gorast

Solid score, pretty well done, though some of the shorter tracks are a little bothersome because they're so short. Both vocal tracks are badass. Worthwhile release overall.

Yeah, it's track 22, after "Drug Lab." OP just missed it. Soundtrack's pretty good. The GBC track is growing on me. My favorite score track might be Hole Drop right now, followed by Putting a Mad Dog Down.

FRGT/10 is a little miffed as well.

Doesn't that have the same problem of trying to find a way to co-headline, though? A7X is big shit. Though it'd certainly give me a reason to go see them live. Haven't felt the inclination to before. Honestly I'm not feeling Incubus on the tour. Not a fan.

You must think QWERTY's a masterpiece then.

Cannot wait for Tuesday. Can't wait to get the physical album, either. Gonnab e a nice addition to my LP-related collection.

Predicting a Tuesday digital release. This Tuesday or next Tuesday, to be exact.

Fair enough about DBS, I forgot about that. But you stated precisely what I was saying: don't even bother comparing The Raid's soundtrack to anything LP might do because they're two entirely separate projects.

I think more accurate comparisons would be "Fort Minor sounded nothing like MTM, Dead by Sunrise sounded nothing like ATS" because those were solo projects and this is a solo project, not a full-band side thing. That was a bit nitpicky. But I just wanted to put out a more...accurate comparison? I dunno.

Enth E Nd is a good remix, imo, and the guest verse is certainly better than others, but I can't stand behind you on H! Vltg3...that guest verse is just bad. Sorry.

Someone help me find my shit, I seem to have totally lost it. I cannot wait for (mostly) solo Mike work. And also the track with GBC vocals.

If this date is legit, I wonder how early a Tampa date would be. I'd need to plan around band shit...or skip a football game and drop a letter grade. Can't wait for an official announcement.

Personally I feel that this shouldn't even be a question. Mike's voice definitely improved from MTM to ATS, and his singing is significantly better on ATS as a result. That's probably why his voice was featured more, aside from it fitting the lyrics of some of the songs more - it just sounded better on ATS.

Maybe the end was only in color because confetti. And confetti in black and white is boring shit.

The film looks too intense for me. But I want the soundtrack. Hopefully we'll see a release in April or something. Or maybe even the Tuesday after the film. But probably not.

Ironically those weren't even the lyrics in the album versions.

I'm impressed by your response.

Who said you're trolling? And if they did, they're stupid. Because you're not trolling. Your opinion is just supported by weak statements, particularly in your opening post. Name five of the greatest albums of all time made strictly on a computer? First of all the idea of using nothing but a computer to make an album is a recent concept and it takes several years of an album existing for it to be called one of the greatest of all time. In addition, you seem to be ignoring electronic instruments, which are hugely important in a number of forms of music and require just as much work as what you apparently deem "real instruments." Who even brought Pro Tools into this discussion? Do you even know how many bands today use Pro Tools? I don't even know what point you're attempting to make here. Additionally, samplers and synthesizers can be used when recording with tape. Don't even try that shit. Those have been used for decades, and samples have existed since the early 1900s. Don't even. The presentation of Linkin Park's shows have changed, and yes, the songs from ATS are more difficult to reproduce live because of how the songs are structured and the layering of them. And yeah, the Catalyst does lose a bit of its appeal in a live setting. But I'll still flip my shit over it if I'm at a concert, because that's what you're there for. It was the lead single from the album, are you saying it shouldn't be played live because it, to you, sounds like crap? What does that say about the band's faith in the album? If you can't even play cuts off of it live, then your album is shit or you're too old to play live shows at all. Again, you seem to be against the use of electronic instruments and methods of music-making. And the statement about lyrics from OSC compared to WTCFM doesn't make sense to me. Maybe I'm not reading it right. If you could clarify it a bit, I'd appreciate that. I should mention that the band, in my opinion, doesn't have the same sort of energy when playing the classic songs as when they're playing the new shit, unless they're bringing back a song they haven't played in years. It feels like it's more out of obligation that they're playing the old songs, because otherwise, fans of the old music wouldn't even bother going to the shows. Are The Black Keys the future? Not a fan of them, honestly. And your statement about radio-safe structure only applies to stupid hipsters who can't appreciate anything that's sold over 1,000 copies. Give the Foo Fighters' "Wasting Light" a spin. Album of the fucking year (to me because, well, Adele exists and wins all the Grammys ever) and they're the definition of radio rock and one of my favorite bands. And I don't know a single person on this forum who would choose fucking Skrillex over seeing a band in concert.

