In the last month we've had three releases by three bigtime rock(esque) types of peoples: Maroon 5 (really stretching it here, but whatevs), U2 and Lenny Kravitz.
And lemme tell ya, I'm underwhelmed. I feel like it is saying a lot when Maroon 5's album is the most listenable.
To be fair, on the day that Apple shoved U2's album, Songs of Innocence, down our throats, (not that I'm bitter or anything) Google Play had Demi Lovato's album for free. I got all the way through U2's. I got two songs into Demi's before I tore off my headphones and started swearing in the middle of the street. Because yes, I'm that crazy person.
 |
| Not shiny. |
I guess to some extent my expectations are too high. I haven't really liked a U2 album since Pop (and I know I'm the outlier on that one, but it truly is one of my favorites), I haven't really liked a Lenny Kravitz album since Are You Gonna Go My Way and, well, never mind, I don't have any expectations for Maroon 5. Pop and Are You Gonna Go My Way came out in 1997 and 1993, respectively. Which is, like, 20 years ago.
 |
| Shinier. |
It's not that I don't like Maroon 5. I think they're fine. I actually own all of their albums, and I've really adored a number of their singles (and other songs that weren't released as singles). I find them enjoyable, but they don't really inspire any sort of passion in me. I've never listened to any of their albums on constant rotation, but I never skip their songs when I hit shuffle on my phone's music library. I hesitated to include them in this post, because I think the most rock thing about Maroon 5 is Adam Levine's tendency to date Victoria's Secret models, but I figured it'd be a good comparison point.
 |
| Shiniest. |
Maroon 5 departed from their norm on this album a little bit, in that in a number of spots it sounds like Levine is imitating Rhianna, and some of the songs are much darker than usual. But overall, it was a solidly poppy collection, with some fun thrown in there, AND, amazingly enough, a ballad that didn't immediately make me want to put my fist through the nearest sensitive guy with a guitar. (also, the New York Times review of this album made me laugh. A lot. Out loud) But what does it mean that in order to sound "fresh" the band is copying much younger artists? That they're using the beats and the productions of today in order to give their music a little bit of a sheen? (is this the musical equivalent of plastic surgery?)
I know I've covered this subject before, but it's something that I struggle with mightily. If an artist that I have loved quite a bit in the past is simply doing what they did before, and I end up bored shitless with their new material, how do I handle the reconciliation of the new boringness with the old awesomeness? If all an artist is doing is rehashing their stuff, does that mean that they've sold out for the guarantee of continued commercial success, and should I support that? (or, you know, if they're aping the contemporary music scene)
I HUNGER FOR THE NEW, PEOPLE! I love the creative and the unique. I want something new for my earholes. And my brain. RAR.
