[Coltrane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MdRex That was rather insulting I guess.

I apologize. Again, to each his own, just providing my perspective.

Quote:

When you say that there is nothing honest and that the "ooze" fakeness I really have to wonder how many albums or songs of theirs have you actually listened to and try to get what they are trying to convey? Is there any chances where you can let me know where was the band being "contrive" and "fake" lyrically speaking?

I have heard a great deal of their music actually. But it really doesnt take that much, once you hear the same thing in three or four songs it becomes obvious. As for specific examples, just take the opening words of Hanging By a Moment. He sings those words because he thinks they sound cool, not because in anyway is he striving for truth. It is like when you know someone is lying to you. Its hard to write a thesis on why you know, but its usually because you have spent enough time around people and listening and seeing inflections in speach and behavior. It becomes very obvious when someone is being dishonest.

You ask me how much of their music I have heard, I would ask you your age and how much music you have heard.

Quote:

I mean it's easy and cool to beat down popular bands and all but rather hard to justify why.

Its actually very easy to justify it, but I dont want to turn this into a 'why lifehouse sucks thread." If you prefer you can pm me. Or better yet, start a poll on people's opinions of Lifehouse, as this is a well rounded and musical board. I can guarantee that most opinions will be somewhat to very negative.

 

[Enverxis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn Hmm, Classic Rock that would appeal to Modern Metal fans...I guess just go for raw energy, but not punk? Hmm...The Who? The Kinks? Something like that? Steppenwolf?

Well Modern Metal is so diverse and specialized now, alot of bands coming out now were influenced by bands 5-10 years ago, and they would have been influenced by 80's bands who were influenced by the classic rock stuff, so we're going back a few steps here, not just one

The majority (but not all) of the metal I like isnt really the energy, rock-hard style, alot of it is symphonic implimenting use of classical instruments and singing to create a beautiful yet sorrowful setting, use of haunting keyboards, some bands have a good mix of each (Therion, After Forever etc) alot of these bands have a "beast" side to it as well, utilizing death/black metal vocals and/or guitar riffing, some of these bands can be quite progressive or avantgarde (Ram-Zet, Epica).

digging back to the roots of this kind of music really only goes as far back as the early 90's.
Although "Dark Metal" traces back a fair way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gratefulshrink How are you on Joy Division?

Not too keen, similar to The Cure IMO, bit too whiny for my liking, once again wasnt keen on the vocals (im so picky lol)

Snufkin has a good knowledge of the underground classic "goth" stuff, I might ask him. I'm sure with some digging around there'll be something =)

 

[gratefulshrink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enverxis e The majority (but not all) of the metal I like isnt really the energy, rock-hard style, alot of it is symphonic implimenting use of classical instruments and singing to create a beautiful yet sorrowful setting, use of haunting keyboards, some bands have a good mix of each (Therion, After Forever etc) alot of these bands have a "beast" side to it as well, utilizing death/black metal vocals and/or guitar riffing, some of these bands can be quite progressive or avantgarde (Ram-Zet, Epica).

How about Univers Zero (circa 1979):http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p...0:ax7tk65x9krj

 

[asmox]

When people make threads like this, they should replace "modern rock" with "modern popular rock". That way, statements like 'today's music just doesn't cut it..' might actually have some degree of validity.

I can't really put my finger on the reason, but I have a definite aversion to these threads.

I guess I believe that exposure works both ways. Many of today's children are exposed to the wonders of MTV, and they swallow that stuff up. But you know what? The children of yesterday are exposed to the same thing, and I've been finding that a lot of them are blinded by it, or end up using it as an excuse. They lump all of "modern rock" into this encompassing category of really bad bands without ever even being aware of the groundbreaking and innovating modern rock bands that exist in the shadow of music's commercialization and privatization.

