Jump to content
 

California discussion


boxelder

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, b00bies said:

California on the other hand is good, but it's just TOYPAJ without riffs and sounds pretty much like every modern pop/punk bandbut blink did it better. It's good that they are having fun and back to the game, but at the same time they set the pressure for the next record. No mercy for the next nana's and whoas with generic sound. 

The major difference is that TOYPAJ, the worst blink album, consists of the band forcing themselves to write the kind of songs they think are expected of them, while on California it finally sounds like they're enjoying themselves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Olidamus said:

 

Don't agree. It's a good album,  but it retains very little of any of their previous work. Perhaps the things that stands out the most as Blink is Travis' drumming. Feldman tried to change just about everything, but he couldn't change the drumming. 

But Matt ain't the problem here, I don't miss Tom, I miss Jerry Finn.


It sounds more like blink than Neighborhoods, DED, and one could even argue Untitled.

Fits perfectly on their discography

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Scott. said:

California is blink. The only albums that don't sound like blink are Untitled and Neighbourhoods. If this had Tom on vocals nobody would say "doesn't sound like blink" simple as that. 

The only non blink thing on the album are the group vocals and maybe the lack of riffs but Tom is absent so we gave that up. No chance id take that wanker back for another neighbourhoods

I wouldn't say that.  Untitled definitely sounds like blink, Neighborhoods does too.  Those albums sound like blink because they were blink pushing their sounds further, just as I'd say the Enema/TOYPAJ albums were pushing the blink sound further from where they had been with Cheshire and Dude Ranch.  It's like looking at the earliest Beatles albums and then their final albums, they are very different sounds, but still undeniably the same band because they pushed their sounds further.

I understand the criticism that this album can be seen as a regression or at least doesn't push the sounds of blink further.  Ultimately that's pretty much true.  But that doesn't have to be a bad thing.  To try and do what they did with Untitled and actually top that album is not going to be an easy task, they tried and really didn't succeed at that with Neighborhoods. If they tried again but with a new member in Tom's spot, that's a hell of a lot of pressure, "Hey, we're going to try and top our magnum opus, you've barely done anything with us, you ready?  If this is a failure, all the fans are probably going to place the blame squarely on you since you're new and we just kicked out a guy."  Under that logic, it's no wonder they took the safe and perhaps easier route of just putting out a solid fun pop-punk album.  Considering how many songs they had prepped and created with Feldmann, its probably a safe bet that the next album will be somewhere in the same vein as California.  However, once I think Skiba has firmly settled in and I suspect after the next full album, I imagine they will try and top Untitled again, they aren't dumb they recognize the universal praise that album got, they play  more songs from that album each night than any other album when they play live.  I have no doubt they will go down that route again of trying to make another album like Untitled, I just don't think that they believe now is the right time for that, and I tend to agree if that is indeed the case.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, M!ke said:

I wouldn't say that.  Untitled definitely sounds like blink, Neighborhoods does too.  Those albums sound like blink because they were blink pushing their sounds further, just as I'd say the Enema/TOYPAJ albums were pushing the blink sound further from where they had been with Cheshire and Dude Ranch.  It's like looking at the earliest Beatles albums and then their final albums, they are very different sounds, but still undeniably the same band because they pushed their sounds further.

I understand the criticism that this album can be seen as a regression or at least doesn't push the sounds of blink further.  Ultimately that's pretty much true.  But that doesn't have to be a bad thing.  To try and do what they did with Untitled and actually top that album is not going to be an easy task, they tried and really didn't succeed at that with Neighborhoods. If they tried again but with a new member in Tom's spot, that's a hell of a lot of pressure, "Hey, we're going to try and top our magnum opus, you've barely done anything with us, you ready?  If this is a failure, all the fans are probably going to place the blame squarely on you since you're new and we just kicked out a guy."  Under that logic, it's no wonder they took the safe and perhaps easier route of just putting out a solid fun pop-punk album.  Considering how many songs they had prepped and created with Feldmann, its probably a safe bet that the next album will be somewhere in the same vein as California.  However, once I think Skiba has firmly settled in and I suspect after the next full album, I imagine they will try and top Untitled again, they aren't dumb they recognize the universal praise that album got, they play  more songs from that album each night than any other album when they play live.  I have no doubt they will go down that route again of trying to make another album like Untitled, I just don't think that they believe now is the right time for that, and I tend to agree if that is indeed the case.

How dare you offer an objective, well-thought-out opinion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you were to compare Dude Ranch and Neighborhoods you'd recognize bits here and bits there (Boring riff = EISF riff, Lemmings = HAG), but overall the separation would be even larger than it is between Neighborhoods and California.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, _Kyle_ said:

Explain then how these songs differ. I mean, explain it simple for dunces like myself. Unless you have a better critique than the "tone" is different (hint, it's not) then you're just splitting hairs about upbeat pop-rock with very similar styles. The fact the vocals on both those GC tracks are more pronounced is another reason.

