DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => General Music Discussion => Topic started by: splent on August 30, 2010, 05:42:49 PM
-
Watching 100 greatest hard rock songs right now, talking about Nirvana changed the scene of rock out of the 80s with the stagnant hair band sound. Most of new rock that's coming out just either sounds emoish or is trying to sound like Nickelback. Both are bad in my mind. It's just stagnant. We need another Nirvana. Anyone agree?
-
I agree. There's probably more music I'm interested in out right now than there ever has been, but it's not being listened to by enough people at all.
-
I'm not a huge fan of Nirvana, but I don't think that's what you're getting at. I do agree that we need someone to step up and break through all the same, unoriginal crap that every band is "composing".
I was just talking about this today and I said that it seems that Shinedown and Seether may be the only saving graces, and that's not very promising.
-
I must agree. Similarly to Marvellous G, I believe that there's more better new music now than there has ever been in the past, but there needs to be someone that pushes to the mainstream and shakes things up a bit.
-
Don't know, don't care. There's tons of awesome music out there and that number seems to only be growing, so I can't complain.
-
Don't know, don't care. There's tons of awesome music out there and that number seems to only be growing, so I can't complain.
Basically this. The music that I listen to can stay underground and I don't really care. I know it will always be there.
-
Don't know, don't care. There's tons of awesome music out there and that number seems to only be growing, so I can't complain.
Basically this. The music that I listen to can stay underground and I don't really care. I know it will always be there.
But don't you wish other people knew too?
-
Don't know, don't care. There's tons of awesome music out there and that number seems to only be growing, so I can't complain.
Basically this. The music that I listen to can stay underground and I don't really care. I know it will always be there.
But don't you wish other people knew too?
Yes, definitely, and I don't see how someone couldn't wish that about music they loved. I'd at least like it to get a little more respect.
-
No. If they want to find this music they can find it themselves... It's not exactly difficult to find.
-
With the way the internet has become so prominent, I don't think the "underground" really exists at all anymore. What we label as underground isn't necessarily what would have been called underground just a few decades ago. For example, bands like Porcupine Tree and Riverside could probably be considered underground, but both have rabid and devoted fanbases that cause the bands to do just fine for themselves with little to no mainstream exposure. Thanks in large part to the internet. If you ask me, we need a new term to replace the old and tired-out "underground" because it has basically lost its original meaning.
I know this doesn't answer the question posed in the OP; sorry about that.
-
I'm not a huge fan of Nirvana, but I don't think that's what you're getting at. I do agree that we need someone to step up and break through all the same, unoriginal crap that every band is "composing".
I was just talking about this today and I said that it seems that Shinedown and Seether may be the only saving graces, and that's not very promising.
Seether?
Shine down, yeah, but Seether?
-
For example, bands like Porcupine Tree and Riverside could probably be considered underground, but both have rabid and devoted fanbases that cause the bands to do just fine for themselves with little to no mainstream exposure.
This is what an underground fanbase really is. They don't have any mainstream exposure yet stay alive without most people's knowledge.
Oh, and Seether sucks. Shinedown is good.
-
If Shinedown and Seether are the only saving graces, Rock music might as well just shrivel up and die now.
-
If Shinedown and Seether are the only saving graces, Rock music might as well just shrivel up and die now.
My thoughts in less-nicer words.
Don't know, don't care. There's tons of awesome music out there and that number seems to only be growing, so I can't complain.
Basically this. The music that I listen to can stay underground and I don't really care. I know it will always be there.
But don't you wish other people knew too?
Yes, definitely, and I don't see how someone couldn't wish that about music they loved. I'd at least like it to get a little more respect.
^This 100%. I'm not asking everyone to love my music, but people accepting it would be great.
No. If they want to find this music they can find it themselves... It's not exactly difficult to find.
But what if they would never look it up in the 1st place? I mean, how many peopl do you know that would randomly type "Dream Theater" into Google?
