CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => Music and Recordings => Topic started by: Original_Ken on December 19, 2013, 05:55:07 PM
-
I'm curious as to whether any of today's musical artists (whether popular or obscure) have changed styles after becoming successful with a style.
Probably the best and most important example is Miles Davis, because he popularized and created new styles:
late 40's - Cool Jazz
late 50's - Modal Jazz
late 60's - Jazz Fusion
The most well known example, of course, is The Beatles, who went from Rock and Roll to Psychedelic Rock.
Bob Dylan was famous (or infamous) for going from Acoustic Folk to Electric Folk Rock, while Joni Mitchell went from Acoustic Folk to Jazz.
So, I'd be interested in knowing about any current artists who have done similarly, thanks.
-
Mozart changed his style dramatically for his last work: Requiem in D Minor K626. It's really weird because it's so different from all of this earlier works and such a masterpiece considering the musical form constraints of that time period. Evidently it was never appreciated until after way after his death. Depending upon the version (it was unfinished), you can tell which parts were Mozart and which parts were filled in by "WTF".
Mozart also had a significant change in style when he moved from Salzburg to Vienna.
The Police changed after Ghost in the Machine. In some ways Ghost in the Machine could be considered a bridge to Synchronicity. There were definitely hints of what was to come. It was still very much a Police album though.
Synchronicity was really the album where the Police (punk/ reggae/ rock) ended and "Sting" began.
-
Maroon 5.
Every album they changed styles. 'nuff said.
-
Radiohead from straight rock to something much more electronic based.
Kid A marked the start of the departure and it just got more extreme from there.
-
Norah Jones
2002 Come Away With Me - country/jazz fusion - 11 million copies sold
2004 Feels Like Home - Honkey Tonk junk - 4 million copies sold
Certainly put a damper on her popularity by changing styles, also by writing most of the album's songs herself. Whoops!
-
I think I've mentioned Opeth before, right? 8) "Watershed" to "Heritage" was a huge jump. Pissed off all the old-school fans so bad, and they already weren't thrilled about "Watershed." Progressive metal to psychedelic progressive rock and jazz fusion.
In some ways, I find the jump similarly comparable to Radiohead going from "OK Computer" to "Kid A." I'd have mentioned that as well, but it was already covered.
Cave In went from being a rather hardcore band to, well...not that? Check out "Jupiter." Progressive space rock? Their latest album pulls much more towards their old, hardcore style, but they had a way different phase for a couple albums.
-
I disagree about Radiohead.
It can be noticed right from OK Computer that they were into electronic and alternatibe sounds, KID A and Amnesiac were their most adventurous albums in my opinion but they didn't really change to something else only refined.
Radiohead are good indeed but they're not the groundbreakers people often make them to be.
Their last work has more in common with those two albums than Hail To The Thief and In Rainbows.
I don't think it's correct characterize Miles Davis musical endeavour as a stylistic "change" either but rather as an evolution, he was breaking new ground but he was evolving not flatout "changing" style nor language.
I don't think any true musician actually flattout changes his/her style, it's something that evolves with more experience and influences. I say "true musician" because there is the chance that a lot of crappy mainstream "musicians" who are seeking fame at all cost will do just about anything to gain it, including preciselly changing style.
I think we can find examples of that in the more popular music circles, I wouldn't be surprised if this was actually a frequent phenomenon.
One artist I consider to have protagonised one of the most fascinating musical evolutions from the 1960's to this day is Scott Walker.
-
I like Feels Like Home and Not Too Late a fair bit more than Come Away With Me. Her debut is solid, but feels a bit too "textbook" and uninteresting to me. Kind of puts me to sleep. She did lose me with her two most recent albums though.
I don't like any of Radiohead's albums pre-Kid A. Terribly generic 90's rock in my view. But Kid A is a masterpiece out of nowhere.
The Red Hot Chili Peppers had an interesting progression in my view. After the funk phase ended, they had a decently long period of making interesting music before they became utter pop rock garbage.
-
I think I've mentioned Opeth before, right? 8) "Watershed" to "Heritage" was a huge jump. Pissed off all the old-school fans so bad, and they already weren't thrilled about "Watershed." Progressive metal to psychedelic progressive rock and jazz fusion.
As someone who's first Opeth album was Watershed, I greatly prefer it and Heritage to their previous work.
