifestyle, the excess, the success. Who wouldn't? He's still a great singer and personality having said that.
I was a huge U2 fan but gave up on them about 10 years ago.
What was the album / event that did it for you? - Joe
@@TastesLikeMusic No Line On The Horizon was good but also disappointing overall. I think the main reason was putting their album on everyone's phone, plus Songs Of Experience was the last one I bought as I didn't care for it.
To follow up on Kram’s theme of Bands that “Disappeared”…
Between 1990 and 1997, The Sundays released three phenomenal 5 star albums and then quit. 😞
Harriet Wheeler, Where are you?
Man, I feel you. There have been persistent reunion rumors.
HUGE FAN! I ran into Harriet pre-show at a record store in 1993 and lost my mind. Three great albums I still play to this day
The band I would drop everything to go see if they reunited. I love The Sundays, I wish they had more than 3 albums. Blind is in my Top 5 of all time.
@@geoffreymaher7169 Top 10 for me, maybe 5! "Blind" just flows so nice - glad to see I'm not alone!
Yoko Ono when she decided to “sing”. 🤮
I would just say any 2000s band that started out using real instruments for the most part and progressively got more electro dance pop-y like Coldplay, Maroon 5, Fall Out Boy, Panic at the Disco, Thirty Seconds to Mars, etc etc. In summary, basically every band that started out with a rock and/or pop punk sound and lost it completely over time.
Spot in with Marion 5!
yep. i had same comment.
When so many bands became mediocre later in their careers, Sparks are a band that to me still creates and releases worthwhile music.
Still waiting for a sparks review
Based on the wonderful, several weeks' long March Madness of worst albums ever discussion, wouldn't Boston be the very definition of this?
Bowie after Let's Dance but then he picked up with Black Tie/White Noise
Good calls here. I'm surprised Kings of Leon didn't get a mention. I was so excited by their debut and then Aha Shake Heartbreak seemed to solidify the promise - loved that too, and despite the over-production of Only by the Night, it still had bangers and passion, but after that, the slide downward was brutal. I used to have this idea that a lot of rock bands turned bad the moment they turn into U2, which agrees with what Kramzer was saying about Coldplay (and I love U2s early albums up to and including Achtung Baby (although not Rattle and Hum). Also, re Kings of Leon, my remarks do come with a deal of sympathy for the personal tragedies and crises the band had to overcome re addiction issues. So my criticism is meant with good grace. Cheers from Blighty. :)
Agreed, first 2 records are great.
The band lost me with Only by the Night. Youth & Young Manhood to Because of the Times are great imo
I'm a little surprised too. Everyone in my frat (a long time ago haha) and other campus groups loved their 2009??? album. It was really good.
Smashing Pumpkins. After Mellon Collie (Adore is alright, but without their drummer it sounds like a different band), Corgan never really recaptured the magic.
100% agreed!
Adore is better than Gish imo. Machina has some of their best songs and Oceania is pretty decent too.
see my comment above (i think it's above..?) lack of real drums kills it for me.
Not by choice, they naturally started to suck. The suck direction is not valid.
I would argue Machina was the last great piece, it took me years to fully appreciate - i think Billy can still write the heck out of a song, a big issue is production and lack of the iconic tone
Like you, Kram, I'm going w/U2. They're my 3rd favorite band of all time. They used to be my 2nd until recently. I loved The Joshua Tree then was blown away by Achtung Baby. I love The Unforgettable Fire and War. Past Achtung Baby, I liked Zooropa but was slightly disappointed w/Pop. Then, things went downhill w/All You Can't Leave Behind. What a boring album!! Then, I gave them another chance w/How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb. I liked that one a lot but, they messed-up again w/No Line on the Horizon. I was done after that. Like you, I could care less about the next U2 album. I'm done!!!
As far as their concerts go, I caught Zoo TV. in 1992 and spent $30 for a ticket. The night of the show, I waited three hours for them to get their butts on stage while mine was freezing, on a cold October night, at Arrowhead Stadium. A lot of the fans were pissed, and we booed everyone who wasn't U2 that came onstage! I'm not kidding!!! The show was alright. I saw INXS in 1988 and 1994 for less and they were 10xs better!! I'm not kidding!!! I saw U2 again in 1997 because one of my housemates had an extra ticket. That was $60 and it was worse than the first show. The good news is I didn't freeze my ass off!! Oh, and I saw INXS a month later at home for less and again, they were cheaper and better!!!!!!!!! So, no more U2 concerts after that one!!!!
Aerosmith, Genesis, Modest Mouse, U2, Van Halen, Smashing Pumpkins
Smashing Pumpkins is a good one.
No, no, never good, no, no and no. - Joe
Smashing Pumpkins just exited their dip with CYR and the previous ep which are great (CYR rules) Disagree
Gotta disagree re: Modest Mouse. Their new album is very good. Saw then last week and they were great live, including the new songs.
Agree. The new Modest Mouse is very good. The one before is their only album that I think is kind of weak. Everything else is solid. -Jason
Nobody was more disappointed than Jason’s cat when Cat Stevens changed his name.
I actualy still loved live in the 2000s but collective soul's albums from the laate 200s to 2010s were all terrible to me.
I guess Joe's disappointment with Radiohead's direction goes without saying.
Bjork. It seems she's lost all interest in catchy hooks or memorable songs. Homogenic and Vespertine are masterpieces. I would rate Vespertine higher than Kid A any day.
Think I liked 2 songs on Medulla, gave up after Biophilia. All the melodies sound the same to me.
@TastesLikeMusic. I do agree with some opinions.
Although…
I’m a very forgivable fan of Coldplay.
Of course..their first 4 albums are amazing. I also like Ghost Stories and Everyday Life. Even though Music Of The Spheres is my least fav, at the very least of Coldplay, I think it’s an ‘ok’ effort.
Weezer’s also one I think of. I like Blue ➡️ Maladroit. Those are classics. I also don’t mind Red Album, however, I’m not a huge defender.
