My view is limited. There was a time when parents would throw out the stuff because it was filled with subjects like drugs and sex and disregard for authority. Even if there was a 100 bad words on an album the time has passed and the effect has changed. The level of being dangerous has moved to a place no one wants or cares to go. Who is shock rock now? Slipknot? There was a time when AC/DC played and it was the edge. Who is making music that is not metal but hard rock in that way?
Rock started out as rebellious music by young people, an outcry against comercial pop-at-that-time crap. A music of their own. Metal (and perhaps Punk too? I dont know a thing about history of Punk) replaced it in that regard at '80s. What replaced metal? I have no idea. That idea is still going strong in underground "true metal" scene with all the extreme subjects and all, but closer to public eyes I have no idea if there is any form of rock or metal or ANY MUSIC that could be considered rebellious in same way as rock was originally or metal at eightees. Subjects like drugs and sex and rebellion against authority are pretty much norm in every harder form of music nowadays, and no one is "shocked" by it anymore.
Well, there is Metalcore and Deathcore, (which are not genres of metal) but I consider that more of a pathetic joke.
So yes. As an art and rebellious music, Rock in all its forms is quite dead. As music genre its still alive though, with good bands appearing from time to time but there is still nothing new going on.
SHAman who knew of Head-Fi ten years prior to its existence
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Posts
9,570
Likes
44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif U2 is a bad example. They built their base off of the listening mentality we are now saying no longer exists. They will always sell millions of any release merely by reputation and nostalgia. They are almost classic rock.
If U2 didn't have 25 years of history and if Joshua Tree were just released today I'm pretty certain it would not become an epic album start to finish.
One can't be pretty sure of that at all. Playing the whatif game, had U2 released it today, it would mean they didn't do it 25 years ago and that would mean the bands U2 influenced would not exist and the culture by which they existed, influencing them to write such an album, would have been long gone. Anyone can speculate, but to think that if the Beatles released something today, it may not be great is as fruitless an argument. Albums were released, they garnered success, some bands are still selling lots of albums and garnering lots of success. What of it?
The point for this discussion is that for those hoping for 70's rock in 2009...well, sure it does not exist. Nearly 4 years later, is that any wonder really? Rock as it were, has evolved, as it always has and it exists as it does now, for better or for worse. No genre remains enchanged. So if someone remarks: "rock of 2009 sure isn't 1970;s rock!" Well of course not, the question should be "do people enjoy the rock of this generation more than that of past generations. If so, why? If not, why not?
im gonna chime in and say that i agree with everyone thats saying that rock has changed. Rock isnt the same as it was in the 70's or 80's thats for sure. But that doesnt mean its not still around. So many good bands are out that i dont consider anything but rock. just look at Them Crooked Vultures, i think its just an evolution of the genre, but its definitely still around. Bayside, Foo Fighters, the new guns n roses album. Maybe you dont consider these to be "rock", but that doesnt change the fact that i believe they still fit into the genre.
Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif Rock started out as rebellious music by young people, an outcry against comercial pop-at-that-time crap. A music of their own. Metal (and perhaps Punk too? I dont know a thing about history of Punk) replaced it in that regard at '80s. What replaced metal? I have no idea. That idea is still going strong in underground "true metal" scene with all the extreme subjects and all, but closer to public eyes I have no idea if there is any form of rock or metal or ANY MUSIC that could be considered rebellious in same way as rock was originally or metal at eightees. Subjects like drugs and sex and rebellion against authority are pretty much norm in every harder form of music nowadays, and no one is "shocked" by it anymore.
Well, there is Metalcore and Deathcore, (which are not genres of metal) but I consider that more of a pathetic joke.
So yes. As an art and rebellious music, Rock in all its forms is quite dead. As music genre its still alive though, with good bands appearing from time to time but there is still nothing new going on.
You make some excellent points my friend. Yeah all the "rebellion" is pretty much out in the open and in everything now. A lot of the metal bands have political themes that rail against the wrongs of government control and war and violence etc...that's why I think metal is the new spirit of "rock".
On a side note:
I personally can't stand the hip-hop type music and the way it has influenced culture. If you want to "rebel", rebel against that. I rebel against tattoos. It seems tattoos are very very popular now, therefore I "rebel" by refusing to get any...
I find threads like this a little silly, and baited. Bottom line, no one will ever be able to define Rock n' Roll and that is part of its brilliance. I also find it very irritating when someone makes a bold statement that a band is not rock when what you really want to say is that you don't care for their music.
For me R n' R's definition is simply great music, and if anyone really feels there is not a ton of brilliant music being made at the present, than they are just plain lazy. In fact, I sometimes wish there was less great music being produced so I could keep better track of it and not have to spend as much money on it.
Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif the question should be "do people enjoy the rock of this generation more than that of past generations. If so, why? If not, why not?
Not any more. I presume the same. Because they don't know any better.
SHAman who knew of Head-Fi ten years prior to its existence
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Posts
9,570
Likes
44
I like quite a few modern rock bands than a good majority of the stuff from the 60s and 70s. Though in my top five all-timers I have the Who, likely ranked at third place. I don't necessarily feel that one era is inherently better than another but certainly different. The cool thing about rock is that it is malleable, kinda ironical given its name. Though perhaps that is part of its charm. Always flowing (akin to magma) but solid as an art form (like its name).
The 1970s Rock was a guide to life. As many people died do to following the advice of songs like Cold Gin as lives were saved. How were lives saved? Rock is one of the best things on Earth. Rock has carried many a soul along hard times.
This type of Rock is gone. If you think U2 fills the void go for it.
Rock isn't dead. There is still new rock being played and recorded.
The problem is that I don't know what that new music is. I've taken myself out of the loop this decade because what is being recorded now is so "loud" that I don't want to listen to it. So I don't know what's new. I don't know what the new bands are and what musical directions rock is going in.
Maybe over the next decade they'll come to their senses and remaster the music from 1999-2009 so that it is listenable and then I can go back and discover the decade of music that I have missed.
For now I'm living in the past. Buying and listening to older rock. There is plenty of it and plenty of holes in my library that need to be filled. I'm still discovering new music to me even though it may be 20 or 30 years old.
Rock isn't dead but it has been diminished by piracy, as has the entire entertainment industry. The reason bands like KISS sign deals with Wallymart is because that's the only way to get guaranteed income for their albums.
Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif What replaced metal? I have no idea. That idea is still going strong in underground "true metal" scene with all the extreme subjects and all, but closer to public eyes I have no idea if there is any form of rock or metal or ANY MUSIC that could be considered rebellious in same way as rock was originally or metal at eightees.Well, there is Metalcore and Deathcore, (which are not genres of metal) but I consider that more of a pathetic joke.
I disagree with you about metalcore and deathcore though. Maybe the music as a whole isn't about rebellion anymore because of how desensitized today's youth is to begin with. Metal has so many sub genres that it would be hard to tell anyways. I will be the first to agree that it doesn't take much talent to write/play metalcore but I still enjoy listening to it. Metal is just as angry and conveys many of the same messages as it did before.
Originally Posted by nwkid178 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I disagree with you about metalcore and deathcore though. Maybe the music as a whole isn't about rebellion anymore because of how desensitized today's youth is to begin with. Metal has so many sub genres that it would be hard to tell anyways. I will be the first to agree that it doesn't take much talent to write/play metalcore but I still enjoy listening to it. Metal is just as angry and conveys many of the same messages as it did before.
It was a comment based on my personal taste anyway, so no hard feelings.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
