I like Baroness, including much of The Blue Album, but I just listened to a clip of "Take My Bones Away" and it sounded like a Nickleback b-side.
I don't think the song's Nickelback bad. It actually more reminded me of Fireball Ministry or somethin' -- beard rock guitar tones meets active rock melodies. The chorus is pretty cool, with the haronies and such. The song just doesn't really go anywhere. And the production doesn't really work for that sound (thought the direct guitars were cool when they first did it on Blue, but they're starting to drive me nuts).
“Take My Bones Away” is about as “metal” as the albums gets... The “Yellow” half explores a broader range of rock music, from indie, to post punk, to prog, to classic rock, with vocal melodies driving the songs rather than riffs, while “Green” is a much more stripped-down rock record along the lines of Crazy Horse and, to a lesser extent, Built to Spill... Those hoping for a return to the heavier sounds of Baroness’s First and Second EPs will be disappointed, but anyone who likes good, guitar-driven rock will love this eclectic, ambitious record.
So we should all probably ignore this record then? I mean I'd hate to pigeonhole an artist into doing a very specific genre for his/her entire life, but if you're aching to unleash your inner Doug Martsch can't you do it with a side project or solo album?
When you form a band, like it or not you are creating a brand. If you are touring and making records that you charge people money for, you are engaging in commerce. So while I understand completely the sanctity of"artistic integrity" -- or at least that most artists need to convince themselves they have some in order to justify doing what they love for money -- when you change the brand you created, you run the risk of losing the fans who gave you a career in the first place. And you can't point a finger at THEM for losing interest. You sold them Pepsi, then switched it to Fresca on the third refill.