Despite owning many CD's made by current 'rock' bands, I realised the other day that I always go back to the likes of the Stones, Zeppelin, Doors, CSNY, Neil Young, Grateful Dead, etc etc in comparision, well, there is no comparison! The contemproray 'rock' bands occasiionally knock out a half decent tune, but clearly these musicians just aren't as good and certainly not as good at song writing as the old dinosaurs above. It's worrying in that we simply don't get classic rock albums anymore, and before anyone starts with nonsense suggestions about bands like the Foo Fighters etc consider this...in 40 years who will be listening to the recordings of bands like that? We don't get the classic rock songs anymore that will stand the test of time.

Is this the final death throws of a failing genre, or will there be a renaissance in the coming decades where we will see the emergence of the super band once again?

AC/DC, more hard rock band but... since 1973.

I'm always fearful that my similar perceptions are more a function of my age than anything else...So I tend to keep them to myself

Opps...cat out of the bag !

I suspect there are really good rock bands out there but they don't get played in today's music environment so they're unknown.

I'm not a HUGE Foo Fighters fan, but I enjoyed the first couple of albums. And I think there are several songs that will stand the test of time. I'm not saying they're as good as a Stones or Zeppelin song, that's all opinion anyway, but songs like "This Is A Call", "I'll Stick Around", "Big Me", "My Hero" and "Everlong" will probably stand the test of time. And already have to some extent. Songs from the first two albums have become radio staples and have stood the test of time for 18 (1st album) to 16 (2nd album) years.

I guess U2 and Springsteen will be the last rock dinosaurs (as long as you not include hard rock bands. They are a spieces of their own). It wouldn't be unthinkable for them to tour in the 2020's.

Quote
crumbling_mice
Despite owning many CD's made by current 'rock' bands, I realised the other day that I always go back to the likes of the Stones, Zeppelin, Doors, CSNY, Neil Young, Grateful Dead, etc etc in comparision, well, there is no comparison! The contemproray 'rock' bands occasiionally knock out a half decent tune, but clearly these musicians just aren't as good and certainly not as good at song writing as the old dinosaurs above. It's worrying in that we simply don't get classic rock albums anymore, and before anyone starts with nonsense suggestions about bands like the Foo Fighters etc consider this...in 40 years who will be listening to the recordings of bands like that? We don't get the classic rock songs anymore that will stand the test of time.

Is this the final death throws of a failing genre, or will there be a renaissance in the coming decades where we will see the emergence of the super band once again?

The music industry cannibalized itself in ways that have been well documented; overpricing its product, failing to adapt to digital distribution, forgoing A&R for chasing the fast buck etc. This is all stuff that began in the late 90's so it's nothing new. 80's & 90's bands are having their revivals now and the Foo Fighters are already classic rock; they are part of the canon, because they came up under the wire in the last days when kids still bought CDs.
Fact is, there are shitloads of great bands still and plenty of folks still go and see them (which is why to many, the current Stones iteration fail to impress by comparison on stage). Only thing is, without industry control over distribution and exposure thanks to the Internet, there is no clear consensus on who rules the roost. Popular acts are disposable by design now, there are only what would be called AM radio acts back in the day without a similar amount of so-called FM radio acts because that paradigm doesn't exist anymore, it's all formatted radio now. Music discovery options are better than ever before, what with YouTube (sample anything you want whenever you want), podcasts, music blogs and so forth. The smart kids are taking of advantage of it. Twenty years from now they will look back and think real rock music ended with Jack White & Ty Segall and they too will be wrong.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-05 14:44 by andrewt.

I think anything can "stand the test of time" based on the strength of the generation who is consuming the music at the time. As they get older, they'll keep listening to it, and it will become "classic". Look at some of the absolute shit that came out in the 80's that we still hear on the radio every day.

If Kajagoogoo can stand the test of time, anything can.

Quote
NoCode0680
I think anything can "stand the test of time" based on the strength of the generation who is consuming the music at the time. As they get older, they'll keep listening to it, and it will become "classic". Look at some of the absolute shit that came out in the 80's that we still hear on the radio every day.

If Kajagoogoo can stand the test of time, anything can.

Nostalgia is indeed a cruel mistress.

Quote
andrewt

Quote
NoCode0680
I think anything can "stand the test of time" based on the strength of the generation who is consuming the music at the time. As they get older, they'll keep listening to it, and it will become "classic". Look at some of the absolute shit that came out in the 80's that we still hear on the radio every day.

If Kajagoogoo can stand the test of time, anything can.

Nostalgia is indeed a cruel mistress.

So was their hairdresser.

