Rage Against The Machine to reform?

[Larsen B]

I really hope rage against the machine reform, their music inspires me so much. I love the message they put out as a band, tom morello on guitars for ratm is incredible. Its about time music had a outspoken voice like this again

I would disagree that music recently has lacked "an outspoken voice".

[Camie]

I really hope rage against the machine reform, their music inspires me so much. I love the message they put out as a band, tom morello on guitars for ratm is incredible. Its about time music had a outspoken voice like this again

You should be listening to Strike Anywhere then.

[davewarden]

I can see me making a pilgrimage to the coachella festival this year!

Bet you dont!

[Stephen]

gotta admit it is a great festival lineup. altho state side festivals ae lookin crazily good this year with lineup for bonnaroo this year potentially including

The Police

Bob Dylan

Pearl Jam

Tom Waits

Ryan Adams

Arcade Fire

TV On the Radio

Cat Power

..and many more

not bad at all id say

[The Kernel Loaf]

I'd hate them to get back together and just be like Audioslave with rapping, they do have the potential to be absolutely lethal again though.

I donno like. A lot of Audioslave stuff lacks a considerable amount of heaviness and the terrific riffs/songwriting that made Rage as good as they were. I tried hard to like Audioslave's first album as Cochise was a promising opener, and I think they have gotten progressively worse since they started.

I think it's great that they are reforming for this festival, but I am unsure wether or not a permanent reformation is a good idea or not. As someone previously mentioned, they are one of the few bands of the 90s who have not continued to release shitter and shitter material.

[Swingin' Ryan]

I donno like. A lot of Audioslave stuff lacks a considerable amount of heaviness and the terrific riffs/songwriting that made Rage as good as they were. I tried hard to like Audioslave's first album as Cochise was a promising opener, and I think they have gotten progressively worse since they started.

I think it's great that they are reforming for this festival, but I am unsure wether or not a permanent reformation is a good idea or not. As someone previously mentioned, they are one of the few bands of the 90s who have not continued to release shitter and shitter material.

I meant Rage when I said 'they have the potential to be absolutely lethal again', not Audioslave. I agree about Audioslave, other than Cochise they haven't really done very much at all that's grabbed me. I hope that Tom Morello has got the whole stadium-rock riffery out of his system and wants to go back and do Rage stuff again.

If they do write new material though, I hope Zach doesn't write an album entirely based on the war in Iraq and American Foreign Policy. That's what I always loved about Rage's political stance, they spoke about things that weren't always necessarily in the public eye.

[Skull Commander]

Rage reforming will be amazing, especially if it isn't a one off. Personally I would disagree with some of the points said earlier. Firstly rage DID go downhill. The first two albums were amazing, but battle of LA was only half a good album. The second "side" just didn't keep up the momentum on the first 5 or so tracks.

Secondly I think Audioslave have gotten better as they have went on. The second album was a lot better than the first and the third even better still. On the first album they were at times guilty of just being rage with a different vocalist, but they outgrow that tag with every album.

[Shaki]

I think Audioslave are as shit as the name "Audioslave". I'm happy enough with Rage's back catalogue, don't need any more. Would love to see Manu Chao again but not too fussed by much else on the bill. Don't actually know many of the bands. Would be chuffed with Interpol, Sonic youth and Gogol Bordello but the others I either don't like or mostly haven't heard.

[psydoll]

Rage reforming will be amazing, especially if it isn't a one off. Personally I would disagree with some of the points said earlier. Firstly rage DID go downhill. The first two albums were amazing, but battle of LA was only half a good album. The second "side" just didn't keep up the momentum on the first 5 or so tracks.

Secondly I think Audioslave have gotten better as they have went on. The second album was a lot better than the first and the third even better still. On the first album they were at times guilty of just being rage with a different vocalist, but they outgrow that tag with every album.

Aye whit?! 'Voice Of The Voiceless'? 'War Within A Breath'? Nae keeping up the momentum?? Steady lad

Best festival lineup I've seen in a long time.

On the subject of Crowded House...

Australian pop-rockers Crowded House have confirmed the title of their return-to-action album.

The band's last long-player' date=' Together Alone (reached number four in the UK), was released in 1993, spawning the hit single 'Distant Sun'. Fourteen years later, its follow-up is to be titled Time On Earth.

Says lead singer (and New Zealander) Neil Finn (pictured):

"We are now announcing our intention to reform Crowded House with a new record entitled Time On Earth.

"It feels right to us that the band should re-emerge at this time and, together with (former member of Supertramp) Mark Hart, we look forward to reconnecting with the audience that we established and for whom we still hold a deep respect.

"We aim to make the upcoming shows and the new music every bit as vital and spirited as what has come before."

The band, who split in 1996, are currently looking for a drummer for the reformation. Their original sticksman, Paul Hester, committed suicide in 2005. He was 46 and had been suffering from depression.[/quote']

[Skull Commander]

Aye whit?! 'Voice Of The Voiceless'? 'War Within A Breath'? Nae keeping up the momentum?? Steady lad

It's true! My interest wanes by then...

