http://www.hometracked.com/2007/05/29/all-linkin-park-songs-look-the-same/

--------------------
Producer etc

No doubt most of their songs are very similar.

I'd still say that they're a very cool and very successful band.

Especially if you're going through a break up with someone..!!

Six

oh shock horror - a pop/metal band use intro/drop/verse/dropchorus structures :O



Seriously no surprise there..

--------------------
www.bimmusic.com
www.timdavisproductions.com

Yeah but if you listen to the mp3 of the two songs together it really does highlight how bloody boring and predictable their songs are.

Don't get me wrong have seen them live a couple of times and they are good stage band (although I do hear they perform to a few backing tracks!). But maybe it points out how some people really don't listen... or maybe how humans like things to be familiar?

--------------------
There is nothing Grim about this Reaper
We Fell From The Sky

Well, all Picasso's pictures also sound the same, and that doesn't make them any less worthy. Judging music by the looks of a waveform is nonsense in my book.

I'm not comparing Linkin Park to Picasso. I don't particularly like the band.

I think most successful rock and pop acts use a formula of sorts.

And what about the Blues?

And I doubt that the structure of country music has changed since the 60s.

And don't get me started on House (and it's pointless, hair-splitting derivatives).

I'm sure if you put most of this type of music (ie as opposed simply to the same band's material) through your wave editor, you would see the same patterns emerging.

Well duh.
* It's only the first 90 seconds
* All their hits, I'm guessing?
* They all sound alike too. What's the surprise?
* At least there's visible dynamic range. I was actually impressed.

Seriously, to each their own. Every year there's a string of best-selling crap pop acts that can get broken down and insulted like this, but no one's forcing you to listen.

--------------------
gentle robot - chapel hill rock band

NEXT WEEK: the sonata form - "classical syphonies lambasted for their predictable conformity"

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

... and the week after: The Folk Song, and it's pointlessly predictable "story in a song" structure.

That's the point, though, isn't it? Some of the lyrics in songs are so fatuous that one can legitmately grow tired of the song's structure. The "boy band ballad" comes all too easily into my mind. With great song writing and emotive performances a band can lift the mundane to new heights.

Listen to the music of Howlin' Wolf and then Buddy Guy, and then Muddy Waters, and then B B King, etc, etc. They all use the same structure. Usually, the song is about "a woman having done her man wrong." Lyrics are littered with cliches. But the music of each artist is fresh and distinctive.

The fact that they all follow the same I-IV-V formula, with lead guitar intro and outro, etc does not relegate the Blues to meaningless drivel.

If you went around surprising everyone with random structures-
1. You could quite possibly miss your target audience by being too clever.
2. You would have to be pretty good at it (Pink Floyd, Meshuggah, Tool) to make something worthwhile.
I assume most people feel more comfortable listening to structures they are familiar with, and that once you really start listening to music you appreciate bands who can effectivly deviate and innovate.
Besides, if you are going to sell out, why not do it properly.

Quote tekro:

---

Besides, if you are going to sell out, why not do it properly.

---

Superbly put!

Many thought Dylan sold out for the same reason. Her was a man (many thought) on the verge of re-inventing the folk ballad. Then (horror of horrors) he succumbed to the evils of pop music!

Was his message diminshed any?

(I'll take a step back from that particular debate, since I'm someone who still finds his first album fresher than, say, Blood On The Tracks. But I know that many remain divided on that particular issue).

There are some simple psychoacoustics principles here.

LEt's have a thought. If everything was always at the same level, you could not exactly feel the strength of a song (how can u judge bad from good if your life is always the same thing). So there has to be changes of level, right?

Now, start with something loud and then continue with a low level part. The high level part will seem normal and the low level part will seem shrinked.

Do the opposite, your low level part will seem normal and the high level one will sound like it has a very good power.

Now if you continue always at the same level, you will get the same result as if there had not been the introduction, because of the short time memory people have. (a few seconds). This short time memory makes it a good idea to keep the same level for a few tens of seconds and then change. This suits very well with the rock song pattern.

So basicly, if you want people to like your song (and even if you want to like your own song), this is the kind of pattern you must follow. Simple psychoacoustics fact.

