Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
✨ STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE WORLD TOUR ✨

Why do I dislike AHFOD so much?


Guest howyousawtheworld
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest LiquidSky
Oh my god... Im not talking about personality or anything like that. I'm talking about his pop influences and AHFOD

 

Oh ok. That's not what you said though. You never mentioned his pop influence. You said "Pop 2015 Chris" meaning Chris being Pop...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 349
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

to some people coldplay were never a great, artistic, original band. to some they were always a band that ripped off of better bands (i see this point, but in a more influenced sense). to some people coldplay were great and are great today. to some people coldplay died after parachutes. to some people coldplay died after a rush of blood. to some people coldplay died after x&y. to some people coldplay died after viva. and to different people these deaths happen to varying degrees. to some people the depressing coldplay are over and they are reborn in better ways with the recent releases. this never changes. artists change, bands change and people change. no point in trying to make others who may enjoy the music feel badly about it. i don't enjoy most of AHFOD, but what's the point of trying to make others think that it's bad?

 

chris recently said that music unites people (talking about the paris attacks). hell no! just look at this forum. hahaa!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

to some people coldplay were never a great, artistic, original band. to some they were always a band that ripped off of better bands (i see this point, but in a more influenced sense). to some people coldplay were great and are great today. to some people coldplay died after parachutes. to some people coldplay died after a rush of blood. to some people coldplay died after x&y. to some people coldplay died after viva. and to different people these deaths happen to varying degrees. to some people the depressing coldplay are over and they are reborn in better ways with the recent releases. this never changes. artists change, bands change and people change. no point in trying to make others who may enjoy the music feel badly about it. i don't enjoy most of AHFOD, but what's the point of trying to make others think that it's bad?

 

chris recently said that music unites people (talking about the paris attacks). hell no! just look at this forum. hahaa!

Not trying to make people feel bad about enjoying AHFOD but there's something very disingenuous about Coldplay today. They are full of cheap production tricks, gimmicky costumes/Neon paint, silly ape videos and pop star guests. It's a million miles away from the 4 guys that started out making good, genuine interesting music. They are disenfranchising the fans that made them who they are in favour of bland, cheap pop music and at the same time lowering their creative output. For all intense purposes they have sold out and are now on a par with Maroon 5, theres no other way to look at it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trying to make people feel bad about enjoying AHFOD but there's something very disingenuous about Coldplay today. They are full of cheap production tricks, gimmicky costumes/Neon paint, silly ape videos and pop star guests. It's a million miles away from the 4 guys that started out making good, genuine interesting music. They are disenfranchising the fans that made them who they are in favour of bland, cheap pop music and at the same time lowering their creative output. For all intense purposes they have sold out and are now on a par with Maroon 5, theres no other way to look at it.

stop comparing Coldplay and Maroon 5. I listen to both bands and in no way they are similar. Chris may write simple lyrics, but there's meaning behind those lyrics, there is passion in their performances, Coldplay share their feelings with their fans. If we don't like that it's our problem because they don't mind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trying to make people feel bad about enjoying AHFOD but there's something very disingenuous about Coldplay today. They are full of cheap production tricks, gimmicky costumes/Neon paint, silly ape videos and pop star guests. It's a million miles away from the 4 guys that started out making good, genuine interesting music. They are disenfranchising the fans that made them who they are in favour of bland, cheap pop music and at the same time lowering their creative output. For all intense purposes they have sold out and are now on a par with Maroon 5, theres no other way to look at it.

 

 

I'm just curious.. Did you hate MX and GS as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious.. Did you hate MX and GS as well?

I didn't mind GS to a large extent, it had a coherent theme and some interesting songs (Midnight). , MX was average and you could see the decline starting. AHFOD is just terrible and panders to the lowest common denominators in music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't mind GS to a large extent, it had a coherent theme and some interesting songs (Midnight). , MX was average and you could see the decline starting. AHFOD is just terrible and panders to the lowest common denominators in music.

 

It's terrible to you.. But anyway, just to have some constructive conversation, do you think they can do anything to regain your respect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's terrible to you.. But anyway, just to have some constructive conversation, do you think they can do anything to regain your respect?

Strip away the production, get away from the pop rubbish and guests stars, get back to being what they originally were, a band and 4 guys who's influences stemmed from Echo and The Bunny Men, U2 etc and not Justin Bieber and Beyonce. It feels like a Chris Martin solo project at the moment and he seems to have got lost in the vapid LA, pop nothing culture.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest howyousawtheworld
Not trying to make people feel bad about enjoying AHFOD but there's something very disingenuous about Coldplay today. They are full of cheap production tricks, gimmicky costumes/Neon paint, silly ape videos and pop star guests. It's a million miles away from the 4 guys that started out making good, genuine interesting music. They are disenfranchising the fans that made them who they are in favour of bland, cheap pop music and at the same time lowering their creative output. For all intense purposes they have sold out and are now on a par with Maroon 5, theres no other way to look at it.