I get what you're saying and maybe I'm exaggerating a little, but not many people are going to get into a band without it being fed to them.
-
I don't think its too bad. There are still bands making decent mainstream rock. The two that come to mind after reading the thread title are Kings of Leon and Muse. Not a huge fan of either of those bands but what I have heard I like enough.
-
But what if they would never look it up in the 1st place? I mean, how many peopl do you know that would randomly type "Dream Theater" into Google?
I get what you're saying and maybe I'm exaggerating a little, but not many people are going to get into a band without it being fed to them.
I think that if someone really wanted to find this underground music, it's not really that hard to find. Most people don't take music seriously, but if they do they will usually find what they are looking for fairly easily.
-
It's a shame Alter Bridge hasn't been mentioned, but Seether has? If rock right now is stagnant, it's because great rock bands like Alter Bridge aren't getting the praise and attention they deserve to have, but bands like Seether (no offense to anyone who likes these guys) are.
-
No, I think it's more just that "great" and "Alter Bridge" don't belong in the same sentence.
-
:|
Alter Bridge is fantastic.
-
No, I think it's more just that "great" and "Alter Bridge" don't belong in the same sentence.
Them are fightin' words right there, Mr. Bosk
-
Alter Bridge, Shinedown and Kings of Leon are good as far as mainstream rock goes. It ends there.
-
No, I think it's more just that "great" and "Alter Bridge" don't belong in the same sentence.
:|
I.... I..... I don't even.... wat
-
:lol Yeah, I think they're a good band, actually. I never saw any reason to be blown away by them, but they are a good band.
-
But what if they would never look it up in the 1st place? I mean, how many peopl do you know that would randomly type "Dream Theater" into Google?
I get what you're saying and maybe I'm exaggerating a little, but not many people are going to get into a band without it being fed to them.
I think that if someone really wanted to find this underground music, it's not really that hard to find. Most people don't take music seriously, but if they do they will usually find what they are looking for fairly easily.
What I meant was, what if they weren't even looking for it? I mena, when you turn on the radio, you can change the station, but you can't choose what music you'll be exposed to.
-
The last big mainstream rock revolution to me was back with OK Computer and Kid A earlier last decade. Before that it was Nirvana. Now the mainstream rock scene is kind of samey, but underground and lesser-known bands can write great music that may not get huge radio attention, but will amass a sizable fanbase with the help of the Internet. For example, Vampire Weekend has some of the most musically unique pop/rock tunes out there right now, and they're already pretty popular. There's a reason DT and PT are becoming more and more popular with mainstream press and sales.
Still, to see another big musical upheaval would be a welcome sight. There's a quote from Matt Bellamy in a Prog magazine that says "Rock music is one of the most conservative genres right now when it really shouldn't be."
-
I think because radio has gone by the wayside that we all think like this. Years ago you found out new music because of radio. Now, because of big buisness, you only hear the same 5 songs from a bands catalog. The internet is a great source for people to find something new. BTW, Is there a videostation that plays music only anymore. Hello MTV and VH1. Stop with the movies and play concerts dammit.
-
To answer the thread title...no. There is more experimentation going on in rock than there ever has been. I will agree that you couldn't tell that by just listening to the radio though.
-
Don't know, don't care. There's tons of awesome music out there, so I can't complain.
This is pretty much how I feel now. There's a decent amount of good rock music around, more than I can keep up with. If most people don't want to listen to it, and radio stations don't want to play it, screw them.
-
Not even close. There are plenty of amazing modern bands out there write now who are churning out wonderful music. I'd say a good portion of my favorites bands are more modern, though it's doubtful you'll hear any of them on a top 40 radio station.
Personally, I think Nirvana sucks, so I couldn't care less if no band ever tries to come along and replicate them. As for Seether.... seriously? Uh, ok.
