Personally, I think that they're changing for the better. I feel like things are only going to get better from here on out. To me this change in sound is what I would have expected after Pinkerton. It's their good old sound that we love, only it's been improved. It's like they went back in time to their old selves with the knowledge that they have now.
I love it and I'm on the edge of my chair waiting to hear what comes out of the genius that is Rivers Cuomo next.
Forget about Matt. Scott kicks ass.
THANK YOU. Finally someone that doesn't completely bash the changes they've made. You've made my day :)
Brittish Rotting said:THANK YOU. Finally someone that doesn't completely bash the changes they've made. You've made my day :)
There are a bunch of us that feel this way.
They're doing worse, far worse. Basically, I've said this a million times, but I honestly cannot fathom what there is to really get excited about with their new material. It says nothing and it mostly goes nowhere. Most of the songs are as formulaic as can be, and the few that aren't still really aren't good. The lyrical sentiments are cliched, the guitar solos are mostly thoughtless when they appear, the progressions are tired...it's just a lot of dumb music. The only reason Weezer is so bad now is because Rivers can churn out melodies, fit some paint-by-numbers lyrics to them, add distortion and voila: the next Weezer album. And it will sell and there will be tons of nostalgic people here calling it a "Return to form" if Rivers emotes a little. With such an uncritical new fanbase, why should he bother to try doing anything really challenging?
But this is not at all the conditions the first two records were written under and it was not at all Rivers' songwriting approach then. In his obsessive detailing of pop structures after the Pinkerton flop, the guy seems to have forgotten that the whole point of learning those rules is to be able to break them for artistic reasons. But Rivers is not interested in producing art, he's interested in producing ear candy. It's so strange to me that this guy is so obsessed with Nirvana...Kurt Cobain did not give two s**** about being famous and he was not the least bit afraid to express/expose himself and fail at it. Rivers in the 90's was the successor to Cobain in that respect, but he was a better songwriter. Now he's not even close and ironically it's because he figured out all the superficial trappings of Kurt's aesthetic while shedding all the heart and meaning.
This band is barely a shadow of itself. I can't see their music getting any better unless Rivers changes his mindset- and if crap like Make Believe can go platinum, then why should he, really?
I don't think you have any idea where I'm coming from. I'm a professional musician who gets hired to play on projects from funk, to jazz, to latin, to country, to rock, to basically whatever. I am theory-trained. I was raised and trained by a professional musician and I could record Pinkerton myself solo playing everyone's parts to perfection. As a matter of fact I am currently working on a solo album where I am writing, performing, recording, singing and engineering every single note. This is not to say how great I think I am- it's been nothing but hard work. I am no prodigy. But the point of all that is this: I'm not coming at this from a fan perspective and that's where you seem to be confused. I could easily give you a detailed explanation of why Pinkerton absolutely destroys Hurley and everything else Weezer has done this decade, but I'm not going to waste my breath on it. It's been done 1000 times and it speaks for itself.
Besides, it's pretty simple, actually. Name me a single key change within a song on Hurley. Pinkerton is full of them. There are multiple modulations in Across The Sea and Falling For You. That's just two songs with far more complex chordal structures than ANYTHING on Hurley.
This idea that I'll never be content with anything because I recognize, rightly, that Rivers has lost the plot as a songwriter is sheer nonsense.
Here's my advice to you- buy the guitar book for Pinkerton and do a chordal analysis. Compare it to ANYTHING from this decade and get back to me. I won't presume to judge that your life will somehow be incomplete if you can't recognize what is glaringly apparent from the study, though.
It's not the amount of time that elapses, it's your age. You don't "get" the album because it's not for people your age. When you get older and have some real life experience, you will appreciate that album far more than you do now.
It doesn't do anything to my argument. You probably liked the things that Dorian doesn't: specifically the messy and raw production style. Still, it was likely just as over your head at 13 as it is over Dorian's head at 14-15. I'm not sure how old you are now, but I'd wager that the older you get, to a certain extent, the more true and immediate that album actually becomes.
And yes, I've heard that statement a million times and I've always felt it was nothing but an excuse. Rivers would never have said that if the album had been as successful as Blue. He was not drunk when he wrote the songs and he was not drunk when he recorded the album. He thought it was going to be huge.
It was never really about expectations for me. They'll never go back. But I'm not going to pretend that's not majorly disappointing. I don't mind them going different directions, I just want good results. And I am 100% convinced that the last 6 albums are crap.
Marc said:Anyone screaming for this band to go back to their original sound only needs to read those comments. My expectations have changed significantly. It is what it is..
elscorcho said:Part me wants to say this guy isn't really Rivers. But I know it is.
Marc said:Opened my eyes to a few things...