KAMELOT 2015 - New Album "HAVEN"

[KingsGene]

KAMELOT - HAVEN HITS #1 ON BILLBOARD TOP HARD ROCK ALBUM CHART

Kamelot's new album Haven, released May 5th, made a stunning debut on ‪Billboard‬ this week going straight up to #1 position on Hard Rock Album Chart. Guitarist and founder Thomas Youngblood comments:

"This is a first in Kamelot's history and we're obviously very proud and happy about it. I'd like to thank all the fans for your amazing support, thanks for your great feedback on Haven and the 'Insomnia' video as well - stay tuned as we have more of these coming up in the next months! See you somewhere on tour in 2015!"

Following is an updated list of the first week Billboard chart positions for Haven:

- Top Hard Rock Album Chart: #1
- Top 200 Billboard chart: #75
- Top Hard Music Chart: #3
- Top Current Album Chart: #40
- Top Internet Chart: #19
- Top Indie Current Album Chart: #6

 

[MeTuLHeD]

You guys kill me. If a band changes their sound you're not happy with them and long for the days of old when they made fantastic music like 'insert-favorite-album-here'. Case in point...Symphony X. If a band stays true to the sound which made them great in the first place, it's too safe, unremarkable, etc. Case in point...Kamelot. As I see it, damned if you do damned if you don't.

 

[General Zod]

You guys kill me. If a band changes their sound you're not happy with them and long for the days of old when they made fantastic music like 'insert-favorite-album-here'. Case in point...Symphony X. If a band stays true to the sound which made them great in the first place, it's too safe, unremarkable, etc. Case in point...Kamelot. As I see it, damned if you do damned if you don't.

Your point is a fair one. I think we all have our own internal systems of measurement for what degree of change we look for or desire in a band. And every band will eventually offend someone's personal metric. With Kamelot, it almost seems as if Youngblood has a machine in his basement that spits out these songs by the dozen. Taken individually, they're good songs; well produced, polished, entertaining. Taken as a collection, they reveal the aforementioned machine. The last six albums are mostly indistinguishable from one another. None of it bad, all of it polished, none of it original, all of it distinctly Kamelot. As I listened to Haven for the first time, I could guess where every break, shift and change was coming before it came. If you've never heard Kamelot or are someone who just can't get enough of that Khanesque goodness, than I can understand why you'd appreciate Haven. But for me, all I hear is the roar of the machine, churning out Kamelot Song #423. I liked it just fine when it was Kamelot Song #32. But at this point I'm just bored with it.

 

[MeTuLHeD]

Your point is a fair one. I think we all have our own internal systems of measurement for what degree of change we look for or desire in a band. And every band will eventually offend someone's personal metric...snip...

As you may or may not know, I am a musician. I've been playing, recording and producing music for many years. No. Of course I am not a "music industry mogul" or anything of the sort. Far from it. I long ago gave up on trying to make music for a living in favor of a regular paycheck and an actual home life with a wife and kids. But I remain as deeply involved in making music as I can be. And here's my observation for what it's worth.

I completely agree with your premise. Kamelot is most definitely producing music according to a certain musical 'formula'. You'd have to be deaf not to recognize that. However, I hesitate to call it a machine, because that implies something else entirely to my way of thinking. Something fake and somehow plastic. And I don't think that's fair. Why? Because it ignores the years of time and artistic craftsmanship which Youngblood gave to forging the Kamelot "house sound". Like it or not, Kamelot is his baby. And the sound they produce is the sound he wants them to produce. It took time and lots of effort to polish and perfect that sound. So I think in fairness, you have to give credit where credit is due. He paid his dues and spent many hours perfecting his craft to get Kamelot to where they are today. However, it is definitely what I would call a certain formula of songwriting and arranging. And it is a formula which he has chosen quite intentionally not to alter over the years. I can easily hear that. Anyone who can't probably doesn't have much of a musical ear.

However, here is my observation, based on years of musical experience as well as a deep personal love for music. The bands who have longevity, who have staying power and make the longest running imprint on the music industry - the "legacy" bands if you will - are the bands who find a specific musical vein and mine it for all it's worth. I have lost count of the number of bands who started out on a strong career path, and ohhhh about album four or five in decided to 'reinvent' themselves. And almost all of those bands have gone down in flames. Why? Because they forsook the sound that made their fans love them in the first place. Daughtry anyone?

Let me give you a good example from a totally different musical genre. Rascal Flatts. Undeniably talented guys. All solid singers, good songwriters, great pickers. But they have basically released the same album eight times now. Variations on a theme. Is that a good or a bad thing? Depends on who you ask. Some people would write them off as formulaic and that's that. BUT...millions of fans world wide eat that stuff up. For them, it's about music and the love of music. But it's also about eating regularly. And that "certain sound" pays the bills.