[Jager420]

I can see me making a pilgrimage to the coachella festival this year!

That should be a good show!! Coachella is a fun weekend. I went a few times when I was still living in California. I mean come on, Rage and Willie Nelson all in the same day!!!

I may make the trip my self

[delboy]

would the now nearly 40 something rage against the machine be able to perform songs from their awesome debut album with the same swagger they did back in 1993??? dunno but i reckon it'd be fun anyways!

[Marsh]

would the now nearly 40 something rage against the machine be able to perform songs from their awesome debut album with the same swagger they did back in 1993??? dunno but i reckon it'd be fun anyways!

I wouldn't associate the word "swagger" with Rage.

Intensity is more accurate.

Could they provide the same intensity? I think so. "Freedom" hasn't been acheived yet, and there's plenty more to be pissed off about in the world now than there was in when they released RATM.

Definitely in the top 5 bands I've ever seen live. I'd travel to see them if they go on tour.

And Battle of L.A. is ace. Throughout!

[delboy]

I wouldn't associate the word "swagger" with Rage.

Intensity is more accurate.

Could they provide the same intensity? I think so. "Freedom" hasn't been acheived yet, and there's plenty more to be pissed off about in the world now than there was in when they released RATM.

Definitely in the top 5 bands I've ever seen live. I'd travel to see them if they go on tour.

And Battle of L.A. is ace. Throughout!

fair do's insensity is probably a better word!!! i kinda lost interest after the first album, didnt think evil empire was half as good as 'rage against the machine' which is in my top 10 albums of all time. never even heard the battle of LA maybe i should invest in a copy!

[WoodyRATM]

fair do's insensity is probably a better word!!! i kinda lost interest after the first album, didnt think evil empire was half as good as 'rage against the machine' which is in my top 10 albums of all time. never even heard the battle of LA maybe i should invest in a copy!

yes. you should.

i love all the rage albums, their worst is, in my opinion, the live and rare cd. The band just dont seem as tight, i presume it was made early in their career or something.

though i agree with 'rage against the machine' being in my top albums Great debut.

i just hope they do reform and tour, i'll be first for a ticket

Woods

[David B]

I've seen RATM. Very powerful and intense performance.

Audioslave get some bad press just because they are NOT RATM. Listen to them with an open mind and they are pretty good.

Morello is certainly the most interesting and innovative guitarist on the scene.

I find the 100mph shredders to be dull and derivative (but it may just be jealousy!).

[Guest bluesxman]

I saw RATM at the first T In The Park, extreme drunkenness makes it hazy but what I remember it was shite hot. And Cypress Hill did a stint on stage with them due to their plane being late and missing their own set. Never really felt the need to buy anything except Rage's first album, it wore thin for me after that. I did buy the album with Renegades Of Funk on it cheap though because I liked that song, the rest of it is pretty mince.

Audioslave got off to a cracking start with Cochise, Like A Stone is a good ballad, the rest of the first album is listenable but underwhelming. I think I've listened to the second one twice if that and haven't even thought about getting the newest one.

Get Soundgarden back together, on full pelt, Cornell could get back to his bellowing best and Matt Cameron can play his fanny-tastic drumming in a decent band again, wasted in Pearl Jam as they are these days.

[TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH]

never even heard the battle of LA maybe i should invest in a copy!

Don't go near it, it is utter balls. Rage should have broken up after Evil Empire.

[Marsh]

Don't go near it, it is utter balls. Rage should have broken up after Evil Empire.

Utter balls?

I'm sorry, but if you like Rage surely the Rage - By Numbers likes of Testify, Guerilla Radio, Calm like A Bomb and Sleep Now In The Fire more than do the job?

I don't have a problem with anyone just not liking Rage, but to like the first two albums and then call Battle of L.A. utter balls is a bit OTT. It's certainly not everyone's favourite, and it's nowhere near as good or consistent as the earlier two, but it's not as if they tried out a new jungle influenced sound or anything. In fact, they moved away from the more hip - hop influenced Evil Empire to a more "classic rock" sound on Battle of L.A. - closer to the sound on the debut.

[TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH]

Utter balls?

I'm sorry, but if you like Rage surely the Rage - By Numbers likes of Testify, Guerilla Radio, Calm like A Bomb and Sleep Now In The Fire more than do the job?

I don't have a problem with anyone just not liking Rage, but to like the first two albums and then call Battle of L.A. utter balls is a bit OTT. It's certainly not everyone's favourite, and it's nowhere near as good or consistent as the earlier two, but it's not as if they tried out a new jungle influenced sound or anything. In fact, they moved away from the more hip - hop influenced Evil Empire to a more "classic rock" sound on Battle of L.A. - closer to the sound on the debut.

My exact problem with Battle of Los Angeles is that it is Rage by numbers. To me it seems like they just wanted to recreate the first record, which to me is a sign of a band who have run out of ideas. If I want to listen to the "classic Rage sound" then I'll put on the debut, not the poor facsimilie that is their 3rd record. You could see a growth between the debut and Evil Empire, but then Rage took a step backwards. Bands should grow and develop and not try recreate former glories as 99 times out of 100 they will just sound like bad parodies of themselves.

