Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

[EWRMETS]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

Considering the 80's was pretty much the era of one-hit wonders, so that's not a compelling argument.

The 50's defined, the 60's refined and the 70's shined.

What's the argument? I didn't say rock of the past two decades is better than those decades.

[DaveDQ]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

This is a great topic to discuss. It's something I often think about. I think the music industry as a whole doesn't produce what past decades have. When you look at bands like Pink Floyd, The Who, The Doors, Rush, Led Zepplin...the list goes on. I just don't see modern bands comparing.

[daflyboys]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

What's the argument? I didn't say rock of the past two decades is better than those decades.

I didn't say you did either.

[Herbsinator]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

I think people need to redefine what the definition of rock and roll is. To me, rock and roll is not about the instruments used and the very specific sound that comes along with genre of "rock." Rock and roll is about an image and an attitude. I think that hip hop music is rock and roll. I also know that some people have started to call electronic music the new rock and roll.

Check this out....
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RldSbAf2Wp4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RldSbAf2Wp4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Ok, it doesn't sound like "rock" (whatever that means), but it sure feels like rock and roll to me. If you ask me, rock and roll is still alive...it just doesn't look or sound anything like it used to.

[buckeyefan78]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

I don't think rock n roll has been representative of youth culture in quite sometime. And really, that has been the purpose of rock music since The Beatles.

It's probably hard to decipher now cuz of all the commercialization it endured but the last "wave" of rock music that really had its pulse on what the young generation was feeling/going thru was probably early 90s stuff (Pearl Jam, Nirvana, Radiohead).

It's tougher today with technology. Everything is so consumable so instantly that it's hard to say what is legit and what isn't. That era of music is the last one to actually "sneak up" on the mainstream music of the time.

[Jon22]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

Rock music is terrible these days, has not been good since the 70's. But what a few people conceive as Rock music is really Metal. People in the 80's considered Hair Metal as rock music. I choose to separate the two.

Metal is in top form this day and age. So many metal festivals across the world making tons of money. It is a fantastic time to be a Heavy Metal fan... new and old.

Here some new Rock for you... Great Video too
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y3Vcoq-QRo4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y3Vcoq-QRo4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Bornindamecca]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

^^^Good post.

I consider the Mars Volta a rock band, and I think they're making good rock music. Other than that, I totally agree.

[ODogg]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

Tool is one of the few bands in existence today that I think will have longevity. I believe their music has deeper meaning than most of the typical rock music you hear today in general.

[chilli311]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

What people keep failing to acknowledge is that there were hundreds upon hundreds of one hit wonders, and garage bands back in the days of Floyd, and the Beatles too. Where are they now? Like someone said earlier, only a few bands will stand the test of time, and they will be remembered for it. There are things to consider that people don't really talk about anymore. Things like:
-When the Beatles came out, the general public fell in love overnight, but fans of the underground despised them. Later, when the Beatles became more experimental, a lot of the public lost that love, but the underground gained a new found respect.
-The Doors were the equivalent of Marilyn Manson in the 60's. They were hated, and boycotted by just as many, if not more.
-The Rolling Stones took a few years to become known in the U.S., and their first U.S. tour was a bomb.
-Pink Floyd was never considered a worldwide success until the mid-70's, despite forming in the mid-60's.

We remember all those bands as some of the pioneers, but the truth is, they had just as much of a struggle to the top as anyone else, but we tend to overlook it based off of their historical value. I'm not trying to discredit them (they were all INCREDIBLE artists), but just trying to enlighten some people who may not have known those little facts.

Today, we don't see the stars that our kids and grandkids will hear about when they are listening to their music, but they are out there. If I had to wager a guess, the bands from the 80's until now that will still be remembered are going to be:
U2
Metallica
Tom Petty (they already play him on the classic rock stations)
Pearl Jam
Weezer
REM

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

Previous eras/decades of music will always get the benefit of the doubt over today's music, especially as the crowd of people debating the topic gets older and older. Its been happening for at least 60 years and it will continue to happen. People tend to forget about the Frankie Avalons of years past and focus on the bands which have aged well over time and have continued on making an impact - even though the bands weren't perceived to be important or even popular in their own day and age. How many music critics and industry scholars were even acknowledging rock n roll as a legit genre of music, much less crowning Elvis, Chuck or Little Richard as the pioneers and king of rock. Its hard to honestly say the 50s were the best period of music etc when the best music was barely acknowledged by people that weren't teenagers. The industry and ASCAP was too busy pushing Pat Boone's "covers" and orchestrating the "payola" scandal to be even be thinking about how important Bo Diddley and Muddy Waters would be 50 years from then.