Either that, or they are aware, but simply choose not to care. It's too different, too weird, too avantgarde, too experimental, too this, too that. I've seen a lot of that in my classic rock friends. They worship Led Zeppelin, despise The Killers and A7X, and completely dismiss artists like Bumblefoot, Freak Kitchen, Peccatum, Bubblemath, Kayo Dot (hell, they even dismiss stuff like King Crimson and Frank Zappa).. and then go right back to claiming that modern rock doesn't cut it (except for Radiohead, of course.. everybody seems to love Radiohead

). Really, what separates those guys from the guys that worship indie pop? Give me a break.

That's just my opinion, anyway. I have no trouble finding incredible modern rock.

 

[markl]

Quote:

Either that, or they are aware, but simply choose not to care. It's too different, too weird, too avantgarde, too experimental, too this, too that.

Oh, please.

No, a lot of it is just too sucky. Absolute dreck.

Quote:

The children of yesterday are exposed to the same thing, and I've been finding that a lot of them are blinded by it, or end up using it as an excuse. They lump all of "modern rock" into this encompassing category of really bad bands without ever even being aware of the groundbreaking and innovating modern rock bands that exist in the shadow of music's commercialization and privatization.

Ah, idealistic youth. You'll get over that soon enough.

Like I've said several times already, I *am* aware of what's going on musically today, both on the surface and below, I'm not "afraid" of any music (as if LOL), I can almost guarantee I buy more new music than you do, and there are plenty of great modern artists. But to dismiss all so-called "classic-rock" (or anything made before the year 2000) as just being yesterday's over-marketed has-been pop-star MTV wanna-be's is just as ignorant as dismissing all modern music. Looking back at 50 years of rock 'n roll and seeing only Elvis, the Beatles, the Stones, and Led Zeppelin is to make the same mistake you seem to be accusing us old fogeys of with modern music-- only observing the obvious. There's 50X more music out there from the last 50 years than came out last year, much more below the surface of incredible value. Can you deny that?

Also, in order to have any idea of what "ground-breaking" music is, you have to have some sense what came before. IME, and I'm not picking on you asmox, I have no idea about you personally, but I find that most of these hipster snob types (and again, not saying you are one I don't know you) have no clue about the history of the music they profess to love.

Believe me, it's all been done, and done much better in many cases. What you consider "ground-breaking" today will also one day be "classic rock" (that is, if it's actually any good). What will you do then? Do you throw out all CDs after the fifth year they've been out? "Oops, too old school now, I can't like that anymore, have to find something 'groundgreaking' and 'new'". For me, I'll trade you 10 "ground-breaking" CDs, for one "good" one.

Good music is good music, and will endure over time, and continue to excite listeners; if it has a built-in "sell-by" date, it never had any value to begin with.

 

[Aman]

Quote:

There's 50X more music out there from the last 50 years than came out last year, much more below the surface of incredible value. Can you deny that?

Yes. There was a lot more music on vinyl than there is now on CD.

 

[asmox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Like I've said several times already, I *am* aware of what's going on musically today, both on the surface and below, I'm not "afraid" of any music (as if LOL), I can almost guarantee I buy more new music than you do, and there are plenty of great modern artists. But to dismiss all so-called "classic-rock" (or anything made before the year 2000) as just being yesterday's over-marketed has-been pop-star MTV wanna-be's is just as ignorant as dismissing all modern music. Looking back at 50 years of rock 'n roll and seeing only Elvis, the Beatles, the Stones, and Led Zeppelin is to make the same mistake you seem to be accusing us old fogeys of with modern music-- only observing the obvious. There's 50X more music out there from the last 50 years than came out last year, much more below the surface of incredible value. Can you deny that? Also, in order to have any idea of what "ground-breaking" music is, you have to have some sense what came before. IME, and I'm not picking on you asmox, I have no idea about you personally, but I find that most of these hipster snob types (and again, not saying you are one I don't know you) have no clue about the history of the music they profess to love. Believe me, it's all been done, and done much better in many cases. What you consider "ground-breaking" today will also one day be "classic rock" (that is, if it's actually any good). What will you do then? Do you throw out all CDs after the fifth year they've been out? "Oops, too old school now, I can't like that anymore, have to find something 'groundgreaking' and 'new'". For me, I'll trade you 10 "ground-breaking" CDs, for one "good" one. Good music is good music, and will endure over time, and continue to excite listeners; if it has a built-in "sell-by" date, it never had any value to begin with.

