Acts That Abandoned their Distinctive Style for a Generic Mainstream Style

Chicago.

Fudge

artists who moved from mainstream or pop to much more experimental realms

oops wrong thread, meant to post this one

Artists who moved from experimental realms towards the mainstream

Incubus.

wiki seems to agree about chicago

Chicago is an American rock band formed in 1967 in Chicago, Illinois. The self-described "rock and roll band with horns" began as a politically charged, sometimes experimental, rock band and later moved to a predominantly softer sound, generating several hit ballads.

With various degrees of success (and subsequent reverse): Metallica, Anthrax, Anathema, Katatonia, Alcest, Faith No More, Life Of Agony, Amorphis, Gorefest, Celestial Seasons, Paradise Lost, Celtic Frost, The Gathering, Pyogenesis, Judas Priest.

say it ain't so, gorefest

some will say fleetwood mac. they will be wrong, of course.

cave in & baroness spring to mind, tho i wouldn't go so far as "generic" in either case

X circa ain't love grand

Cave In went more pop, definitely, but I rather like that period, and I would still say they were distinctive. Nowadays they try to sound like all of their albums at the same time which doesn't always work. Still good, though.

yeah if people hate 'Jupiter' that's on them but it's in no way generic

don't really think Metallica fit the bill either

Yeah the word 'generic' definitely makes this trickier, lots of bands went more 'pop' but still sounded recognisibly different from their peers e.g. PiL, The Fall, Siouxsie & the Banshees (having a disctinctive vocalist obviously helps).

jefferson airplane -> starship

Discharge

tho their hair metal-ish stuff is arguably distinctive if only by accident

Genesis has got to be the most well-known example of this, right?

jefferson airplane -> starship

yessssssss.

MC5

Blue Oyster Cult

REM?

Tyrannosaurus Rex

Did Spoon do this?

Nah.

Jewel

Tyrannosaurus Rex

What was generic about T-Rex?

Judas Priest.

― Siegbran, Friday, February 7, 2014 8:19 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i don't think it's possible for judas priest to ever sound "generic"

X circa ain't love grand

― CANONICAL artists, etc., etc. (contenderizer), Friday, February 7, 2014 8:29 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

&

jefferson airplane -> starship

― CANONICAL artists, etc., etc. (contenderizer), Friday, February 7, 2014 9:24 AM (58 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

are the best examples

i don't think genesis was ever remotely generic either

Heart

ELO

i don't think genesis was ever remotely generic either

The last four albums (Calling All Stations doesn't count) were generic pop/soul pap.

Goo goo dolls. It depends how distinctive you thought they were before.

Jay Leno was supposed to be this avant grade comic, which I can't even imagine
Fred Armisen didn't actually change very much?

Scritti Politti

yeah if people hate 'Jupiter' that's on them but it's in no way generic

I think people are more hating on Antenna

had to check I owned 'Antenna' (affirmative). kinda recall it being on the same tip as 'Jupiter' but not as good, were they getting geneeric at that point...?

never enjoyed Jupiter and never even really listened to Antenna, I just remember reading that was the last straw where their fanbase abandoned them

I love Until Your Heart Stops; listening to clips of Antenna now it sounds like Incubus so a far cry to say the least

Simple Minds

Husker Du? saying "mainstream style" is probably pushing it. they did mellow with each album they put out though

ZZ-Top?

With various degrees of success (and subsequent reverse): Metallica, Anthrax, Anathema, Katatonia, Alcest, Faith No More, Life Of Agony, Amorphis, Gorefest, Celestial Seasons, Paradise Lost, Celtic Frost, The Gathering, Pyogenesis, Judas Priest.

Whether or not all these bands fit the thread's bill, I do think metal bands in particular get called out for this more than other bands, at least among metal fans. On the one hand, I think there's a partiuclar sociology at work there that's very attuned to a band changing its style, and leaving its original fans behind. But also, when you start out extreme, it's hard NOT to sound like you're changing your style.

Faith No More

No. Their last three albums are way spikier and more disagreeable than The Real Thing.

had to check I owned 'Antenna' (affirmative). kinda recall it being on the same tip as 'Jupiter' but not as good, were they getting geneeric at that point...?