Ouch

Quote
crumbling_mice
Despite owning many CD's made by current 'rock' bands, I realised the other day that I always go back to the likes of the Stones, Zeppelin, Doors, CSNY, Neil Young, Grateful Dead, etc etc in comparision, well, there is no comparison! The contemproray 'rock' bands occasiionally knock out a half decent tune, but clearly these musicians just aren't as good and certainly not as good at song writing as the old dinosaurs above. It's worrying in that we simply don't get classic rock albums anymore, and before anyone starts with nonsense suggestions about bands like the Foo Fighters etc consider this...in 40 years who will be listening to the recordings of bands like that? We don't get the classic rock songs anymore that will stand the test of time.

Is this the final death throws of a failing genre, or will there be a renaissance in the coming decades where we will see the emergence of the super band once again?

I have similar thoughts about young rock bands. I listen to "Underground Garage", the Little Steven radio show on Sirius/XM. Lots of young bands music is played and most of the time it's great, really good. But those young bands are playing "classic rock, punk, rock and roll etc..." . It's good but it isn't new therefore I always compare it to the original songs that have inspired the young musicians and the originals always win. Unless the new bands take rock and roll into new territories and one can still call it rock and roll music, the new bands are destined to be compared to the great orignals(that is if one knows the music from 50's, 60's, 70's).
The Rolling Stones transformed Robert Johnson' music into something that is quite different, creating something new, artistically & commercially making a huge impact into popular music. The foo fighters are good but for me they aren't as important as the Rolling Stones. I am not putting down the young musicians, I wish them the best.
Rock and roll,
Mops

What current music are you listening to?

I'm 19 so maybe it's my age and music but there's great music out there. I may be listening to the same albums 40 years from now and complain noone that they don't make albums like Blacks Holes and Relevations anymore

I'm sure there were people in the 60's and 70's were complaining that the Stones etc aren't as good as music earlier

Since The Black Crowes or maybe Oasis no young rock and roll band made several great albums. At best a decent single or 2 (Strokes, BRMC, White Stripes).
If you wanna hear great stuff by young people you have to listen to hip hop, pop or even r&b.
Kendrick Lamar, Frank Ocean, Kanye West: that's great stuff.
I'd much rather buy the new Justin Timberlake or Taylor Swift album than some new hot rock band.

Quote
BowieStone
Since The Black Crowes or maybe Oasis no young rock and roll band made several great albums. At best a decent single or 2 (Strokes, BRMC, White Stripes).
If you wanna hear great stuff by young people you have to listen to hip hop, pop or even r&b.
Kendrick Lamar, Frank Ocean, Kanye West: that's great stuff.
I'd much rather buy the new Justin Timberlake or Taylor Swift album than some new hot rock band.

Look a little deeper and you will find plenty of great new rock albums, just not on the billboard charts or on the music "award" shows. Rock music is back underground where it thrives best. The quality hip hop is largely underground now as well.
Search: Dr. Octagon, MF Doom, Ty Segall, Thee Oh Sees, Black Mountain and on and on.

Quote
Jackglfc
What current music are you listening to?

I'm 19 so maybe it's my age and music but there's great music out there. I may be listening to the same albums 40 years from now and complain noone that they don't make albums like Blacks Holes and Relevations anymore

I'm sure there were people in the 60's and 70's were complaining that the Stones etc aren't as good as music earlier

Bands like: Len Price 3, Mothertruckers,cocktail slippers,Pedico and others that I didn't memorize their names. I am not complaining about the young bands, I am just saying it's tough to come up with something new that will leave a mark in popular music.
Guys like Dean Martin were complaining about the Rolling Stones because Dean Martin wasn't into rock and roll music, in fact he was against it because those new bands were taking over the young public playing a different genre of music. My point is more about the difficulty for young rock bands to come up with something new, exciting that could bring rock and roll music to a different place; that is the only way the new generation of rockers will leave an impact. The last great rock "revolution" was punk, that was almost 40 years ago.
Rock and roll,
Mops

Quote
rollmops

Quote
Jackglfc
What current music are you listening to?

I'm 19 so maybe it's my age and music but there's great music out there. I may be listening to the same albums 40 years from now and complain noone that they don't make albums like Blacks Holes and Relevations anymore

I'm sure there were people in the 60's and 70's were complaining that the Stones etc aren't as good as music earlier

Bands like: Len Price 3, Mothertruckers,cocktail slippers,Pedico and others that I didn't memorize their names. I am not complaining about the young bands, I am just saying it's tough to come up with something new that will leave a mark in popular music.
Guys like Dean Martin were complaining about the Rolling Stones because Dean Martin wasn't into rock and roll music, in fact he was against it because those new bands were taking over the young public playing a different genre of music. My point is more about the difficulty for young rock bands to come up with something new, exciting that could bring rock and roll music to a different place; that is the only way the new generation of rockers will leave an impact. The last great rock "revolution" was punk, that was almost 40 years ago.
Rock and roll,
Mops

And there has been no youth culture revolution since hip hop and the rave scene in the 80's but there is plenty of great new music, just without the mass cultural significance.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-05 16:00 by andrewt.

