Has any band ever started to suck again after they recovered?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Aerosmith, after the comeback.

Stones after Tattoo You/Some Girls.

Yeah, Aerosmith wore out that comeback pretty quick with banal Dianne Warren-penned power ballads.

So, were the Stones in a funk up until Some Girls? Were the early to mid-70's that bad for them? What's there - Black and Blue and Goat's Head Soup? I don't know - are those bad records?

/not really versed on the Stones.
 
Me neither. They're just both acclaimed albums, possibly their most praised albums after the famous four album run.

That, or after Steel Wheels.
 
R.E.M. has sucked and recovered and sucked again.

I consider Automatic For The People a HUGE improvement over Green and Out Of Time.
 
I don't consider Aerosmith's COMMERCIAL comeback some kind of artistic triumph. They still sucked, they just hired hitmaker songwriters (like enemy-of-art Desmond Child, or Jim Vallance, another tool who helped write many Bryan Adams hits) to give them some pop singles, and the masses lined up at the trough. There's only 3 songs on Permanent Vacation that were written by the band members without any outside help, and the big three singles (Angel, Dude Looks Like a Lady, and Rag Doll) all had co-writers. This trend continued with What It Takes on the next album, and all four singles from Get a Grip.

They're sellout whores, and have sucked since they stopped doing drugs.
 
I don't consider Aerosmith's COMMERCIAL comeback some kind of artistic triumph. They still sucked, they just hired hitmaker songwriters (like enemy-of-art Desmond Child, or Jim Vallance, another tool who helped write many Bryan Adams hits) to give them some pop singles, and the masses lined up at the trough. There's only 3 songs on Permanent Vacation that were written by the band members without any outside help, and the big three singles (Angel, Dude Looks Like a Lady, and Rag Doll) all had co-writers. This trend continued with What It Takes on the next album, and all four singles from Get a Grip.

They're sellout whores, and have sucked since they stopped doing drugs.


Sounds about right. Did they suck before the big comeback? Or did they just get drug-addled and sloppy?
 
They kind of had a 3-year break (1982-85), after which they released their first drug-free album Done With Mirrors, which failed to be the big comeback they expected it to be. This was the first album since Joe Perry and Brad Whitford returned (Perry had quit the band in '79 and hadn't played on the previous album, Whitford had been gone since 1981).

The drug problems were pretty bad, and it was only after the Run-DMC collaboration that they got popular again. Any contributions the hip hop act may have made to the music world are invalidated by this horrendous twist of fate.
 
R.E.M. has sucked and recovered and sucked again.

I consider Automatic For The People a HUGE improvement over Green and Out Of Time.


WTF?


The only "comeback" REM has ever had was after their album Around the Sun came out in 2003. It wasn't exactly critically or commercially acclaimed. Hell, even the band wasn't so crazy about it. But, their next album, Accelerate, which was released in 2008 was both a critical and somewhat commercial success.


Green was REM's first album with Warner Brothers and it was both a huge commercial and critical success. And Out of Time skyrocketed REM into the stratosphere. Just because you didn't like these albums doesn't make them failures.
 
WTF?


The only "comeback" REM has ever had was after their album Around the Sun came out in 2003. It wasn't exactly critically or commercially acclaimed. Hell, even the band wasn't so crazy about it. But, their next album, Accelerate, which was released in 2008 was both a critical and somewhat commercial success.


Green was REM's first album with Warner Brothers and it was both a huge commercial and critical success. And Out of Time skyrocketed REM into the stratosphere. Just because you didn't like these albums doesn't make them failures.

IMO, R.E.M. has sucked and recovered and sucked again. IMO.

I consider Automatic For The People a HUGE improvement over Green and Out Of Time. This is something that I consider. IMO.

Better?

I honestly don't care if Green and Out Of Time were commercial successes, as it's ultimately irrelevant to what one considers an artistic achievement. On a more subjective level, I consider both records creatively stagnant; a notable slump between Document and Automatic For The People, two classic records. IMO.
 
I agree with you on Green, and Out of Time may be uneven, but it has some pretty amazing highlights. I don't think it's fair to label an album with Radio Song, Losing My Religion, Low, Belong, or Country Feedback "creatively stagnant".
 
Well, I don't consider Around the Sun a bad album at all. And Accelerate is very good too. So, R.E.M. may not be as good as they were right now, but still well above average.
Same for Aerosmith. Ok, Honkin' on Bobo is not an original songs album, but it's fuckin' awesome, and I think Just Push Play is a decent album.
 
Better?

I honestly don't care if Green and Out Of Time were commercial successes, as it's ultimately irrelevant to what one considers an artistic achievement. On a more subjective level, I consider both records creatively stagnant; a notable slump between Document and Automatic For The People, two classic records. IMO.

Almost. Not only were these albums commercial successes, they were also "critical" successes. But, a wild guess says you couldn't give a shit either way, because you found them "creatively stagnant". It almost sounds like you listened to them when they first came out. But, alas, you didn't and I'm pretty sure you know why. Green came out in 1988 when you weren't even born and Out of Time came out when you were barely a part of this world. Sometimes, you just had to have been there. I was 15 and 18 respectively when those 2 albums came out, so I definitely remember the positive reception they received. I didn't read about it years later on the internet. I lived it while it was going down. There was no notable slump. There was only steady progression.

