Is rock and roll dead?!

[dasceder]

Insipid boy/girl bands have been around since creation; their existance shouldn't be an indicator of rock's viability.

That said, I'll make two brief points befoe tossing this to the masses:

1) What are the kids listening to? When I was 15 I listened to the Who, Zep, and REM. Kids sure as $*%# aren't listening to that now. It's hip-hop, no question.

2) What was the last "great" rock album? I'd say "Nevermind," and that was 10 #$%& years ago!

My fears are that r'n'r is dead and hip hop (or some new genre which has yet to make itself known) is dethrowning it.

Any thoughts?

[ZipperJJ]

I have a thought that this thread will be moved promptly...

However, I'll give my opinion on this.

Just because a great rock 'n roll album hasn't been #1 in the last 10 years, doesn't mean there haven't been any made.

And it doesn't mean that "insipid boy/girl bands" are bad just because you don't appreciate them. To people who grew up before 1964, The Beatles were pretty insipid themselves.

Disclaimer: Just because I stuck up for N'Britney doesn't mean I like them!

[jaimest]

Rock works in cycles. Rock explodes, gets tamed into pop-rock, dillutes into pure ear candy, almost completely dies out, and reignites all over again...every 11 or 12 years.
So I would wait 3 or 4 more years - and if rock doesn't ressucitate - it can be pronounced dead.

[dasceder]

I bet that's what jazz artists said about their genre in 1965, and look what happened. Christ, jazz was GIGANTIC in 1958 and it was eclipsed in the blink of an eye.

Don't dismiss thuis topic because you think it belongs in IMHO. My point isn't only that nothing worthwhile has come in the last 10 years (save Wilco, etc) but that kids jst dont' listen to it anymore.

[Tedster]

So many definitions- some people believe that Rock and Roll would be something like Jerry Lee Lewis, Bill Haley and the Comets, stuff like that.

Led Zeppelin wouldn't qualify. 'Zep is pretty mellow, actually, even from the "heavy metal" standpoint of naming music rock and roll...

One of the few things that people agree on, maybe, is what Rock and Roll isn't, such as the "Disco Sucks" phenomenon, sort of a "your enemy is my enemy too" philosophy brought to fruition.

[Qwertyasdfg]

I'm 16 and listen to a lot of "Classic Rock" ie: Jimi Hendrix, Led Zepplin, the Beatles, etc. I also like classical and hip hop music.

The only 2 contemporary bands I like (both of which are gone now) are Sublime and Rage Against the Machine. All the rest of modern rock is crap.

I think the best rock album ever was "Are You Experienced?" by Jimi Hendrix. Just about every song on that album is pure rock and roll perfection.

[Duck Duck Goose]

By my actual count, rock has been dead many times--in the early 70s, in the mid-70s, in the early 80s, in the mid-80s, in the late 80s, in the mid 90s, and now.

[discombobulator]

I'm going to agree with Qwertyasdfg. While I'm a huge fan of Rage Against The Machine, and Sublime, and i can't seem to get enough of Hip Hop, I also find myself COMPLETELY devoted to "oldies". Anything that's behind my time is my kind of music, and I find that all of my favorite CDs are actually records. Some (Don Mclean) say the music died, but me? I "Still like that old time of Rock 'n' Roll" (Well that was a failed attempt at humour)

[bibliophage]

This will make a fine addition to the new Cafe Society forum.

bibliophage
moderator, GQ

[dragonfly98]

Rock and Roll died a horrible death in the mid-1980's unbeknownst to its most die hard adherents. It died a prolonged, painful yet unnecessary death mainly due to the poisoning of the well by most "mainstream" bands of that era. Metallica almost pumped some life back into it, maybe even revived it for a short period, but after the abrupt and massive failure of the "flying by the seat of your pants" grunge period, rock 'n roll was buried quietly in the backyard of most it's enthusiasts.

[Wumpus]

"Rock and roll achieved perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact!" - Homer J Simpson.