I feel the same way about current rock groups. The thing that really kills me is that there is no more guitar solo in a rock song. Every single song - to me - sounds EXACTLY the same regardless of the band. For me, Slash is the last great guitarist. I love a guitarist where you can turn on the radio and INSTANTLY know who's laying down that riff. Mick T, Angus, Slash all come to mind for me for this. The guitar solo is a lost art now, and it made many a classic rock song great. I think there were many runners-up to the more recent bands who could have stood the test of time, but most have faded for various reasons. Some version of Nirvana may have carried on. STP was great for a while. Some of the other bands I have loved have called it a day - REM. What's left is the likes of Dave Matthews, who I've never understood the allure, but who is probably a contender for carrying on, although I don't really consider him rock. There are some very good bands out there, but they are all underground, or not nearly as famous and may never get there. Moon Taxi is probably the best band (IMO) in the country right now. LOVE them. I have also loved The Elms and Cross Canadian Ragweed of late - unfortunately both are no more.

To fight off this decline though, I've branched out too. For me, I'm turning to the Marleys, as my 9-year old son is a HUGE Bob Marley fan. I've been trying to acquire all of the Marley stuff - his and his kids, and over the last 6 months or so, I've really come to dig Stephen Marley. A true talent, but not rock by any means.

So, I do agree with those who say that one must look elsewhere - meaning other genres - for good music these days.

I guess the best example would be T. Rex.

Quote
VoodooLounge13
I feel the same way about current rock groups. The thing that really kills me is that there is no more guitar solo in a rock song. Every single song - to me - sounds EXACTLY the same regardless of the band. For me, Slash is the last great guitarist. I love a guitarist where you can turn on the radio and INSTANTLY know who's laying down that riff. Mick T, Angus, Slash all come to mind for me for this. The guitar solo is a lost art now, and it made many a classic rock song great. I think there were many runners-up to the more recent bands who could have stood the test of time, but most have faded for various reasons. Some version of Nirvana may have carried on. STP was great for a while. Some of the other bands I have loved have called it a day - REM. What's left is the likes of Dave Matthews, who I've never understood the allure, but who is probably a contender for carrying on, although I don't really consider him rock. There are some very good bands out there, but they are all underground, or not nearly as famous and may never get there. Moon Taxi is probably the best band (IMO) in the country right now. LOVE them. I have also loved The Elms and Cross Canadian Ragweed of late - unfortunately both are no more.

To fight off this decline though, I've branched out too. For me, I'm turning to the Marleys, as my 9-year old son is a HUGE Bob Marley fan. I've been trying to acquire all of the Marley stuff - his and his kids, and over the last 6 months or so, I've really come to dig Stephen Marley. A true talent, but not rock by any means.

So, I do agree with those who say that one must look elsewhere - meaning other genres - for good music these days.

Check Dinosaur Jr's "Farm" LP or either of the Raconteurs albums.

Quote
andrewt

Quote
BowieStone
Since The Black Crowes or maybe Oasis no young rock and roll band made several great albums. At best a decent single or 2 (Strokes, BRMC, White Stripes).
If you wanna hear great stuff by young people you have to listen to hip hop, pop or even r&b.
Kendrick Lamar, Frank Ocean, Kanye West: that's great stuff.
I'd much rather buy the new Justin Timberlake or Taylor Swift album than some new hot rock band.

Look a little deeper and you will find plenty of great new rock albums, just not on the billboard charts or on the music "award" shows. Rock music is back underground where it thrives best. The quality hip hop is largely underground now as well.
Search: Dr. Octagon, MF Doom, Ty Segall, Thee Oh Sees, Black Mountain and on and on.

I don't believe a great band remains underground.
If somebody is really good and fresh they're going to be picked up by a major.

The artists you mention are not my thing either (besides the Dr. Octagonecologyst album which is interesting but that album is nearly 20 years old).

