Originally Posted by finnhiggins
Why keep repeating yourself for diminishing returns, year after year?
Because its fun? I could play 2 and 4 back beat shuffles all day long in a blues band.
I've always found bands and artists who 'branch out' to new areas to be pretentious. The absolute Poster Child of the phenomena has to be Pearl Jam.
Bands should change to keep up with the times, but they should never leave the original essence of what got them there. Well, they can, if the like, but they have no right to bitch about commercial failure if they do. If they want to play just to play and experience music, then more power to them. But they can't expect their fans to just change and suddenly like their new stuff, because "that old stuff was so lame and cliche".
Think Tom Petty here. Hasn't changed a thing, and his music is timeless. You can't tell a 1984 track from a 2003 track.
This doesn't mean keep playing the same 3 chords and the same cliche lyrics over and over either. But change for artistic sake...bah. Stick to what works for you.
Steve Smith left Journey and rock drumming pretty much forever in 1983ish, but I still hear the foundation of that big tom pounding rock style (and his early fusion stuff before that), even though he's branched of into Indian music and stuff. That's his own personal trek, and he's never been one to disguise it. But rock bands who have less talent than STeve has in his pinky are totally phony when they are "branching out to new musical realms".
In short, bands should evolve with the times, not change for some phony "musical enlightenment". So in that aspect, I agree with you finn.