The kids, as always, listen to all sorts of things. It was like that Back in the Day, too. Don't forget that the heyday of the Who and Led Zeppelin was also the heyday of Al Green and Barry White and Elton John and Cat Stevens and America and Neal Diamond. Rock has receded in the musical mix in the last 10 years, but it was never the only game in town.

As for the last great rock album....Radiohead's THE BENDS was recently voted the best rock album of the 1990s. (I forget the source, it was during the end-of-the-millenium deluge of lists.) I personally would vote for it over NEVERMIND.

Rock and roll will never die. However, like swing and the blues and "old-timey" music and show tunes and every other form of popular music before it, it will eventually become a cult music beloved by an aging audience and a handful of new fans and record collectors. It's not a bad way to go, really. Just accept it as part of the Circle of Life, Kimba.

(Nitpick: I would disagree that jazz was "gigantic" in '58. It was fairly successful, but it's not like it was the major, or even *a* major component of record company sales at the time--Miles Davis didn't make the Billboard charts till 1962. What jazz did have was a cetain cachet, due to things like Newport and Hugh Hefner. Its popularity with the masses actually peaked in the early 60s, with "My Favorite Things," Stan Getz and soul jazz. Then the college crowds that had supported jazz decided to listen to Dylan and the Beatles instead. The resulting collapse was catastrophic to jazz, but it was a small genre getting smaller, not the collapse of the predominent genre of its day.)

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

It really depends on how you define rock. I think a case can be made for the statement that hip hop is just another form of rock anyway.

In any case, RHCP's Californication kicked butt all over Nirvana's Nevermind album, and this was made about three years ago. RHCP make music that's a mix of many genres, but rock's definitely in there. And in Canada, people still go nuts for the Tragically Hip. They're a rock band in most senses of the term.

[mangeorge]

Because the OP is asking about contemporary (top 40) music, I looked here;
http://www.rockonthenet.com/charts/arc.htm
Problem is, I'm not sure what's rock and what's not.
Al least it's not all hip hop.
I can listen to some hip hop.
Peace,
mangeorge

[Wumpus]

The Billboard album charts can be found here:

http://www.billboard.com/billboard/charts/bb200.jsp

(The really amazing thing is that the Isley Brothers have staged *yet another* comeback.)

[HP Ellison]

I'd say rock'n'roll as we know it is dead. Honest to god, you listen to "modern rock", and the smell of that bludgeoned dead horse almost makes you gag. However, the idea behind rock seems to be living on. Bands are still shaking things up; it's just that guitars aren't necessarily used anymore. Good thing, too, in my opinion, because anymore guitars seem to be little more than a crutch for many bands to lean on. I'd go so far as to say that Kid A was a true rock album in terms of the underlying idea behind it. But if you're going for the usual definition of rock, Radiohead's The Bends was a great rock album. That came out in ninety five, didn't it? Also, take a look at the Dandy Warhols. Their new album, Ten Tales of Suburban Bohemia, is very rock, and simply incredible. They're definitely a band to keep your collective eyes on.

[Acco40]

Rock 'n roll is not dead. It is simply hibernating. It will never be the same again though.

Each time rock is resurrected, it has a different feel to it.

When people talk about "rock 'n roll" and "hip-hop" I have no fuckin' clue at all what they are talking about.

In fact, the classification of music is largely flawed. The brush it paints with is too wide.

I mean the new Gorillaz album... is that hip-hop, rock, what???? It's neither... it's Gorillaz.

And really, what's the point of classification anyway (other than from a marketing standpoint)?

I would argue that the success of rock 'n roll songs will never fade... rock 'n roll artists will.

The music tastes of the public are too varied to force one type of music down their throat for any span of time.

[horhay_achoa]

How 'bout the Black Crowes? They are still chuggin. I do think the quality of their material has gone down hill since "Amorica", but they are still a rock and roll band. The tour with Jimmy Page was fucking sweet!
In general though I think r'n'r will live on. In fact, some might argue that it is still going with bands like Limp Bizquit, and Train and those other pop rock bands, but I would not consider them rock and roll.

