This fish my mom has...it looks like it's always dead. It doesn't do anything. Except float. Stupid fish.
Issues. Issues a-plenty. Oh wait...sorry, I meant tissues. Tissues a-plenty. Allergy season is upon us. I mean, for me, allergy season is every season. All the times. (I'm not a good writer - more specifically, I'm not good at translating what I'm thinking/feeling into words/blogs, so just kinda bear with me, if you would be so kind, good sir/madam).
I hate when people hate a certain style of music because it "sounds like everything else". It's really dumb. For instance, I know people that listen to all kinds of music, from classic rock (The Doors, The Beatles, Stevie Ray Vaughn) to 90s alternative (Fastball, Harvey Danger, Semisonic), to old school heavy metal (Judas Priest and...whoever else falls into that category). And even a lot of modern stuff (Death Cab For Cutie, James Blunt, etc.). But when it comes to the modern punk rock/emo and modern hard/metalcore stuff, it all "sounds the same". Anberlin and Taking Back Sunday "sound the same". Underoath and Showbread "sound the same". I could go on and on.
It bothers me because these people say that ignorantly. I understand where they're coming from. A lot of today's good bands are similar sounding. But that's genres. Those bands are divided into genres, and these genres have specifics. Punk has specifics, so it's all gonna have similarities. Emocore has specifics, so all bands that fall under that category are also gonna have similarities. But if one takes the time to actually listen to each band, and not just write them off as the same thing they've already heard, when they get past the genre-specific similarities, they will hear differences. Ska is one of the easiest genres to write off, but listen to The O.C. Supertones and Five Iron Frenzy and try to tell me they sound exactly alike. It's kinda funny sometimes though, because I know if I heard some of the stuff they were listening to, without actually listening to it, there would be a lot of bands I couldn't tell apart. I wouldn't be able to tell the Electric Light Orchestra apart from the Steve Miller Band. Or Judas Priest from Ratt. I'm just being honest. (Be, be honest, be be be honest)
It also bothers me because they don't give the bands a chance, and therefore miss out on some truly great artists. Sadly, some of these people will never give Emery and their musical beauty a chance. And Secret & Whisper will just always take a back seat, because they've "heard it before".
I guess what I want to get across is this: a band doesn't have to create something new or play something different to be good. I mean, creativity is key in writing truly good songs, but does creativity necessarily equal new or untouched? Take for example, Children 18:3. There's a lot of stuff on their debut that's been heard before. Some punk rock, and a couple times they venture into ska-ish stuff, but it's basically all stuff that's been heard before. Social Distortion and Sublime come to mind. But it's still quite a fantastic CD, despite the inevitable sounds-likes.
Sigh. That's my ranting. I guess it's not really a rant. I'm just over-opinionated. Or I'm bothered by trivial matters? Call it what you will, but give a band a chance before you go calling it "everything else".
(For the record, I DO believe there are a lot of bands that sound exactly alike. I admit that I fall into my own area of accusation sometimes, having never actually given some bands a chance, but a lot I have, and they sound the same to me. For the sake of not starting a riot, I will leave these bands unnamed, so take THAT!)