I think the only ones that really hurt are Ratitude, Pacific Daydream and Teal Album (just covers). Those records, I don’t like a single one. I still don’t like Make Believe, although I like at least a couple of songs.
I do agree with Kings Of Leon. Personally their first record, Aha Shake Heartbreak, Only By The Night and Come Around Sundown are all great. Because Of The Times isn’t my fav, but this would be after those 4 albums, if I was ranking. Good vid, dudes 👍🤘
Coldplay is a great example of this and theory of a deadman
Drake’s career trajectory is the most disappointing to me because he’s still making music
He stinks
I liked him when he first came out. Now he's pretty much over it seems like haha.
Oh, got a couple…
Korn (after Follow The Leader)
System Of A Down (after Toxicity)
The Black Keys (after Brothers)
Radiohead (after OK Computer), okay, kill me…
Black Keys after Rubber Factory for me.
Bands or artists that disappointed me;
1. Morrissey - I love Morrissey and all his late 80s / 90s stuff was great. But after his promising comeback (You are the Quarry), things went sharply downhill. I feel he's recently making a bit of a return in terms of quality but it was really rough for a good decade.
2. Biffy Clyro - The first 6 albums ranged from amazing to good. But after that everything became bland crap.
3. R.E.M 1983 to 1992 R.I.P - I could say more but you know how it went.
4. Editors - First four albums hung on to post-punk promise by their fingertips before falling onto the jagged rocks of awfulness.
5. The Twilight Sad - An underground act that always seemed like they could do something great. Finally they made that a realization back in 2014 with the phenomenonal 'Nobody Wants to be Here and Nobody Wants to Leave'. But their follow up 'It Won't be this Way All The Time' suffered from increased expectation after gaining a lot of accolades and attention. Unfortunately the album turned out to be uniformly bland crap.
Nah man that last Twilight Sad album is brilliant, one of the best albums of 2019.
@Apathy&Exhaustion With the exception of Monster, I really hate the R.E.M albums you just mentioned. Especially Up. There's a special place in hell reserved for that one. Lol
R.E.M. went shit after they left IRS. document was the last good one, IMO
@@shoogerkane dang that’s a hot opinion. Green and Automatic are top tier records imo which also seems to be a consensus with many casual and hardcore REM fans. Agree though Monster and New Adventures are not good though Up is very underrated.
@@tokyochuchu there are a lot of standalone good songs on Up just not enough tone variation to make it a goid album. Daysleeper, falls to climb, walk unafraid are up there with their best and at my most beautiful, diminished and parakeet not far off.
eric clapton and van morrison
You gentleman are a lot younger than I am so I don't really know anything about some of the bands you mentioned EMO? I would definitely put both Nine Inch Nails and The Cure in the category of "Bands that went in disappointing directions. On "Fragile" it sounded like Reznor just kind of went ahead and released what he had been working on after the "Downward Spiral" because he didn't have any other choice. Clearly he was directionless, and mired in a lot of personal excesses over the years that did not translate into any worthwhile musical output. However, to Trent Reznor's credit he did have a good second run after the failure of "Fragile" with the albums "With Teeth", "Year Zero", and some parts of "The Slip' before sinking totally into the abyss hinted at on "Ghosts." The Cure really have nothing worth mentioning after "Disintegration" other than a couple of remix double albums. As far as "Wish" I might want to give the 2-lp set version a try, but there's certainly no rush.
Pink Floyd. Ariel Pink.
I am going to make myself unpopular, right off…. I argue Radiohead.
They are talented as hell, I am not saying that they are not. The first album is great, and man, The Bends is revelatory, completely perfect, in every way. I know that was part of their trajectory, and they didn’t really lose any steps, but it has always been curious to me, how they captured so much, after that, in the public eye. OK Computer is good. It is. But to me, it’s one of those albums that’s really impressive when you first hear it, and then you kind of just don’t really want to listen to it again, not because it’s bad, to the contrary, just it is not grabbing…. If I went to a party, or something social, I would not want to hear that, or anything after that, by them, for that matter. The music is challenging, and that’s cool, but it doesn’t make me want to challenge anything. KID A, I think is a better record, and I get why people like that one so much. That is the one, to me, that’s like the perfect balance of what they were and what they became…. Other than the novelty of the pricing, etc…. After that, they’re all kind of interchangeable after that for me. The one that really sticks out is In Rainbows, because of the pricing, and that whole thing…. The record itself though, was forgettable at best…. That first Thom Yorke solo album was pretty good, I think it is the best thing to come out of that post KID A batch. It’s short and sharp… the others honestly, I think they start to fall too far, too fast, into the rock for people who don’t really like rock, category… I don’t know, I guess I am simple….
It’s okay, In Rainbows is rubbish. - Joe
@@TastesLikeMusicWrong
Franz Ferdinand for me. I loved their first album so much and with every successive release it just went downhill. I didn't hate their subsequent albums but they weren't even in the same universe as their debut.
Yes, a classic example of a band unable to leave their debut album behind. What did it for me was a gig at the Barrowlands in Glasgow when they toured to promote either the second or third album. Most of the set was from the first album. I have rarely been so disappointed in a band being so trapped in audience expectations. Rarely listed to them since and would never go to see them play again.
I disagree a bit here. Thought their second album was great (AOTY 2005). For me the disappointment was Right Thoughts . . but the latest was a fine return to form.
@@NaughtyVampireGod I liked the second album but not nearly as much as the debut. I liked the third one, Tonight, as well. I thought Right Thoughts was okay, but after Nick McCarthy left I kind of abandoned them. I heard Always Ascending but wasn't impressed. I'll have to go back and give it another listen, though. Sometimes after I've been away from an album a while I go back and listen to it again and I'll actually like it.
Yeah I agree, although their album with Sparks is awesome.
@@joshf.4270 Yeah, I bought FFS when it came out. I only listened to it a few times, though. I should probably give it another spin.