By the way, its a given that whatever you are saying is "your opinion". There's no need to type "IMO". We already know its your opinion. No need to remind us. Like I said, that's known as "a given". Just a little tip for you. :wink:
 
Almost. Not only were these albums commercial successes, they were also "critical" successes. But, a wild guess says you couldn't give a shit either way, because you found them "creatively stagnant". It almost sounds like you listened to them when they first came out. But, alas, you didn't and I'm pretty sure you know why. Green came out in 1988 when you weren't even born and Out of Time came out when you were barely a part of this world. Sometimes, you just had to have been there. I was 15 and 18 respectively when those 2 albums came out, so I definitely remember the positive reception they received. I didn't read about it years later on the internet. I lived it while it was going down. There was no notable slump. There was only steady progression.

By the way, its a given that whatever you are saying is "your opinion". There's no need to type "IMO". We already know its your opinion. No need to remind us. Like I said, that's known as "a given". Just a little tip for you. :wink:

Fair enough. Hindsight is 20/20 and all that. I just find Document and Automatic far superior to the two albums in between. No biggie.

Whether or not I type IMO after every statement I make is completely irrelevant to whether or not the statements I make are my opinion. They just are. However, you seemed to be extraordinarily disturbed by my opinion, so I wanted to make it clear that it is, in fact, just that.
 
Fair enough. Hindsight is 20/20 and all that. I just find Document and Automatic far superior to the two albums in between. No biggie.

Whether or not I type IMO after every statement I make is completely irrelevant to whether or not the statements I make are my opinion. They just are. However, you seemed to be extraordinarily disturbed by my opinion, so I wanted to make it clear that it is, in fact, just that.

I got that it was your opinion. I wasn't "extraordinarily disturbed" by your opinion, but that is a pretty cool adverb. :wink: Anyway, I just slightly disagreed with your opinion, which you are definitely entitled to. I just wanted to give you a different perspective about those 2 particular albums' places in rock and roll history from someone who was actually there.

By the way, I do actually agree with you that Automatic and Document were better than Green and Out of Time, but those albums were pretty good too. Peace!
 
I really enjoy both Green and Out of Time and wouldn't call either record creatively stagnant. There's amazing work there. The creatively stagnant period of R.E.M.'s career came earlier this decade when all they could muster up was Reveal and Around the Sun.

I do agree with you though, LM, that Green and Out of Time aren't on par with Document and AFTP. Those are my two favorite R.E.M. LPs.

Mr. Pryck, you should join us in the voting in our R.E.M. Survivor contest we got goin on right now. It seems you know the band pretty well, and we need all the votes we can get! The more the merrier.

/salesman
 
Mr. Pryck, you should join us in the voting in our R.E.M. Survivor contest we got goin on right now. It seems you know the band pretty well, and we need all the votes we can get! The more the merrier.

/salesman

I do actually participate in those from time to time. I love REM. I've seen them 3 times and they always put on a great show. The last time I saw them was last year and Michael sounded awesome. When Bill left, they had a tough time recovering, but even REM felt that Around the Sun was their worst effort since Bill left.
 
I got that it was your opinion. I wasn't "extraordinarily disturbed" by your opinion, but that is a pretty cool adverb. :wink: Anyway, I just slightly disagreed with your opinion, which you are definitely entitled to. I just wanted to give you a different perspective about those 2 particular albums' places in rock and roll history from someone who was actually there.

By the way, I do actually agree with you that Automatic and Document were better than Green and Out of Time, but those albums were pretty good too. Peace!

And I appreciate the contrasting opinion. That's fine and dandy. Check out the recent pages of the Most Average Albums thread to see what the flipside of these disagreements can look like.

Definitely join us in the R.E.M. survivor when you find the time. Document is next, and I'm pretty stoked for that. Here's hoping we can rack up some record voting totals there.
 
Gee, I must be in the minority in that I like REM's Around The Sun a lot. I'd pick Reveal as their really crappy album. It is boring. The songs on Around The Sun are just that bit more lyrically hard hitting and topical.
 
Eh, I've always had a soft spot for the Chili Peppers. I had an awesome time at the one show I saw. The band is fantastic and work their asses off, even if Anthony can't sing. Part of the fun, however, was because Snoop Dogg opened the show and I could not stop laughing. He and his on-stage entourage lit up joints and pretty soon I was joining in on a fist-pumping "fuck the police!" chant as the smell of marijuana wafted through the audience with the police just standing there helpless. This was also in marijuana-friendly Denver. The whole show was just a blast.
 
RHCP have been boooooooooooring since One Hot Minute. 'Warped' off that album was the last thing they've done that I've liked. Everything else is just a snoozefest, wannabe "rock"/really the stuff for which elevator speakers were designed.
 
Back
Top Bottom