# Three Days Grace...Meh



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

So I'm on my way home from the office and I'm listening to Dave Rocks 107.5 when a song comes on that I really like. I see its a song by Three Days Grace. So I'm always up for new "to me", music. So I get home and I search out what is considered the best Three Days Grace album. Seems most think its One-X. So I load it up in youtube to have a listen. I'm still listening to it and its on the 9th track. But by the 4th track I'm thinking there singing the same song over and over. In-fact the song I'm listening to right now, the 9th track of the album is called "Over and over". And to me, so far that about describes this band. Everything sounds the same. Is this what people criticize Nickleback for?
By the way the song I was listening to on the radio by this band is called "Just Like You". And it sounds like just about every cut on the One-x album even though its not one of the tracks on the album.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

A one hit wonder, over and over and over and over again?


----------



## jbealsmusic (Feb 12, 2014)

Isn't that normal? Most artists/bands have a "sound", and most of their songs sound kind of the same. At least that's what I've always found. Once you've heard one popular song, you get a good idea of what the rest of their music will be like. For me, that idea applies to nearly any artist/band from any era of music after 1950.


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

guitarman2 said:


> *Everything sounds* the same. Is this what people criticize* Nickleback* for?


Cause they're produced by Chad Kroeger!

First song I heard was _Nothing Could Come Between Us_. (probably when it came out) I loved it! The first couple times.... then was kinda sick of it. Then when I heard another tune, I'm like... ya, I don't think I like these guys all that much.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

jbealsmusic said:


> Isn't that normal? Most artists/bands have a "sound", and most of their songs sound kind of the same. At least that's what I've always found. Once you've heard one popular song, you get a good idea of what the rest of their music will be like. For me, that idea applies to nearly any artist/band from any era of music after 1950.


Yes for sure you get a sound that becomes like a brand for the band. Something that appeals to you. But there is diversity and creativity in song writing\recording. 
But this 3 days grace band sounds like the same song recycled over and over.


----------



## Chitmo (Sep 2, 2013)

AC/DC anyone?


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

I'm surprised these guys are still around. They have a sound that's massively dated. I can't imagine hearing them on a new-music station - their material would sound so jarringly out-of-place next to everything else.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

I can think of a few bands that don't sound the same every song. If you guys are talking about sheeple music, then all I can say is, "huh?". Of course it all sounds the same.

Fever Ray
MGMT (first album - not sure about the others)
Radiohead
Arcade Fire

Those are just off the top of my head that _don't _sound the same every song.


----------



## Chitmo (Sep 2, 2013)

hollowbody said:


> I'm surprised these guys are still around. They have a sound that's massively dated. I can't imagine hearing them on a new-music station - their material would sound so jarringly out-of-place next to everything else.


They're still getting a lot of play on the satellite radio stations like octane and liquid metal.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Yes, there are lots of bands that don't sound the same. Perhaps some of you remember the Beatles.


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

Does the theory of bands having an overall sound come and go in waves? There are quite a few lately that definitely have a 'sound', but that's not the same as knowing a song you've never heard is "So & So".... I think. 

Radiohead was mentioned.... I'm pretty sure I can tell it's them before I _know_ it's them, and they are quite diverse, overall. Other bands have...err... formulas.... _Black Dog_ sounds nothing like _That's the Way_, but _The Immigrant Song_ is similar (in style) to _Communication Breakdown. _Start at 100mph and plow through! 

Bands like Nickleback, Theory, and Creed, seem to make the same songs, and same albums over and over showing no growth.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## ezcomes (Jul 28, 2008)

SWLABR said:


> First song I heard was _Nothing Could Come Between Us_. (probably when it came out) I loved it! The first couple times.... then was kinda sick of it. Then when I heard another tune, I'm like... ya, I don't think I like these guys all that much.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Three Doors Down was terrible music, even for pop radio.


----------



## johnnyshaka (Nov 2, 2014)

adcandour said:


> I can think of a few bands that don't sound the same every song. If you guys are talking about sheeple music, then all I can say is, "huh?". Of course it all sounds the same.
> 
> Fever Ray
> MGMT (first album - not sure about the others)
> ...


You forgot Cold Play.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

Chitmo said:


> AC/DC anyone?


Yes! Me. 