Aerosmith. From being one of Americas classic rock bands of the 70's to becoming the world sensation in the 80's. I don't mind that but later on they didn't return to the classic stuff and they tried to keep being relevant.. But for who? The 70's fans didn't care. The 80's fans didn't care.. Would the hiphop/post grunge crowd care? So what is Nine Lives, Just Push Play and Music From Another Dimension! about? Who exactly are the records directed against? I don't hate the albums and there are some decent songs on them but overall... Just too over-produced, long and pointless attempts of being relevant.
Def Leppard. One of the biggest acts of the 80's who decided do to anything but their peers and so much is just forgettable. I don't hate it.. I don't feel anything really about 90 % of what they did after Hysteria. Some minor gems perhaps but overall a band that lives on their live-acts and biggest selling albums over 30 years ago.
AC/DC. Changing by not changing. I understand that the concept for the band is to make something that will please the fans but really.. How many fans sit and listen to all their albums? I'm guessing that 98 % of everyone with their entire catalog has several albums they haven't played for years and years. At some point I would have liked them to branch out. Just a little bit. Making some of the albums more memorable. I mean.. The difference between Let There Be Rock and Highway to Hell is rather big. Why not try something similar later on as well?
I agree with your comments on Aerosmith. Man, "Music from Another Dimension" is BORING and totally forgettable...... Come on 'smith....get back to where you once belonged.....Def Leppard kind of started to lose it after the 3rd album.....in fact, they REALLY changed after the 2nd album (which was GREAT by the way).
@Dave Costello I know people don't love this album...but at least "Honkin" on Bobo" was at least an attempt to get back to basics again.
Def Leppard I absolutely love, but yeah after Hysteria very hit or miss. Pyromania, Hysteria, High n Dry, On Through the Night, awesome. Their 2015 album was pretty decent I felt as well.
Aerosmith really needs to get a producer like Brendan O'Brien who actually grew up listening to 70s Aerosmith and who can get them back into shape and have them sounding like Toys in the Attic/Rocks. They need someone to hunker down and make them focus on being a sleazy, dirty, raunchy bluesey hard rock band that has borderline proto-metal influences without the cheesy power ballads. One ballad is fine as a concession. Because Steven Tyler can still sing very well so they have enough in the tank for one more classic album. Or at least an album that's not embarrassing.
AC/DC - I mean they've become a singles band after Back in Black. The general public seems to not care that they change so I guess they have no incentive.
Stellatarr were ace. They had The Killers as support in a small venue in Glasgow (Scotland). That's the way it should have stayed!
As atrocious as later Coldplay is, I don't understand being so disappointed that a mediocre band just started to suck more as time went by. Their first two records are pleasant, tuneful and consistent but we're not talking about anything close to mind-blowing here...
I think the disappointment is aggravated by their enormous popularity. They set out to be in the category of REM (ok, that's generous) and ended up between somewhere between Ed Sheeran and Richard Clayderman. And they became the most popular band in the world.
Simple Minds has to be one of the ultimate examples. They were a great band once and now most people dont even know it
Have you heard their more recent albums?
@@179rich no tbh I havnt heard anything after real life, which on some level I quite liked haha. you think its worth it?
@@Captain_Rhodes I do think their two most recent albums Walk Between Worlds and Big Music have good songs. I do think their covers album Neon Lights is actually quite good. The rest, not so much. I like Real Life too and pretty much everything before that.
@@179rich real life is quite enjoyable but I think they are a band whos best work was all made before they became well known. A lot of bands drop off in quality but the public often knows what the good stuff is like. In the case of simple minds they are almost unknown in their peak years, especially these days. Anyway ill have a listen to the recent stuff. Real life was the first one I heard when it came out so I have a soft spot for that one ;-)
@@Captain_Rhodes I do love their early stuff like Real to Reel and Empires and Dance.
Genesis, Mike Oldfield, U2, Liz Phair... and more recently, Sleater-Kinney, Arcade Fire, Sharon Van Etten, Margaret Glaspy (good call Jason. Me too, I am hoping that that third album will get her back on the right track)
Genesis, that I can’t dance nonsense. So bad
The Mars Volta for me was the big heart breaker. Their Tremulant EP was very good, followed by two truly great albums, the first in my top five: Deloused and Frances the Mute. But then they lost control of their editor, lost Jon Theodore the drummer, added way too many extra sounds beyond the core group, and went ham on the vocal layerings. They went from dark and heavy to uber-proggy. They could take what should be a terrific track - like Viscera Eyes or Goliath - and just kind of overdo it all instead of keeping it to the bones.
I sometimes just wish they had stayed with Rick Rubin. He tried to simplify what they did, and it ended up as Deloused, one of the best records ever made.
I very sadly and hesitantly agree. As much as I want to love their post frances the mute stuff, the first two albums are leagues above the rest.
There are tons of bands that go in a dissapointing direction or become lacklustre, but I feel that it is very common for a band to go that way, especially over a long period of time. There are very few bands that can keep it at a high level all the time. But to name a few in general, smashing pumpkins (i guess it was hard to follow up a classic in melloncollie and the infinite sadness), Kings of Leon (had a unique sound that slowly morphed into bland alt rock and semi U2isms), Morrissey (he lost his lyrical wit amongst other things), R.E.M (played it safe at the end), Oasis (steered towards a more rockier, more boring sound) Green Day (became the thing that they did not set out to become, with playing it safe and becoming too poppy and mainstream - feel the same happened to Offspring).
Good ones and def leopard too poppy
muse and radiohead
Modest Mouse. Their last 2 albums are really disappointing, I think Long Drive and Lonesome Crowded are 5 stars albums, The Moon and Antartica's songwriting is really good too; really disappointing they lost their energy and Spirit, ever since their 3rd album it al goes on a Downward Spiral
Totally forgot about them lol. I had their 2004 album on repeat.
The Stones Roses are kinda disappointing, they could have been one the best bands of the 90s
They was one of the greatest bands of the 90’s they got put in a bad contract .
Jonathan Richman - from Modern Lovers debut masterpiece to .....children's music?
I'd say Green Day fits this bill. Their first 4 albums were amazing and even tho I love American Idiot, it was a sign of them selling out to corporatism and becoming too political. Everything after American Idiot (minus a few songs) is really just garbage.