[Zanshin]

Hey, like everything else, musical styles are cyclical. Every hot new style is a reaction (and usually a radical departure) from the last hot style. For example, the current boy-band bubblegum phase is a reaction to the angry alternative music of the nineties, which was a reaction to the happy new-age music and hair-band rock of the eighties. So all we have to do is wait a couple of years and rock'll be back. In the meantime, I'll console myself with my SRV, ZZ Top, Kenny Wayne Shepherd, Black Crowes (go horhay!) and Los Lobos albums till the pendulum swings back the other way. (I tell ya, though, I'll be so happy when bands start using guitars to actually create MUSIC instead of just a chunga-chung chord every now and again to punctuate a rap beat.)

[RickJay]

Originally posted by dasceder

2) What was the last "great" rock album? I'd say "Nevermind," and that was 10 #$%& years ago!

Why does everyone think Nevermind was so good? I thought it sucked.

Moby's "Play" comes to mind. It's not traditional "rock" but it's good stuff - cutting edge music, different from what came before, which is what rock music is REALLY about. Pearl Jam's made some great stuff, as has U2. The Tragically Hip made "Day for Night" in 1994 and "Phantom Power" in 1998, both classic rock albums. PJ Harvey has made some outstanding stuff. The Red Hot Chili Peppers are as good a rock band as there is - I think someone's already mentioned "Californication." Cracker has done some great work, and "Low" remains one of the greatest rock and roll songs of all time. Radiohead is great.

[plnnr]

As long as there is some kid who's pissed at the parents, ticked off by society, or just plain anxious to impress members of the opposite sex there will be rock and roll. Its not about music - its about attitude.

[Acco40]

Originally posted by Rickjay:

Why does everyone think Nevermind was so good? I thought it sucked.

Nevermind didn't suck per se, but I don't for the life of me know why it gets so much glory. I can't think of more than two songs on it.

That's the kind of fame suicide can bring, I guess.

[Tabeitha]

Rock and Roll is not dead by a long shot. I love classic rock and although new rock has a different sound it's still alive. I can't stand Nirvana and don't consider grunge good rock and roll but that's my taste. What about Godsmack? They've put out two really good albums in the last few years. I saw these guys open for Black Sabbith a few summers ago. They kick ass live. I've actually gone to see them all 10 times they've played in my area, bought both their albums and anticipate the next one. The RHCP have been a great band now for over 10 years and still going strong. Gotta love Flea with his funky bass rifts. Stained-SP? has a few good songs out but I’m not to hopeful for them. But then again what do I know.

[The_Peyote_Coyote]

It's not dead, it just smells funny.

[Sea Sorbust]

I not sure that it's "rock", but I can't imagine that "Echoes", the entire flip side of Pink Floyd's album Meddle can (--not "will"--) ever die.

There's hardly a word in the whole 20 or so minutes, so maybe it shouldn't be called "rock"; but I've listened to it many, many times (but not for a couple of years) and still find it an almost mystical experience.

If Meddle (and "Echoes") is Rock and Roll, then Rock and Roll will NEVER die.

[freesok]

[quote]Originally posted by dasceder
[



2) What was the last "great" rock album? I'd say "Nevermind," and that was 10 #$%& years ago!


If that Nirvana crap is what counts as a great album,i would say rock has been dead for a while.

[AHunter3]

dasceder:

What was the last "great" rock album? I'd say "Nevermind," and that was 10 #$%& years ago!

Get your hands on some Julieta Venegas. Rock as good as you can roll it. Rock ain't dead.

Be that as it may, I think rock now occupies the same kind of niche status as folk or jazz--it has and will probably always have its following (and I'll be listening to it from my rocking chair when I'm 110), but its days of being THE music is over.

[mangeorge]

Well, there is the Rollins Band.
I saw an interview with Henry Rollins on 'Behind the Music', and was impressed. Maybe because they are, uh, different.
I'll probably check 'em out live if they pass this way.
Peace,
mangeorge

[red_dragon60]

More Rage fans!


I think that RATM was the last band to actually put passion and emotion into their songs. Listen to Wake Up (off of self-titled) and then listen to the crap like Saliva or Linkin Park. There is no passion in the new stuff. You can sing (or scream) the words, but there has to be meaning behind them. If the band doesn't feel the song, you can hear it. It is music, not music. There is something intensely sublime about Rage's music. It's not just the words, but the catharsis of emotion that is in every song.