-
I think I've mentioned Opeth before, right? 8) "Watershed" to "Heritage" was a huge jump. Pissed off all the old-school fans so bad, and they already weren't thrilled about "Watershed." Progressive metal to psychedelic progressive rock and jazz fusion.
As someone who's first Opeth album was Watershed, I greatly prefer it and Heritage to their previous work.
I like their older and newer styles equally but for different reasons, minus the very first two albums. Can't really get into those...
-
Jenny Scheinman and Brian Blade have both made critically acclaimed singer-songwriter albums after first coming to prominence as jazz players. Jenny is all over the place stylistically, which is fun: every album she does with Bill Frisell seems to be different from anything she has done before, Mischief and Mayhem (her "side project" with Nels Cline) is avant-rock, and she has toured with a lot of folk and country artists, from Rodney Crowell to Bruce Cockburn to Robbie Fulks (hoping to catch his show at the Mint in LA on Saturday).
Speaking of Nels Cline, has anyone ever been in two more different bands at the same time than Jenny Scheinman's Mischief & and Mayhem and Wilco?
Edgar Meyer, Mark O'Connor, and Bela Fleck have all migrated with ease back and forth among bluegrass, jazz, and classical. Julian Lage is known primarily as a jazz guitarist, but he also has ridiculous bluegrass chops (see example here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4F9j39xcQWo)
And then there's Chris Thile getting all the love from all the classical-music critics for his Bach recording.
-
Mozart changed his style dramatically for his last work: Requiem in D Minor K626. It's really weird because it's so different from all of this earlier works and such a masterpiece considering the musical form constraints of that time period. Evidently it was never appreciated until after way after his death. Depending upon the version (it was unfinished), you can tell which parts were Mozart and which parts were filled in by "WTF".
Mozart also had a significant change in style when he moved from Salzburg to Vienna.
Pretty much the beginning of the Romantic Period along w/ the arrival of the piano and a young Beethoven. I'm sure age, experience and illness had a lot to due w/ that too.
__________
Daft Punk's latest album.
-
Metallica went through a few evolutions, from the dirty, unfocused and raw Leather Charm thrash of KEA to progressive thrash on their next few to commercially tailored arena rock/thrash on the "black" album to what became known as "Alternica" on Load.
Anathema and Paradise Lost also underwent massive changes in their sound, as did Darkthrone.
-
Talk Talk changed styles starting from spirit of eden
-
I disagree about Radiohead.
It can be noticed right from OK Computer that they were into electronic and alternatibe sounds, KID A and Amnesiac were their most adventurous albums in my opinion but they didn't really change to something else only refined.
Radiohead are good indeed but they're not the groundbreakers people often make them to be.
Their last work has more in common with those two albums than Hail To The Thief and In Rainbows.
Certainly, some of the ideas started to crop up in OK Computer and it was a gradual descent from there. But Kid A was still the tipping point. A lot of fans jumped ship after that one and a whole new crowd came in (I'm looking at you OJneg!).
But, whatever...it doesn't really matter HOW they got there. Just put in Pablo Honey. Then put in King of Limbs. Yeah...they've changed.
-
Heart 70's v. Heart 80s.
-
I disagree about Radiohead.
It can be noticed right from OK Computer that they were into electronic and alternatibe sounds, KID A and Amnesiac were their most adventurous albums in my opinion but they didn't really change to something else only refined.
Radiohead are good indeed but they're not the groundbreakers people often make them to be.
Their last work has more in common with those two albums than Hail To The Thief and In Rainbows.
I don't think it's correct characterize Miles Davis musical endeavour as a stylistic "change" either but rather as an evolution, he was breaking new ground but he was evolving not flatout "changing" style nor language.
I don't think any true musician actually flattout changes his/her style, it's something that evolves with more experience and influences. I say "true musician" because there is the chance that a lot of crappy mainstream "musicians" who are seeking fame at all cost will do just about anything to gain it, including preciselly changing style.
I think we can find examples of that in the more popular music circles, I wouldn't be surprised if this was actually a frequent phenomenon.
One artist I consider to have protagonised one of the most fascinating musical evolutions from the 1960's to this day is Scott Walker.
Musicians do evolve, however once they can no longer reproduce with their former selves they are considered a new species. So yeah, evolution is the process of change, it often happens with a rather drastic mutation which could not be predicted from a prior plateau.