Major label album, touring with foo fighters, they certainly went for a more polished sound and whilst it wasnt that bad an album per se it did sound just like a lot of other bands whereas with Jupiter they had got something more unique. Antenna was by far their weakest album at that point but it did get rave reviews in mainstream rock press like Kerrang but it lost them more fans than it gained them.

has been years since i dropped this crews name in a thread, but damn, its relevant.

age of chance

I feel like White Denim has been going gradually poppier and away from their original proggy/mathy sound

X-Mal Deutschland.
On their first two albums they sound like a heavier, darker, german version of Siouxsie and early Cocteau Twins. On their 3rd album they started incorporating English lyrics and poppier melodies. Their fourth album in 1989 was completely in English and sounded like Roxette.

REM?

― we slowly invented brains (La Lechera), Friday, February 7, 2014

thought about them. they got closest from document -- out of time, then veered into some other distinctive sounds (automatic for the people) and genre-hopping (monster, up). not sure if that middle-period is really "generic," but it's certainly arguable.

new adventures in hi-fi is kinda their murkiest weirdest album imo

ZZ Top did this and then turned around.

The Human League

Simple Minds is, yeah, the most appalling example.

"giant for a day" is thoroughly risible, but "civilian" at least has something going for it, in my book. it's an album by a band that seems truly confused as to why everybody hates them all of a sudden.

X-Mal Deutschland.
On their first two albums they sound like a heavier, darker, german version of Siouxsie and early Cocteau Twins. On their 3rd album they started incorporating English lyrics and poppier melodies. Their fourth album in 1989 was completely in English and sounded like Roxette.

― LeRooLeRoo, Friday, February 7, 2014 11:34 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I didn't know this, are those latter two albums any good?

― nothing a reincarnated ronnie james dio couldn't fix (brimstead), vendredi 7 février 2014 21:13 (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The third album is ok, but not really memorable compared to the first two. It has strong moments like a polished version of early song "Polarlicht". The fourth one is barely listenable, not only because of the generic production, but because her voice is not suited for poppy melodies at all. She's out of tune on most of the album.

ctrl-f "Sugar Ray"

come on y'all

― Fight the Powers that Be with this Powerful Les Paul! (DJP), Friday, February 7, 2014 1:06 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

(I guess "distinctive" might be a stumbling block there)

― Fight the Powers that Be with this Powerful Les Paul! (DJP), Friday, February 7, 2014 1:09 PM Bookmark

They became more distinctive when they went mainstream!

SPK

I still think T-Rex is a good one, mostly because of the lyrics. You read the lyrics to those early Tyrannosaurus records and they are really ornate poetry. The T-Rex stuff by comparison is purposefully stripped down to the bare essentials, for the most part. The goat bleat singing is also really toned down on the T-Rex albums.

is the bang a gong disc early, mid, or late-period t-rex?

Early, it was on the 2nd album as T. Rex.

Rod Stewart post 1973.

Nobody's said Roxy Music yet?

As unique as Tyrannosaurus Rex was, I think they were much more rooted in a well established, even cliched, hippy folk mold than what came later. He basically invented glam, and in some ways continued to get weirder and less commercial throughout the T. Rex albums.

David Bowie did the same thing.

well established, even cliched, hippy folk mold

I don't know how well established it was. Some of Donovan's hits were sort of pop rock. The ISB were popular, but Tyrannosaurus Rex were very different.

PIL

US Maple

?

Nobody's said Roxy Music yet?

― kornrulez6969, Saturday, February 8, 2

We haven't because it's wrong.

As unique as Tyrannosaurus Rex was, I think they were much more rooted in a well established, even cliched, hippy folk mold than what came later. He basically invented glam, and in some ways continued to get weirder and less commercial throughout the T. Rex albums.

^this, LOL @ the idea that his lyrics got more conventional!

Whether or not all these bands fit the thread's bill, I do think metal bands in particular get called out for this more than other bands, at least among metal fans.

No Aerosmith?

