July 9, 201115 yr I as well am a pretty big Radiohead fan and one thing I really liked about the 90's, specifically early 90's was the re emergence of psychedelic music. Bands like Primus, Radiohead, Tool, among others had a lot of 60's psychedelic influence in it, but was also meshed with other genres as well and I just loved the result. Personally I consider a band like Tool a modern day Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd. It is my opinion that the closest thing my generation has to having a band like that would be Tool, just the musicianship, the musical pieces they construct, just the entire style of the band. To me Tool is like a modern day (harder more 90's version) Led Zep or Floyd. From the 10 minute songs to the stage show. Other than that I do not see a Black Sabbath in today's music. I do not see a Rolling Stones. I do not see a Jimi Hendrix Experience. All these ground breaking bands, its as if most bands in today's music can't get on that level. I don't know what to tell you. There's lots of good music out there, you just have to look for it. Cross-promotional marketing and multi-platform entertainment (which the industry loves) are designed to get viewers for TV and movies as well as sell records. That means lots and lots of pop music. So your gripe shouldn't necessarily be with musicians, who I promise you are out there making new, excellent, inventive music, but with all the people in America listening to music that you don't like.
July 9, 201115 yr As I've said before, I'll take the ten years between 1964 and 1973; and you all can have the rest.
July 9, 201115 yr I don't know what to tell you. There's lots of good music out there, you just have to look for it. Cross-promotional marketing and multi-platform entertainment (which the industry loves) are designed to get viewers for TV and movies as well as sell records. That means lots and lots of pop music. So your gripe shouldn't necessarily be with musicians, who I promise you are out there making new, excellent, inventive music, but with all the people in America listening to music that you don't like. I know there is good music out there, but no bands who will grow to be legendary. You don't want to get into Independent label stuff because I probably know more of that music than anyone on the board, that is about the only place to find good music anymore IMO. No matter how you turn it, music just isn't what it used to be.
July 9, 201115 yr I know there is good music out there, but no bands who will grow to be legendary. You don't want to get into Independent label stuff because I probably know more of that music than anyone on the board, that is about the only place to find good music anymore IMO. No matter how you turn it, music just isn't what it used to be. I'll agree with your last statement with a minor edit: "... music [business] just isn't what it used to be." I reject the notion that the music of today is not as "good" as the music of 40 years ago. The way it is marketed and distributed is certainly different and done in such a way that popular music appeals only to the "lowest common denominator" for lack of a better term. The best way I heard it described to me is like this: 40 years ago media was universal and airplay on only a few media outlets was possible. So on one channel of TV you maybe had the Partridge Family, The Osmonds was on another but you could turn on the radio and hear at least some rock music, maybe some soul or Motown stuff but that was about it. Now, the media conglomerates that control TV and record labels have figured out that if they pump all their marketing resources into JUST the Partridge Family or JUST the Osmonds, then they can make just as much money as diversifying their product because they'll still sell as much but without the effort of having to deal with other groups. So all the money and resources a record label had to dump into finding, signing and marketing rock groups, pop acts, family acts, soul groups and classical performers, they now dump into a single product and push it as hard as they can because they can make just as much money with a lot less effort. Look no further than Disney. If you have kids or know people with kids, it took no time at all to realize just how pervasive "High School Musical" was a few years ago and I thought that thing was terrible. But Disney designed a TV movie, DVD sales, album sales and a licensing campaign off of it. Why would anyone want to bother with wrangling rock stars when you can make gobs of money doing this?