New "rock" can't grasp that.

[xanadu]

I think that what passes for rock music these days is so pathetic that most people would agree that bringing back disco would be an improvement. I'm 19, and I don't really listen to any of those "teen pop" acts. I usually listen to artists or bands that have been around a while and have consistently put out good albums - U2, The Rolling Stones, Genesis, etc. Granted, I like happy pop music as much as the next girl, but I'd like to see some substance to it. As for the question - "Is Rock dead?" - I think that teen pop music has been around in its current form too long for us to call it a trend. I think that when everything's said and done, the artists with substance will still be around, and Miami, Florida will be proud to call themselves the only town with an entire boy band employed at their McDonalds. Maybe N'SYNC can make themselves useful by singing "would you like fries with that" a capella.

[elfkin477]

Originally posted by red_dragon60
More Rage fans!


I think that RATM was the last band to actually put passion and emotion into their songs. Listen to Wake Up (off of self-titled) and then listen to the crap like Saliva or Linkin Park. There is no passion in the new stuff. You can sing (or scream) the words, but there has to be meaning behind them. If the band doesn't feel the song, you can hear it. It is music, not music. There is something intensely sublime about Rage's music.

You know, I've always disliked Rage because the singer screams/screeches in what seems to me to be a dispassionate manner, therefore the songs all sound similar and meaningless(to me). However, I absolutely love Linkin Park and would say about them what you said about Rage, except I'd add something about being in awe of their ablity to harmonize which is rare in the hardcore scene... different strokes for different folks, I guess.


Rock isn't dead, it metamorphized into Alternative.

[Forbin]

Yes,it's dead.

[warmgun]

I am so disapointed in this thread.
Do you people really not understand that what the youth of this country holds dear is told them by the powers that be in music. Hell no, rock is not dead. It's just that the bean counters at the major labels have found it's much cheaper to churn out Rap than it is an 'Axis - Bold As Love' or even ' Mean Streets' . It's the Emperors New Clothes. Or think fashion - What Tommy H. tells us is cool, is cool.
Rock and Roll is far from dead, but if you are a great (unknown) band, how do you get the millions needed to promote yourself in the style of the major labels?
Sadly, music (and musical style) is a product. And it doesn't matter what it is, like Microsoft, If you throw enough money at it in advertising, folks will buy it.
And let's not forget that bottom line. I can set here all day and night and debate what is good rock but the people spending the most $ on CDs are the young, impressionable, angry youth.
Ah...demographics...

[Living Dead Girl]

Rock isn't dead - it just isn't what teenyboppers are going crazy about anymore. There are great new rock bands coming out every year, they're just not hitting the top 40. It doesn't mean they don't exist.

And there are some that are still topping the charts. Radiohead, I believe, has been mentioned - and what about harder rock bands, like Tool? They still have a large following, and they are far from hip-hop. What about Hole? Would just call PJ Harvey rock? I'm really confused on what's being classified as rock here, actually, as many bands I formerly classified as so are still popular. But, I may have a broader idea on rock than most.

Another thing that's confusing me - "the kids" aren't listening to that nowadays? I'm a teen, and I love REM - but I detest hip-hop, rap, and sugar-coated pop. Hip-hop is just the popular genre at the moment, but it doesn't mean the others don't exist. Because the teen majority listens to the same thing, it doesn't mean ALL of them do - some of us still pick our music on taste, not by what our friends are currently listening to.

[bibliophage]

Now that I have time to do more than just move the thread . . .

As a matter of fact, I was thinking of starting a thread a few months ago about how Rock is back from the dead. For many years there was very little good new Rock. But I noticed an improvement starting about five years ago, and I think it has been quite pronounced in two years or so. I like both the new acts and the new stuff from the old farts. A few examples of each:

• Good (relatively) new acts
  Black Crowes
  Kenny Wayne Shepherd Band
  Goo Goo Dolls (but they've been around longer than I realized)
  
  (relative) Old Farts with good new material
  Stevie Nicks
  Jon Bon Jovi
  Sammy Hagar
  Aerosmith

Now the good stuff doesn't outsell the Boys 'n the Britney crap, but that doesn't mean there isn't any good stuff out there. If you want to hear the good new stuff, you have to find a radio station that sticks to playing good music for the sake of playing good music, and not ones that plays new music for the sake of playing new music.