As for good mainstream bands, I think Muse and Radiohead are certainly worthy of that title. You could argue that Megadeth are more or less mainstream, considering their last 3 albums alone have broken into the top 10 on the billboard charts. They still sound as good as ever to me. Hell, "Black Clouds & Silver Linings" debuted at number 5 or 6 on the billboard 200.
There are lots of great bands out there; you just need to look beyond what's being played on the radio and at dance clubs.
-
Personally, I think Nirvana sucks, so I couldn't care less if no band ever tries to come along and replicate them.
No-one is saying someone should.
-
Where they debut isn't proof of mainstream. Staying on the chart for many, many weeks does. Which still doesn't mater if it's good or not, just that it's popular.
-
I don't think its too bad. There are still bands making decent mainstream rock. The two that come to mind after reading the thread title are Kings of Leon and Muse. Not a huge fan of either of those bands but what I have heard I like enough.
Agreed on both. KoL is what more modern rock should sound like. Alter Bridge is awesome too. Shinedown is good, but nothing that blows me away.
-
(https://www.theriverrooms.com/whats_on_pics/love80s.jpg)
Also, :
(https://api.ning.com/files/fjCJhks0XLvBA-darSZ7IRCB7eWpIlpjqq38sR6E4hN2AzSxId*4wALFgJb8bu6syT*13yo5y22zsqTE8TgbUxBHIbK3cuzD/hair_metal_collage_mine44.png)
That's all I have to say about today's music.
-
:clap:
-
Don't know, don't care. There's tons of awesome music out there and that number seems to only be growing, so I can't complain.
-
The hair metal picture is like a huge, bleak collage of fail.
-
The 80s was the worst decade in music of the past fifty years.
-
The 80s was the worst decade in music of the past fifty years.
The hair metal picture is like a huge, bleak collage of fail.
WHAT IS THIS
-
The 80s was the worst decade in music of the past fifty years.
Pretty much.
-
Hair Metal was stagnant, grunge was stagnant, emo is stagnant. All american music trends are, that's how they survive. 50 bands all have to sound identical and look identical, this is america, deal with it.
-
You could probably argue that a few years ago Nickleback was the "next Nirvana" to all those Blink 182 clone bands of the early 2000s...too bad we went from terrible pop punk bands to even worse Nickelback bands. It would be nice to have something new take over. What would it be though? I hope something good and not something even worse, like a Chad Kroger side project or something
-
The 80s was the worst decade in music of the past fifty years.
Wrong. WORNG!
-
The 80s was the worst decade in music of the past fifty years.
Wrong. WORNG!
-
I actually agree with that. the 60's were great, 70's were great, 90's weren't bad, and 00's were pretty good. But seriously, fuck Hair Metal and that shit.
-
Maiden, Metallica, The Crue, Bruce Springsteen.
Yeah, shut up/
-
The 80's had more than hair metal. Thrash metal, industrial, prog metal, none of that would have existed without 80's stuff.
-
Maiden, Metallica, Queensryche, Megadeth.... that's about it. There was better prog in the 90's.
-
80s had a ton of awesome stuff. Every decade did. And I won't deny the influence artists that formed in that decade had on bands I listen to now. I just prefer the 70s, 90s, and 00s. By far.
-
The 90's is where all the shit lies. Spice Girls, Boyzone, Backstreet Boys, 5ive, Eiffel 65, Grunge. All shit.
-
The 90's is where all the shit lies. Grunge.
NO ONE LIKES YOU
-
90s had Jeff Buckley, Faith No More, Björk, Aphex Twin, Tool, Dream Theater, Anathema, Wu-Tang, Savatage, Death, Neutral Milk Hotel, A Tribe Called Quest, Smashing Pumpkins, Elliott Smith, Pearl Jam, Radiohead, Incubus, and Nine Inch Nails. All are amazing.