I.e., Anthrax and Pyogenesis went generic grunge in the early 90s, Judas Priest and Celtic Frost did radio-friendly glam rock albums, Paradise Lost, Metallica and Amorphis at some point all morphed into more or less the same band, Alcest is now competent but pretty generic shoegaze, Anathema a Pink Floyd clone, Celestian Seasons a dime-a-dozen stoner rock band, etc.

Here's the opening song to "Unicorn"

The toad road licked my wheels like a sabre
Winds of the marsh lightly blew
Stone jars stacked with stars on her shoulders
Hunters of pity she slew

Chariots of silk she rode
Stallions of gold she owned

A mad mage with a maid on his eyebrows
Hunteth the realm for a God
Who could teach him the craft of decanting
The glassy entrails of a frog

The bard of my birth with his ballet
Walked the wild worlds in the chase
For the black chested canary
Who as a moose can sing bass

Here's the opening to "Electric Warrior", recorded two year later:

Beneath the bebop moon
I want to croon with you
Beneath the Mambo Sun
I got to be the one with you

My life's a shadowless horse
If I can't get across to you
In the alligator rain
My heart's all pain for you

Girl you're good
And I've got wild knees for you
On a mountain range
I'm Dr. Strange for you

Upon a savage lake
Make no mistake I love you
I got a powder-keg leg
And my wig's all pooped for you

With my heart in my hand
I'm a hungry man for you
I got stars in my beard
And I feel real weird for you

Beneath the bebop moon
I'm howling like a loon for you
Beneath the mumbo sun
I've got to be the one for you

I guess I'm not arguing he went straight for the mainstream as much as he took some mainstream (rock band, rhyming repetitive lyrics, non-bleating vocals) and shot it in his outsider folk arm.

His folk wasn't outsider anyway, it was fairly straightforward compared to the Incredible String Band, probably closer to Donovan tbh, and it was also pretty popular too

Nobody's said Roxy Music yet?
We haven't because it's wrong.

Ok, I'll bite. Roxy is 100% right, and I am to be commended for adding it to the thread. They started out weird then got slicker, more mainstream and as Flesh and Blood clearly illustrates, more generic.

Yeah not Fleetwood Mac.

We could quote lyrics back and forth but those for T. Rex but were often every bit as batshit as those for Tyrannosaurus Rex (xxxp)

Yeah, they are.

All those bands were really popular? I thought Donovan had a few fluke hits but ICB and TR were both pretty underground. By '68 you pretty much had to have a rock band and some heavy Dylan covers if you were in a folk (sorry, Folk Rock) band.

While I would call "Same Old Scene, "Dance Away," "Over You," and "More Than This" attempts to use the rhythms and keyboard sounds of the day, they are not generic.

ISB were pretty big at one point, top 5 UK albums, selling out Albert Hall and Fillmores in US, Grammy noms etc.

As was Donovan. Hits all over the world for a good five years. Arena-size concerts.
Albums still hitting the top 40 in 1973, long after singles success had dried up.
Def more going on than a few fluke hits!

Yeah, I mean, I'm no fan of post-'76 Roxy Music, but "generic" doesn't apply. They'd lost a lot of their dynamism and tension, but they weren't pandering to mainstream tastes by any stretch.

xp

I think REM's New Adverntures In Hi-fi and Up are just as odd as the early albums but have a mainstream sheen. I think with a lot of famous bands, their familiarity makes you forget how odd they are; it's nice to take a step back and think about what an oddity some of the most successful bands are. The Cure went more pop several times but I think they were always unique (even if they didn't always maintain a desirable level of quality).

I think Yes's Tormato is fantastic fun (especially with bonus tracks) and better than Going For The One. I think the mainstream approach filtered a bit into Jon Anderson's solo career and his collaborations with Vangelis, and mixed occasionally with more fullblown prog. I think Wakeman, Bruford and Howe's solo work just stayed prog.

Renaissance went more pop and really regretted trying to change with the times.

