Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   Punk (https://www.musicbanter.com/punk/)
-   -   The Official Blink 182 Thread (https://www.musicbanter.com/punk/18066-official-blink-182-thread.html)

hiu 05-30-2005 09:25 PM

Im being generious when I say Blink 182 made one good song, Carousel. They were an ok pop punk band back in the day but still not half as good as great pop punk bands like The ****ies or The Descendents.

hookers with machineguns 05-30-2005 09:33 PM

One day you're punk, then the next day *BAM!!!!!* airborne herpes. It happens to the best of us.

Urban Hat€monger ? 05-30-2005 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by el_bandido
I was listening to one of their cds (dude ranch) which was like all punk, and then I listened to their next cd which is Enema of the state and it was so more poppy. what happened?

Nothing happened , they`ve always been crap. The old albums might be less poppy but they`re still f*cking awful.

phoenixflames 05-31-2005 06:34 AM

Did they change drummers after Dude Ranch or was it before? If I remember rightly they changed after. I don't really think you can blame all of their "poppiness" on a producer. While some of the sound shaping of a CD is by a producer, blink still wrote the songs and had a choice of how they sounded. Its kinda unrealistic to expect a band to stay with a certain sound or exact style for their whole career. People grow and change and so does their music and musical ablilites. If you don't like their stuff, don't listen to it.

ArtistInTheAmbulance 05-31-2005 06:38 AM

^After Dude Ranch, in that album they still had Scott (I think it was Scott?). And youre right, I wouldnt say it was all the producers fault... Ive heard blink say themselves how they've matured, and so has their music. I'd say it was their own choice.

Not that Im worried, I can still listen to the old stuff if I want to. The fact that their newer stuff was poppier doesnt affect the older stuff now, does it :)

phoenixflames 05-31-2005 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtistInTheAmbulance
Not that Im worried, I can still listen to the old stuff if I want to. The fact that their newer stuff was poppier doesnt affect the older stuff now, does it :)

Exactly! I prefer the newer stuff, but the old isan't too bad. Just seems kinda repetitive. Not very skilled musicianship (which some people will say never got better). I don't see how they could have stayed at that point for their whole career.

ArtistInTheAmbulance 05-31-2005 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phoenixflames
Exactly! I prefer the newer stuff, but the old isan't too bad. Just seems kinda repetitive. Not very skilled musicianship (which some people will say never got better). I don't see how they could have stayed at that point for their whole career.

Heh yeah, the really early stuff sucked, they couldnt sing or play their instruments, it was...Interesting. One song I always remember was "Strings", the singing was something to be remembered...to say the least.

phoenixflames 05-31-2005 06:52 AM

^ I think for me it was the repititious drums and the using of 4 chords through out the whole song. The drums seemed to play the same beat with very little variation (which drives me crazy). They never seemed to change up their chords for the song either. Same 4 power chords for verse, chorus, and bridge (if there was one). Don't get me wrong, I like some of the older stuff, but some of it just drives me crazy.

PerFeCTioNThrUSileNCe 05-31-2005 12:34 PM

the way i see it is: they got older and changed and so did their music. personally, i dont listen to them as much as i used to, in fact i probably havent listenned to anything by them in a year or so. but i have no problems with any of their music. its just not my favorite.

EDGE 05-31-2005 01:16 PM

who cares.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:23 PM.


© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.