Released: Aug 31, 2010
Genre: Hard Rock, Alternative Rock
Label: Eleven Seven Music
Number Of Tracks: 14
Papa Roach’s latest release Time For Annihilation carries the appeal of both a greatest-hits record and EP all in one.
Time For AnnihilationFeatured review by: UG Team, on september 17, 2010 3 of 4 people found this review helpful
Sound: If you’ve kept up with this year’s schedule of new releases, you may have noticed that a greatest-hits package for Papa Roach hit the shelves in June. Well, now that the California band has parted ways with Geffen Records, which released …To Be Loved: The Best of Papa Roach, profits from the record will not necessarily be seen by vocalist Jacoby Shaddix and the boys. If you’re craving a release that is the next-best thing in terms of best-of material, then Time For Annihilation is a fairly logical solution (one that is also endorsed by the band). It’s true that those greatest hits are all done in a live concert setting on Time For Annihilation, but the band has sweetened the pot with five fresh tracks.
The new material is impressive for the most part, with “Burn,” “Kick In The Teeth,” and “The Enemy” carrying on Papa Roach’s tradition of writing infectious, sing-along choruses and memorable riffage. “Burn” delivers right off the bat with a darker feel and twin harmonies apparently executed by Jerry Horton’s layered tracks alone. “No Matter What” is your basic power ballad and will undoubtedly provoke lighters at the live show, but it’s nothing too out of the ordinary. Likewise, “One Track Mind” fails to leave a huge impression and could be considered a fairly run-of-the-mill rock tune.
The remaining nine tracks were performed live over the course of several shows on Papa Roach’s 2009 tour with Shinedown. What is most evident about them all is the fact that this is one band that sounds pretty impeccable live. Granted, there might have been some tweaking done with the audio mix, but the concert performances are solid as a whole. You’re getting plenty of the tracklist found on that greatest-hits record we’re trying to forget all about, with hits like “Getting Away With Murder,” “Lifeline,” “Scars,” and “Last Resort” included.
The live recordings are fairly true to the originals, with a few of the songs every once in awhile receiving a prolonged intro for added effect. That artistic decision actually makes those particular songs much more intriguing and in many ways you do feel like you’re there in the live setting. Some bands opt to cut out any chatter/conversation on the live albums, but Papa Roach thankfully leaves in all of the banter from Shaddix. As far as frontmen go, Shaddix is one that handily connects with the audience and manages to rile them up with each F-bomb he utters. // 9
Lyrics and Singing: The five new tracks delve into everything from backstabbing to overcoming obstacles. Papa Roach doesn’t get flowery or poetic at any time, but there is a real, conversational quality to the lyrics. Sure, the ballad “No Matter What” sounds pretty much what you’d expect a love song to sound like (“I need you right here, by my side; You're everything I'm not in my life; We're indestructible; We are untouchable”), but so do most bands follow that same route. Although there isn’t anything too creatively amazing lyrically, it’s not necessarily expected from a band that continues to draw a pretty diverse range of fans. // 7
Impression: Time For Annihilation is a worthwhile purchase for Papa Roach fans. Some of the older songs that might seem tired at this point – specifically “Last Resort” – are injected with new life thanks to the live setting. The new tracks are likable enough that they could certainly hit high on the music charts, and if anything they’ll tie you over until a full-length studio album of completely new material is released. And the most impressive aspect? The fact that Shaddix took a moment in the final moments of the CD to relay a message fighting hunger and homelessness. // 8
Time For Annihilation
Reviewed by:
Torturednights, on march 04, 2011 0 of 0 people found this review helpful
Sound: Papa Roach have made the massive jump from typical teenage aimed rock to a proper rock band. The new sound is much more mature and not based upon the dramaticness from the previous endeavour Metamorphosis. The newer sound is much more fluid, and is much tighter then on previous work, including Jacoby's vocals, which are on the rise for passion and pure energy. // 8
Lyrics and Singing: The lyrics are much more provocative, heart pulling and mind blowing. No Matter What shows maturity beyond the bands previous albums, which include Infest and Getting Away With Murder. Can be abit repetative though, like on the track Kick In The Teeth. Which are still similar to Metamorphosis, but overall a big improvement. // 6
Impression: It's maybe the best album Papa Roach have produced in years. It's showing matiurty, and still that little childish edge, in which the audience can really interact with and sing along too. It's maybe the best written so far for me. Musically, finally the guitarist has made a real effot, especially considering the draging on-ness of the studio versions of Hollywood Whore, Lifeline and Time Is Running Out. They show a new energy, new passion for their music and fans, in which they are now recieving the praise they deserve, Overall, an really good album. But still needs a few tweaks over the lyrics repetitiveness. // 8
...I get the feeling that they've run out of things to do with themselves. Why keep making this post-nu-metal rehash material when it passed ages ago..
