Pop "Punk" acts - especially in the UK...

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

ok then...

I know no-one cares, and personally I've never been a big fan of Busted, "Noise Next Door" whoever they are, Rooster, those ones that sang "Five COlours In Her Hair" and even Avril Lavigne...

But why the hell do they all follow the:

1st single: Fast and frantic

2nd single: Faster and more frantic

3rd single: Slow ballard, crack out the acoustic guitars

pattern...

I know there's not much intelligence floating around there but so many groups fade away after the third song because of this...sheeeeeesh

[King Ellis]

How can you forget the mighty McFly! Surely being named after the main character from BTTF should make them easily memorable.

[apsham]

I mean, it's like that for nearly every emo\general punk band over here too. For example, the best that I can remember is New Found Glory's last two albums:

Sticks And Stones:

1st: Fast and frantic

2nd: Slow ballad

3rd: Faster and more frantic

Catalyst

1st: Fast and frantic

2nd: Faster and more frantic

3rd: Slow ballad

It's a form that works I suppose, the first song draws them into buying the CD and the other ones are there because of necessity, the slower songs come later for when everyone is aquainted with them.

[Malenko]

I'm glad you wrote "Punk" but i think with the "" it still looks wrong

Don't worry, that trend is over, avril lavignes, and busteds won't appear anymore because the major trend now is another one.

On to the answer, the thing is all those "bands" you mentioned, the ones build up by agents and produced in major labels have the first single(s) to attract one sort of auddience and the second/third/fourth to attract other kind of audience, because usually after the second single, sales drop, cause they've got all the kids that like it to buy it. Then they move on to show the so called band can also do other sort of stuff, like ballads, acoustic songs, or whatever thus bringing a new bunch of sales. While these sales don't reach the peak of the first single, they reach a local peak that isn't something to reject. That formula is basically made cause there aren't any people who would buy their records without that sort of advertising.

[YI]

I like Rooster's new song. Somebody hold me.

And "Punk" still does hella look wrong, even in inverted comma's.

And Noise Next Door, what the fuck horrible name is that. At least with Busted you could say "They had Charlie, so were Busted"

[ClaRK! Kent]

I don't mind Avril Lavigne, because it's somewhat pop-punk by numbers but it's done with a degree of savvy and musical ability, but I have noticed the somewhat formulaic single trend before.

McFly are not good, but miles better than Busted, and at least they have a halfway decent grounding in good quality 50s rock-and-roll music, even if it doesn't find its way onto many of their songs. They're big fans of that era, apparently, so I'm hoping they'll do a "Beatles" and get really prog-rock on their later stuff. Let's not forget that the Fab Four were the 1960s equivalent of these bands.

RK!

[Corizzle]

Catalyst

1st: Fast and frantic

2nd: Faster and more frantic

3rd: Slow ballad

←

[Underage Politician]

Let's not forget that the Fab Four were the 1960s equivalent of these bands.

←

Your ignorance amuses me.

[ClaRK! Kent]

I assure you, I'm one of the biggest Beatles fans around.

But, the fact remains that they started out as a 'pop act' with rock-n-roll leanings, and these bands are the natural successors to them in that sense. The Beatles' first few albums sold a lot to teenage girls and other such core demographics, but a lot of more 'serious' music people - the NME, Melody Maker, for instance - thought that they were quite naff and too poppy compared to, say, the Rolling Stones.

Which is a fair point. I love the Beatles, they changed the face of music for the better, yes, but their first couple of albums were hardly taken 'seriously' by your average rock-savvy teenager or the weeklies. It was only really at about Hard Day's Night or Rubber Soul when people started to sit up and say "fuckin' Hell, this is quite good, isn't it?" and then the drugs/Sgt Pepper's and beyond era began, the prog-rock stuff. Which was my point re: McFly.

My dad grew up in the 1960s, as did uncles of mine on both sides of the family, and they never tire of lecturing me on how music today is just a rehash of everything their generation did first. The Beatles weren't even a rock act, so to speak, they were a pop act (like these bands today) until they stopped doing the commercial stuff, really.

And so the comparison stands.

RK!

[Skummy]

Did anyone catch Popworld's feature on The Noise Next Door this morning on Channel 4? Absolutely hilarious, I kid you not.

"They've dropped the outrageous hairstyles and gone for a look that many have described as...Busted."

"This was all done without stylist intervention...wait...stylists chose their clothes....and their hairstyles....and the song isn't their's either.....but they did choose their own pyjamas. Wait...only the tops."