There's a lot of people here who can't handle criticism and are weirdly insecure about themselves and what they like.

No, it's nothing to do with criticism, it just honestly is something someone would say with the absolute most lacking detail of musical ear. Like you should just listen to the radio and not dig into music if you honestly think good Charlotte sounds similar enough to go on any Blink album. 

This isn't even in the Nirvana, Stone Temple pilots, Pearl Jam, Verve Pipe have similarities range. Which I feel you're reaching for.

1. Vocals: the most glaring difference. Mark and Matt sound incredibly different from GC, at all times.

2. Guitar & Bass: Blink is known for leading with heavy bass lines. Their guitar tone is vastly heavier as well, that song you posted I don't think Skibba ever gets as high as even on no future bridge. Blink often plays E/A power chords and falsettos, GC plays like D string power chords.

3. Song Structure: Sure Blink focused heavily on choruses in California, but that song is 100% hanging around the chorus at all times, where's the slowed down bridge, where's the verses?

4. DRUMS: Every single Blink song is set apart from all other bands, especially GC, because of Travis' complex drums that stand out every song. Even if Blink managed to write something this light and poppy and strictly for teenage girls (admittingly I don't mind it, but Blink writes for a much bigger range - teens, college, young adults like me, even 40 year olds wanting to be a bit hipper get into blink), the track would undoubtedly be edgier and different because of Travis. Take it the drums in Sober and it's pretty ehh poppy, but you can't. It's part of the song, and it makes it pretty cool overall 

5. History: Blink has a large history of being edgier, more punk, and a lot just love who they are. That makes a difference. When they make a poppy song it's not as redundant as GC who simply only goes for that. That's their sound. Blink mixes it up. Rabbit hole, BTD, TOTTM, Los Angeles, Cynical, joke songs, No Future, hey I'm sorry, San Diego DO exist in this album. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghent said:

A lot of people hated untitled when it came out. The fans that couldn't take it eventually left, as the new group settled in.

I have high hopes for the next generation of blink fans. And can't wait for the pessimistic ass hats around here to finally piss off.

 

A peek inside Ghent's blink-182 online utopia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, theedge00 said:

A peek inside Ghent's blink-182 online utopia.

Actually, Ghent is right about the fans that didn't like Untitled in 2003, I remember that really well.  I was just a lurker on this site for another solid year so, but I also was reading the message boards on the official blink-182 website constantly when the album came out, it was really divisive (much like this album), a lot of the fans that didn't like it, said they were done with the band, this isn't what they thought blink should be and all that kinda nonsense.  When the dust did settle within a year or so, you were left with the people that really liked that album populating places like this and the official blink site.  I suspect this will be the same this time as well, especially if the next release is similar to California.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, b00bies said:

no future has a good bridge, the rest is shit. lol.

The intro though!  I love the bridge and intro.. The 'let the music, seal your fate' is vintage, but then yeah.. The gang vocals really kill that song for me and the 'they don't caaaarree' or else it'd be my favorite.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, M!ke said:

Actually, Ghent is right about the fans that didn't like Untitled in 2003, I remember that really well.  I was just a lurker on this site for another solid year so, but I also was reading the message boards on the official blink-182 website constantly when the album came out, it was really divisive (much like this album), a lot of the fans that didn't like it, said they were done with the band, this isn't what they thought blink should be and all that kinda nonsense.  When the dust did settle within a year or so, you were left with the people that really liked that album populating places like this and the official blink site.  I suspect this will be the same this time as well, especially if the next release is similar to California.

If they (blink) ever release an album that I don't like at all, I'm not going to stop loving the band. If someone does that, then they were not blink fans in the first place, at least that's what I think. The Offspring is another one of my favorites bands and I didn't like the last album they released, but I still love the band and I always will. One album doesn't change the fact that they did amazing things in the past, and that's pretty obvious! so if someone give up on blink after what they think is a bad album...then they are not FANS, they are something else.

I love California, I have been listening to it  non stop since the leak (every fucking day haha) but I prefer Enema, or TOYPAJ, that's it. It doesn't remind me of those albums at all (well maybe one or two songs, like I said before) but that doesn't change the fact that I LIKE California. I love Tom and I love Matt, it doesn't have nothing to do with these two, but I guess it has something to do with Feldmann or with the absence of Jerry Finn (just like Olidamus said). Or maybe is just that they have evolve to another thing and I still prefer what they did in the past. That's it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Nshesaid said:

No, it's nothing to do with criticism, it just honestly is something someone would say with the absolute most lacking detail of musical ear. Like you should just listen to the radio and not dig into music if you honestly think good Charlotte sounds similar enough to go on any Blink album. 