[Skull Commander]

I love rage and Audioslave, but even I concede, Morello does tend to overuse THAT riff....

[Marsh]

My exact problem with Battle of Los Angeles is that it is Rage by numbers. To me it seems like they just wanted to recreate the first record, which to me is a sign of a band who have run out of ideas. If I want to listen to the "classic Rage sound" then I'll put on the debut, not the poor facsimilie that is their 3rd record. You could see a growth between the debut and Evil Empire, but then Rage took a step backwards. Bands should grow and develop and not try recreate former glories as 99 times out of 100 they will just sound like bad parodies of themselves.

First, I wouldn't call Battle of L.A. a bad parody of the first album.

If you like seeing bands grow and develop that's fine. that's your opinion. However some bands are "one trick ponies" to a certain extent. I would class Rage as one trick ponies - shouty rapping about political issues - huge repetitive riffs punctated by some "frr t trr" effects and tricks and a solid as a rock rythmn section. I fuckin' love it.

Now, to me it's fair cop that Rage use the same tricks again and again - it's part of the appeal to me. You know what you're getting. They did go with a more hip - hop based sound on Evil Empire but to me that just meant cutting out some of the solos and funking up the bass and drums.

I think by your accounting Rage must be one in a hundred.

On a completley seperate note - How many bands do you, me and probably everyone on this forum say "I don't like their new material - much prefer the older stuff." It's a no - win situation as if you change direction or "grow and develop" you lose the fans that put you there in the first place - if you stick with the same sound you have "run out of ideas." I can count hundreds of bands whose material gets worse and worse when they tried "maturing their sound" or "expanding their ideas." Off the top of my head the Beatles for me could do anything and master it and released "different sounding" albums with every release and were a far better band when they split up when they started. Not many bands can claim to do that. Muse have developed with each release and I think they will continue to do so.

The more I think about it, a fair amount of my favourite bands have a similar trait in that you know exactly where you stand with them and they haven't / never deviated from their early releases:

AC/DC

Rancid

Rage Against The Machine

Misfits

Kyuss / Queens of the Stone Age

I would include the Ramones - but they were great until they broke their winning formula then released (in my opinion) some terrible albums.

Maybe I fear change, but, in conclusion, I suppose i'm trying to say that I disagree with your idea that bands SHOULD develop and change their sound. Rage, and Battle of L.A. have no less impact because they are not "new" ideas.

If it ain't broke..............

[WoodyRATM]

It's a formula which works.

i too fear change it seems

[Jager420]

First, I wouldn't call Battle of L.A. a bad parody of the first album.

If you like seeing bands grow and develop that's fine. that's your opinion. However some bands are "one trick ponies" to a certain extent. I would class Rage as one trick ponies - shouty rapping about political issues - huge repetitive riffs punctated by some "frr t trr" effects and tricks and a solid as a rock rythmn section. I fuckin' love it.

Now, to me it's fair cop that Rage use the same tricks again and again - it's part of the appeal to me. You know what you're getting. They did go with a more hip - hop based sound on Evil Empire but to me that just meant cutting out some of the solos and funking up the bass and drums.

I think by your accounting Rage must be one in a hundred.

On a completley seperate note - How many bands do you, me and probably everyone on this forum say "I don't like their new material - much prefer the older stuff." It's a no - win situation as if you change direction or "grow and develop" you lose the fans that put you there in the first place - if you stick with the same sound you have "run out of ideas." I can count hundreds of bands whose material gets worse and worse when they tried "maturing their sound" or "expanding their ideas." Off the top of my head the Beatles for me could do anything and master it and released "different sounding" albums with every release and were a far better band when they split up when they started. Not many bands can claim to do that. Muse have developed with each release and I think they will continue to do so.

The more I think about it, a fair amount of my favourite bands have a similar trait in that you know exactly where you stand with them and they haven't / never deviated from their early releases:

AC/DC

Rancid

Rage Against The Machine

Misfits

Kyuss / Queens of the Stone Age

I would include the Ramones - but they were great until they broke their winning formula then released (in my opinion) some terrible albums.

Maybe I fear change, but, in conclusion, I suppose i'm trying to say that I disagree with your idea that bands SHOULD develop and change their sound. Rage, and Battle of L.A. have no less impact because they are not "new" ideas.

If it ain't broke..............

I Agree. There is something comforting about knowing what your going to get from a band. Not that they can't supprise you, Like the Chillie Peppers for instance.

[Spoonie]

i think battle of LA is an absolutely fantastic album. the intensity of Zack's delivery is at it's highest point on that record. Born of a Broken Man, Calm Like a Bomb etc. are outstanding. Zack cites one of his main reasons for leaving as being the Renegades album and I can understand his point to some extent, regarding his general world views, but there are tracks on there which are better than the originals. I'm Housing and How I Could Just Kill a Man in particular. Each to their own, but I don't consider Battle of LA to be a drop in quality at all. I rate it above Evil Empire, although I haven't listened to it in a while, not owning a copy. Might go out and buy one!!

/x