From Kerplunk to American Idiot, Green Day had such a winning streak. A legitimate punk band with strong pop influences that unfournately spawned a whole lotta crap in the 2000s. Then after that, I have no idea what the fuck happened but the band just became total dogshit. I get the vibe that Billie and the rest of the guys kinda stopped wanting to be a punk band and more of a traditional rock band but they can't really break out of the pop punk sound since their fans expect them to be a pop punk band forever. Like you said, some good songs here and there, but never a good album. 21st Century Breakdown is meh, the trilogy is terrible, Revolution Radio is just tired and formulaic. I'll give ...Father of All credit in that they sound actually excited to do the album and the 70s glam rock/power pop influences are interesting but it doesn't work as a whole and the marketing of the album gave off major boomer vibes.
Bowie being so lame in the 80's after the amazing streak from Hunky Dory through the Berlin Trilogy and Scary Monsters was such a drag. The Beatles pushing aside their brilliant producer George Martin to musically strip down for Let it Be was a wrong turn - what a rebound though. It's probably not easy being a rock star - fans expect change - just not too much.
Yeah bowie got kind of lazy around the 80s sadly
Not sure if this counts, but I remember hating that Elvis Costello and Joe Jackson weren't still playing the edgy pop music they were known for in the late 70s and I was bored with them for similar reasons, but my feelings about their more mature sounding catalogs have changed over the years.
The Killers and Bon Iver for me
Genesis was doing alright when Steve Hackett left, but when Phil brought in Pop, it went to Crap.
Other Bands that went to wrong direction
ZZ Top (But Rythmeen brought it back)
Steve Miller Band (Circle of Love isn't that Bad)
Scorpions (I love Crazy World though)
Yes (But Union kinda brought it back)
Def Leppard (Adrenalize is Great)
Supertramp (I'm talking about after Brother where You Bound)
The Doobie Brothers
The Doors
Grateful Dead (The last 3 Studio Albums)
Queen (After A Day at the Races)
Queensryche (After Empire, but the Todd Era is Amazing)
And, who could forget-
Emerson, Lake, and Palmer
Why? Just Why for Love Beach?
rhythmeen is so good , been listening to it alot lately. Have alot of your bands on my list.
A lot of people find Arctic Monkeys' newer music disappointing but it's totally the opposite, they get better with every album.
I think there's a distinction between an artist that goes in an undesirable direction and one that simply runs out of gas and has nothing left to offer. Some writers have only one book in them and some bands have only one album.
Queen is king o this sh!t
Hot Space took me decades to get past before I even realized that they bounced back to put out much better material post Hod spice
Part of Whitney Houston's sad story is the incredibly high bar she set with that amazing first album. After that, everything had to be a disappointment. A good case could be made for Rod Stewart going downhill after the Every Picture Tells a Story album, although he made a lot of entertaining music in the 1970s. But really, no one can sustain greatness forever. Over the last 50 years, I've watched the arcs of many careers, and always thankful when someone makes a comeback, but I try to manage my expectations.
I thought the same thing about Whitney when black Twitter went on that crazy debate on who the queen of pop music is ( Janet or madonna). A lot of folks realized that her career (while it was good), didn't really reach that far. It seems like a lot of contemporaries surpassed her.
Totally agree with you on U2
I don't mind artists making a left turn. They don't own me anything, and sometimes it even works for the better. But there are of course many acts that I love that develop into earache. My least favorite left turns has to be ROD STEWART, DEF LEPPARD, CHICAGO, GENESIS, NEIL YOUNG (in the 80s).
Good points. My 2 cents would be that any artist who takes chances and tries new things will eventually go in a direction you're not thrilled with. I still prefer those kinds of artists to the ones who regurgitate the same thing over and over again, cookie-cutter style.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 Couldn't agree more. Some bands get stuck in a rut and sound like a parody of themselves after a while.
Just listening to Nothing’s gonna stop us now by Starship… nuff said
But the real winner is Chicago. Even though I do like their later work. Their first decade was just so sublime and they did change direction and sound not just became less good.
This video cracks me up. I agree with you guys on a lot with a lot of the bands you guys talked about. I’ll check out some of your artist's picks. Also,I'm a big fan of these artists which is what disappoints me a little bit haha.
Janet Jackson’, Jay Z, U2, Aerosmith, and Weezer, have been disappointing. I was a big fan of their earlier music but their new stuff doesn’t sound as good. Also, the Aracade fire sort of fell off. That our lady peace reference took me back lol.
So many of my favorite bands have a ‘Bell curve’: They have some solid (but not necessarily top) early stuff like EPs/singles and debut albums, then peak after their first few albums, then fall from there.
Examples:
-Depeche Mode. Although I like Ultra, by and large the albums before Alan Wilder joined, and the albums after he left, weren’t nearly as good as the stuff he was there for.
-REM. Some ‘decent’ early stuff, but they really hit their stride with Document, Green, ( not so much Out of Time) and Automatic for the People. Monster started the downward slide.
-U2. Already discussed quite a bit here. I don’t *hate* any album (they are my favorite band, overall). But their last 2 albums only reach C tier for me, whereas October, War, Unforgettable Fire, The Joshua Tree and Actung Baby are all S tier for me. Pop was one of my most disappointing albums of all time-not that i think it sucks--only disappointing.
-Toad the Wet Sprocket. Their first two albums (Bread & Circus and Pale) are solid early entries, but they absolutely knocked it out of the park with ‘Fear’ and ‘Dulcinea’. However, their comeback stuff--including their new album, are fairly uninteresting, which I find disappointing.
-Weezer. I actually like the ‘Red’ album, but most of their stuff the past 2 decades has been ‘quantity over quality’ unfortunately.
Pearl Jam and Coldplay don’t really follow the ‘bell curve’ as I consider their first two albums to be their best ones, and then a (mostly) taper with some exception; I really like No Code and Viva La Vida. Coldplay fell much farther than Pearl Jam, tho, so I don’t consider them to have gone in a ‘disappointing direction’ more just their songs are not quite as awesome as the earlier stuff. The Samples are another band like this--first two albums are awesome, then big taper. Band of Horses I consider a one-and-done.