-
90s had Jeff Buckley, Faith No More, Björk, Aphex Twin, Tool, Dream Theater, Anathema, Wu-Tang, Savatage, Death, Neutral Milk Hotel, A Tribe Called Quest, Smashing Pumpkins, Elliott Smith, Pearl Jam, Radiohead, Incubus, and Nine Inch Nails. All are amazing.
80's had Winger.
I rest my case.
-
I could easily make the case that any decade is both the best and worst era of music ever.
Except the 70's. The 70's > All.
-
The 80s was the worst decade in music of the past fifty years.
This
due to the nature of art, I'd say this decade (err I mean 00's) has had the most great artists. However, for reasons I won't go into here, the 70s' are my favourite decade of music. Naturally when looking back you can just cherry pick all the amazing bands without having to put up with the crap, now long forgotten. Nevertheless, that is my preference. And like Arcaeus said, lots of great stuff in the 80's, but for many reasons simply not on the scale of the other decades.
-
Don't know, don't care. There's tons of awesome music out there and that number seems to only be growing, so I can't complain.
This. People who complain about the "state of rock music" are just being ignorant and going on what they hear on the radio.
-
No. If they want to find this music they can find it themselves... It's not exactly difficult to find.
This exactly.
Some people want to find good music, meanwhile others cant be bothered and just listens to whatever's on the radio/tv.
If you want to find something you can just look, it's not hard, why does everyone have to be spoon-fed?
-
The 90's is where all the shit lies. Spice Girls, Boyzone, Backstreet Boys, 5ive, Eiffel 65, Grunge. All shit.
Hey now, the Backstreet Boys were awesome. No sarcasm.
-
The 90's is where all the shit lies. Spice Girls, Boyzone, Backstreet Boys, 5ive, Eiffel 65, Grunge. All shit.
Hey now, the Backstreet Boys were awesome. No sarcasm.
Quit playing games with my heart, Gadough!
-
Oh God, it's playing in my head now. :lol
But that's just fine. :heart
-
:tup
-
Oh man, I remember when boy bands were huge and all over the place; I used to have serious hardcore arguments with anyone who claimed Nsync were better than Backstreet Boys. The very notion that someone could prefer Nsync used to make me rage. Still does, actually. Nsync were terrible and Backstreet Boys were amazing. And look who's still going strong today - Backstreet Boys, with Nsync having been broken up for years now. I wonder why.
-
Damn, I just adore 90's while 80's is pretty meh for me. 90's have DT, PT, Opeth, PoS, and SX, and they are pretty much the only bands I listen to. Also some of the bands I enjoy from time to time, like Meshuggah, Tool, and Devin Townsend are all from the 90's.
For 80's, Metallica is pretty much the only obsession I had.
-
I saw Shinedown live last year, really the most generic rock/metal band I've heard. Essentially the problem the OP is talking about. They're not bad, but I rarely take that type of music seriously. If I ever saw many emo's in one room, it was at the Shinedown gig.
For mainstream rock we still got:
Radiohead
Muse
Kings of Leon
Queens of the Stone Age
Them Crooked Vultures
Kasabian
Editors
Placebo
All decent to awesome bands.
-
Watching 100 greatest hard rock songs right now, talking about Nirvana changed the scene of rock out of the 80s with the stagnant hair band sound. Most of new rock that's coming out just either sounds emoish or is trying to sound like Nickelback. Both are bad in my mind. It's just stagnant. We need another Nirvana. Anyone agree?
On a whole, I agree with you.
The amount of great 70's and 80's songs that get played on the radio and tv, proves how shit most of the music of the last 20 years has become.
-
The 90's is where all the shit lies. Spice Girls, Boyzone, Backstreet Boys, 5ive, Eiffel 65, Grunge. All shit.
Hey now, the Backstreet Boys were awesome. No sarcasm.
Awesome compared to cancer.
-
The last revolution of commercial rock was Nu Metal whether you like it or don't.