[mangeorge]

There's a good idea for a new thread, bibliophage.
I'll start one. I hope this is the right forum.
Peace,
mangeorge

[G. Nome]

Rock's not dead - it's just old. Rock and Roll and the formula which gives expression to it (guitars, drums, singer) came into being before the moon landing, personal computers, postmodernism and cultural relativity, feminism and probably 50% of scientific discoveries. Rock music has been a big part of my life and I will love it until I die but even to my ears the beat is beginning to sound old fashioned alongside house and hip hop. It still sounds so great but, at the same time, in some way, it sounds dated.

[woodstockbirdybird]

No, rock isn't dead. You guys are making the mistake of assuming that just because "rock" songs aren't number one on the charts rock is irrelevant ( and in my opinion, the "rock" songs that have been on the charts for the past decade have been crap anyway - "alternative" rock is as big a sham as boy bands). But I guarantee you that in garages all over the world teenagers with chips on their shoulders are plugging into their amps and banging out three chords same as it ever was. Check out the smaller local clubs in your area - lots of guitar bands, not many teenybopper vocal groups to be found. I think most people are content to let the radio or MTV dictate to them what is "great" or "important" music, and - surprise! - 99% of the time they're wrong. If you're that into rock music, it's easy enough to find if you're willing to do some work.
Having said that, I'd also agree with the comments made that hip hop and electronic music can be seen as rock music themselves - a big beat and outraging parents have long been part of the rock tradition. Even if your idea of rock is a bunch of long-haired white guys playing variations on boring old 12-bar themes or recycling tired old Sabbath riffs and "shocking" lyrical content, there are still plenty of bands around to supply you with your fix, as has been mentioned in this thread already (the Black Crowes, Metallica and MarilynMansonBizkitSlipknot are still around, near as I can tell). If you can overcome your conservative/luddite-like preconceptions of what rock is, you might even find some stuff you enjoy in the stuff that's played on the radio. Just my opinion (wrong forum, I know).

[Crusoe]

This interests me. What is 'rock' and why is it perceived to be the only alternative to 'chart' music?

To me,'rock' is guitar-based, largely (but not exclusively) up-tempo music. It's not alternative or chart music exclusively, but can be either (Meatloaf? Aerosmith? Oasis? Where's the indie/chart line drawn?).

As several posters have mentioned, just because 'rock' is not apparently storming the charts, that does not mean 'the kids' are stuck with teeny bands. 'Rock' is no more or less valid a genre than big beat, hip hop, drum and bass, R&B, country, folk or any other.

So what is 'rock', and why is it more 'important' than any other genre?

[Rock-n-Rolga]

'kin 'ell! Where is Black455 when ya need him?
Allow me to step into the void and introduce you to some current, honest to goodness RAWK-N-ROWL bands that are making albums RIGHT NOW!
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you:

The Hellacopters
Backyard Babies
Silver Ginger 5
Murder City Devils
Gluecifer
Electric Frankenstein
Place of Skulls
Spiritual Beggars
Quadrajets
the Yo-Yos
The Flaming Sideburns

And people who dismiss the above bands as being unworthy of a listen simply because they're not on a major label are invited to apply their lips to my leatherclad posterior. Liberally. And with great skill. I mean, fuck a bunch of top 40 shit. Rock-n-Roll can't be dead on the charts anyway because it never really lived there in the first place. Hail to the Independents!

Still weeping over the demise of Man's Ruin Records,
R-n-R

[okielady]

No, it's not dead, it just re-invents itself every 10-12 years (as jaimest stated earlier.) When I was a teenager, the rock world was in the midst of the 80s hair bands. Those are still my favorites, and many of them are releasing new stuff. I was so happy when Tesla did a reunion tour that I nearly cried!