I disagree about Radiohead. Listen to their late 80s demos, their early 90s guitar and melody driven music, their grandiose progrock turn with OK Computer, followed by the flirtation with minimalism in Kid A. They changed quite a lot throughout their first decade, though they've stabilized after Hail to the Thief. They're also the first major band to release a pay-what-you-want album online. If Radiohead wasn't groundbreaking then I'm not sure what that word must mean.
A couple more radically evolving groups: Suicidal Tendencies, Pat Boone.
-
I'm glad for the love being shown for radiohead as I love their music myself.
But I still stand by what I said earlier about radiohead not breaking new ground.
It can be said that their musical aesthetics, since OK Computer, evolved into something trully accomplished and unique (which was what attracted me to them) but aesthetical judgement is subjective and either linguistically or technically speaking there was nothing really new about what they did.
A lot of the experimentation they did in Kid A or Amnesiac bears resemblances to what can be heard from Krautrock bands back in the 70's and the british band has assumed Krautrock to have been a major influence in their sound. That was in my opinion the last period where significant innovation could be acknowledge in the Rock genre, from the 80's to this day not much happened.
And truth be told Radiohead was not the only progressive rock band doing the sort of stuff they did, I could name a few more. I can agree they were one of the best though.
The proccess from the late 80's to the late 90's you described for Radiohead is something that a lot of musical artists and bands go through when they are just starting and still trying to find their sound.
-
We'll have to disagree about "new ground". It is arguable that the formative albums of a band finding its voice by very definition vary in style from their later work. Also when speaking of Radiohead I'm including the side projects of its members. Johnny Greenwood's work on soundtracks is superb and Thom Yorke has been a guest vocalist for bands of varying genres, not to mention his solo work or the recent Atoms for Peace project.
On to other artists. Bjork. Holy crap has she changed over the years. Not that I have to go over her career, I'm sure most here are quite familiar with her work. But why not. She started at 12 with a few innocent pop songs with a somewhat unrefined but enthusiastic voice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no_G6Qyo04k
Then her work with the Sugarcubes, a band that was all about fun, influenced a bit by punk and overtly theatrical:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoMG_7N5vUY
Followed by a jazzy turn with Björk Guðmundsdóttir & tríó Guðmundar Ingólfssonar. Check out their version of a classic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1EoZH87lb0
-
willie nelson
-
Rest of Bjork post:
She began finding here voice in the early 90s with Debut, an inquisitive, poppy, house derived affair:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCGveA39VYA
By Homogenic she was fully formed and bold. A bit more sensuous, more confident of her use of sparse instrumentation and simple beats as a background to her unique voice to entrance the listener
.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rupcbukhszw
Followed by Vespertine, even more intimate, more mature and leaning towards a mystic poetry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqF8_UcUQdQ
By Medulla she wanted to tear things apart further and craft a challenging but rewarding album.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi06IE0QXMU
I'd like to also include this song, her duet with Antony Hegarty.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktoBm0t8KV8
One of hererecent collaborations with Dirty Projectors on the Mountain Wittenberg Orca reimagining of Bitte Orca:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OquMlYFtnE
[/quote]
-
Lol - I don't consider Bjork to be merely a musical artist, and I don't consider her to have a "style" to have changed. Her most recent is yet different from all the above (and yet different from anything else at all):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM80F_J-QHE
-
Lol - I don't consider Bjork to be merely a musical artist, and I don't consider her to have a "style" to have changed. Her most recent is yet different from all the above (and yet different from anything else at all):
I agree, in part. When sorting my music by id3 tags I usually try to be general with genres, but all of Bjork's album simply go under the "Bjork" genre. Nor is it fair to distill her work to a few videos. I'm thinking of starting of a rabid fan thread where each post chronicles an artist's whole body of work and the listener's analysis/connection to it.
-
Scott Walker - in his early twenties he was singing baroque pop/chanson like Jacques Brel covers. In his latter years (ignoring all the crappy stuff he did between those periods) starting from Tilt his work becomes quite experimental and dark.
-
U2 sounds like Coldplay
Muse sounds like Coldplay
Coldplay sells so everyone wants to sound like Coldplay
Enough with the Coldplay
-
Scriabin, went quite off the deep end in the end, but thankfully for us music fans it created great music.
Here's early Scriabin:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw_zENfDH88
Later:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4wuqR2NdF8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GEwho6Dbnc
-
People should read the OP before replying.
Scriabin is a parrot.
-
People should read the OP before replying.