 

Is absolutely correct! Today they are the mere sound of mass produced mainstream pop. They are McDonalds set to music. They make it sound like they are trying to be everything to everyone (which they aren't) and in doing that they have ended up being nothing to no one. It's blatantly commercial driven, nothing else and because of that it is disingenuous. There is no attempt to create something different or push the boat out. At times it's bordering on Michael Bay stuff - childish, cynical and exploitative of those who don't know any better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my point is there were comments like this from different people even when parachutes came out. that it's watered down, sugary radiohead-lite for mass consumption.

People never said they were sugary, there was nothing sugary about Parachutes or AROBTTH or up to MX. Remembering back people said Coldplay were boring and miserable (possibly Radiohead lite) but this new album is way beyond that, it's complete syrup and cheese akin to something Take That would produce . The songwriting and chord progression is so tired and lazy also.

There's no need for them to take such a direction why are the instruments barely audible in this album as well? they're buried away under layers of synth noise. It's such a shame to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People never said they were sugary, there was nothing sugary about Parachutes or AROBTTH or up to MX. Remembering back people said Coldplay were boring and miserable (possibly Radiohead lite) but this new album is way beyond that, it's complete syrup and cheese akin to something Take That would produce . The songwriting and chord progression is so tired and lazy also.

There's no need for them to take such a direction why are the instruments barely audible in this album as well? they're buried away under layers of synth noise. It's such a shame to hear.

there was negativity when parachutes was released. it was labeled by some as an effort to mainstream more left-field, better artists.

and about AHFOD, i'm not disagreeing with you. my point is you try to make this out as the ultimate betrayal by the band or something dramatic like that, when in fact fans have been saying similar things since a rush of blood. there are people who think that the only good album coldplay made was parachutes because they sold their sound to make arena pop/rock from a rush of blood. i'm just fed up of the constant ranting, unfounded insinuations about the band (who are we kidding, that would be chris) and sometimes even personal attacks. it's all chris' fault right? poor old will, guy and jonny..

 

this thread is indeed a train wreck. it is as tiring as it is entertaining.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there was negativity when parachutes was released. it was labeled by some as an effort to mainstream more left-field, better artists.

and about AHFOD, i'm not disagreeing with you. my point is you try to make this out as the ultimate betrayal by the band or something dramatic like that, when in fact fans have been saying similar things since a rush of blood. there are people who think that the only good album coldplay made was parachutes because they sold their sound to make arena pop/rock from a rush of blood. i'm just fed up of the constant ranting, unfounded insinuations about the band (who are we kidding, that would be chris) and sometimes even personal attacks. it's all chris' fault right? poor old will, guy and jonny..

 

I am with gai with regards to people bashing the band, particularly the band's choices with AHFOD - the arguments are not new and have always been there... some "Oldplay" fans who missed the initial backlash from the early 2000's just do not see the validity from these earlier comparisons (made when Parachutes and AROBTTH were released).

 

For people lamenting their loss of originality with AHFOD (compared to earlier works), read these reviews - they were never brilliantly original. Also same to be said about them "selling out" or becoming too big / commercial with AHFOD:

1) Pitchfork - lamenting Parachutes' blandness, lack of originality (lifts off Hitchiker's Guide..), generic and "nothing special" songs when it was released... Oh, and CM sounds like Jeff Buckley. NME and Rolling Stone - writing favourably, but still noting influences from Buckley, the Verve, Radiohead, Travis, U2, Dave Matthew's.

2) Pitchfork again - lamenting AROBTTH "forgot to tote along their initial strength (from Parachutes) - the songs", and blames producer Ken Nelson to boot, oh and calls the album boring (at the end). The Guardian - reviewing AROBTTH's masterpiece, but essentially calling Parachutes beige and timid. While also noting that the AROBTTH songs are instantly familiar while fresh, but comes at a price - no mystery / charm. BBC review - "mid-album, they let all their hard work go to waste with the insipid, vanilla tracks "The Scientist" and "Clocks". They pass you by and fail to raise even the smallest emotion."

