Why did Kaiser Chiefs latest album flop so hard?

Comments

• Slojo Posts: 4,230

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  10/01/12 - 15:18 #2

  Totally IMO of course but having had a quick listen to the above it just sounds very ordinary and actually quite dated.
  
  Sound a bit like Tears For Fears to me ??

  0
• Amazing Posts: 1,541

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  10/01/12 - 16:21 #3

  Their initial success baffled me. I always thought they were vastly over-rated.

  0
• Benllech Posts: 2,297

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  10/01/12 - 16:27 #4

  It seems with a lot of indie bands that people just get bored of them after a while.

  0
• Watcher #1 Posts: 9,040

  Forum Member

  ✭

  10/01/12 - 16:27 #5

  Because their third album was, quite frankly, terrible?

  0
• LostIslands_ Posts: 630

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  10/01/12 - 16:33 #6

  Watcher #1 wrote: »

  Because their third album was, quite frankly, terrible?

  
  So that means their fourth was doomed too?
  
  I know they're not the best band in the world, but I honestly thought The Future Is Medieval was them getting back on form after two mediocre follow ups to Employment.

  0
• Watcher #1 Posts: 9,040

  Forum Member

  ✭

  10/01/12 - 16:41 #7

  LostIslands_ wrote: »

  So that means their fourth was doomed too?
  
  I know they're not the best band in the world, but I honestly thought The Future Is Medieval was them getting back on form after two mediocre follow ups to Employment.

  
  Once you've lost that all important airplay (from the flop 3rd), it's really hard to get back into the top layer. The media (and the pluggers) would rather move onto the next thing.
  
  There are hundreds (if not thousands) of artists still putting stuff out after they have flopped, but the number who have really come back from a real 'flop' to massive commercial success - are there actully any?

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 1,270

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  10/01/12 - 21:09 #8

  I just don't think they're that good. Their singles were always catchy, but once I've heard them a few times, I just don't care anymore. No replay value, they're certainly not doing anything that others haven't done much much better.

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 2,177

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  10/01/12 - 21:15 #9

  they lost their early appeal, like The Hoosiers and Ting Tings.

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 3,180

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  10/01/12 - 21:37 #10

  I still think they're a great band, but I've been a bit less interested in each successive album unfortunately. They really had their own slant on what was popular at the time when they came out, and I guess they've just struggled to stay relevant. They've given us some amazing songs and video's though. I ought to give their latest album another listen as I tend to make my mind up about music quite quickly these days and didn't give it much of a chance to grow on me.

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 1,407

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  10/01/12 - 22:55 #11

  Album 1 was great. Album 2, however was a real disappointment. But I think as much as anything the music climate has changed. In 2005 there were bands everywhere. But then the term 'landfill indie' started to be used and they all lost their aura a bit. it's happening again now with 'generic club tune'. I'm sure we'll get a new dominant genre soon enough and maybe Kaiser Chiefs will fit better into that one. Probably not though.

  0
• gav016 Posts: 5,836

  Forum Member

  ✭

  11/01/12 - 01:46 #12

  They lost the support of the 'credible' music outlets, and seemed to pander towards the charts, which is fine, but that doesnt really last forever. They sort of ended up with no pop fans left after the mainstream soulless indie craze died down (which I think they were better than anyway), and having alienated some of their alt fans.
  
  Its a shame, because there are some good songs on The Future Is Medieval (which I think is easily their best since Employment), but the general consensus was quantity over quality, which I can kind of see.

  0
• Dub2 Posts: 2,869

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  11/01/12 - 01:59 #13

  You knew it would end in disaster when they were getting introduced to festival crowds as `the biggest band in the world`.
  
  They were a bit too shouty for me.

  0
• Sifter22 Posts: 12,057

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  11/01/12 - 02:26 #14

  They were just part of the whole "indie" thing in around 06/07. Just like The Kooks, they have vanished into obscurity.

  0
• LostIslands_ Posts: 630

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  11/01/12 - 05:25 #15

  As long as they're happy, and the "hardcore" fans are too. I suppose commercial success isn't that important. I think they're still a rather popular live act too, and do plenty of festivals.
  
  What makes The Future Is Medieval special for me is the little things, guitar riffs and just amazing instrumental parts buried in some of the tracks (The endings of Fly On The Wall & Child Of The Jago, the way City & Saying Something both build into monsters of tracks, the mad energy of Howlaround)
  
  I just love it.

  0
• BrunoStreete Posts: 7,180

  Forum Member

  ✭

  11/01/12 - 08:08 #16

  LostIslands_ wrote: »

  So that means their fourth was doomed too?
  
  I know they're not the best band in the world, but I honestly thought The Future Is Medieval was them getting back on form after two mediocre follow ups to Employment.

  
  Yes. People lose interest in a band. It is very hard to come back from an album that has flopped so badly.

  0
• Metal Mickey Posts: 1,606

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  11/01/12 - 12:04 #17

  Pretty much all of those UK guitar bands who came to prominence in 2004-5 have now either split up or are on their uppers - Kaiser Chiefs, Franz Ferdinand, Libertines, Razorlight, Zutons, Magic Numbers, Bloc Party, Hard-Fi... all of them were "the future of rock" for a fortnight at some point, though to be fair, Kasabian, Elbow and Arctic Monkeys have all managed to stay in the frontline...
  
  Now that radio and the media has almost given up on guitar bands, they're going to rely more and more on the summer festivals for exposure...

  0