Scriabin is a parrot.
Yeah I guess he doesn't qualify for the modern artist part, but I saw Mozart being mentioned. How is he a parrot?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE
-
Well, I think Pink Floyd changed with DSTM. I mean I've listened to songs like See Emily Play and wondered where the heck that was coming from.
-
Lionize dropped the "dark reggae" from their stuff and now they are touring with Clutch.
-
Well, I think Pink Floyd changed with DSTM. I mean I've listened to songs like See Emily Play and wondered where the heck that was coming from.
The songwriter from their early years left the band.
-
Has anyone brought up Matisyahu yet? I wish I could lock him into a time machine set for 10 years ago.
-
Muse sounds like Coldplay
At least they stopped trying to sound like Radiohead.
Also, how are we not talking about the devastating loss to 90's era "rock" when Darius Rucker became a country star? HOOOOOOTIE, NOOOOO!
-
Maybe there should be a thread for Artists Who Shouldn't Have Changed Styles :)p13
-
Maroon 5.
Every album they changed styles. 'nuff said.
I cannot stand Adam Levine until he drops the nasal whine. Good band though.
About Pink Floyd, after Syd Barrett was out of Pink Floyd, mark II was a fact. The Syd Barrett influence made Pink Floyd more fun to listen to though. "The Piper at The Gates of Dawn" is one of my prog favourites.
-
Funk, don't forget our favorite bank Deep Purple. Mark III was distinctly different than Mark II. I suppose this is why they went back to the Mark II lineup until Ritchie left for good.
-
Maybe there should be a thread for Artists Who Shouldn't Have Changed Styles :)p13
Finger Eleven :vomit:. The metal was all right, and I love the alternative rock... but then they went pop. I don't listen to a lot of Infected Mushroom (just Viscous Delicious and Black Shawarma) but they vary significantly throughout their discography. I truly hate Army of Mushrooms.
Not sure what you define as recent, but Mother's Milk by Red Hot Chilli Peppers and prior is a lot different from the modern albums (more funk in the old). I don't listen to a lot of Stone Temple Pilots, but they seem to have changed from grunge rock to modern rock.
-
Funk, don't forget our favorite bank Deep Purple. Mark III was distinctly different than Mark II. I suppose this is why they went back to the Mark II lineup until Ritchie left for good.
Deep Purple mark II was so "In Rock" that Mount Rushmore was struck by a "fire ball" that "machine headed" one of the best album covers of all times. Thankfully Ritchie Blackmore inspired a generation of guitar awesomeness.
Shall we add Focus and Frank Zappa to the thread? Sounds like a new catch phrase: "needs more Zappa."
-
The Contortionist underwent a pretty dramatic change with their last album. They went from an aggressive tech metal band to something...much more difficult to describe. It's tech metal with restraint, patience, and a rich atmosphere...but it's also something entirely different.
-
Massive Attack seemed to change a lot with 2010 Heligoland. Supposedly, they were going back to working with Tricky and recorded some tracks which leaves me really hopeful. This year, it came up that they were now working with Run the Jewels...so all promising.
-
Taylor Swift
Then - Pop country targeted towards upper-middle class tween girls
Now - Pop targeted towards upper-middle class girls in their late teens/entering college
She lost her way.
-
Taylor Swift
Then - Pop country targeted towards upper-middle class tween girls
Now - Pop targeted towards upper-middle class girls in their late teens/entering college
She lost her way.
Thankfully the goat remixes with Dubstep are still hilarious though. Otherwise her acoustic performances are your only consolation.
-
Thankfully the goat remixes with Dubstep are still hilarious though. Otherwise her acoustic performances are your only consolation.
I will always remember this Taylor: http://www.mtv.com/videos/misc/559926/innocent-live.jhtml
-
Talk Talk changed styles starting from spirit of eden
LOL, this could not be more understated, they veered from off the shelf New Wave/Romantic shit to what can possibly only be labeled as 'Later stages Talk Talk'. 'Post-Rock' doesn't really say much.
-
I have to say that most of the responses have people who changed styles to further their career.
My original question was (to summarize now) - artists who have changed style for artistic reasons.
Miles Davis, The Beatles, Bob Dylan and Joni Mitchell were long past worrying about their careers - the world followed them.
Yes, there are plenty of Alanis Morrisette's who made career moves by changing genres, but there is no point to making a list of those.
( But all the posts are interesting anyway! )