I'm not sure if U2 can ever come back after three such disappointing albums. It didn't help that they were so many years apart as well. How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb was the last one that I really liked, and it was 17 years ago. Sad!
Achtung Baby was the deal breaker for me. Haven't given them any time since
I'm glad you said How to Dismantle a Atom Bomb as a "liked" album. That is strange story with me, i loathed that album for soooo long, primary because of the sound of Vertigo, but years later revisiting it, then revisiting it again, it REALLY grew on me in a major way, there are some fantastic songs on there that i listen to quite frequently. I think HTDAAB is the last album where U2 felt connected to the music (firing on all cylinders), it's the last album without a gimmick, or the "guess we need to make a album, right" type vibe
You can never come back from breaching people's itunes account and put your album on their library without consent.
REM. Anything after Monster I couldn’t get into, and I started listening to them with Fables, saw them live in the 80’s, and bought every album the week of release until the early 2000s. .
Can’t help but feeling a bit cynical about The Edge being mentioned about his appeareance in It Might Get Loud…
In defense of The Edge, when was the last time Jimmy Page released something worthwhile?
Just an opinion, guys. Keep up the good work! 👍
Jimmy sure as hell didn't care as he never struck me as an elitist. They didn't go there to watch each other play solos.
The edge gets a ton of flak because of all of the effects and pedals such. I appreciate what he's done.
Page is my favorite guitarist from a composition point of view, but the dude was sloppy as hell live even when he wasn't drugged up.
To be clear, I love u2 and the edge.
But I didn't like the movie very much
@@ryankramzer1256 I forgot half of the movie. It’s fun, but not essential viewing. Big Zep fan btw.
I am wondering if there are that many acts, who have released at least 8 albums, whose albums are generally considered to be better in the second half of their discography than the first? I have said 8 because quite a few acts take 3 or 4 albums to hit their stride, so the last 3 of a total of 6 would probably be better.
Plenty - Kramzer
I'd argue the second half of The Beatles career is better than the first half. But it's a rare thing, for sure. There are quite a few bands whose first 6-to-8 albums are all great- but getting into double digit territory seems to be prohibitively difficult.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 don't know if I'd rank the Beatles albums before Help or Rubber Soul as albums since at the time albums weren't really considered as a singular work of art so much as a collection of songs. If you grant me that caveat (you don't have to, of course) then the question of front half versus the back half becomes quite interesting.
I don't think Fleetwood Mac got really good until they absorbed Buckingham/Nicks, which was their 11th album.
@@edgustafson Fleetwood Mac makes me wonder if bands with with big lineup changes should even be eligible for this discussion. If we're being honest, Buckingham-Nicks era Mac is a completely different band than Peter Green era Mac. (Btw, I think Then Play On is fantastic and gives Rumours a run for its money.)
I could not agree more about Our Lady Peace, Joe! They were such a big deal here in Canada in the 90s. The singles off Clumsy especially were inescapable and I loved them so much. I still have a lot of love for that album and Naveed as well. But at some point they just got sooooo bad. So very disappointing.
Definitely agree about Live too. Forgot all about them but they used to be so good too.
My family had a lake house in Canada where my grandma was born / raised so I spent a fair amount of time up there. Must be where I picked up the OLP love. - Joe
@@TastesLikeMusic The 90s were a great time for Canadian rock music in general. I may be a little biased about that though.
@@Vanessa.P 70s and 80s also ,max webster , april wine , triumph bands underated i believe!! and many more!!
@@bengalgangster Oh definitely, I agree lots of great Canadian bands in the 70s and 80s too. I am CD and record collector and one thing I love collecting is forgotten Canadian bands (as long as I like the music of course - it's not all good).
Spiritual Machines is also a great album IMO.
Looking forward to this - immediate thought when I saw the headline was the Cult Electric. Rick Rubin ugh.
I hated what the Cars did in the mid 80s
Barenaked Ladies is the big one for me. From 1988 to 2003, they put out pure alternative gold. Some cracks appeared on Everything to Everyone, they put out a horrendous stream of themed albums and the final blow came with Steven leaving the band. The four piece BNL is just...wow. I hate it. From my favorite band to unlistenable.
Here’s a deep cut answer. Scott Walker started off the 60s with some incredible psych-pop crooner albums. But as he got more experimental in the following decades, his music became very challenging and difficult to listen to. I respect what he was going for and for doing something different, but most of his 90s and beyond albums are just way too much for me.
Have to agree, wish we’d gotten some more from him in the vein of Nite Flights and The Electrician, but alas…
Kings of Leon (post-Because of the Times), Gomez (post-In Our Gun), The Offspring (Americana and onward).
Conversely, best direction changers: Beck, Tom Waits, David Bowie (consistently); Arctic Monkeys (Tranquility).
Agree wholeheartedly about Arcade Fire. Wondering if they will come back with another Suburbs or Funeral
Brit pop had a year of the bad follow up albums when a lot of leaders of the movement discovered cocaine but it cost them in ceativitivity - the most well known example is Oasis's Be Here Now album but the one that hurt the most is Pulp's This Is Hardcore, Garbage's second album is a major step down from the first, lesser known example were Kenekie's second album. Another example Faith No More's last record wasn't great - they finally got a band where they all got along but at the expense of their creativity.
Used to love Our Lady Peace! I actually didn’t mind Gravity, but it definitely was not the same sound anymore with the departure of guitarist Mike Turner. Oh well…
Agreed. Ditching producer Arnold Lanni in favour of Bob Rock after Spiritual Machines was also a massive blow to the band.
I always hear people raving about early Our Lady Peace, but i fail to connect, is there a particular album i should focus on?
@@garrettredd2541 Spiritual Machines was probably their peak, their attempt at a Radiohead-ish concept album. In no way am I saying it’s as good as OK Computer, but the similarities are there. Raine’s voice is not for everyone, I get it. But for a few albums there I thought they were quite good and a little left of the already left of center…
@@garrettredd2541 Clumsy is a popular one, and solid from start to finish.
