Will this be Linkin Park's Kid A? https://www.youtube.

>>71153034
no
kid a was ingenius
heavy is pure generic pop chainsmokers-inspired cow shit

>>71153034
wow
that is really, really bad

more like their raditude, but even that implies they were ever somewhat good

the reaction to this is utterly perplexing to me, as if linkin park being an industry plant is some kind of massive shock? that is literally their history - they are and always were a boy band. that's why their first 2 albums follow the exact same formula. that's why every single song on those albums follows the same songwriting formula, besides the token dj instrumental. that's why the clean bits could literally be fucking NSYNC bits

rock bands don't just form and suddenly land a major label deal with a polished, radio-ready sound and go diamond. linking park were a boyband put together through focus groups and stat shitters, they had all the sincerity of the spice girls (and less good songs)

I kept hearing that this is linkin park being experimental.

So nu-metal bands experimenting = generic pop?

>>71153034
if we were talking about a "Kid A" from them,it's always been A Thousand Suns,not that top 40 song

critics compared ATS with Radiohead and also DSOTM for its concept and as a straightforward record....I dont know if they were ironic,but it's the nearest thing to Kid A

it's like linkin park's recovery (the eminem album)

>>71153235
that's a believable narrative but what does it matter?

Weezer's very first album was released on a sub-label of Universal

>>71153986
it matters because of the way people are reacting to linkin park pandering to current trends, as if that isn't what they were formed to do

and there could very well be a significant amount of label intervention in weezer's blue album, but it is very clearly less sterile than anything linking park put out. you're comparing a band going triple platinum in the 90s to a band going diamond in the 00s.

weezer were likely just the product of a confused era where majors were desperate to find the next nirvana, where every young kid wanted to be a rockstar and where every radio station would play loud-ass guitar music all day every day. linkin park sounds like a bunch of executives sat down in a room and said 'middle school boys like Limp Bizkit, middle school girls like the Backstreet Boys. what if we had BOTH, in ONE BAND?'

>>71153940
underrated reply

>>71155390
>>71153235
LP weren't designed from the ground up as big pop hitters, they were a legitimate underground band with a semi-unique sound who were picked up by someone who saw their massive commercial potential.

>>71153753
I unironically really like ATS, it's easily the least worst thing they've done.

File: LinkinPark-Xero.jpg (37KB, 400x400px)

37KB, 400x400px

>>71153235
>the reaction to this is utterly perplexing to me, as if linkin park being an industry plant is some kind of massive shock? that is literally their history - they are and always were a boy band. that's why their first 2 albums follow the exact same formula. that's why every single song on those albums follows the same songwriting formula, besides the token dj instrumental. that's why the clean bits could literally be fucking NSYNC bits
But that's wrong you fucking retard.

>>71153235
>>71155390
lay off the scaruffi.com buddy

>>71155390
fact of the matter is you don't get anywhere in any business if you don't like what you do, so marketing is just marketing and you shouldn't judge the product by it, your narrative is simplistic thus boring and imo you'd be better off if you rose above this commercial vs authentic dichotomy instead of trying this hard to go against the grain because indie labels have target demographics too

>>71156152
that's more like Shallow Rewards rhetoric isnt it

File: flat,800x800,075,f.jpg (18KB, 248x189px)

18KB, 248x189px

>>71153034
they're making a 2009 album in 2017

>>71158508
chart music didn't sound like this in 09, it sounds more 2013 tbqh