Like others, I just can't get over the vocals. I don't get what they are trying to do. I've always had at least some interest in each RA release, but this album looks to be doing nothing for me. And Nowhere Generation was so good too.
Have always been like, peripherally aware of this band outside of their music (which I haven't listened to much) and uh... how do you get to a point where you say 'I support a genocidal 'state' but also listen to Rise Against' with your whole chest? Makes no sense.
One of their official documentaries has a segment about a guy whose whole thing is "I'm a conservative Republican and I also love Rise Against!" It's weird.
How does a band go from Nowhere Generation to this? It's a complete step backwards in all regards. I just wish I were privy to the thought process behind the production and mixing. Who thought this sounded good and who signed off on it?
Not that weird when you think about. They've been playing hard rock festivals for the past 10-15 years.
In all the interviews they’ve done they said this would sound completely different than anything else they’ve ever done. They also wanted to go with a producer team that they didn’t know. Catherine marks was suggested by multiple people they talked to this album was never going to be produced in the blasting room or by bill Stevenson
Most people don’t listen to Rise Against for “cool, rock songs,” they want passionate, politically charged punk rock with Bill Stevenson production.
I don’t have any real issues with the songs themselves, bands change and evolve and that’s cool and okay, I just don’t think these particular songs sound very good.
1) I think those can be the same thing, 2) the band's best album isn't produced by Bill Stevenson, 3) given all the cliches about the band's fanbase, I'd venture you're wrong and MOST of their fans absolutely do just want "cool rock songs." 4) Sometimes you don't get what you want from artists and you gotta meet them where they are? Best thing I ever did in my music fandom journey was starting to come at music not from the perspective of what I want but wanting to understand what the artist wanted, believing they knew more than me about their own art. The band, and Alan Moulder and Catherine Marks are better at making music than I am. Coming at it from that angle makes me search for so much more than wanting the band to sound like they did when I was 15. 5) I've liked every single song from this album yet and am pretty sure I'm going to like the full thing on Friday. 6) Sorry.
1) You're confusing your opinion with objective truth, which is very uninteresting to me. 2) And yet I still think their best album is produced by Garth Richardson. 3) Most of the band's "fans" are rock radio "Savior" fans. By a factor of 2 to 1. 4) You're confusing your opinion with objective truth, which is very uninteresting to me. 5) Not angry, you quoted me.
Some of my favorite albums of all time sound like they were recorded in a tin can and I fell in love with them on blown out headphones played from a cassette tape. Some of the most pristine sounding recorded music I find abjectly boring. I find most of the conversations around production in general to remove the flavor of music I'm most interested in. No, I don't think the songs sound "bad." I think they sound different than what modern rock music fans are used to every song sounding like in 2025.
Bingo.....Too many people these days immediately go into "this sounds bad to me so it must not be good" territory. I know that a lot of times that is the case, but why is it so hard for people to fall in love with songs just because the initial sound is different from what they 'expect'?