I love all of their first four albums, and would just listen to them in order:
- Naveed
- Clumsy
- Happiness...
- Spiritual Machines
Lenny Kravitz admittedly had a five album run of all inspiration, then pretty meh afterwards imo.
I never liked any LK album. Always found him to be super duper derivative.
@@josejones Back in the day, "Let Love Rule" was money well spent
I know they were never very good, but Imagine Dragons. When I first heard "Radioactive" on the radio, I thought this could be a legitimately interesting new direction for radio friendly rock music that might help bring rock back into the spotlight. I thought "It's Time" and "Demons" were pretty great too. I bought the album and already had my hopes dashed, as nothing on that album outisde of the singles is interesting, but at least none of it is a crime against humanity. And so they've gone from "hmm" to "one of the worst offenses to music ever" with their recent stuff, which really should have been in your "Badness" tournament. They got my hopes up for a split second and since then have been relentlessly punishing me for ever even having had that thought.
I think a better question might be who DIDN'T go into a disappointing direction. Pretty much all of my favorite artists/bands are former shells of themselves. Rush, the Beatles, Bowie, Tom Petty, Radiohead - they had careers that didn't disappoint me. I'll even give Led Zeppelin "In Through The Out Door" because half of that album is excellent...I'm having a hard time figuring out who else DIDN'T disappoint. But a ton of my favorite bands either diminished or disappointed: The Who, U2, REM, Pink Floyd, Elvis Costello and Genesis are my favorite bands who disappointed. (That said, I watched footage of the Who performing at the 9-11 concert last night and that was one of the greatest live performances I've ever watched. They still have the live chops.)
Uh Radiohead's last album is one of their best imo. A Moonshaped Pool is fantastic....oops misread your point....ok sry🤦🤦🤦....lol
@@threestringsomg I fully agree with your assessment of A Moon Shaped Pool. Wasn't a big fan of The King of Limbs, but pretty much everything else they've ever done has been pretty great. Some better than others. A Moon Shaped Pool is upper echelon, even for them.
Nah, I’m in the “Radiohead went the wrong direction” pool. I really liked The Bends and they peaked OK Computer, Kid A gets props for experimentation. I still really liked ‘In Rainbows’ but I my mind their newer stuff is not nearly as good as the stuff from 1995-2000.
@@mrp4242 I'm in that camp as well. That doesn't mean Radiohead's albums post Kid A are necessarily bad- they're not, for the most part. They're just not nearly as good as their '90s stuff. In Rainbows is probably the best of them but even that one's a little overrated in the grand scheme of things.
@@chrisdelisle3954 absolutely....it's a psychedelic masterpiece....and the final track is for me their best ever last track on any album. I end listening to Moonshaped with a little tear of appreciation....😢😂 A beauty...
Primus, they got too wacky for my taste. Enjoyed up to Pork Soda. 🐷
I would say Maroon 5
I also agree with Highly Suspect, hated their last album
I would throw in The Offspring in there too
Only reason I love U2 is the direction they took. Wow you can’t be serious got better every album
Good call on Band of Horses Kramzer! Exactly how I feel about them.
I love U2 and I've long been clamoring for a countdown from you guys (in spite of Jason's hatred of them). I guess I should brace myself for what Kramzer will say when you guys cover their discography. He REALLY doesn't like post-Achtung U2. Never again would they have a whole-better-than-the-sum-of-its-parts album, but they have had some wonderful songs. All That You Can't Leave Behind and How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb were comprised of many great tracks (to me). I know you don't want to do all of the big, legacy bands all at once ... but I do hope you guys get to U2 in December. I can't wait to hear it.
Zooropa and Pop are not classic albums but I think they do deserve points for being experimental. It's really only after Pop that U2's albums start to get a little boring.
There are at least three albums after Achtung that I like better than that one. Spoiler. - Joe
I love Pop, but it was the first album of theirs to have bad material (well, one song in particular). When All That You Can't Leave Behind came out, for the first time I was quite disappointed with a U2 album. I even sold my CD copy to a friend. But I think they redeemed themselves with No Line on the Horizon.
@@TastesLikeMusic first of all, “spoiler” warning indicates to me you have a U2 countdown on the horizon. 🤞 Secondly, I wondered whether more listens would mean you’d start to like the album cuts on Achtung a bit more. I know you like the singles, Joe. I guess this answers my question. Thanks for the reply. Love the content you guys provide.
I love Zooropa -- I'd put it in the top 3 U2 albums. Pop, not so much, but I don't think it's as bad as people think.
Sadly, some of my favorite artists of all time fall into this category big time lol:
U2- everything after Pop is pretty much U2 on autopilot. Pop wasn't good but it was interesting and after it bombed they never took any artistic risks ever again
R.E.M.- their post-2000 discography falls on the bland side for me
The Rolling Stones- starting with 'It's Only Rock and Roll' their albums become extremely hit or miss but there's still some great songs occasionally. Tattoo You is the last really great Stones album for me, everything after that isn't terrible, but a bit generic for them
Can- the second half of their discography is extremely disappointing compared to how unique and creative their first few albums are. Mid to late 70s Can albums have sloppily reused song ideas from earlier albums and no interesting frontperson to distinguish themselves
The Byrds- honestly McGuinn should have gone solo after Dr. Byrds and Mr. Hyde. I like Chestnut Mare but the quality of some of the songs and performances on their final albums are sometimes appalling for a major label band
The Kinks- they transitioned into the 70s and 80s better than most other 60s bands but I miss the range of musical influences and songwriting in their 60s material compared to the hard rock sound they went for. Not really a fan of 70s-80s Kinks albums but there are still a lot of great songs in them
Arcade Fire- I agree with Kramzer
Vampire Weekend- Really liked the debut when I first heard but I've enjoyed each subsequent release less and less. It also doesn't help that their overall aesthetic has aged poorly for me and I've found myself not really interested in them that much these days
The Who- they lost me after Quadrophenia and even then I liked the movie better
Pixies- Love the first 2 albums, the next 2 are good, and the reunion ones are meh. Frank Black's solo albums are more interesting to me and i'd rather listen to those most of the time
mostly agree. i like all Pixies albums though. never liked Vampire weekend - too light for my taste. The kinks 70s output is great!. Arcade Fire's debut is righteous, but nothing since. same thoutghts regarding The who.