Now, you can take many other bands' waveforms and I'm pretty sure you'll find the same thing.

Of course, there are other musical style that work differently.

For blues, for example, you might not have this aspect but you will have harmonic similarities, because that's part of what construct blues (being not an expert, I might be wrong, but the blues grid is something common to many many blues songs, isn't it?).

Was just a thought, might be wrong, though. (well, not about the short time memory, at least ;-) )

Absolutely Laurent - and this concept is in no way new to Linkin Park or the modern era.

I mean the simple and obvious underlying accusation and slur that is going on here has led me to stay clear so far...but Laurent makes a good point. I can simply sum up the jumped up charges in two words.

1. Dynamics
2. Formulaic

Now if the charge is LP use dynamics thats pretty pathetic - lets face it - a simple study of form will show that almost every band uses dynamics. Oops sorry. Got that wrong. Something Kinda ooooo by Girls Aloud has absolutely no dynamics AT ALL....and I must say I actually find myself switching off pretty damn fast...it gets painful to listen to.

If the argument is that it is formulaic...er...for christ sake...ever heard of a concerto?!

In fact the study of form would lead you to realise that almost ALL songs in some way look the same. Its a completely pointless accusation.

Now lack of imagination and variation - fair cop guv. 'Havent we heard that phrase/meoldy before?' fair cop again.

The problem is they got carried away with what people like...and didnt want to branch out...sold out - absolutely. The money men obviously wanted more of the same - dont upset the applecart type stuff no doubt....but there again - ever heard of James Bond? I dont hear anyone slating that in the same way...curious isnt it?

Quote leslawrenson:

---

The fact that they all follow the same I-IV-V formula, with lead guitar intro and outro, etc does not relegate the Blues to meaningless drivel.

---

But if they had gone quiet/loud/quiet/loud in the post-Nirvana style it would be quite tiresome...

Even the old punk formula: 1 2 3 4 loud/loud/loud/loud/loud/stop was more interesting without the fey winsome noodling interlude that seems to be de rigueur these days, and not just Linkin Park (whoever they are).

--------------------
www.bemuso.com

True, I suppose.

Talking about the Blues, it is the fact that it has such a stripped down structure that makes it such a fascinating medium. When I was 15 I used to learn the early Clapton stuff and play it in my band. I spent hours learning how to do Clapton's bends and vibrato, without which his music loses a lot of its magic. It seems so very easy, but it is not.

Ah, happy days!

I think it's fantastic that somebody has wasted their time comparing the waveform representations of Linkin Park songs. Granted I didn't read the full post as it looked so ridiculous but HONESTLY. Who does that sort of thing?

This reminds me of a brilliant friend of mine who, although loves music, doesn't know much about how it's made. Once after we'd been playing around in Logic making a track (he creatively directed, a little like Goldie)he took it home with him and later called me up.

"I've looked at the waveform and it looks like Drum & Bass which is good".

I said (while laughing), "Oh really? What exactly does Drum & Bass look like?"

SJ.

Quote leslawrenson:

---

Many thought Dylan sold out for the same reason. Her was a man (many thought) on the verge of re-inventing the folk ballad.

---

Dylan isn't a man??

Blimey!

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

I thought he was a rabbit!

Next week, Life: Birth, copulation and death too predictable by half.

--------------------
With a boom-a-lacka, zoom-a-lacka, wee.

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Quote leslawrenson:

---

Many thought Dylan sold out for the same reason. Her was a man (many thought) on the verge of re-inventing the folk ballad.

---

Dylan isn't a man??

Blimey!

---

I thought everyone knew?

Real name "Bobbi Dylan."

Well put Barry, but:

Quote Barry Pearce:

---

I mean the simple and obvious underlying accusation and slur that is going on here has led me to stay clear so far...

---

Who was slurring? Quoting from the blog linked to in the opening post:
"And while it’s easy to criticize the band for their overuse of a formula that’s by now cliche, the similarity between their tracks at least holds a lesson on the importance of song arrangement in pop music production".

So it's all good! And if it's not, it's a sonata

--------------------
madtheory creations
Synths and pianos for Kontakt