The ending part of Iridescent is probably my favorite studio drum part that Rob's ever done.

This. You can't really tell an artist that what they're doing is or isn't evolution. If the music sounds different, I consider that evolution. Whether it was just what they wrote without thinking about it or if they intentionally threw out all their signature traits and wanted to do a completely different thing, it's evolution.

Allow me to express my immense surprise at your opinion.

whoops this got really long Well then, what would you suggest they do? You brought up some valid points there. Some. But some aren't necessarily valid. " The record is considered ground-breaking in terms of Linkin Park. Why? Because most of the songs all connect via basic synth lines (Radiance into Burning, Jornada into Waiting, Waiting into Blackout, Fallout into Catalyst)? Why, because Mike is singing on more songs?" It's not that the songs connect, that's not actually new to LP (listen to Reanimation or Meteora). It's the fact that the songs actually don't all sound vaguely similar. It's the fact that instead of Chester and Mike singing and rapping about their feels, they're discussing subjects that are less personal, more...thoughtful. Is it masterfully executed? No. Was it one of the best albums of 2010? No. But did the songs indicate a willingness to deviate from the norm for the band? Yes. The album is indeed the band wanting to be different, and trying to be different. It feels like an experiment. Sure, the sound can evolve naturally, and it will. But sometimes you'll want to push it, see what happens when you take yourself out of the usual situations creating the usual shit. That's called art. You know that Reanimation wasn't entirely the work of the band, right? They didn't do anything on most of those songs. So I don't know why you're bringing Reanimation into the discussion. And in regards to the sampled speeches, the manipulations are an extension of the music and segues in the live setting. It's not like the six of them sat backstage and said "How can we shit all over these two men? Oh yeah, by messing with the speeches! Yeah let's do that!" The samples are put into a different context with a different meaning in live concerts. I can't say anything about the segue from The Catalyst to The Messenger because honestly I hate the studio version of The Messenger and its placement isn't great. It could've been intended to be a quiet closing to the album, intended to bring one back to calmness after the peak of The Catalyst. But I don't know. I don't like The Messenger on the album at all, so I'll move on from that. What about Empty Spaces doesn't sound right? Burning in the Skies evokes imagery of nuclear fallout. Empty Spaces illustrates an emptiness in the world following that event, and then bam, war sounds. Because that's what happens in the vague, vague series of events that you could see in the album. When They Come for Me's flow isn't great, but it's far from the worst Mike's done. Have you listened to Hit the Floor? The Fort Minor-esque raps made their way into the album because the Linkin Park-esque raps are shit. Mike has zero emotion in any of them except for the reprise of High Voltage up until he went and did Fort Minor. It brought an intensity to the words and made you believe them more. And finally, give me one goddamn artist that comes up with 100% original, not-influenced-by-anyone-else-ever music. You can't, because it's impossible. Every single artist in the business today is influenced by the people that came before them, and Linkin Park is no different. This isn't a Coldplay album, or a U2 album, or a NIN album. This is a Linkin Park album. And they're not going to make Hybrid Theory 3. tl;dr I respectfully disagree so shush.

Disagree. I'm not a fan of covers that are purely photography. like every bruce springsteen album cover

Aw, it's not that bad. That guest verse certainly could've been better, though. But just focus on FRGT/10 and let it clear your mind!

+1 But no ATS is definitely the best for me. I can't even really listen to Meteora any more. It's...to me, it's just Hybrid Theory with shittier cover art. That's all. There's very little musical growth. And sure, that can be expected from a band that had existed for all of three years (in the eyes of the public, not in actuality). The second album doesn't have to be a total reinvention. But it should push the boundaries of the established sound, and Meteora doesn't do that at all. It takes the established sound and, honestly, pokes at it a bit, maybe changes the shape a little bit, but certainly doesn't challenge it whatsoever. Shit, Breaking the Habit was probably the most adventurous song on that album, and that's not saying much.