Agree about Pop. They were GOING FOR IT. After that it wasn't the same. Despite some flaws I do like Pop and greatly prefer it to ATYCLB. And with The Stones I feel like Undercover is kind of their Pop. It's interesting and staves off the generic.
REM is no longer a band, but even before the broke up they lost me after the 80s. The 1st 4 IRS albums are classic for me
I'm on the REM train all the way up through Automatic For The People. Monster is their first album that I was kind of 'meh' about.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 I love Monster, though I was lukewarm on it at the time. Now, it's one of my favorite R.E.M. albums -- I think I had it at #2 on the R.E.M. Listography episode, and I stand by it.
Totally on the same page with you Whammy. All their records until Monster are spectacular. After that different levels of all right
@@frangarcia7774 It's certainly no knock against REM. To have your first 8 albums all be great is impressive. Not too many bands have done that.
I agree...I dig the first 4 or 5......"Dead Letter Office" is good though....great stuff on that I think.
Genesis took a huge wrong turn after booting Steve Hackett and deciding to record dog shit.
Paul McCartney: Mac1 had its charm, Ram & Wild Life had some moments, but for the exception of 3 or 4 songs from Band On the Run, the rest of the catalog had too many misses. Silly Love Song & My Love miss the barn by a mile.
Mccartney II? Completely crazy but its still Macca branching out into new territory.
I have always liked My Love. Silly Love Songs is kinda cute and a bit cheesy. It's a feel good song. For that kind of tune, it's kind of long. Around 6 minutes. Like, enough already, at the three minute mark. And it keeps going and going.
My Love though, jeez, I always thought it was a tender homage to Linda. It's a good Paul song. It would have made a great Beatles track. For contrast in Paul's writing style, Admiral Halsey would have too. Cheers.
Run Devil Run is a very, very good later album from McCartney.
I think after 1982/3, mccartney's albums haven't been that great. But he's still capable of making good catchy numbers - great numbers on Flowers in the Dirt, driving rain, chaos and creation.
JJ&K will disagree but for me Rush mid-80s onwards. That definitely is a change of direction for a band (although it still worked stunningly on Signals) - around Power Windows they start getting barely listenable to me. A couple of albums killed by the 80s production, and then the ability to actually write memorable songs with actual melodies completely dies.
I don’t think it’s a melody problem. Tons of strong melodies, I’d say especially in the 80s. - Joe
Simple Minds peaked with New Gold Dream. I was into them around the time of Sparkle in the Rain and Once Upon a Time as I was in my mid teens. After then, nothing, but I still listen to stuff from Real to Real Cacophony to NGD. Smashing Pumpkins' debut was good and I bought Siamese Dream but that was it.
Same, regarding Pumpkins
U2, Coldplay, Green Day and Pearl Jam's recent albums today are definitely disappointing after many amazing albums in the 80's, 90's and early 2000's
It hurts me to say it but when I want to hear some Tom Petty, I don’t play Mojo or Hypnotic Eye. Also, does anyone listen to any Boston album after the first two?
Petty had a good long run though. I like all of his albums a lot...until Mojo -Jason
@@TastesLikeMusic Yeah, the problem is that his earlier albums were SOOOO good.
I like Third Stage a lot. Don’t get yourself too hot, don’t get yourself too high, if we don’t take it easy we can kiss it all good bye. Cool the engines. Poetry man, poetry. 😜
A variation on this could be the "one album wonder", if you haven't done it already.
I'm a little surprised that Dylan wasn't mention nor has his name come up much in the Comments. This guy has had so many 'left turns', it's a wonder he didn't screw himself into the ground. That said, a lot of his fans either forgave or caught up so it wasn't exactly as if too many hearts were broken. Maybe his fan base is used to it by now. However, I think his multi-album foray into the Great American Songbook was as weird as Rod the Mod's. What a time to be tackling these classics, when your voice has collapsed! I'd also mention Dylan's 'Christian' phase as a lot of his lyrics turned trite and/or offensive. On the other hand, "Every Grain of Sand" came out of that time so it wasn't a complete lost period. Dylan's '80s albums are a tough listen but not necessarily a 'left turn'.
There's an amazing dylan album in every decade... Including the 2020s
@@ryankramzer1256 I agree. Dylan switches it up, does weird stuff, but also manages to knock one out of the park, even during a slump!
The thing about Dylan is that he seems to always get up after being down.
@@mdav30 That's certainly a big part of his enduring success.
He has his minor albums and his major albums. I don't bother with his minor albums much. Fortunately though he's recorded a ****-load of minor albums he's still doing the majors as well. I absolutely adore Rough and Rowdy Ways, I think it stands amongst his best.
I have been a longtime fan of My Morning Jacket, but i admit somewhere around Circuital they kinda fell slightly, Evil Urges certainly leaned into a different direction but i actually like that album quite a bit, but they took all the weird elements to that album and kind of just kept going in those directions. Also, James' voice altered somehow .... his singing on everything has been i don't know, just different, i have a lot of trouble connecting now, GREAT band, but there's just been something altered about their sound - maybe James' solo outings changed something about his song development within the band, who knows
I think the Waterfall was great. Their new one (self titled) is okay. Need more time to process it. My love for Evil Urges is boundless. - Joe
Metallica, Boston, Ice Cube, Counting Crows, Live & Smashing Pumpkins
Yeah it rarely goes the other way does it? Nothing will defeat you as easily as success.
I think Sick Boy's unifying theory of everything from Trainspotting might actually be a natural law.
Morrissey after "Vauxhall & I", REM after "Automatic For The People", and U2 after "Achtung Baby/Zooroopa"
I liked Monster and New Adventures quite a bit.