A lot of generalizing in your post, there.

I'm not dismissing classic rock. I only said that there are many classic rock enthusiasts out there who dismiss a lot of what's going on in today's underground because it's too "out there", relative to what they are used to (I'm not necessarily saying that you are one of these people). I didn't pull that out of my rear, either.. that came from my personal experiences with both my family and friends, and their friends.

Dismissing things made before 2000? Well, I can't seem to apply that to myself. I love old progressive acts like King Crimson, Captain Beefheart, Genesis, Frank Zappa, Camel, Ozric Tentacles, and Gentle Giant. I'm a big fan of old electro-pop ala Pet Shop Boys and Depeche Mode. I listen to a good deal of both traditional and contemporary jazz. I love metal of all sorts.. from the early progressive pioneers Watchtower, Pestilence, and Death to current orchestral acts like After Forever and Therion. I love things that are almost alien in their complexity and musical texturing.. Ruins, Orthrelm, Infidel?/Castro!, Peccatum, and the like. I absolutely adore The Black Dog, a classic group in experimental electronica.

In short, I listen to a whole lot of different stuff and I'm aware of the origins of much of it. Though honestly, there's a lot of stuff out there that seems wholly original.. I don't think I'd ever heard of anything like Orthrelm prior to discovering them. Sure, you can take a given band and break their music up into the smallest parts and say, "Hey, this piece sounds like that, and that piece sounds like this other band over here..", but who was doing this sort of impossible fusion of styles back then? Is that not original and groundbreaking on its own? Was Cynic not original in 1993 when they took the dysfunctional jazz/fusion/metal hybrid and turned it into a driving musical force? How about Upsilon Acrux a few years back, when they stood progressive rock on its head? The only thing I don't listen to at all is indie pop/rock.. it doesn't appeal to me in the slightest.

I don't dislike oldschool music at all. I don't get rid of albums after they've aged a certain amount of time (I don't know where you even got that idea). I'm aware that there's a ton of stuff in the world of classic rock aside from what's on the surface, just like there is with modern rock. I'm not denying any of that. I'm just too busy discovering the immeasurable amount of new music out there today to worry about the past.

 

[XxATOLxX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coltrane Well, since you asked... Lifehouse is HORRIBLE. I don't mean mediocre, or not my taste, but absolutely unlistenably horrid. Their lyrics are hopelessly contrived, their music is astonishingly unoriginal, and everything about them oozes fake band manufactured by a greedy record company. Their is nothing honest about anything they do. Additionaly, this is hardly just an opinion I hold. I thought dislike of them was universal by those who actually like music. Kinda like Creed or Nickelback. To each his own I suppose.

I think Lifehouse is awesome

They are definitely one of the better bands out there on MTV. (IMO)

I can see why kids are turning to classic rock instead. I'm still amazed at how such a horrible band like Fall Out Boy actually made it to the top 10.

 

[titaniumx3]

Music is very much like food. Think of it as eating at an upscale restaurant and eating at mcdonalds. Why is the latter so popular amongst the masses?

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

Quote:

I still see kids in Smiths shirts, way too young to have been there the first time. I also see kids in Misfits shirts, way too young to have been there the first time.

And they sell Harley-Davidson® T-shirts to people who wouldn't know a clutch from a choke. band shirts have everything to do with fashion and nothing with the music that the shirt-wearer owns or has even listened to.

Quote:

The Beatles *were* aiming for mass appeal, so were the Stones, Zep, The Who, everyone. This fake pose of "oh, I'm all about the art, I don't care if it never sells it's way over the heads of the ignorant masses anyway", is newer invention, IMO.