Hair metal
Grunge
RadioHead/Bush kind of at the same time Spice Girls and BackStreet were dominating the pop world.
and
Nu Metal till 2002
There has been a revolution in the pop world over the last few years where gangsta hiphop has been slowly replaced with Lady Gaga, Shakira, Rihanna and Black Eyed Peas where the focus has been on making catchy singing chorus instead of rapping about cool cars and houses.
IMO Rock has been completely stale ever since with Muse being the lonely bunch that experiments, Radiohead pretty much stopped doing rock music since Kid A.
-
I never listen to the radio. I don't watch MTV. I mainly go by internet word of mouth to find new music. Whats popular really doesn't effect me musically.
That said if what I listened to was mainstream... I would be glad the artists were appreciated. But I wouldn't care much besides that.
-
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: at all of the 80's hatred. Everybody can eat me.
-
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: at all of the 80's hatred. Everybody can eat me.
Amen.
-
80s had some great stuff. Rush put out some of their best albums, there was plenty of good hair metal music (mixed with a lot of crap hair metal, but hey), Maiden, Priest, Thrash, The Cure, REM, The Police, Journey...But I do think that the 70s and 00s win forever.
-
Well I just prefer 90's but then that doesn't make me a 80's hater or whatever. I honestly don't think there's any crappy decade for music because there was always at least a single or a couple of artists that shone.
-
As the year is winding down, I'm still eagerly awaiting the release of two albums--perhaps the only two albums of 2010 that I am the least bit excited about: Symphony X and Alter Bridge. Neither has a definite release date. :( It looks like the Alter Bridge album is released in mid-October in Europe, but doesn't yet have a U.S. release date. SX hasn't updated since March, which is baffling. It's been a slow year for music in terms of my own tastes. But I guess that's okay. Hopefully, we'll get a lot of good stuff next year.
-
I think so. A little bit. Don't get me wrong there's alot of good stuff out there but you have to really look for it. For me, I just need variety and I can get it now with iTunes, Napster, Pandora, Grooveshark. etc. One day I can listen to Dream Theater and Opeth and the next I can listen to Moby and Allison Krauss. We live in a ADD age where people have so many choices that everything gets diluted. Rock music on the radio just can't satisfy the masses any more because we're so used to having more control and choices. And for me, having only discovered Dream Theater in the last year, I have even less trust in radio playing something good because they don't play them. Even if I want to hear something on the radio that they do play I might have one station to choose from and I might have to wait through a ton of music I don't like before hearing something I do like.
It seems to me that the only people that are satisfied with radio right now are the ones listening to hip hop and rap because there's so much of it right now. But one day that will become stagnant as well.
BTW I'm with the "80's were great" people.
-
No. If they want to find this music they can find it themselves... It's not exactly difficult to find.
This exactly.
Some people want to find good music, meanwhile others cant be bothered and just listens to whatever's on the radio/tv.
If you want to find something you can just look, it's not hard, why does everyone have to be spoon-fed?
:heart
-
Rock, and I feel this very strongly, is dead.
Rock today is fast becoming what jazz is - a specialist genre of music listened to by a few die-hards who can't move on, and viewed by most everyone else as some sort of joke.
-
why does everyone have to be spoon-fed?
Because today's world has bred legions of kids with entitlement issues who think the whole world should be handed to them on a silver platter.
As mentioned in another thread, I play in a band and part of my responsibility to to listen to new stuff that's popular, to decide if it's something we should/could play. Generally, I hate most of what I hear nowadays. With very few exceptions - I've grown to be a big fan of ZO2 and have heard Burn Halo's "Save Me", which sounded pretty kick ass, so I'd like to check out more of their stuff.
In general, my personal feeling is that today's music (this is going to sound stereotypical, so spare me the lectures, I know it isn't ALL this way) comes across to me as more "Woe is me, my life sucks, it's so hard being a multi-millionaire touring act", complete with very downtuned guitars which (again, IMO) add to the dreariness and make it easier for the singer to sing (when they are actually singing).