3) NME on X&Y - already criticising CM's "Hollywood star wife, the baby", then ''exhausted after a relentless, punishing tour", "Coldplay doing Radiohead", Kraftwerk, Prince, U2 influences. Pitchfork (and same AROBTTH critic) on X&Y - mostly harmless, ridiculous that Coldplay were called the "next U2" coz U2 "wrote I Will Follow,New Year's Day, the Joshua Tree" while Coldplay "started in the middle of the road and haven't strayed since". Sputnik music - criticising "mainstream" Coldplay, "Full of such terrible lines as "My song is love" and cliches such as "When you get what you want but not what you need" (Does the cons list look familiar anyone?)

4) Rolling Stone still called VLVODAAHF ""about stadium-scale melodies and singalong choruses. And while the experimentation makes this their most musically interesting album to date, its political messages are too vague to be heard amid its outsize hooks". CoS - "Chris Martin and friends are embracing the idea of being a U2 knock off, and even more than before", then "many of the tracks here drag on, mostly because they’re instrumentals that have been accomplished previously (and better) by a slew of bands with less of the palette to work from"

5) I won't bother continuing with MX and GS, most people here remember the criticisms levelled at these...

* On a funny side note - the reviews tend to be the most scathing when the album first gets released (ie those written in the year of release), and progressively get more favourable the more years have passed since the album was first released lol... The blessings of hindsight and having to adjust opinions following huge album sales / mainstream approval :D

 

For those lamenting their (read CM's) "new" pop / non-rock influence, take note:

- early covers of / references to Kylie Minogue, Crazy Frog, Ms. Dynamite, t.A.T.u., Nelly (Hot in Heere), Aqua (Barbie Girl)

- more recent covers of Michael Jackson (Billie Jean anyone?), Hunting High and Low, Take That (Back For Good), The Wiggles (yep, the children's band)

- CM referencing A-Ha, Rammstein, Jay-Z / Kanye, and the lyrical genius of Eminem - before his most recent forays into Justin Bieber, et al.

 

For those saying that they no longer emulate great rock bands (where they previously did) - I guess this partly validates Chris Martin's statement that rock has been done / nowhere else to go... Who is the great (new or old) rock band they can emulate off / gain inspiration from (that they previously did from icons eg Jeff Buckley, Radiohead, U2, REM, Echo and the Bunnymen, etc)?

 

Lastly, for those complaining that they are now using pop influences, which are inferior to rock... you need to accept that it is a different genre, with its own set of characteristics - that's why it's pop and not rock... Rock usually = guitar + melody + steady / more straightforward drums + bass + good lyrics; well Pop = catchy hook + good beat (if you're lucky) + direct / more cheesy lyrics + lighter subject matter + more overt emotional expression (ie melodramatic singing). And despite what they have previously produced, Coldplay have always had pop influences close by, so it's not anything "new" - they are just being more open about this now, and embracing of it...

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am with gai with regards to people bashing the band, particularly the band's choices with AHFOD - the arguments are not new and have always been there... some "Oldplay" fans who missed the initial backlash from the early 2000's just do not see the validity from these earlier comparisons (made when Parachutes and AROBTTH were released).

 

For people lamenting their loss of originality with AHFOD (compared to earlier works), read these reviews - they were never brilliantly original. Also same to be said about them "selling out" or becoming too big / commercial with AHFOD:

1) Pitchfork - lamenting Parachutes' blandness, lack of originality (lifts off Hitchiker's Guide..), generic and "nothing special" songs when it was released... Oh, and CM sounds like Jeff Buckley. NME and Rolling Stone - writing favourably, but still noting influences from Buckley, the Verve, Radiohead, Travis, U2, Dave Matthew's.

2) Pitchfork again - lamenting AROBTTH "forgot to tote along their initial strength (from Parachutes) - the songs", and blames producer Ken Nelson to boot, oh and calls the album boring (at the end). The Guardian - reviewing AROBTTH's masterpiece, but essentially calling Parachutes beige and timid. While also noting that the AROBTTH songs are instantly familiar while fresh, but comes at a price - no mystery / charm. BBC review - "mid-album, they let all their hard work go to waste with the insipid, vanilla tracks "The Scientist" and "Clocks". They pass you by and fail to raise even the smallest emotion."

3) NME on X&Y - already criticising CM's "Hollywood star wife, the baby", then ''exhausted after a relentless, punishing tour", "Coldplay doing Radiohead", Kraftwerk, Prince, U2 influences. Pitchfork (and same AROBTTH critic) on X&Y - mostly harmless, ridiculous that Coldplay were called the "next U2" coz U2 "wrote I Will Follow,New Year's Day, the Joshua Tree" while Coldplay "started in the middle of the road and haven't strayed since". Sputnik music - criticising "mainstream" Coldplay, "Full of such terrible lines as "My song is love" and cliches such as "When you get what you want but not what you need" (Does the cons list look familiar anyone?)

