Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Music' started by MikeH1, Aug 9, 2003.
They went "boy band" back in the 80's.
I really liked the 1st 2 albums. The 3rd was OK. After that?
Give me On Through the Night and High N Dry and maybe Pyromania (tolerable) but that's it.
Call it what you want, but X is a fantastic rock and roll album, regardless of who produced it.
So how long before they hire Diane Warren to write them a hit song?
Sorry but I have to disagree. I find far too many people have jumped on the back in the day bandwagon. Priest before painkiller Ryche before Empires etc.
OK Leps were hot in the Day no kidding but they were also young and angry(drunk). They took allot of shit in the UK for going American, Kerrang magazine being their only homeland support but nobody can take their success away from them. AC/DC were also produced by mutt lange and were also popular at the time so really Heavy Rock could be thought of as its Pop music of its time. POP Rock maybe?
As for "X" at times its a POP Rock masterpiece at others it well it's just OK, everyone loves to bag on the Leps its fun and almost too easy,but I still love them and can only wonder...
What would G'n"R's put out if they could of held it together.....
LONG LIVE ROCK AND ROLL
I think the Leps can take some ragging on from the press/public. As long as the checks keep coming in, why should they really give a shit?
As for getting a pop producer, I think the comment is in regards to building a vocal mix. I don't know how they'll sound with out old Mutt in there though.
Im really not fond of On Through the Night or anything after Adrenalize (which was only decent).
The best IMHO is High N Dry. I used to love them when I was younger but lost it after hearing Slang.
Funny, I thought that was their strongest release since Hysteria, and probably my second favorite of theirs after Hysteria.
I just got "X" after reading all the negative remarks here, I just had to find out for myself... and it's not very good, IMO. I have liked almost anything they've done before, but the production on this CD is so far off the mark from what I think Def Leppard should be about. It's too poppy and not in a "we're with the time" way, but in a "this sounded good 4 years ago, let's try it" way. It sounds like stuff Shania would have rejected, and the production is late-90's boy bands (I didn't believe it when I read it here, but it really is!).
If it had been released in 1997 maybe it would have been OK for some people (though not for me), now it just feels extremely dated.
Don't get me wrong, I love pop songs. Shania's latest CD is excellent, and Def Leppard's poppier stuff on "Hysteria" was great.
But this time they've managed to couple a too-light production with not-good-enough pop songs. If they had at least made it a heavier production OR written catchier songs, the album would have been better...
Thats too bad. I always did like Def Leppard and enjoyed Hysteria. After that, to me they started to sound more and more early 90s Bon Jovish.
I am in an 80's cover band and we have been going through a lot of difficulty trying to find a Def Leppard song to play. Most of the Hysteria songs are so "electronic" sounding, so we went back to songs like "Rock of Ages" and I couldn't believe how "electronic" it sounds (considering the year).
If any rock group is leaning toward the boy band sound, I can totally see Def Leppard doing it.
And why not? Do you really think old Leppard fans are going to like anything new they put out? I doubt it, so why not cater to 'new' fans (i.e. teens that like the boy band sound).
From a marketing stand point I think it's quite smart.
IMO, that's the problem. Def Leppard used to be a hard rock band. I can remember after the 1st lp came out, that some reviews compared them to Zeppelin. Now, they are being compared to the Backstreet Boys, Britney Spears, and Shania? I don't even know who Shania is.
Mark- Was in some rock bands in my lifetime. We covered Rock, Rock 'til you Drop. And on my own, I played Rock Brigade, and High n Dry.