I did't embrace the grunge era when its turn rolled around, although looking back I realize that I listened to and enjoyed more of it than I was aware of at the time. I went through a country phase for a while then into top 40 and eventually into a rap and R&B phase. Then it was back into top 40 and whatever was on MTV/VH-1 (mostly VH-1, since MTV rarely plays videos anymore.)

Now I'm back into the rock scene and I love it. Godsmack, Staind, Tool, Nickelback, Seven Mary Three, Saliva, Three Doors Down, Disturbed...Love 'em all and more.

Having said that, I will add that in addition to my 80s hair band and "modern" rock CDs, I also have Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Ozzy, Skynyrd (yes, Skynyrd I'll admit it...The Eagles, too. ) etc. I love the rock sound and the way it's transformed throughout the years. I can find many more things that I like about each incarnation than things I don't like.

Nope, not dead. Still alive and kicking. And I think it always will be. Just because little of it hits the top 40 doesn't mean it's not around.

[Typo Negative]

Originally posted by dasceder
2) What was the last "great" rock album?

Hedwig and the Angry Inch soundtrack!

[dragonfly98]

For those of us rock "purists" who grew up on Beatles, Rolling Stones and Jefferson Airplane, rock is very dead. i'm talking about music based on rhythm and blues and 12-bar delta blues, as most of the early rock was indeed based. Just because a band has a wannabe acid-rock name, has boatloads of insincere screaming vocals, alot of synthtetic noise disguised as clever guitar work, and wierdos disguised as serious muscians, does not mean that what they play and/or foist upon the unsuspecting public is even rock, has a message or is anything more than a passing fad. And yes, what #%@^*& Alternative music are you talking about? That was just more insubstantial noise that polluted our airwaves not so long ago, courtesy of the music industry. Noise with a catchy label and nothing more.

[Hodge]

Originally posted by dragonfly98
For those of us rock "purists" who grew up on Beatles, Rolling Stones and Jefferson Airplane, rock is very dead. i'm talking about music based on rhythm and blues and 12-bar delta blues, as most of the early rock was indeed based.

Two Words:

BIG SUGAR

Hodge

[mangeorge]

Dave Mathews.
Susan Tedeschi. (Sometimes wanders into rock.)
Pete Yorn.
Cracker.
There are more.
Whaddya want, man? Quit complaining and listen.
Peace,
mangeorge

[Kyomara]

Originally posted by dragonfly98
For those of us rock "purists" who grew up on Beatles, Rolling Stones and Jefferson Airplane, rock is very dead.

Sounds to me like you're the one who's dead, grandpa.

Don't believe everything you hear on the radio. As Woodstockbirdybird so eloquently put it, there is plenty of good rock 'n' roll out there if you're willing to look. And if you're not an old fart with his head up his ass.

[dragonfly98]

Originally posted by Kyomara

>>>>Sounds to me like you're the one who's dead.<<<<

Wrong sissyboy. How else could i write this response, hmmmm?

>>>>Don't believe everything you hear on the radio.<<<<

Wrong again you-know-what-for-brains. i don't listen to that much radio anyway, or cable TV, perhaps that could explain your confusion. What ever gave you that idea?


>>>>As Woodstockbirdybird so eloquently put it, there is plenty of good rock 'n' roll out there if you're willing to look.<<<<

Wrong again Butterballs! i think what you mean is if i'm willing to pay for it. And on top of that i disagree with the gist of what you're saying. You say there's still rock and roll to be had out there? i say show me the kwon.

[toshirodragon]

Purists? Sounds like a eugenics argument...
Frankly,and I know I shall never be allowed back in here again for this, I think the Beatles suck ditch water. Twist and Shout was their ONLY imaginative song period. My CD collection probably looks a lot like okielady's little bit of everything (but Beatles)and I am pleased that I enjoy new stuff as well as music that was OLD when I was born in '65. So I have everything from 50s blues to Fuel....