Lol

Honestly the iconic ACDC songs sound very similar but their stuff just rocks. A, D and E. I have learned so many old school licks, song phrasing’s and techniques etc from the 35+ years I have been listening to them. Listening to them motivates me to try new stuff and learn it. It never grows old. I can’t frankly say that about Nickleback or Three days grace.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

jbealsmusic said:


> Isn't that normal? Most artists/bands have a "sound", and most of their songs sound kind of the same. At least that's what I've always found. Once you've heard one popular song, you get a good idea of what the rest of their music will be like. For me, that idea applies to nearly any artist/band from any era of music after 1950.


Most, but not all, bands. I couldn't say it better than Jack Black:


----------



## jbealsmusic (Feb 12, 2014)

High/Deaf said:


> Most, but not all, bands. I couldn't say it better than Jack Black:


When I hear music at a glance, I primarily hear the singer's vocal style, the guitarist's playing style, and the general production feel. If I get familiar enough, I can tell pretty quickly who it is when a song comes on the radio by -=insert artist/band name here=-, especially when the singer comes in or when a guitar solo starts. It isn't until I listen more purposefully (or learn to play it) that I realize it is actually quite variable. In the sense of what I'm referring to, even bands like Rush and The Beatles fall into the category of, "all their stuff sounds kind of the same."

I'm a fan of Dream Theater. JP et al use an incredible breadth of musical techniques, timings, and you name it to introduce a wide variety of texture in their music. But again, just to hear it without analyzing it or learning to play it, it sure all sounds the same to me. Nothing wrong with that.

@Lola has a great example with ACDC. All their stuff is very much the same. Even on a closer listen, their music is really quite technically uninteresting (to me at least). But I'll be damned if it isn't fun to listen to, jam/sing to, and maybe even dance (badly) to. My one year old loves ACDC! Once day I was trying to entertain him with my guitar and ended up playing/singing a bit of thunderstruck. Now he walks around the house bobbing his head around wildly yelling, "THUNDER! Oo aa ooo aa AA oo AAaaww..." All while flailing his hands/fingers around playing air guitar.

The only problem with that is, now that's the only song he'll let me play. He asks me to pick up the guitar and play "thunder" all the freakin' time. If I try to start playing anything else, he gets mad.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

Yea, I can get that. Bands have a signature sound that is probably more of a positive than a negative wrt marketing themselves. Both of those bands have very recognizable sounds (and one had a significant singer change along the way). Nearly every band is like this though. Tom Petty was Tom's voice. Zep was Percy's voice. The Who was Daltry's voice. Mick was the Stones sound. Jon was Yes. To most of the general public, Pink Floyd was the lead singer's name. It's what the public does.

But, to me, there is no comparison listening to Rush's earliest 'Canadian Zeppelin' stuff or their prog rock stuff, or their keyboardy new wave synth pop stuff. Or their return to the power trio stuff in the later decades. They were a band with a lot of sauce. 

I don't hear that variety in bands like AC/DC, which is also cool. Who can argue against their success? And people who love AC/DC have never been disappointed by AC/DC (with the exception of the last couple of years when the Axl fell off the wheels). They bring their brand of rock night after night, album after album. They don't risk losing their market the way bands like Rush do (they lost me totally from Signals to about the mid 90s).


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Lola said:


> Yes! Me.
> 
> Lol
> 
> Honestly the iconic ACDC songs sound very similar but their stuff just rocks. A, D and E. I have learned so many old school licks, song phrasing’s and techniques etc from the 35+ years I have been listening to them. Listening to them motivates me to try new stuff and learn it. It never grows old. I can’t frankly say that about Nickleback or Three days grace.


I think there is a difference between something like AC\DC and Three days grace. One has a signature sound and has made a lot of hits of songs that are distinguishable as being a different song. The other band all there songs seem to sound like exactly the same song. 
AC\DC definitely has a formula signature sound to their music. Three days grace seems to have written one song. So what I don't get is how come so much hate on for Nickleback for doing the same thing, and I don't see the same hate for a band like Three days grace?


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

jbealsmusic said:


> The only problem with that is, now that's the only song he'll let me play. He asks me to pick up the guitar and play "thunder" all the freakin' time. If I try to start playing anything else, he gets mad.


Learn to play "Bohemian Rhapsody". Its more challenging and little kids love it.


----------



## jbealsmusic (Feb 12, 2014)

High/Deaf said:


> But, to me, there is no comparison listening to Rush's earliest 'Canadian Zeppelin' stuff or their prog rock stuff, or their keyboardy new wave synth pop stuff. Or their return to the power trio stuff in the later decades. They were a band with a lot of sauce.
> ...................
> They don't risk losing their market the way bands like Rush do (they lost me totally from Signals to about the mid 90s).


