The Alternative

1. 60

   kerouac1986posted 12 years ago

   Every generation rock n roll has changed and transformed into something else and now you don't hear much about rock music which I think is bullshit. I hear some people say rock n roll is dead, But they are wrong rock n roll is in the underground as we all are. so my question
   
               Is rock n roll dead or do you thing it's underground like think ?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      klarawieckposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      There are tons of great rock bands signed to independent labels, so yeah... I'd say it's underground. But I also see a lot of black Americans falling in love with rock music... something that wasn't happening ten or twenty years ago. And I think, in a way, it's because of TV shows such as The Voice and American Idol, and all of that. I hate those shows, but a lot of people watch and they're being exposed to all kinds of music, which is great.
      We need to educate people to listen to good music! What plays in the radio is trash for the most part.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      vparkerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I grew up listening to rock music even though my parents for the most part hated it. I go to 50 rock concerts a year and most of them are sold out shows. Rock music is not dead. Music has a history of recycling itself that is all.

      replyreport
2. 76

   spartucusjonesposted 12 years ago

   Rock is not dead. But Rock and music in general has become really sub divided. But there are a number of indie rock acts that are well known with in the music blog community and that have a devoted live following. You just are not going to hear these acts on conventional top 40 radio.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      kerouac1986posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      that's the truth and that's what sucks. I believe all kinds of music should be heard but alot  them are not because there not commercial

      replyreport
3. 83

   TheMagicianposted 12 years ago

   Are we talking original rock n' roll here? I never really dug it much. Now the 70s and early 80s punk rock, I'm all over that... as well as every other sub-genre rock n' roll has spouted off (new wave, alternative punk, hardcore, indie, etc). I just can't seem to wrap my mind around the original stuff though. I suppose I'm missing out, but oh well. I'm much more a fan of a heavy dose of bass drum than guitar, anywho.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      kerouac1986posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Not original rock but rock in general

      replyreport
      1. 83

         TheMagicianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Oh then I'd say it's well alive! Not as much as an uproar in the mainstream though since it seems dance, rap and pop music has really just went nuts lately, but if you dig a bit and get into the right scene, the rock music is huge!
         
         Like Jonathan Janco, some great musicians are still going, like Elvis Costello (who I also saw not too long ago, and it was awesome!) and Talking Heads. Now that scene, which I never really knew what to classify it as other than just new wave and whatnot, the scene isn't too big. Other rock sub genres though, like pop-punk, hardcore, ska-punk... very very big underground, but most of the people are young adults to mid 30s, many older though, especially for ska-punk shows. You don't hear about it on the surface, but dig a bit and you've uncovered a HUGE world.
         
         I've also come to notice if you're friends with traditional skinheads (not racist, mind you) or mods, they're very much into the new wave and old school punk rock scene, so that's a fun little community.
         
         Nowadays, it's a lot about who you know and what you surround yourself with. The group of people I associate with on a daily basis might as well not even realize pop or dance music exists. New rock record comes out? It's a huge deal.
         
         Except for grunge rock (Nirvana, Creed, Nickelback, etc.). We all have a mutual hatred for that stuff

         replyreport
         1. 61

            vparkerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Nirvana should never be placed with those bands (Nickelback, Creed or not grunge).  First of all Nivana is grunge, but they didn't even coin that title. Grunge music is a subculture of Punk rock. Kurt was extremely talented and did a lot of blues covers-- like of Robert Johnson and stuff. I'm not being harsh, but Nirvana is WAY different than what you think.  Nirvana has become of the best selling rock bands of the 90s era besides Pearl Jam. I'm just curious why you hate them?

            replyreport
            1. 83

               TheMagicianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I understand they're great and accomplished tons, otherwise they wouldn't be so well known and revered. I can totally see why lots like it, but personally, I've just never been interested in them. I absolutely hate the grunge rock sound, the voices that often incorporate it (Kurt drove me NUTS), and... just the music. It's just me, though. I don't disagree that they're very talented and great, but just not my cup of tea
               
               Also, I didn't mean any harm grouping them together... I just did it because they were the only names I could think of at the moment, and well, they all fit the grunge bill. Creed I've only heard a bit of, and what I did hear was very grunge-esque... not sure 'bout the rest of their stuff. I should have said Stone Temple Pilots instead
               
               I suppose my distate for the genre stems from my love of more upbeat or melodic stuff. Pop punk, punk, new wave, ska, hardcore (not exactly "upbeat" but I just love the stuff).... some classic rock. Never cared much for most classic rock or metal (Megadeth and Gamma Ray are good though), unless it was Hair Metal/Glam Rock which I love, and that BARELY counts, if it does at all
               
               But like I said, I notice talent. I just don't always like it
               
               Everyone agrees that Nickelback is horrible though
               
               
               
               

               replyreport
               1. 76

                  spartucusjonesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Not only shouldn't you lump Creed & Nickleback with Nirvana, but it is erroneous to lump them with the bands that where originally lumped into the Seattle Grunge explosion of the early 90's. Nickleback & Creed where never a part of that scene.
                  