Dinosaur Jr is another band who have been around for awhile correct? Is there any rock band who have come out since the end of grunge who could actually still be relevant in 40 years, or even around? I remember being a record store whenever 2LiveCrew's Banned in the USA came out and talking to the girl behind the counter about how none of the bands out now would still be around in 20 years. I told her Bon Jovi could be, and probably would be - mind you I was and still am a big Bon Jovi fan, and what do you know? They're still here. Although Richie Sambora and Jon Bon Jovi seem to be bickering in the way of Mick/Keef of late, mostly from JBJ.

I am also a huge fan of Matisyahu, but again not a rock act. He's the only one I've seen more than once in the last 15 years besides the Stones.

Quote
VoodooLounge13
I feel the same way about current rock groups. The thing that really kills me is that there is no more guitar solo in a rock song. Every single song - to me - sounds EXACTLY the same regardless of the band. For me, Slash is the last great guitarist. I love a guitarist where you can turn on the radio and INSTANTLY know who's laying down that riff. Mick T, Angus, Slash all come to mind for me for this. The guitar solo is a lost art now, and it made many a classic rock song great.

I think you need to listen to Muse, Matt Bellamy is a fantastic guitarist.

No cultural significance since the '80's? What about grunge, britpop in the 90's. I wasn't old enough then, but I think the 90's had a big effect on music I listen to. i think the internet has played it's part too

No 90's grunge was the last great period of music, I agree, but most of those bands are long gone, or shells of their former greatness. I was never a Pearl Jam fan - or not a big one. To me, Vs. and No Code are their best albums, with a couple of other songs here and there, but otherwise forgettable. Alice in Chains, Nirvana, Soundgarden, STP were all great. But all gone. Sure AIC is still touring, but it's not the same without the volatile Layne Staley, and Soundgarden just got back together within the last year. The album wasn't nearly as good as their prior efforts. Same with STP. The magic is gone I think.

I was never a fan of 90's British pop - assuming you're referring to likes of say Oasis? British pop to me is more like Depeche Mode and Fine Young Cannibals. Love that stuff. Amy Winehouse was great. Picked up Adele's 21 a couple of weeks back - thoroughly disappointed in it. Music today is much more hit or miss. The Black Crowes are carrying on nicely, but they're an older band as well.

I'm talking post-grunge. What has been relevant to last and stand the test of time? Not a whole helluva lot. Jack White I think is good, but I do find a lot of his albums are not as easily accessible - of course I only have one and have listened to others, so maybe I'm just trying to like him more than I really do? Not sure, but he was great on Loving Cup. And he's very talented to be sure. He has some good stuff, but I find a lot of it to be not my cup of tea is all.

It's music, it's all about the songs.

Most groups today can play great but the songwriting skills leave alot to be desired.

Great, another "Today's music sucks and I have the ability to look into the future and nobody in the future will be listening to today's music" thread.

Did you get the damn kids to get off your damn front lawn?

Five acts all still enjoying success, from memory

Foo Fighters
Muse
Radiohead
Green Day
Arcade Fire

Britpop - Don't focus on Oasis, they burned out after two albums, Pulp are great too Also refering bands like the Smiths and Stone Roses, they were around as a precussor to Britpop

Also, Jack White was brillant with the White Stripes

Quote
Jackglfc
Five acts all still enjoying success, from memory

Foo Fighters
Muse
Radiohead
Green Day
Arcade Fire

Britpop - Don't focus on Oasis, they burned out after two albums, Pulp are great too Also refering bands like the Smiths and Stone Roses, they were around as a precussor to Britpop

Also, Jack White was brillant with the White Stripes

Stones Roses burned out after 1 and a half album. Ofcourse their debut is one of the best albums ever, so that might count as 10 great albums.
Out of al the britpop bands, only Primal Scream is still worth checking out (great new album).

The Roses have released two studio album, plus a collection of B sides. The debut album is incredible, how are they supposed to beat that album? The B sides are brillant, just full of songs that weren't good enough for the first album. IMO the second album is pretty good, but drugs kicked in and the band spilt up.

I was lucky enough to see them last year

Rock is now jazz. There's a couple giants left, but they're fading from the scene. There's an encouraging sound here and there for brief moments but few lasting lights. The problem is that the younger generations never put down the electric guitars and went and found their own sound. There may not be a sound to find. Rock and Roll pretty much mined out and incorporated just about every genre of music ever made. The conditions for the rise of rock are sixty years old. Even things like rap and hip hop have already long overstayed their welcome.

I think at some level we're afraid to let the Stones go. Because once they do, there's no giants from our youth. Some of them have already been dead more than 40 years. Change is healthy. And even though we sound like old crabs when we'd bitch about rap, we weren't necessarily wrong. Was Dean Martin supposed to recognize the pure musical genius of Freddie and the Dreamers?