I'll disagree with you on 'The Who'. Tommy took almost 4 years to make, simply because everyone except Townshend thought it was a terrible idea and was going to waste alot of studio money. So that is a good example of a mega-album not being developed strictly for profit.

And say what you will about modern music. I'll still amazed at how good Coheed & Cambria's 'secrets of silent earth 3' is.

 

[MdRex]

Quote:

I have heard a great deal of their music actually.

Like 4... 5 songs? Have you heard their latest album? They changed their sound.

Quote:

As for specific examples, just take the opening words of Hanging By a Moment. He sings those words because he thinks they sound cool, not because in anyway is he striving for truth.

Or... because you thought it's only because he thinks it sounds cool?
Base on the fact that the band comprises of Christians and by simply reading thru the lyrics, I'll probably imply that the song was written from a human to God. Curious: how do you know that he just use the words because it sounds cool? The thing is, as Christian I can relate to the feelings expressed in their lyrics.

Quote:

You ask me how much of their music I have heard, I would ask you your age and how much music you have heard.

I'm 18, how much music have I heard? I've probably 65-70 CDs. I guess this is pretty little in comparison to what you have heard.

 

[omedon]

Quote:

The Beatles *were* aiming for mass appeal, so were the Stones, Zep, The Who, everyone. This fake pose of "oh, I'm all about the art, I don't care if it never sells it's way over the heads of the ignorant masses anyway", is newer invention, IMO.

I don't thik the Beatles were aiming for mass appeal. Britney Spears and New Kids on the Block aim for mass appeal. Bands those days didn't know what mass appeal was. They didn't have teams of mid-level accountants, focus groups, and marketing agents working away to help them make the most marketable music.

Instead, they played what they liked and hoped that other people would like it too. When it worked it worked. In there case it really worked. Great for them. They weren't fools and once they discovered what people liked they weren't going to make a huge left turn away from that. But in those days a lot of this stuff was really new and a lot of ground was being broken.

Not like nowadays where you have pearl jam version 5.0 showing up in the charts.

Don't mistake me, ground is definitely still being broken but the 'mass appeal' music doesn't seem to be doing it. Accountants like what is safe. It is a lot like the current movie and video game sequel/safe properties glut.

 

[shplorgh]

I think the problem is that the mainstream music of then was good, as well as the not-so-mainstream, whereas the mainstream stuff now is almost all complete and utter crap.

 

[Aman]

Quote:

And they sell Harley-Davidson® T-shirts to people who wouldn't know a clutch from a choke. band shirts have everything to do with fashion and nothing with the music that the shirt-wearer owns or has even listened to.

Quite.

I went out with a girl for a long time who wore a Ramones shirt. I complimented her on it one day, and asked her what songs she liked from the band. She couldn't name one song from them. I was kind of shocked - but she was very, VERY pretty so I really didn't care in the long run

 

[Nacher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwitel I think the rock scene is about to come full circle (and Thank G-D) go back to its classic roots. The more kids are getting into and buying more of the "classics", the less they spend on current releases. This inherently creates a decline in present day album sales and this "hole" in the market will need to be filled with higher quality music. I think it will be inetersting to see whether that void is filled with music that is remeniscent of classic rock or perhaps an entirely new direction/genre is created? Maybe it will be a combination of the two?

Without reading the whole thread, I have to comment on this. In Finland, this has already happened. The dark metal scene has grown so much that it's really rivaling the mainstream pop stuff. With dark metal, also the interest towards classic rock, especially progressive rock, has increased. The best recordstores seem to concentrate on metal, progressive rock and some electronic music. The dark metal shelves may be twice as wide as pop/rock. The low quality of today's mainstream pop music will dig it's own grave. Here it's already happening, and I'm pretty sure it will happen in a lot of countries in near future. The media is still dragging behind though, as dark metal still isn't played on racio or shown in TV, even though those albums keep being on the top of the charts. We briefly had a TV-show, where audience could vote for the music videos to be played, and the show was stopped because the only thing that was voted were metal videos, heh.