I know the 50s/60s formula had changed, but by "Rock n' Roll is a fad" people meant that after a while teenagers would stop having their own styles of music and go back to the listening habits of their parents' generation, which hasn't happened. Rock n' Roll has evolved into genres we know today, and hasn't died at all. I'm not saying chart music today is good, far from it, but underneath the garbage good music is still being made.Cynical skeptic said:...Alex Cowan said:After all, they said that Rock n' Roll was a fad, and look where we are now...
Not... generally... listening to... rock n' roll?
Sure, the Beatles formula has persisted to even now, but I can't think of a single band from the 00's I'd place in that genre. The closest thing currently being produced is what country has become, and its all simply god awful tripe.
So stop listening to the radio then.MiracleOfSound said:I have been switching off the radio very often recently as all I'm hearing is awful, autotuned nonsense and I'm sad over the state of music these days.
That's cuz the playing field has gotten too fucken wide. The consumer has too wide a choice.MiracleOfSound said:Some people may count Muse, Arcade Fire or Kings Of Leon, to that I say fair enough for Muse, but AF and KOL have not (to the best of my knowledge) had nearly the same cultural and musical influence as most of the big bands of the other decades.
The problem is that the successful bands of today have made more money and sold more records than Elvis did while he was still alive. Selling a million records was a big deal back then. Now its a benchmark. Then, despite the millions of records sold, the bands won't be remembered in a few years.Alex Cowan said:I know the 50s/60s formula had changed, but by "Rock n' Roll is a fad" people meant that after a while teenagers would stop having their own styles of music and go back to the listening habits of their parents' generation, which hasn't happened. Rock n' Roll has evolved into genres we know today, and hasn't died at all. I'm not saying chart music today is good, far from it, but underneath the garbage good music is still being made.
The reason I quoted that in the first place is that I wanted to show how the people of one generation cannot judge the significance of that generation until it has passed - just like people assumed Elvis would be a one-hit-wonder - it's impossible to tell until a good few decades after.
Have you noticed that people only consider their music good when they look back on it?MiracleOfSound said:I have been switching off the radio very often recently as all I'm hearing is awful, autotuned nonsense and I'm sad over the state of music these days.
Every decade apart from the last one has given us tonnes of classic artists that have had a huge, defining sound that rocked the world.
The 50s had.. well, you know who.
The 60s had the Stones, Beatles, Bob Dylan, James Brown, Hendrix, The Supremes, Beach Boys ect...
The 70s had Zeppelin, Bowie, Grateful Dead, Stevie Wonder, Fleetwood Mac, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Bob Marley, etc...
The 80s had Iron Maiden, Guns'N'Roses, The Who (also 70s), U2, Metallica, Depeche Mode, Michael Jackson, Prince, Madonna, Springsteen, Run DMC etc ect
The 90s had Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Public Enemy, NWA, Radiohead, Prodigy, Bjork, Oasis, Nine Inch Nails etc...
In the naughties, in my opinion there was not one band or artist who came along and gave us such new, fresh, exciting world changing music as all of these wonderful musicians.
Some people may count Muse, Arcade Fire or Kings Of Leon, to that I say fair enough for Muse, but AF and KOL have not (to the best of my knowledge) had nearly the same cultural and musical influence as most of the big bands of the other decades.
Or am I wrong? Will you show me some good music to make me smile, Escapists? Something with some heart and soul that came out in the last few years, that could be potentially as world changing as the greats?
Prove me wrong and I will be happy!
It isn't even 2011 and you're claiming the music of today hasn't influenced new artists?Cynical skeptic said:I'm just going to say it... but every sort of disagreement on this basically boils down to, "MUSIC ISN'T SHITTY NOW! HERE, LISTEN TO A FEW BANDS ONLY I'VE EVER HEARD OF!"
The reality is the "pop" of the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s lead people down paths they otherwise never would've taken. While the pop of the 00's was completely self-contained. If you liked it, you weren't going to find it anywhere else as it has no influences. It was derived entirely from everything thats ever been popular, with every sharp edge electronically ground away.
Admittedly, proper rock (not this pussy ass indie bullshit) is unfortunately hard to find, but it's there. Stone Gods, Black Stone Cherry, Airbourne and Black Spiders are all rock bands from the last ten years.Cynical skeptic said:...Alex Cowan said:After all, they said that Rock n' Roll was a fad, and look where we are now...
Not... generally... listening to... rock n' roll?
Sure, the Beatles formula has persisted to even now, but I can't think of a single band from the 00's I'd place in that genre. The closest thing currently being produced is what country has become, and its all simply god awful tripe.
I think the Fray is going to be remembered as a big hit band, for better or worse.Outright Villainy said:Well there's no ground breaking big bands in the last decade, but then I prefer more obscure stuff or metal. Not world changing as you say, but I don't really care for all the "greats" anyway. Out of every band you mentioned I only like Pearl jam and Hendrix.
So schmeh I say to big bands. Schmeh!