The reason I always bang the 80's drum (hair metal, especially) is that it was upbeat and fun. It was about partying and drinking and f*cking and having a good time, universal topics that everyone has the capacity to appreciate. It made you want to go party and drink and f*ck and have a good time, yourself.
-
80s music was awesome.
For the 193rd time, Nirvana did not kill hair metal. It was already on life support when they came along.
The music scene is so different now than it used to be, it is almost impossible for a single rock band to make a huge splash and be almost universally known and loved.
-
For the 193rd time, Nirvana did not kill hair metal. It was already on life support when they came along.
No, I think there is a valid argument that grunge did temporarily kill hair metal (using the term generically for most '80s rock as a whole). Granted, the genre had become bloated with a lot of no-talent acts that had the same schtick, and that was also a problem. But a big issue is that there was a lot of turnover at the record companies and a changing feeling as to what to push and what not to push, and a lot of really good bands that had a lot to offer suddenly found themselves unable to function simply because they had their label support pulled out from under them and could get no backing for recording albums and booking tours. Some of the better and/or bigger bands either ground it out or disappeared and then later resurfaced after the tide changed again and things changed in the industry to allow bands to do things more on their own terms. But a lot of good music disappeared simply because the industry pulled the plug on it financially in favor of the latest fad (grunge). It's not Nirvana's (or any other band's) fault, but that is exactly what happened.
-
Is it okay if I continue to blame Nirvana for it, though?
-
I think it's a moral imperative.
-
The 80s were awesome. The 80s were also pretty bad.
Just like every other decade.
-
Is it okay if I continue to blame Nirvana for it, though?
Have you seen "The Wrestler," Cozmo? There's a scene that made me think of you and Blob. Mickey Rourke and the girl are listening to (I think) Motley Crue, and Mickey says "That pussy Cobain showed up and ruined it for everyone. Who decided it was a crime for having a good time?" or something like that. Followed by "The 90s fucking sucked."
-
I think it's a moral imperative.
It kinda is, really. Also, when mentioning how a lot of bands disappeared altogether, due to the management rug being pulled out from under them, I believe this band was likely one of them:
https://video.yahoo.com/watch/2031089/v2162340
Is it okay if I continue to blame Nirvana for it, though?
Have you seen "The Wrestler," Cozmo? There's a scene that made me think of you and Blob. Mickey Rourke and the girl are listening to (I think) Motley Crue, and Mickey says "That pussy Cobain showed up and ruined it for everyone. Who decided it was a crime for having a good time?" or something like that. Followed by "The 90s fucking sucked."
I can't think of any better way to sum it up, really. :tup
-
1960s - end of Doo Wop
1970s - end of the hippies & the british invasion
1980s - end of disco
1990s - end of hair bands
2000s - end of grunge
2010s - ??? end of.....??? :justjen
Rock is too broad of a category to discuss the end of it. Rock will never die. It'll just transform
-
For the 193rd time, Nirvana did not kill hair metal. It was already on life support when they came along.
No, I think there is a valid argument that grunge did temporarily kill hair metal (using the term generically for most '80s rock as a whole). Granted, the genre had become bloated with a lot of no-talent acts that had the same schtick, and that was also a problem. But a big issue is that there was a lot of turnover at the record companies and a changing feeling as to what to push and what not to push, and a lot of really good bands that had a lot to offer suddenly found themselves unable to function simply because they had their label support pulled out from under them and could get no backing for recording albums and booking tours. Some of the better and/or bigger bands either ground it out or disappeared and then later resurfaced after the tide changed again and things changed in the industry to allow bands to do things more on their own terms. But a lot of good music disappeared simply because the industry pulled the plug on it financially in favor of the latest fad (grunge). It's not Nirvana's (or any other band's) fault, but that is exactly what happened.