This isn't even in the Nirvana, Stone Temple pilots, Pearl Jam, Verve Pipe have similarities range. Which I feel you're reaching for.

1. Vocals: the most glaring difference. Mark and Matt sound incredibly different from GC, at all times.

2. Guitar & Bass: Blink is known for leading with heavy bass lines. Their guitar tone is vastly heavier as well, that song you posted I don't think Skibba ever gets as high as even on no future bridge. Blink often plays E/A power chords and falsettos, GC plays like D string power chords.

3. Song Structure: Sure Blink focused heavily on choruses in California, but that song is 100% hanging around the chorus at all times, where's the slowed down bridge, where's the verses?

4. DRUMS: Every single Blink song is set apart from all other bands, especially GC, because of Travis' complex drums that stand out every song. Even if Blink managed to write something this light and poppy and strictly for teenage girls (admittingly I don't mind it, but Blink writes for a much bigger range - teens, college, young adults like me, even 40 year olds wanting to be a bit hipper get into blink), the track would undoubtedly be edgier and different because of Travis. Take it the drums in Sober and it's pretty ehh poppy, but you can't. It's part of the song, and it makes it pretty cool overall 

5. History: Blink has a large history of being edgier, more punk, and a lot just love who they are. That makes a difference. When they make a poppy song it's not as redundant as GC who simply only goes for that. That's their sound. Blink mixes it up. Rabbit hole, BTD, TOTTM, Los Angeles, Cynical, joke songs, No Future, hey I'm sorry, San Diego DO exist in this album. 

First off, I applaud you for articulating an argument here. It is appreciated.

But dude, Good Charlotte was straight up pop-punk on their first two album (in any case, Blink has been a constant "influence" for them as well) and yes, they're not exactly the same. But to say that Good Charlotte absolutely does not, in any way, shape or form, ever in the history of their recorded history, sound similar is basically saying that no band sounds like each other and that's final. But wait, they operate in the same genre. Surely you can see that? Albeit Blink is very west coast, and Good Charlotte is very east coast. Good Charlotte has always emphasized more pop than punk, even moreso than blink has. This new blink record leans very heavily on the pop in pop-punk. Hence why the comparison to mid-career Good Charlotte is actually not that far off. Also, both have used John fucking Feldmann, who probably had his hand in both bands output at this point.

I'll address these points.

1. Joel Madden can actually sing better than Mark or Matt. But he has a higher range, but Mark and Matt have been singing (more like straining) to get as high as JM on these tracks. Clearly both are reaching for a more modern, constantly UP FOR THE CHORUS type of singing that is going on here. Mark traditionally keeps his tones pretty mellow (Dammit excluded) but his new vocals have been kicked up a notch. Matt kind of as well (Matt is more of a strained punk thing going). It's to the point that Mark can't even replicate this live even.

2. L.A. is the track I'm talking about and comparing the lead singles from Good Morning Revival. How is that song "experimental" even outside of what Good Charlotte was doing. Both tracks to me sound very "modern" pop rock.

3. DFA is more obviously a faux-dance track, but the basic song writing (intro, verse, chorus, maybe throw a bridge in there, final chorus) is still there. The emphasis on the choruses is super strong on the songs on both albums. While blink's songs on California may have more "rock" backbone, it's not so on a track like L.A.  

The rest of your points just are not what the topic at hand is. Yeah, Travis is a unique drummer, but it doesn't separate itself to the point that Blink 182 and Good Charlotte are like comparing The Strokes to Metallica. Both bands operate in the same quasi-fake punk more often than not (especially California). My point still stands that Blink 182 is closer to Good Charlotte now than they ever have been and nothing on this record is "experimental". I think Feldmann is responsible but, what do you expect? He has certain attributes that are undeniable on both bands right now.  

TLDR

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what if blink sounds similar to Good Charlotte?  Good Charlotte's got some great tunes, not a great singer, but catchy ideas with enjoyable instrumentation.  That's exactly what California is but with enjoyable singers (same is true of Enema and TOYPAJ, only really difference is that they preceeded Good Charlotte).  if you don't like that, well then California isn't for you, but there are plenty of people that absolutely like that; of course I'd love another Untitled, but I also wasn't expecting that, not now, not for a few years really, especially when you bring on a new member like that. So just enjoy the album for what it is.  Or I guess hold a grudge and complain about it if you think that will somehow make some sort of a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dyls5 said:

It's hilarious that a group of people on here get upset and angry when people put down the album or have differing opinions.

No one is upset or angry. The people who hate the album are just perceiving it that way.

I mean, i think anyone who hates this album is kind of a retard, but it doesn't make me angry in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...