Gentle Giant did an interview in prog magazine a year ago about their later albums and although they were ashamed of some stuff, there was some bits they were proud of, but it didn't appear that there was an agreed consensus in the band about those albums

I once seen a statement from the author of Our Band Could Be Your Life that all the bands made lesser albums when they went to major labels Butthole Surfers

I think Swans' Great Annihilator sounds quite pop compared to the other albums, to me it sounded like a choice. I think some fans accused them of selling out even as early as Children Of God.

In the dvd interview for Heartwork Carcass talked a lot about a backlash about their cleaner sound.

Boredoms became less mad (but still totally mad) and a bit post-rock?

Melt Banana are still totally nuts but I think they are one of the finest examples of something becoming weirder and more unique as a result of becoming more conventional in some ways (the song length and structures).

I still think there is a lot of good in the first three Sigur Ros albums but I think the accusations of becoming too Coldplay were fair.

Mastodon has definitely gone for a more accessible sound with the vocals being less he-man master of the universe and doing a bunch of overdubs.

Forgotten to finish this part above:

I once seen a statement from the author of Our Band Could Be Your Life that all the bands in the book made lesser albums when they went to major labels. But I think Replacements' Tim is just as good as Let It Be. Butthole Surfers' Independent Worm Saloon is my favourite album of theirs, although it isn't as representative of what makes them interesting, I just find it way more fun than anything else they did.

from what i read (and have heard) mastodon and baroness have moved toward a more mainstream sound.

I think REM's New Adverntures In Hi-fi and Up are just as odd as the early albums but have a mainstream sheen. I think with a lot of famous bands, their familiarity makes you forget how odd they are; it's nice to take a step back and think about what an oddity some of the most successful bands are. The Cure went more pop several times but I think they were always unique (even if they didn't always maintain a desirable level of quality).

what's odd about NAIHF? maybe the answer will cause me to listen to it again, with a new perspective. i like the comment about familiarity influencing the way listeners process music. a lot of times, i have a fairly high entry-level-barrier to new music. it takes patience, and a willingness to hear new things. it's very easy to drift back toward familiar sounds. i can always listen to, say, AM gold type-music, even if some of it is conservative and safe and mundane. the same impulses sometimes drive my interest in familiar, pastiche-y sounds, instead of something more innovative.

NAIHF apart from maybe "Wakeup Bomb" and a few others has kind of a dark atmosphere despite all the stylistic shifts. I've talked a lot about how atmospheric Up is but that's a bit more obvious.
I think quite a few of their early 90s albums also have some of this atmosphere too. Out Of Time, Automatic For The People, Monster and NAIHF all have tracks that make me (and I'd imagine other people) think of atmospheric landscapes and night life but Up is kind of claustrophobic. Maybe these are overly personal associations but that is how I remember those albums. I suppose lots of very American bands make you think of atmospheric, often desolate country landscapes. I associate that with lots of Americana bands and slowcore bands.

It's more of a zig-zag with him, but if you compare what Herbie Hancock was doing in the early 70s (cosmic, ambient avant-jazz) to what he was doing by the end of the decade (pretty straighforward disco), the difference is huge. He's done some less mainstream since then, but nothing quite as idioscyncratic as the Mwandishi era albums.

hm. similarly, i guess there were some pretty bad, generic, grasping-for-the-mainstream miles davis albums released in the few years before his death.

You could say this about Yello and Severed Heads if you're talking about starting as tape cut-ups and ending as synth pop, but I wouldn't call either band "generic"- it's a matter or relatively approachability

also, SPK very much on the money- the distance from "Leichenschrei" era-SPK to their attempted dance jams is pretty wide:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXcs_hgIHH8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xur3Kt1PPKw

Darius

Jandek is the obvious answer.

Nah, just kidding, he's still flying his flag good and high if anyone is.

Cabaret Voltaire imo though I know a lot of people like them loads better after the Some Bizarre jump

good one

Does anyone here think that there may have been a point very early on where Ocean Colour Scene really thought they could reinvent the wheel of song and contribute a fresh and artful take on the well-worn rock formula, but then decided to play it safe? Is this possible, do you think, people? I guess we may never know.

french montana

The Thompson Twins

Nelly Furtado, after the first two albums.

And she was better for it.