...I get the feeling that they've run out of things to do with themselves. Why keep making this post-nu-metal rehash material when it passed ages ago..
...I get the feeling that they've run out of things to do with themselves. Why keep making this post-nu-metal rehash material when it passed ages ago..
Because it's what they wanna do. Let 'em
I'm just looking at it from a commercial view, because they're obviously a commercial band..
...I get the feeling that they've run out of things to do with themselves. Why keep making this post-nu-metal rehash material when it passed ages ago..
So far the only people complaining about the album are the ones that have yet to actually give it a chance and LISTEN to it. I've listened to it and it's a good live/EP album. They're not going for #1 hits on this album, obviously.
Crappy album cover. But i like the new songs kinda goes back to the getting away with murder sound. I seen em in concert this weekend and i think jacoby was lip syncing cause he made the same exact mistakes as on the cd and it was in the same order and he said the same exact things but oh well lol
...I get the feeling that they've run out of things to do with themselves. Why keep making this post-nu-metal rehash material when it passed ages ago..
Way to genre name-drop--you must be quite the musical connoiseur.
Great review! I saw Papa Roach live last year and I went to the show with relatively low expectations but left impressed by the enthusiasm and energy that they brought. The band sounded great and really seemed to be having a good time on stage--something that carries over to the crowd for sure.
most bands are commercial as they get money out of the music. technically. slayer are commercial band as they've made money. so are dethclok cos they still make money form their music grrrrr
I'm just looking at it from a commercial view, because they're obviously a commercial band..
How trendy of you.
I'm learning to be a music producer, they're a trendy bunch.
Seriously? Because you'd FINALLY be the first person in a position to throw those terms around and not come off like the kid trying to fit in. I hope you're not screwing around because you just made my day.
So far the only people complaining about the album are the ones that have yet to actually give it a chance and LISTEN to it. I've listened to it and it's a good live/EP album. They're not going for #1 hits on this album, obviously.
Really? The only people? Prove it. Because from what I read, none of the people that ragged on it implied that they had or hadn't heard it.
jfsj123 wrote:
most bands are commercial as they get money out of the music. technically. slayer are commercial band as they've made money. so are dethclok cos they still make money form their music grrrrr
Wow! Way to get all semantical on us! I guess if all bands are commercial than non of them are! Thank you for showing us that Ryan Adams and The Grateful Dead, even though they encourage bootlegging of their shows, are just as commercial as KISS and Coldplay.
I'm really glad you posted. I never would have noticed that if you didn't way something. Here I was all along thinking that 'commercial' was just a figure of speech used to describe music that had been written and produced for mass appeal, but YOU were there to remind me that the only true artists were the broke ones!
I'm just looking at it from a commercial view, because they're obviously a commercial band..
How trendy of you.
+1 Haha. What's the point in caring about how commercial a band is or what they're labelled as? It's either pleasing to the ear or it's not.
I remember, ages ago, somebody on UG said Jerry Horton was the best live guitarist because he played everything perfectly and he sounded so tight.
^^^ Gene Simmons said in an interview with Herny Rollins that any band who sells merchandise is commercial. I think he's right.
Thanks for that comment man--I feel EXACTLY that way about music--either you like it or you don't and whether you do or not shouldn't determine whether or not it's acceptable for OTHER people to like (or dislike) that same music.
As for the commercial thing--yeah man, totally agree. It's frustrating because there are really very few true non-commercial acts that are popular given the nature of the machine that is the music industry. I like a band called 10 Years and they did what too many bands seem to do: wrote a song about how f'ed up and evil the music industry is because it stifles creativity...and then they released that very same song as a single. Go figure!