4) Rolling Stone still called VLVODAAHF ""about stadium-scale melodies and singalong choruses. And while the experimentation makes this their most musically interesting album to date, its political messages are too vague to be heard amid its outsize hooks". CoS - "Chris Martin and friends are embracing the idea of being a U2 knock off, and even more than before", then "many of the tracks here drag on, mostly because they’re instrumentals that have been accomplished previously (and better) by a slew of bands with less of the palette to work from"

5) I won't bother continuing with MX and GS, most people here remember the criticisms levelled at these...

* On a funny side note - the reviews tend to be the most scathing when the album first gets released (ie those written in the year of release), and progressively get more favourable the more years have passed since the album was first released lol... The blessings of hindsight and having to adjust opinions following huge album sales / mainstream approval :D

 

For those lamenting their (read CM's) "new" pop / non-rock influence, take note:

- early covers of / references to Kylie Minogue, Crazy Frog, Ms. Dynamite, t.A.T.u., Nelly (Hot in Heere), Aqua (Barbie Girl)

- more recent covers of Michael Jackson (Billie Jean anyone?), Hunting High and Low, Take That (Back For Good), The Wiggles (yep, the children's band)

- CM referencing A-Ha, Rammstein, Jay-Z / Kanye, and the lyrical genius of Eminem - before his most recent forays into Justin Bieber, et al.

 

For those saying that they no longer emulate great rock bands (where they previously did) - I guess this partly validates Chris Martin's statement that rock has been done / nowhere else to go... Who is the great (new or old) rock band they can emulate off / gain inspiration from (that they previously did from icons eg Jeff Buckley, Radiohead, U2, REM, Echo and the Bunnymen, etc)?

Here's a crazy thought, they could take inspiration from Bob Dylan, Neil Young, David Bowie, The Clash, The Kinks, ELO, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Nirvana, The Foo Fighters, The Ramones, The Who, The Police etc etc etc.

 

To say rock music is dead is one of the most obnoxious comments ever.

 

Coldplay are in Maroon 5 territory now, it's beyond bland. I just can't understand people trying to defend them on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a crazy thought, they could take inspiration from Bob Dylan, Neil Young, David Bowie, The Clash, The Kinks, ELO, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Nirvana, The Foo Fighters, The Ramones, The Who, The Police etc etc etc.

 

To say rock music is dead is one of the most obnoxious comments ever.

 

Coldplay are in Maroon 5 territory now, it's beyond bland. I just can't understand people trying to defend them on here.

 

They could have chosen rock inspirations, but they chose not to. And quite consciously too.

I respect them enough as people to not judge them too publicly / harshly on this... They have a right to like / take influence from wherever they like. I may occasionally go "OMG, this?", but I will not bash them about it - the same way I will try not to judge any other individuals for their music taste.

Btw I think you may be misquoting Chris Martin there... I believe his actual words were more "We felt like rock music has been done", rather than actually saying rock music is dead... He could well have meant "rock music has been done (by us)"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, is there still people in this thread that think AHFOD is good?!?!?!

Have you been living under a rock ?

Check the forums and you will see that most of the people here love the album.

 

Also your personal opinion is not what determine whether it's a good or bad album.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They could have chosen rock inspirations, but they chose not to. And quite consciously too.

I respect them enough as people to not judge them too publicly / harshly on this... They have a right to like / take influence from wherever they like. I may occasionally go "OMG, this?", but I will not bash them about it - the same why I will try not to judge any other individuals for their music taste.

Btw I think you may be misquoting Chris Martin there... I believe his actual words were more "We felt like rock music has been done", rather than actually saying rock music is dead... He could well have meant "rock music has been done (by us)"

Yes, the chose to take inspiration from boring pop acts whose music has no depth and won't be remembered in 5-10years time. They also chose to laden themselves with gimmicks, guest pop stars, lyrics about being drunk and high, Neon pain, ape videos, syrupy pop production etc etc. It's all aiming towards a lower age mass market and away from the quality music driven stance that they had earlier in their career and that allowed them to produce music that will stand the test of time. Noone will remember or cite AHFOD in 5 years.

Their new outlook on music seems such a cynical ploy to sell albums and appease everyone to keep themselves at the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their new outlook on music seems such a cynical ploy to sell albums and appease everyone to keep themselves at the top.

Appease everyone? Please, that is so not what they're going for. They have said time and time again how this is the album where they were truly free and didn't care about what anyone else thinks. Also, this album is arguably one of their most polarizing ones to date. If they really wanted to appease everyone they would just pull of another AROBTTH or Viva.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...