Nirvana was the poster child, nothing more. "Grunge," (aka the type of music that had an angst to it with simpler song structures) did put an axe to the more free-spirited party-metal music, sure. But grunge was the music of the time with the bands getting their start in 1990-1991, and those bands and musicians were feeling something totally different than the excess of the 1980s.
I personally don't blame Nirvana at all, I blame fans for turning on bands they were loyal to. Blame ourselves. Instead of liking everything, we (meaning society at large) discarded what we enjoyed and looked for something different to latch onto. And we did. Nirvana did nothing more than play some simple chords that uh, struck a chord with youth that were feeling something totally different than the youth of the 1980s.
-
I didn't mind grunge at all, I hated the newer bands after grunge that drop tuned, didn't play a full bar chord and stoped doing solos.
-
Rock, and I feel this very strongly, is dead.
Rock today is fast becoming what jazz is - a specialist genre of music listened to by a few die-hards who can't move on, and viewed by most everyone else as some sort of joke.
Rock and jazz can't be compared. Jazz is a seperate genre, rock is basically just pop music from a theoretical point.
Jazz isn't dead. There are still many professional jazz musicians that are able to make a living and it is still widely taught both privately and at conservatories. It has just largely turned into a interpretive art form, like classical music. And even in this form it still allows for a lot of creative freedom through improvisation. This is why it probably won't die anytime soon.
On the other hand, rock music, being pop music, allows for even less creative freedom than classical music. This is the main reason I don't see rock music turning into an interpretive art form like jazz. So I very strongly doubt that anyone will still listen/play rock 20 years from now when all the original artists are gone.
-
I blame fans for turning on bands they were loyal to. Blame ourselves. Instead of liking everything, we (meaning society at large) discarded what we enjoyed and looked for something different to latch onto.
Yes, that's the other important component to this. But fads change, and the larger group of more casual fans will also change with the tide. I just can't discount the effect of the industry and the series of decisions as to what to promote and what not to promote. Large numbers of fans still did clamor for good '80s rock, which is why it was able to come back. But the industry was slow to respond and was stuck in a mindset that it could dictate what the fans can and cannot consume.
-
we (meaning society at large) discarded what we enjoyed and looked for something different to latch onto
True and it sucks. It's like some sort of virus infected the music scene and said "look sloppy, play sloppy, sing sloppy, and don't worry about being awesome at your instrument".
I pride myself on not having compromised my tastes for what was the flavor of the moment, though.
-
we (meaning society at large) discarded what we enjoyed and looked for something different to latch onto
True and it sucks. It's like some sort of virus infected the music scene and said "look sloppy, play sloppy, sing sloppy, and don't worry about being awesome at your instrument".
I pride myself on not having compromised my tastes for what was the flavor of the moment, though.
Oh man. I am soo on the right message board! ;D
This is exactly the way I see it too.
-
we (meaning society at large) discarded what we enjoyed and looked for something different to latch onto
True and it sucks. It's like some sort of virus infected the music scene and said "look sloppy, play sloppy, sing sloppy, and don't worry about being awesome at your instrument".
Technically speaking this started about 100 years ago when classical music was suddenly no longer the biggest genre. Compared to classical musicians even the members of Dream Theater play sloppy. Not to mention "musicians" like the members of Nirvana. Hell, nowadays most people in hip-hop can't even play an instrument. And I don't see this improving in the future as children are becoming less and less motivated to do something that takes effort without getting a direct reward, like learning to play an instrument well.
-
Oh man. I am soo on the right message board! ;D
Absolutely.
-
Oh man. I am soo on the right message board! ;D
This is exactly the way I see it too.
:tup
Technically speaking this started about 100 years ago when classical music was suddenly no longer the biggest genre. Compared to classical musicians even the members of Dream Theater play sloppy. Not to mention "musicians" like the members of Nirvana. Hell, nowadays most people in hip-hop can't even play an instrument. And I don't see this improving in the future as children are becoming less and less motivated to do something that takes effort without getting a direct reward, like learning to play an instrument well.
