If you happen to like that sound, then Nickleback is your dream come true. Sometimes when a band innovates it can be a disappointment. Skillet changed their sound yet again (as usual) with their latest album Comatose, resulting in me being saddened. I was hoping for something similar to the harder, less polished Collide. I could lay NIN wide open for their long, repetitive intro's, simplistic and repetitive rhythm sections and clichéd angst, but that's what I listen to NIN for. Sometimes you just want a simple, long angry song. Sometimes you just want a predictable bit of hard-rock punch.
The people to be mad at are not Nickleback. It would be the music execs who (perhaps) are pushing Nickleback upon audiances. If Nickleback is not being forced onto airwaves via less-than-moral means, then yeah, be mad. But if their song Rock Star is one of the most requested songs on the local classic and little-modern rock station (actual occurrence here), then what are you complaining about? Change the station to something you like.
Circe, yes, they are. Jars of Clay is actually more of a 'New Folk' than rock, though their last album [i]Good Monsters[i] has a rockier core.
Kas, there's nothing wrong per say with Nickleback. Their music is catchy and well-liked. I simply fail to understand how people can really like them as a band. That 'Rock Star' is a popular song says very little - chances are many people who like it have not heard anything else by the band (as is often the case with people who listen to the radio but do not buy CDs).
Nickleback's songs are ridiculously predictable and, while good in and of themselves, do not represent a good band. I would rather be disapointed by a band that tries to innovate and actually show some artistic merit than listen to a band rehash the same themes and chords for six albums.
Simply put, if I were considering buying the new Nickleback album, I would stop and say "wait, I have one album, I can listen to that one" and get the exact same thing out of it.
To me, a band should be making music. Nickleback, on the other hand, is making music. Music is fluid, not stagnent. I can enjoy Nickleback, but I can't really support them as a band. They would almost better be described as a cover band - they sound good, they play well, but they don't bring anything new to the table.
No, there are many things wrong with Nickleback. They're a band with no composition ability and litterally have reused the same music pieces over and over again, which contradicts your fluid, stagnant statement. They're lazy, but pushed to the fore by a giant relentless marketing machine that simply thrives off lazy.
I like so much different stuff I cannot say I have one favorite band, but right now I'm listening to Zepplin.