Look, I understand your argument totally and I agree with it on a certain level. But I also understand the world of music and why artists make the choices they do. Far too often, reinventing yourself is a bad business decision. Art for art's sake doesn't pay well. It's the reason we have a national endowment to support art that no one wants to see.

 

[Oblivion Ocean]

You guys kill me. If a band changes their sound you're not happy with them and long for the days of old when they made fantastic music like 'insert-favorite-album-here'. Case in point...Symphony X. If a band stays true to the sound which made them great in the first place, it's too safe, unremarkable, etc. Case in point...Kamelot. As I see it, damned if you do damned if you don't.

I am not sure who this "you guys" you are referring to

I prefer that a band evolves throughout their career. I don't need a band to constantly reinvent themselves, but I would like it if they were adventurous. While I do not like the new Sonata Arctica stuff as much as their classic albums, I would much rather have them put out Paraiah's Child than Ecliptica part 7. I know I might be in the minority on this.

But then again, I am much more of a fan of progressive metal than power metal. For better or worse, power metal tends to be a real meat and potatoes genre. Many bands find a slight variation of the Maiden, Priest, Helloween formula and then do that for their career.

You're right, it is a bit of a damned if you do and damned if you don't, but I guess if those are the two choices I fall much more often on the side of be damned if you do.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Interesting conversation and points...

I do hate hearing the same stuff over and over from bands but then again most of my favorite bands have made some changes that I hate and won't listen too.. Pain of Salvation,Symphony X, Opeth and Rush are the some bands that I don't see myself grabbing any of their newer stuff when I'm in the mood to listen to them...

My conclusion is that I probably will stop bothering to purchase new stuff from bands after a run of discs but will at least sample them...

Never realized this until now!

As for Kamelot... They lost me after Ghost Opera...

 

[General Zod]

Look, I understand your argument totally and I agree with it on a certain level. But I also understand the world of music and why artists make the choices they do. Far too often, reinventing yourself is a bad business decision.

I don't disagree with anything you wrote. And I completely understand why Youngblood does what he does. After interviewing him for the program, it's abundantly clear he's equal parts business man and musician (he's also quite gracious). I also agree producing the same record over and over again works better than reinventing yourself, from a business perspective. And while I admire the art he crafted to get to this point (I own five Kamelot records), his decision not to alter the formula record after record, is a business decision, hence the machine analogy. His recent output strongly suggests he's not interested in exploring his art, he's interested in selling a finely honed product.

 

[MeTuLHeD]

His recent output strongly suggests he's not interested in exploring his art, he's interested in selling a finely honed product.

Which I contend actually IS an art form in and of itself rather than somehow being beneath him.

I don't think Eagles or Jackson Brown or AC/DC or Bruno Mars are "sellouts" just because they write according to a certain formula. Michael Jackson crafted songs that were the height of pop formula perfected. And he sold billions doing it. If you think that's easy to do, try it.

 

[Oblivion Ocean]

I don't think Eagles or Jackson Brown or AC/DC or Bruno Mars are "sellouts" just because they write according to a certain formula. Michael Jackson crafted songs that were the height of pop formula perfected. And he sold billions doing it. If you think that's easy to do, try it.

Yea, but that is a little of a strawman. I don't think anyone is looking for him to write a rap album or a jazz odyssey. But even within a somewhat restricted space as power metal (or metal in general) there is a middle ground where you stretch out creatively while still not straying too far from the formula. But even in that there is some risk, but when decisions are being made in a bottom-line/risk-averse way, it does not often create good art IMO.

 

[Random Axe]

Ours has it for $12.99. It's the 2-disc version and comes with an exclusive patch.

They actually had it. This may be the first album I've purchased at retail since Tesseract's Altered States. I'm holding off listening till my vacation in a couple of weeks.

 

[MeTuLHeD]

Yea, but that is a little of a strawman. I don't think anyone is looking for him to write a rap album or a jazz odyssey. But even within a somewhat restricted space as power metal (or metal in general) there is a middle ground where you stretch out creatively while still not straying too far from the formula. But even in that there is some risk, but when decisions are being made in a bottom-line/risk-averse way, it does not often create good art IMO.

So none of the artists I mentioned in my post "create good art"? I think that's an eye-of-the-beholder thing. Just because they have a signature sound doesn't invalidate their music.

As far as the motivations behind their artistic decisions, I really couldn't say whether they are "risk averse" or not. Perhaps they actually like the music they are creating?