I'm just looking at it from a commercial view, because they're obviously a commercial band..
How trendy of you.
I'm learning to be a music producer, they're a trendy bunch.
Seriously? Because you'd FINALLY be the first person in a position to throw those terms around and not come off like the kid trying to fit in. I hope you're not screwing around because you just made my day.
Nope, I seriously am. Acadamy of Contemporary Music, Music Production Diploma. Last weeks homework was to do a mashup of two songs you really like.
I like papa roach. I think everything after LoveHateTragedy is awesome. They have a solid hard rock sound now and their lyrical skills are impressive. I saw them live when they opened for Motley Crue during "Crue Fest" them and BuckCherry KILLED it, doing a better live show than the Head liners themselves.
HOWEVER, Compared to "The Paramour sessions" I thought this album and "Metamorphosis" were uninspired and mostly filler with maybe two songs killer. I hope they're not going through a slump and will put out another truly awesome album along the lines of "getting away with murder"
I thought this album might've been better if it was all live. They have an amazing dynamic while playing live which is one of the big reasons why these guys are still around.
Anyone that thinks they're still "nu metal" haven't truly listened to any of their stuff post "LoveHateTragedy" and should keep their ignorance to themselves. Eventually if they stick around for another 15 to 18 years they'll be hailed as a band that persevered, stayed true to themselves and possibly be known as influential in the hard rock genre and maybe someday legends of longevity.
I'm just looking at it from a commercial view, because they're obviously a commercial band..
How trendy of you.
+1 Haha. What's the point in caring about how commercial a band is or what they're labelled as? It's either pleasing to the ear or it's not.
I remember, ages ago, somebody on UG said Jerry Horton was the best live guitarist because he played everything perfectly and he sounded so tight.
^^^ Gene Simmons said in an interview with Herny Rollins that any band who sells merchandise is commercial. I think he's right.
Thanks for that comment man--I feel EXACTLY that way about music--either you like it or you don't and whether you do or not shouldn't determine whether or not it's acceptable for OTHER people to like (or dislike) that same music.
As for the commercial thing--yeah man, totally agree. It's frustrating because there are really very few true non-commercial acts that are popular given the nature of the machine that is the music industry. I like a band called 10 Years and they did what too many bands seem to do: wrote a song about how f'ed up and evil the music industry is because it stifles creativity...and then they released that very same song as a single. Go figure!
see also: "Dinosaurs will die" by NOFX and "Welcome to the machine" by pink floyd.
After opening for papa roach this past tuesday in lynchburg I must say I've gained a whole new respect for this band. Jacoby was very cool to hang out with and actually seemed genuinely interested in my band and what we are doing and wanted us to stay in touch. The new songs are shaping up very well, kick in the teeth and burn are both very solid radio singles. The band was even rehearsing some newer material at soundcheck and it was very interesting to see how Tobin takes control of the writing and rehearsing. And Jacoby just wants to jump around and be the crazy frontman and brings it every single show. I'm rooting for these guys!
as for some of the comments above, which I normally don't waste time reading, give the guys a break. They're obviously not attempting to write virtuosic classical music, just good pop songs. Accept them for what they are: a good time party band that just loves to rock hard. And calling them commercial or any other band commercial because they sell music is just silly. By your logic, anyone who isn't a street performer is a sell out. And technically they would be too if they put a guitar case out for spare change. Music is art, and artists make their craft because they love it, but at the end of the day a musician HAS to make money to continue pursuing a CAREER. Is someone who starts as a cashier at mcdonald's and ends up as a regional manager or CEO years down the line a sell out? No. Its just someone who advanced in their career field. Stop giving musicians a hard time when all they do is create the music they want to create.
Stop giving musicians a hard time when all they do is create the music they want to create.
I would love to take the side of all you naive and argumentative commenters on this one, but if you knew the nature of the music industry, you'd know that the above is not true.
I'm just looking at it from a commercial view, because they're obviously a commercial band..
How trendy of you.
+1 Haha. What's the point in caring about how commercial a band is or what they're labelled as? It's either pleasing to the ear or it's not.
I remember, ages ago, somebody on UG said Jerry Horton was the best live guitarist because he played everything perfectly and he sounded so tight.