Every band has a dip....I like Everything Now. It's an 8/10 for me and Reflector is about 8.5/10 but it is a dip of sorts. No way are those two 3 star albums K...🧐
Agreed.
Yes I like those albums too, although I do slightly prefer the first 3.
For me, as a fan since Chronic Town, I say REM after Bill left.
REM after they left IRS for me.
100% Arcade Fire, Kram. Don’t think I’ve ever been so deflated with a band the first time I listened to Reflektor.. 😩
Yeah I was so unhappy
Sturgill Simpson is the one that immediately came to mind. Jason's thoughts are pretty much dead on with my disappointment. Leon Bridges is another one. His debut "Coming Home" and its throwback old school soul and R&B was so refreshing. His stuff since then has strayed gradually away from that and is not nearly as interesting.
Great call on Leon Bridges
I agree with Sturgill’s later records but I’m a big fan of A Sailor’s Guide to Earth. Love those Stax-esque horns. Everything else has been pretty m’eh though. Didn’t mind the bluegrass albums because I like those songs but they weren’t adding anything.
At first I didn’t like Sound and Fury but then I came around and now I think it’s fantastic. - Joe
I remember really liking Mercury in Retrograde at the time but not much else. I’ll give it another listen though because his voice is incredible.
I cannot see any further than Roxy Music.
I would stand their first three albums against any artists first second and third, and then they fell off a cliff for me.
But what about Siren and Avalon? Didn't like any songs?
I can see a point here but I disagree. My ranking of Roxy Music would simply be in chronological order with the debut being the best. After the first two albums and Eno leaving they could have gone a number of directions. They did not go where I would have expected them to go BUT I am not disappointed with what they did instead. Compare the band output to the Ferry solo stuff and there is a significant difference (from Manzanera, Mackay). Even their final album is a good record, even if they ended at a point I would never have expected when I embarked on the journey in 1972. The trip was worth it all the way.
Modest Mouse, The Shins, Jimmy Eat World, and Foo Fighters are a few bands who's first few albums are absolutely amazing then they just become so boring to me.
Def Leppard was great but went to commercial. So did Bryan Adams..
I agree about Arcade Fire, except I don't like Neon Bible all that much either. Funeral, The Suburbs, and the Arcade Fire EP are all really good.
Oy, so negative, I like Coldplay's last 2 albums. Agree about Sturgill Simpson though, I love Sailor's Guide but after that, just not my thing.
I was disappointed when The Strokes decided to work with Rick Rubin. The Weezer albums after Maladroit feel like a can of worms you're hesitant to open. And when did it all start to go wrong? Well, they decided to work with Rick Rubin.
Rick Rubin rarely makes good records. He should have a much higher batting average given the caliber of artists he works with. I don’t get the way people worship him. -Jason
@@TastesLikeMusic I don't understand it either. It's like good artists are just working with him based on who he worked with in the past. Not the actual albums. Unless, unfortunately, they're just looking at sales.
I'd have to agree very much w/ Kramzer on Arcade Fire. That is definitely the 1st name that popped in my head. It is puzzling that a band that good, could become so trivial, and disposable. If there had been a massive line-up shakeup, it would be easier to understand. Maybe they needed to wait a lot longer in between albums. The other name is Kings of Leon. And I think of AF and KOL together often; they were part of a new rush around'04. KOL first 3 albums are stellar! Some of the best rock'n roll I have ever heard. Now they are in this formula. (And side-note: KOL have got to be the most boring band live EVER!) Going way back I'd say Rod Stewart. He was so freakin good early on. The Faces were tops! And his solo albums pure gold. We all know what came after. Humble Pie, are part of that same class, and also were supposed to end up much better , I think. In a weird way I have to name two of my absolute favorite artists of all time: Tom Waits and Lucinda Williams. it's not that their work ever got lame. Not at all. But they hit this plateau. So their albums in a strange way became a disappointment. Always very good, 4 stars, but never a surprise anymore. I;m trying to think of other eras. Could we say the Clash became a disappointment? Yes, but was it even the Clash anymore? I would also name JayZ. Edit - Queen. Oh, and Genesis. Another one of my alltime favorite bands, while w/ Gabriel. After Hackett left too, they lost the plot. Edit 2 - whoever named the Frames - great call!
Trying to upset Kramz here, right? Cut the c**p! 😉
I'm surprised Kramzer didn't mention Interpol. Not terrible nowadays but they still kinda fell off a little bit
Eh not a big enough fall. I love the 2010 release, and it's really just a matter of not being as good as the debut. They haven't changed so much to dishearten me... If they did a bluegrass album unplugged...I'd be mad
I also noticed Mr T. Edge's lack of humility with Page in that film. When Page suddenly broke into the riff for Whole Lotta Love, Josh White, in contrast, reflexively put down his guitar and just listened.
Maybe U2 should pull a Zep and steal other people's songs so they can be as "humble" as Page.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 Maybe Page could've whipped out a riff more complicated than Whole Lotta Love to impress two professional guitar players. The Edge was probably like, "Yeah, we learned that one right after 'Smoke on the Water' and 'Iron Man', Jim."
@@edgustafson I've watched It Might Get Loud and it seemed to me like Edge was pleased when Page whipped out the Whole Lotta Love riff. Can't deny Page is the ultimate riff master, even if some of Zep's songs are not exactly original compositions.
Good old Josh White.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 love the shade thrown at ol' Jimmy P. Warms my 🖤.
John Grant. I still think Queen of Denmark is one of the best albums of the last 20 years, but apart from a few tracks here and there just haven’t got into the whole electro shift he made after that.
Agree with this but think Pale Green Ghosts is excellent also. GMF, Glacier, Ernest Borgnine, I Hate This Town. I have a lot of love for that album as well but everything else, as you say a few tracks here and there, isn’t something I’m into. He still writes very funny and frank lyrics though so I haven’t written him off just yet!
All I’m trying to do, Mark, is help you understand that The Name of The Rose is merely a blip on an otherwise uninterrupted downward trajectory.
Metallica, gold medal winners.
I deeply Appreciate this reference