While this is probably quite true, I wasn't around 100 years ago. :lol I think that around that time is when I was really starting to get into music. I'd been getting serious into it for a few years when Nirvana and the like came around, so that's why it seemed like such a dramatic change, to me. A lot of the bands of the late 80's did care. They dressed over the top, they lived the lifestyle, they were technically pretty damned good. Then came grunge. Total about-face, in my eyes. Playing fast meant apparently no feeling or soul - which I interpreted as "a convenient excuse for why I'm not that good at my instrument".
-
I remember that Blind Melon interview you posted where they tore apart "Pull Me Under" because DT was playing fast for the sake of being fast or something. Now the singer of Blind Melon killed himself/OD'd years ago and now they're basically trying to resurrect themselves a la Thin Lizzy but ultimately failing. I too hate the argument that playing fast means there's no emotion. "The Best of Times" solo is an example I will always pull out to show people.
-
I remember posting that. ;) Illustrates my point well.
https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=7781.msg244511#msg244511
-
Rock music, by its very nature and history, is a type of music that is predicated on "shocking the establishment", an idea which goes all the way back to Elvis and Bob Dylan, on through The Who/Hendrix/Stones/Zeppelin/Sex Pistols/Metallica. Rock has even taken to shocking its own "established" parameters, as when punk reacted against the complexity of prog, and grunge reacted to the excesses of hair-metal. Throughout its history, it’s been a vicious cycle of action and reaction. It almost didn't matter that one movement featured complex technical playing or whether it featured simplistic sloppy playing... just as long as it was diametrically opposed to the scene that came before it. Like it or not, rock music has been about “trends”…. always striving to make the next big “splash”. Rock has always had that ego-centric need to maintain its importance in the eyes of the public.
Looking at it from that perspective, rock music just doesn't hold much relevance anymore. There’s no music “establishment” to rebel against, which makes it much harder for a single artist or movement to capture the imagination of the general populace. And part of that comes from the splintering of rock (and the music industry in general) into myriad genres and sub-genres. The way music is now distributed and listened to, people have the ability to zero in on their exact tastes and completely ignore whole genres of popular music altogether. In the old days, there was one top 10 chart. Now, there might be 5-6 top different charts depending on whether you decide to focus on R&B, Pop, Dance, Country, Latin, etc.
-
On a whole, I agree with you.
The amount of great 70's and 80's songs that get played on the radio and tv, proves how shit most of the music of the last 20 years has become.
I tried to find a shred of logic in your post, but sadly there does not appear to be any.
Obviously the stuff from 20 years ago that still gets played is the good stuff, because the shit that nobody cares about anymore doesn't get played now. Whereas the music being made recently hasn't had to stand the test of time yet.
And furthermore, when the hell did "radio and tv" become the pinnacle of good music? :lol
-
Whereas the music being made recently hasn't had to likely won't stand the test of time yet.
FTFM
-
On a whole, I agree with you.
The amount of great 70's and 80's songs that get played on the radio and tv, proves how shit most of the music of the last 20 years has become.
I tried to find a shred of logic in your post, but sadly there does not appear to be any.
Obviously the stuff from 20 years ago that still gets played is the good stuff, because the shit that nobody cares about anymore doesn't get played now. Whereas the music being made recently hasn't had to stand the test of time yet.
And furthermore, when the hell did "radio and tv" become the pinnacle of good music? :lol
Back when radio wasn't big buisness it was all about good music. When DJ's played album cuts, full sides of albums. That's when radio mattered. Then corporations came in and made guidelines to play certain types of music. Hence a playlist of songs to play.
-
Yeah exactly, these days radio is not a place to discover good music because the whole industry and distribution methods have changed.
-
Record companies have shot themselves in the foot being greedy. Trying to control a market like the digital era and not excepting it or putting their resources early on has forced music lovers to search elsewhere. Bands now are releasing music online themselves.
We are in a brand new world of music distribution right now.