Style, as I define it, is the reoccurrence of elements from one piece of work to the next. Style should reflect the musician and his/her experience. Rather, style commonly tends to be a recycling of major parts. I said 'elements' before for a reason. Reusing a good riff, formation or pattern is fine. But... I wonder if applying the same formula to everything is really music? Think about it like this: If everything you did looked and worked as if cast from the same mold, how would you evolve? Experimentation is a big part of music (at least for me). Doing the same thing over and over has to have a negative effect on exploration, because, well, you aren't exploring.

Musicians need to evolve to survive just like anything else. There is always merit in figuring something out. I think this is what music is all about. The challenge is doing it the first time, not the 10th time. Once you find the right combination of melody, rythm, imagery, type, intent, etc. let it rest. When it all comes together, call it done and try something else. Learn from the past. Popular music is trend. But there are artists who surpass this, who stay around over time. Why? Because, some artists have been in a perpetual state of reinvention since their first song. No one wants to hear the same thing from the same person forever.

Cumberland Sound is no different.