 

[Comic Book Dude]

Having a signature sound is great, but when one has a hard time distinguishing which song is from what album because they are all practically interchangeable...? Well, that's where I think the problem lies. I like the last two Kamelot albums, but as was said before, they are incredibly similar. The last cd from them where I felt them pushing their sound in slightly new directions was The Black Halo....March Of Mephisto was so cool because it had the signature Kamelot sound, but it also pushed a darker, more gothic feel with some harsh vocals for effect (and I'm not even a fan of harsh vocals). It felt like they were expanding on the Kamelot formula a little and pushing the boundaries....sadly, I haven't really heard that since.

 

[Justin G]

You guys kill me. If a band changes their sound you're not happy with them and long for the days of old when they made fantastic music like 'insert-favorite-album-here'. Case in point...Symphony X. If a band stays true to the sound which made them great in the first place, it's too safe, unremarkable, etc. Case in point...Kamelot. As I see it, damned if you do damned if you don't.

I hope SX never goes back to the old sound. Iconoclast was amazing.

 

[Mardoch]

I hope SX never goes back to the old sound. Iconoclast was amazing.

That makes two of us.

 

[General Zod]

Which I contend actually IS an art form in and of itself rather than somehow being beneath him.

If you feel selling a finely honed product is an art form, you're welcome to that opinion. We can agree to disagree.

I don't think Eagles or Jackson Brown or AC/DC or Bruno Mars are "sellouts" just because they write according to a certain formula.

That's an odd grouping. I'll narrow it down to AC/DC for the purposes of keeping the discussion focused. AC/DC has done a great job writing the same album over and over again. It's served them very well financially. But at the same time, it's not an unfair criticism to point out that writing the same album over and over again is precisely what they've done. They know it, their fans know it, and critics know it. Similarly, if Thomas wants to write the same album over and over again, and people keep lining up to buy it, good for him. But you don't get to have your cake and eat it to. You can be a band that explores their art or a band that finds a sound and stagnates within it. But you don't get to be both.

Michael Jackson crafted songs that were the height of pop formula perfected. And he sold billions doing it. If you think that's easy to do, try it.

Two comments here. One, holding up the biggest Pop star in the history of the planet as an example, is a poor point of reference for anything discussed on this forum. Second, I never said it was easy to write a Pop hit. I'm not even sure how or when that became a discussion point. I fully acknowledge that in today's market writing a Pop hit is extremely difficult. First, you have to be born beautiful. That takes a ton of artistic energy. There's almost no time to dedicate to your art, with all the time you have to spend learning your dance moves. And by the time you're done Tweeting selfies, who has time to write their own songs? Your fingers are practically worn down to the bone.

 

[Purveyor Of Evil]

I hope SX never goes back to the old sound. Iconoclast was amazing.

1000 percent agreed! Iconoclast has become one of my favorite albums...ever! Not a prog metal album or a power metal album. Just a fanfuckingtastic HEAVY METAL album!

 

[lane_miller]

November 14. Atlanta. Saturday night. Road trip!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Liquid Tension]

I hope SX never goes back to the old sound. Iconoclast was amazing.

I hope they change their sound again...

Iconocast wasn't worth repeated listens...

 

[MeTuLHeD]

You can be a band that explores their art or a band that finds a sound and stagnates within it. But you don't get to be both.

Here's another perspective on that. You can be a band which releases discs people want to hear and have a lengthy and successful career. Or you can be a band that puts out two or three discs exploring your art and then breaks up because they aren't making enough money to buy bologna, much less bread.

Two comments here. One, holding up the biggest Pop star in the history of the planet as an example, is a poor point of reference for anything discussed on this forum. Second, I never said it was easy to write a Pop hit. I'm not even sure how or when that became a discussion point. I fully acknowledge that in today's market writing a Pop hit is extremely difficult. First, you have to be born beautiful. That takes a ton of artistic energy. There's almost no time to dedicate to your art, with all the time you have to spend learning your dance moves. And by the time you're done Tweeting selfies, who has time to write their own songs? Your fingers are practically worn down to the bone.

So is that all that writing pop hits is in your opinion? Just marketing strategy and makeup and nothing more? Zero musical creativity?

Ok. Let's approach this from another angle. Let's take the band Boston as an example. Unquestionably one of THE biggest classic rock bands in the history of the genre. But if ever there was a band which wrote according to formula, it was Boston. I would argue that their music is the very definition of "signature sound". Does that fact alone invalidate their music?

 

[KingsGene]

KAMELOT – MAKING OF “INSOMNIA” MUSIC VIDEO STREAMING