Each era is like this, though. My history of rock instructor last semester kept emphasizing that the most popular music isn't always the most important and that rings true for every decade. The first half of the sixties had Dick Clark's music assembly line and the British pop music stuff before getting into Dylan, folk-pop, psychadelic etc in the last half of the decade. Etc etc etc.

The term important is different for everybody though. I don't think there will be a band that will change the way people play or listen to music, which is perfectly fine by me. There's a ton of different styles and sounds out there that people expose themselves too, so I think its becoming harder and harder to come up with something truly "new" or "original." I don't think this is a problem. Blues and country have been mining the same instrumentation and laments for God knows how long and they're still alive and kicking.

Nickelback won't be remembered 10 years from now. People have already forgotten about Creed, so I don't think Nickelback stands a chance of being remembered once they finally quit. The thing about today's music scene is, that it has become insanely difficult to make it "big" with all the different ways music is delivered today. It seems like you're either an overnight sensation or you're not and a lot of the good music isn't an overnight sensation. There are a lot of bands that have been playing for 5-10 years which have barely reach the surface of the indie industry, much less garnering recognition from the Grammys and the rest of the mainstream.

[The GIGGAS]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

Today, we don't see the stars that our kids and grandkids will hear about when they are listening to their music, but they are out there. If I had to wager a guess, the bands from the 80's until now that will still be remembered are going to be:
Weezer

Hell yeah! Weezer pwns.

[chilli311]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

Previous eras/decades of music will always get the benefit of the doubt over today's music, especially as the crowd of people debating the topic gets older and older. Its been happening for at least 60 years and it will continue to happen. People tend to forget about the Frankie Avalons of years past and focus on the bands which have aged well over time and have continued on making an impact - even though the bands weren't perceived to be important or even popular in their own day and age. How many music critics and industry scholars were even acknowledging rock n roll as a legit genre of music, much less crowning Elvis, Chuck or Little Richard as the pioneers and king of rock. Its hard to honestly say the 50s were the best period of music etc when the best music was barely acknowledged by people that weren't teenagers. The industry and ASCAP was too busy pushing Pat Boone's "covers" and orchestrating the "payola" scandal to be even be thinking about how important Bo Diddley and Muddy Waters would be 50 years from then.

Each era is like this, though. My history of rock instructor last semester kept emphasizing that the most popular music isn't always the most important and that rings true for every decade. The first half of the sixties had Dick Clark's music assembly line and the British pop music stuff before getting into Dylan, folk-pop, psychadelic etc in the last half of the decade. Etc etc etc.

The term important is different for everybody though. I don't think there will be a band that will change the way people play or listen to music, which is perfectly fine by me. There's a ton of different styles and sounds out there that people expose themselves too, so I think its becoming harder and harder to come up with something truly "new" or "original." I don't think this is a problem. Blues and country have been mining the same instrumentation and laments for God knows how long and they're still alive and kicking.

Nickelback won't be remembered 10 years from now. People have already forgotten about Creed, so I don't think Nickelback stands a chance of being remembered once they finally quit. The thing about today's music scene is, that it has become insanely difficult to make it "big" with all the different ways music is delivered today. It seems like you're either an overnight sensation or you're not and a lot of the good music isn't an overnight sensation. There are a lot of bands that have been playing for 5-10 years which have barely reach the surface of the indie industry, much less garnering recognition from the Grammys and the rest of the mainstream.

Exactly. You summed up what I was trying to say perfectly. Music is a constantly changing monster, and you never know what is going to be the next big thing. The only thing that is important is that the music is being created.

[SPTO]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

I find that popular music in all aspects, not just rock doesn't have the same kidn of potency that the stuff from 30-40 years ago. I also think the era of the 60's to early 70's was unique as it was a confluence of events that shaped people's creativity and such.

Today's music is very prefabricated right down to the image that most of the singers portray themselves in. Now that's not to say that there isn't important or relevent music being made but it's so far buried beneath the pop music scene that you have to dig very deep just to find it. I also think the ratio of very talented singers/songwriters to crappy ones is far far greater now then it was in the past as even some of the novelty acts back then actually had some talent. A lot of what passes for talent these days wouldn't get you through the door of some record companies back in the day.

That's just my opinion and I could be way off but i'm sticking to it.

[Maxattax3]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

95% of the "music" that comes on the radio is garbage. "Got to find the hottie with the million dollar body"....these are lyrics to a new "rock" song.
think about the younger generation who is force fed this stuff...

this is not music. this is not music. this is crap designed in a lab by researchers that specialize in mass-appeal. designed to be used in short clips to sell things...I hate everyone.

[bgeno]

Re: Is today's rock as important as yesterdays?

this is not music. this is not music. this is crap designed in a lab by researchers that specialize in mass-appeal. designed to be used in short clips to sell things...I hate everyone.

hahahahahaha... I agree with the quote (well, I think it's music... just not very good music), but I just think that last part is hilarious.