[Rock-n-Rolga]

Originally posted by dragonfly98
For those of us rock "purists" who grew up on Beatles, Rolling Stones and Jefferson Airplane, rock is very dead. i'm talking about music based on rhythm and blues and 12-bar delta blues, as most of the early rock was indeed based. Just because a band has a wannabe acid-rock name, has boatloads of insincere screaming vocals, alot of synthtetic noise disguised as clever guitar work, and wierdos disguised as serious muscians, does not mean that what they play and/or foist upon the unsuspecting public is even rock, has a message or is anything more than a passing fad.

You've never listened to a single band I mentioned in my post, have you? It's obvious you just looked at the names and assumed like mad. Oh, and real "rock purists" would have listed the MC5 and Radio Birdman, too. But wait, have you even heard them either?

P.S. On a "wet blanket" note: last I checked, we save namecalling for the Pit. Ok? Ok.

[dragonfly98]

toshirodragon : i disagree. The Beatles were much more than just another flash in the pan rock act. They added scope and creativity to rock and roll, and thusly energized it, widened its horizons if you will.


Rock-n-Rolga: i still don't grasp the gist of what you're saying here. Still, i will answer your questions as stated.

>>>You've never listened to a single band I mentioned in my post, have you?<<<

Prolly not. Like i said before what does it matter?

>>>It's obvious you just looked at the names and assumed like mad.<<<

Exactly. Want to know the reason why? i, like so many others, just sat there in mock amusement/extreme horror as The Rolling Stones and even Black Sabbath just burned out after a few good ablums. Todays bands, though i admit that many of them do sound like they have talent and extreme potential, just aren't able to fill the bill. One exception does come to mind though... Green Day.

>>>Oh, and real "rock purists" would have listed the MC5 and Radio Birdman, too. But wait, have you even heard them either?<<<

Yes i have heard of MC5. And i have heard of the Dave Clark Five, The Monkees and Paul Revere and the Raiders as well. What's your point?? Seems to me like you are bending over backwards to prove something that just isn't possible or even true, namely that rock and roll is still fresh and pure as it was during its inception, and not the 3 ring circus freak show that it obviously is today.

[Rock-n-Rolga]

Originally posted by dragonfly98

Rock-n-Rolga: i still don't grasp the gist of what you're saying here. Still, i will answer your questions as stated.

>>>You've never listened to a single band I mentioned in my post, have you?<<<

Prolly not. Like i said before what does it matter?

>>>It's obvious you just looked at the names and assumed like mad.<<<

Exactly. Want to know the reason why? i, like so many others, just sat there in mock amusement/extreme horror as The Rolling Stones and even Black Sabbath just burned out after a few good ablums. Todays bands, though i admit that many of them do sound like they have talent and extreme potential, just aren't able to fill the bill. One exception does come to mind though... Green Day.

>>>Oh, and real "rock purists" would have listed the MC5 and Radio Birdman, too. But wait, have you even heard them either?<<<

Yes i have heard of MC5. And i have heard of the Dave Clark Five, The Monkees and Paul Revere and the Raiders as well. What's your point?? Seems to me like you are bending over backwards to prove something that just isn't possible or even true, namely that rock and roll is still fresh and pure as it was during its inception, and not the 3 ring circus freak show that it obviously is today.

And it sounds like you're all too glad to display an awful lot of ignorance about the state of Rock-n-Roll today. Honestly, if you have to ask "What does it matter?" then you're displaying a disappointing amount of intolerance. I have zero patience for that, especially when it comes to giving bands a chance. If you're gonna publicly dismiss my opinion/advice wholesale, you'll have to do a lot better than covering your ears and shouting "I don't wanna! Lalalala I can't hear yoouuuu!"
What have you got to lose by checking a few of them out? I'll tell ya what: nothing. Those bands I mentioned had NO synthesized anything, no screaming, no insincerity, no "weirdos" - just pure rock that's true to its roots. Now you show me "the kwon"!

By the way, I didn't say have you heard of those bands, I said have you heard them. One preposition makes a big difference, no? Please don't twist or flat out dismiss my words like that. Thanks.

P.S. Bending over backwards? Sheeit, honey, I can't even see the ceiling yet!