Your most controversial music opinions

[lighthouse]

Kendrick Lamar. His debut was good. The follow ups are era defining. 

[gigpusher]

Little Simz just keeps getting better and better. 4th album could well be her career defining one. 

Hounds of Love album number 5 by Kate Bush cited by many as their favourite. 

[balti-pie]

Amon Amarth didnt get good until their seventh album (twilight of the thunder god), but heavy bands get a bit more creative leeway and time to develop themselves i reckon. 

[CaledonianGonzo]

So the main conclusion we can draw is - it varies.

Some debut albums are good, whereas other acts go on to improve on them.

[gigpusher]

19 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

So the main conclusion we can draw is - it varies.

Some debut albums are good, whereas other acts go on to improve on them.

Who knew that people are individuals and don't all follow the exact same formula!! 😄 

[kingbadger]

The Horrors might be the ones who really didn't suffer from second album syndrome. I have a soft spot for the first album despite its faults and gimmicky nature, but Primary Colours is awesome, let alone compared to the first. 

I'd throw LCD Soundsystem, Beck and The Cribs up there as acts who have haven't suffered much, if at all from diminishing returns. 

Saw Up The Bracket mentioned as a stand out first album. I'd say the follow up was pretty good, and after 10+ years Anthems For Doomed Youth was much better than most probably expected.

[lessthanwill1]

Siamese Dream is a good counter to the Sophmore Slump argument. 

Charli XCX and Carly Rae Jepsen are good examples of artists hitting their stride a good number of years into their careers. 

Big Thief continue to get better and better in my mind (while also being incredibly consistent and I love all their albums). 

[Quark]

23 minutes ago, lessthanwill1 said:

Siamese Dream is a good counter to the Sophmore Slump argument. 

That was exactly the one I had in mind. Arguably their best as well.

[gigpusher]

50 minutes ago, lessthanwill1 said:

Siamese Dream is a good counter to the Sophmore Slump argument. 

 

And John Grant - Pale Green Ghosts arguably the best album he ever made. 

[CaledonianGonzo]

That's like his 8th album though.

[gigpusher]

2 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

That's like his 8th album though.

True but in different guises although it proves the point about diminishing returns even more. 

[nikkic]

18 hours ago, Matt42 said:

As a spin off of @stuartbert two hats, what bands took ages to release a solid album? Like who released their best album after a fair few years of being around?

The National.

First couple are pretty shite, then they have a really solid run after that. 

[lessthanwill1]

7 minutes ago, nikkic said:

The National.

First couple are pretty shite, then they have a really solid run after that. 

“Available” being The National’s best song, though.

[lessthanwill1]

For me, Biffy Clyro are the perfect example of diminishing returns. Adore their debut, really like the next three.  The rest I am either indifferent to or actively dislike (with the exception of Pocket, such a tune!). 

[gfa]

RHCP have to fit the take ages to release a good album description- although probably more of a Frusciante correlation.

Two Door Cinema Club scream diminishing returns to me. Their new album is pathetic - both to listen to and on Spotify etc 

[Gnomicide]

On 10/3/2021 at 7:45 PM, Mardy said:

I've always been fascinated why the overwhelming majority of bands tend to get worse with every subsequent album, but authors generally don't get good until a few books into their career.

 

(with obviously the usual caveats and exceptions)

 

On 10/3/2021 at 8:48 PM, stuartbert two hats said:

It's worth remembering that unless an act is brand new to music when they record their first proper album, it's often a compilation of all their best tunes written as an unsigned band, rather than a collection of songs written in the period directly before going into the studio. Thus, the "difficult second album syndrome".

My theory has long been that 3rd albums are the breaking point.

Album one - all the good stuff you've written as you plied your trade in clubs and basements.

Album two - Some stuff you've written on the road while touring the first one plus a few decent songs written years ago that didn't make the cut for the first one.

Album three - you're too successful, too full of drugs and everyone is telling you how great you are. Result is a shit album.

From them on it's make or break, get your act together and make something a bit different from the last one or continue throwing out shite.

On 10/3/2021 at 9:51 PM, Matt42 said:

Is Appetite for Destruction (their debut) the only good Guns and Roses album?

It's the only essential one. If they'd cut the UYI albums down to at least one double, preferably a single album, they could have had another classic on their hands.

[Gnomicide]

Other bands that never bettered their debut:

Queen, Iron Maiden, Motley Crue, Van Halen, Love/Hate, Poison.

Yeah, I know.

 

[justanotheronethen]

44 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

It's the only essential one. If they'd cut the UYI albums down to at least one double, preferably a single album, they could have had another classic on their hands.

Felt this at the time and still agree now. Cocaine + Axl's ego tainted everything in sight

[justanotheronethen]

41 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

Other bands that never bettered their debut:

Love/Hate

 

Blackout + Wasted are on a par in my humble opinion

[stuartbert two hats]

1 hour ago, Gnomicide said:

Other bands that never bettered their debut:

Queen, Iron Maiden, Motley Crue, Van Halen, Love/Hate, Poison.

Yeah, I know.

 

Queen?  I don't think I've ever heard of any of the songs on their debut.  I just had to look it up!

[maelzoid]

1 hour ago, Gnomicide said:

 

My theory has long been that 3rd albums are the breaking point.

Album one - all the good stuff you've written as you plied your trade in clubs and basements.

Album two - Some stuff you've written on the road while touring the first one plus a few decent songs written years ago that didn't make the cut for the first one.

Album three - you're too successful, too full of drugs and everyone is telling you how great you are. Result is a shit album.

From them on it's make or break, get your act together and make something a bit different from the last one or continue throwing out shite.

Honestly, this could be copy pasted from Oasis’ Wikipedia page.

[Gnomicide]

57 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Queen?  I don't think I've ever heard of any of the songs on their debut.  I just had to look it up!

Liar is still the best thing they ever recorded. 

[henry bear]

3 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

Liar is still the best thing they ever recorded. 

I saw them in ‘84 and they played (at least bits of) Liar, Keep Yourself Alive and Great King Rat. 

[kingbadger]

1 hour ago, maelzoid said:

Honestly, this could be copy pasted from Oasis’ Wikipedia page.

Oasis could have stretched to a much better third album before halfway capitulating though if they didn't spunk a lot of good songs as B-sides. 

[Mardy]

2 hours ago, Gnomicide said:

 

My theory has long been that 3rd albums are the breaking point.

Album one - all the good stuff you've written as you plied your trade in clubs and basements.

Album two - Some stuff you've written on the road while touring the first one plus a few decent songs written years ago that didn't make the cut for the first one.

Album three - you're too successful, too full of drugs and everyone is telling you how great you are. Result is a shit album.

From them on it's make or break, get your act together and make something a bit different from the last one or continue throwing out shite.

 

I like this a lot. Nice theory. Will no doubt pass it off as my own next time we're down the boozer talking about music. Thanks Gnomi.