I see what you're saying. Even a band like Metallica has had major changes in their writing style, despite most of the material being written by the same guy. Big difference between Kill 'Em All and Load. It doesn't even sound like the same band at that point.



guitarman2 said:


> So what I don't get is how come so much hate on for Nickleback for doing the same thing, and I don't see the same hate for a band like Three days grace?


I don't get why Creed and Nickelback get so much hate in general. I was a fan before it was popular to hate on them. Lots of cool guitar riffage throughout many of their albums. There's some interesting song writing if you look beyond the radio stuff.



guitarman2 said:


> Learn to play "Bohemian Rhapsody". Its more challenging and little kids love it.


Brilliant! I can already play it, doubt I can sing it though...  Either way, I foresee many Wayne's World moments driving with my boy from now on. Thanks for the suggestion!


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

jbealsmusic said:


> Even a band like Metallica has had major changes in their writing style, despite most of the material being written by the same guy. Big difference between Kill 'Em All and Load. It doesn't even sound like the same band at that point.
> 
> I don't get why Creed and Nickelback get so much hate in general. I was a fan before it was popular to hate on them. Lots of cool guitar riffage throughout many of their albums. There's some interesting song writing if you look beyond the radio stuff.


Kill 'Em All and Load _are_ wildly different, but those aren't album #1, and album #2. There were so many albums in between, and it was a progression that got them there. It could be "growth", it could be an abandonment of their "sound". I vote for growth, even if you're not a fan of the new stuff, at least it's not just re-hashed old riffs. The one they did with Lou Reed was absolute crap though! 

I willingly admit I liked Creed and Nickleback when they first came out. Creed's _My Own Prison_ was awesome, as was NB's _Worthy to Say_. But then they both released to same stuff over and over. They had 0.0% growth!


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

SWLABR said:


> I willingly admit I liked Creed and Nickleback when they first came out. Creed's _My Own Prison_ was awesome, as was NB's _Worthy to Say_. But then they both released to same stuff over and over. They had 0.0% growth!


At least in the 50's artists knew to get their one hit wonder, then get out before the hate started.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

SWLABR said:


> Kill 'Em All and Load _are_ wildly different, but those aren't album #1, and album #2. There were so many albums in between, and it was a progression that got them there. It could be "growth", it could be an abandonment of their "sound". I vote for growth, even if you're not a fan of the new stuff, at least it's not just re-hashed old riffs. The one they did with Lou Reed was absolute crap though!


Of course, this is where many of their fans place the blame.










To be fair, I really liked the black album. It was after that that I lost interest in them. Plus, Lars' fricken about-face regarding downloading music kinda stuck in my craw.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

High/Deaf said:


> Of course, this is where many of their fans place the blame.
> 
> View attachment 176969
> 
> ...


Ya, I liked the Black album too, but _...And Justice For All_ is probably my favorite. To me, they were a slightly more polished version of the Cliff Burton years, but still hard and edgy. James vocals had thickened up and lost that teenage pitch (in a good way).
I think Bob just polished too hard with Black and basically turned them into a harder Def Leopard.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

guitarman2 said:


> Learn to play "Bohemian Rhapsody". Its more challenging and little kids love it.


That’s a hot one to sing to! Who doesn’t know the lyrics to that one.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

Look how simplistic this song is in reality. We have all played E, A and D. How many times?

But......

This song just rocks. Really!!


----------



## KapnKrunch (Jul 13, 2016)

_*XTC*_

All thirty-two years of it. 

Starting with the early stuff, that's "like seeing yourself in the highschool yearbook with a bad haircut." 

Into the classic "_Drums & Wires_".

And thru all the progressively more sophisticated stuff to the supremely-crafted material at the end. 

If you can't dig "_Skylarking_" y'd better check your pulse.

So many different innovations. Never copied. Never duplicated. Never surpassed.

Outstanding roster of singles.

The only band to do a perfect cover of _Ella Guru_ by Capt. Beefheart.

And Dave Gregory weighs in as the third most original guitarist after Hendrix and Zappa. Styles no one has ever done before or since. 

Let's not forget their Sixties alter-ego _The Dukes of Stratosphere_.

Hardly an unbiased post! Lol. Needless to say, my favourite group. Because of their variety.


----------