^^^ Gene Simmons said in an interview with Herny Rollins that any band who sells merchandise is commercial. I think he's right.
Thanks for that comment man--I feel EXACTLY that way about music--either you like it or you don't and whether you do or not shouldn't determine whether or not it's acceptable for OTHER people to like (or dislike) that same music.
As for the commercial thing--yeah man, totally agree. It's frustrating because there are really very few true non-commercial acts that are popular given the nature of the machine that is the music industry. I like a band called 10 Years and they did what too many bands seem to do: wrote a song about how f'ed up and evil the music industry is because it stifles creativity...and then they released that very same song as a single. Go figure!
see also: "Dinosaurs will die" by NOFX and "Welcome to the machine" by pink floyd.
Nope, I seriously am. Acadamy of Contemporary Music, Music Production Diploma. Last weeks homework was to do a mashup of two songs you really like.
That's friggin' awesome man (both the homework and the fact that you're going for it). Good luck with the degree--I hope it does you better than my education degree's done for me so far haha Good stuff though dude!
What a stupid debate over the definition of "commercial." Obviously any band that sells any of their shit or even attempts to is commercial. The only time a band wouldn't be commercial is if they just stayed in their basement, or handed out demos to their friends for free, not intending to promote themselves or make any money or get signed. So virtually every band/musician is "commercial."
But thats not what people mean when they say it. They mean, like someone said, "produced specifically and particularly for the mass appeal" rather than just for the sake of music. Lady Gaga is commercial. The Jonas Brothers are commercial. Porcupine Tree is not commercial. Neither Infected Mushroom etc etc etc...
But whether Papa Roach is commercial or not...who cares? Just listen to the music.
This band isn't original. I'm not hating on them but the truth is this; The only reason this band is still around is because they are one of those bands that are good at creating what is in. You hear it from album to album. They don't have a signature Papa Roach sound. For example, if the cool thing in mainstream rock music is opera in 5 years... You can bet Papa Roach will have some opera in their stuff too. That is a stupid example though. Linkin Park is doing the same thing kinda but they do have a signature LP sound. Either way, this isn't what music is about.
What a stupid debate over the definition of "commercial." Obviously any band that sells any of their shit or even attempts to is commercial. The only time a band wouldn't be commercial is if they just stayed in their basement, or handed out demos to their friends for free, not intending to promote themselves or make any money or get signed. So virtually every band/musician is "commercial."
But thats not what people mean when they say it. They mean, like someone said, "produced specifically and particularly for the mass appeal" rather than just for the sake of music. Lady Gaga is commercial. The Jonas Brothers are commercial. Porcupine Tree is not commercial. Neither Infected Mushroom etc etc etc...
But whether Papa Roach is commercial or not...who cares? Just listen to the music.
That's exactly my point man--who gives a flying f&*% if a band makes music for the sake of making music or for the sake of making money? It doesn't devalue YOUR existence for listening to something because it sounds good and you like it.
EpiExplorer aside (because of the nature of his work), most people who go off on that commercial labeling tangent are doing it to sound intelligent or to make it seem as if they are better informed when it comes to music. It's the same thing with labeling disdainfully bands with particular genres (like saying "Ugh...Disturbed is SO nu-metal"). As if the FACT that they might fit a distinct genre would or should really determine whether or not you listen to something, you know? If you don't like nu-metal (or whatever genre), then just don't listen to it! It's just obnoxious to see how many comments are made wherein people attempt to identify themselves as distinguished music listeners because they turn their noses up at particular genres (or bands). Whatever man--it isn't that complicated: listen to what you enjoy listening to and ignore the rest!
We've detected that you are using Ad Blocking software.
If you hate ads, but love Ultimate Guitar, how about subscribing to Ultimate Guitar's Ad Free Service? If you subscribe to this service, you won't see annoying banner ads, pop-up ads, text-link ads or video ads and will be helping to support your favorite site at the same time.
As you know, we provide you with a lot of great, free content like news, reviews, interviews, tabs and chords, but you see, ads are the way we generate revenue to run UG and pay royalties to the songwriters and music publishers of the songs that are posted here.
Was this review helpful to you? 