July 9, 201115 yr I'll agree with your last statement with a minor edit: "... music [business] just isn't what it used to be." I reject the notion that the music of today is not as "good" as the music of 40 years ago. The way it is marketed and distributed is certainly different and done in such a way that popular music appeals only to the "lowest common denominator" for lack of a better term. The best way I heard it described to me is like this: 40 years ago media was universal and airplay on only a few media outlets was possible. So on one channel of TV you maybe had the Partridge Family, The Osmonds was on another but you could turn on the radio and hear at least some rock music, maybe some soul or Motown stuff but that was about it. Now, the media conglomerates that control TV and record labels have figured out that if they pump all their marketing resources into JUST the Partridge Family or JUST the Osmonds, then they can make just as much money as diversifying their product because they'll still sell as much but without the effort of having to deal with other groups. So all the money and resources a record label had to dump into finding, signing and marketing rock groups, pop acts, family acts, soul groups and classical performers, they now dump into a single product and push it as hard as they can because they can make just as much money with a lot less effort. Look no further than Disney. If you have kids or know people with kids, it took no time at all to realize just how pervasive "High School Musical" was a few years ago and I thought that thing was terrible. But Disney designed a TV movie, DVD sales, album sales and a licensing campaign off of it. Why would anyone want to bother with wrangling rock stars when you can make gobs of money doing this? I agree with that 100% Not disagreeing with your notions at all. I like your opinion on the issue. I guess what I am trying to say is half of what I've said so far, and half of what you've said so far, but I had been missing a key piece of my argument. I guess what I've been trying to get at is there is good music out there now, although to find it sometimes you have to go through numerous independent channels or underground markets to discover it or what not. Seems like once bands do make it out into the open commercial market they are never the same. So in turn what I have been trying to say is you still have these awesome bands, that are out there and who do exist in today's music scene, BUT, they will never reach the level of all of the great bands back in the day because for most of them to be good they have to stay out of all the commercialism of the industry. Look no further than Pearl Jam as a band who goes past extremes to try to drive that home. Like not using ticketmaster for ticket distribution. Plenty of people know Nickelback, and all these trash radio rock metal bands, but few people know about metal bands such as DOWN (which is actually a metal super group) who as far as quality of the band goes is 100x better than anything that most people will ever hear about. So I guess what I have been trying to say is good music is still out there, but most of these bands will never get big enough to carry as much of an important role through history as the Zeppelins, and Sabbath's.
July 10, 201115 yr I agree with that 100% Not disagreeing with your notions at all. I like your opinion on the issue. I guess what I am trying to say is half of what I've said so far, and half of what you've said so far, but I had been missing a key piece of my argument. I guess what I've been trying to get at is there is good music out there now, although to find it sometimes you have to go through numerous independent channels or underground markets to discover it or what not. Seems like once bands do make it out into the open commercial market they are never the same. So in turn what I have been trying to say is you still have these awesome bands, that are out there and who do exist in today's music scene, BUT, they will never reach the level of all of the great bands back in the day because for most of them to be good they have to stay out of all the commercialism of the industry. Look no further than Pearl Jam as a band who goes past extremes to try to drive that home. Like not using ticketmaster for ticket distribution. Plenty of people know Nickelback, and all these trash radio rock metal bands, but few people know about metal bands such as [highlight]DOWN[/highlight] (which is actually a metal super group) who as far as quality of the band goes is 100x better than anything that most people will ever hear about. So I guess what I have been trying to say is good music is still out there, but most of these bands will never get big enough to carry as much of an important role through history as the Zeppelins, and Sabbath's. I bought NOLA the day it came out back in 95...Great album and killer band.I kind of like having them almost all to myself...:ylsuper::thumb:
July 10, 201115 yr Something else that I think has killed music is that most of the talented bands now make music that really can't get on the radio. Stuff that will never be mainstream. AX7 is huge for a modern band, but they will never get their due IMO. Korn was one of the few heavy bands that reached an all-time status, but do they even compare to bands like Sabbath or the Stones? Not to me.
July 10, 201115 yr I bought NOLA the day it came out back in 95...Great album and killer band.I kind of like having them almost all to myself...:ylsuper::thumb: I know its just a matter of taste and opinion but to me NOLA is one of the greatest albums of all time. Top to bottom its hard to find an album with that much musical greatness. AND, like you I kind of like jamming them knowing most people, even proclaimed metal fans do not even know they exist. For my musical taste its hard to find many metal/rock bands who have the musicianship they show, just the overall give and take is incredible and thats surprising considering it is a Phil Anselmo fronted band.
July 10, 201115 yr Something else that I think has killed music is that most of the talented bands now make music that really can't get on the radio. Stuff that will never be mainstream. AX7 is huge for a modern band, but they will never get their due IMO. Korn was one of the few heavy bands that reached an all-time status, but do they even compare to bands like Sabbath or the Stones? Not to me. I will always have a place in my heart for bands like Korn and Limp Bizkit cause they were fighting the good fight against what was then a slew of boy bands and other mega pop sensations. New Metal was something new to the scene and really took over the main stream metal scene for a while to end the 90's and the move into the 2000's. I l was one of the biggest Limp Bizkit and Korn fans in the world back in middle school. However, to me all the real metal acts of the 90's are ones who get little recognition, bands such as Pantera, Corrosion of Conformity, Crowbar, Kyuss, DOWN, Acid Bath, White Zombie, etc. They are the bands who stood for Metal through the 90's IMO, they were the ones with what you would call substance in metal. Then bands like Tool (pretty acclaimed and may not even be considered a metal band) and Alice in Chains (maybe more of an alternative hard rock band) can be thrown in as well for the Hard Rock side of things. Kind of just shows how some forms of music in certain genres gets passed and hyped while others don't. It was like the new metal boom was a huge fad that just took over for three or four years, then in a flash it was all gone. There have been numerous fads like that in music. I guess we will have to wait and see how many of these bands from our generation stand the test of time and bridge the generation gaps.
July 10, 201115 yr Here is the Top 1O Billboard singles for the week of June 29, 1974: 1.Sundown-Gordon Lightfoot 2.Billy Don't Be A Hero-Bo Donaldson & The Heywoods 3.Rock The Boat-Hues Corporation 4.Just Be Thankful For What You Got-William DeVaughn 5.You Make Me Feel Brand New-Stylistics 6.Rock Your Baby-George McRae 7.Hollywood Swinging-Kool & The Gang 8.If You Love Me (Let Me Know)-Olivia Newton-John 9.The Streak-Ray Stevens 10.Band On The Run- Paul McCartney & Wings All of these songs could be heard on your favorite radio station within a 4 hour period. That would never happen today. 7.Hollywood Swinging-Kool & The Gang 8.If You Love Me (Let Me Know)-Olivia Newton-John 9.The Streak-Ray Stevens 10.Band
July 10, 201115 yr Here is the Top 1O Billboard singles for the week of June 29, 1974: 1.Sundown-Gordon Lightfoot 2.Billy Don't Be A Hero-Bo Donaldson & The Heywoods 3.Rock The Boat-Hues Corporation 4.Just Be Thankful For What You Got-William DeVaughn 5.You Make Me Feel Brand New-Stylistics 6.Rock Your Baby-George McRae 7.Hollywood Swinging-Kool & The Gang 8.If You Love Me (Let Me Know)-Olivia Newton-John 9.The Streak-Ray Stevens 10.Band On The Run- Paul McCartney & Wings All of these songs could be heard on your favorite radio station within a 4 hour period. That would never happen today. I (rightly so, thenkyouveddymuch) feel like I know my music well. And while I know all these songs, I would never have attached song to artist if pressed on some of them. "Sundown" and "Band On The Run" might be AAA hits, but that's about it. The rest have no chance, which is kind of sad considering what passes for a "pop" song nowadays.
July 11, 201115 yr While there can be no doubt that most mass marketing of music is designed to appeal to 13-year-old girls, I think you'll find that there's good music out there, just as there always has been. Maybe the author's right and that the future will consist of those who love rock music having delve a little deeper to find it, but that's the way it goes. I, for one, first really delved into indie music when I was about 16 or 17 and now, more than 10 years down the road, I find it's too exhausting to try and keep up with new music when I have to constantly try and dig for it. Perhaps my late 20s is too early to feel like an old man with regard to music and rest on the library from my high school and college days... but it's probably what I'll stick with from here on out. In the end, however, I believe now as a have for years: music is a matter of taste and there's no accounting for taste. Just this week I told my girlfriend how terrible Aerosmith is, to which she responded by telling me how wrong I was. The week before, I was touting the merits of the Wu-Tang Clan only to be informed about how awful they are. C'est la vie. So, if music marketing really is targeted at 13-year-old girls, then we're not supposed to like it anyway. BTW, I love the old guy vein in this thread. It might as well be the initial post and then five posts of "Those darn kids and their loud, lousy music! In my day we had real music, and we had to walk five miles in the snow just to listen to it!" :lol: Did you write that for me? I love music, but it's much more difficult to devote the time necessary to find new music and keep up with new music when you work, have a wife and a baby. That's not to say that I don't add to it from time to time, but for the most part, my musical library is set. The headliner is Pearl Jam and it all falls in line from there.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.