                  But I think we can all agree that Nickleback & Creed are a big piss stain on rock music.

                  replyreport
                  1. 83

                     TheMagicianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     As I said, I meant no harm... just was naming off artists who fall under the grunge category, whether they were from the original scene or later on
                     
                     My expertise lies in pop-punk and hardcore, and obviously not in grunge rock
                     
                     But oh man, there are SO many jokes poked at Nickelback's expense all over the net. Almost makes me feel bad for them! I remember I used to own an album when I was like, 10, and had no idea what I was doing musically.  Such a horrible period of time... Nickelback and Aaron Carter, hahaha!

                     replyreport
                     1. 76

                        spartucusjonesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        That's the thing, I've never heard Nickleback and Creed referred to as Grunge. By the time they came out, I didn't think they where still using that expression. But the expression Grunge was an expression that was coined by marketing people to refer to the Underground rock scene that started to bubble up in the late 80's-early 90's in Seattle. Of course with Nirvana, Pearl Jam and Soundgarden the scene started to get mainstream attention. But even Pearl Jam had more of a classic rock influence and Soundgarden had more of a metal influence while Nirvana had more of a punk influence. But Nirvana did have the loud soft dynamic that categorized a lot of the underground "Grunge" bands. But that loud soft dynamic was also popularized by 80's bands such as Dinosaur Jr. & Pixies (neither of who where from Seattle).   
                        
                        That being said I do tend to be bit of music snob (but I'm getting better). But no offense was taken from your comments, but being a borderline music snob I couldn't fight the urge to jump on it. But I also didn't mean any offense either.
                        
                        But I'm glad that you developed your own musical identity and where free from the shackles of Nickleback & Aaron Carter. It must of been a tough childhood for you.

                        replyreport
                        1. 83

                           TheMagicianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           Understandable, I'm quick to jump on music topics that I'm very fond of and have a deep knowledge of as well
                           
                           About the grunge term, I've always heard of Creed, Nickelback, Nirvana, Stone Temple Pilots, etc. bands like that being called grunge or at least grunge-esque. Whether or not they fall under even more or other subgenres is beyond me since each is different, they all share a unique characteristic or two found in grunge rock. For some reason, every person I've come into contact who listens to grunge faithfully has considered them as such, even though most of the time they def. didn't dig Creed or Nickelback (they also said Nickelback was grunge-esque, but more "alt. rock" than anything... now that I think of it, it's probably the voice). Like I said though, I'm no expert... but grunge seems to be a broad topic, sort of like pop-punk which varies from each end of the spectrum, so I guess it makes sense for people to mix the name up with bands here and there.
                           
                           It certainly was a tough childhood. Mom listened to serious gangster rap (which I'm totally cool with, but at the time I couldn't stand it) and all I wanted to do was play my blink-182 single over and over. But yes, I'm glad I grew out of AC and NB too

                           replyreport
4. 71

   jaybird22posted 12 years ago

   Each generation changes and follows a new and different genera of music.  Just like music preference changes from person to person, a complete generation can have a particular taste (as a whole) in a certain type of music.
   
   Not sure if it is just me, but it seems as though music in the last two years has taken on a dance club, house music style.  Now, even artists like Madonna are trying to come out with dance music. WEIRD!  Growing up from the 70's, and living through the 80's and 90's, I don't particularly like this new style of music.
   
   To me, this new dance club music is not music at all.  Most of it comes from computers and sound bytes and not actual instruments like back in the day.  I miss the hair bands, squealing guitars, keyboards, and cool music videos that MTV and VH1 used to play.  Now those channels don't even show music but rather reality TV shows, and music is downloaded off from computers straight to cell phones or Ipods.  No more CD covers and music videos :-(

   replyreport
5. 60

   Jonathan Jancoposted 12 years ago

   Every kind of rocknroll is still out there. It's just not the next big thing that has the whole world in an uproar sort of thing that it was in the 50's and 60's. I saw the Talking Heads a couple weeks back . . . well, I mean all of them except for all of the guitar players. But it was still a rock show. Saw Elvis Costello and Chris Isaak a few years ago. Patti Smith is still touring. So I would rocknroll is far from dead.

   replyreport
6. 65

   Greek Oneposted 12 years ago

   How can ANYONE say that rock is dead with Justin ripping up the charts!?!?!
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 0

      kimberlyslyricsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              

      replyreport
7. 58

   WindMaestroposted 12 years ago

   Are you suggesting that Justin Bieber is rock n' roll? Because if you are, you are horribly misguided. And have a terrible taste in music.

   replyreport
   1. 65

      Greek Oneposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      you can be mean all you want, but Justin has feelings, and if he comes across your post he might be offended

      replyreport
      1. 83

         TheMagicianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Move over, Michael Jackson.
         Or should I say roll over?
         
         ...too soon?

         replyreport
         1. 65

            Greek Oneposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Whitney is too soon... Michael was fair game 4 hours after 911 was called

            replyreport
8. 60

   Jonathan Jancoposted 12 years ago

   Ok, let me just set a couple of things straight, here. I don't enjoy seeing witch burnings in the forums and I really dont like them when the point of hysterical debate derives from a subgenre of rock music. So before anyone gets hurt:
   
   Green River, Mudhoney, Screaming Trees, TAD and Nirvana are examples of grunge.
   
   Then, the major labels being the savages that they are, raped and pillaged grunge and created this undercurrent of the grunge sound within pop music for the better part of the 90's. Thus, Stone Temple Pilots, et al
   
   The Dandy Warhols, and many other bands that I will fail to name right now, would be considered post-grunge. Kind of like Matisse is considered post-Impressionist.
   
   Ok now play nice.
   

   replyreport
   1. 76

      spartucusjonesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Dude, I don't think there was any witch burnings or any hysterical debates. If anything both myself & Magician said no offense was intended and we ended that discussion on a good note. So I don't think you have any thing to worry about.
      
      Nice concise synopsis (which was basically my point, but maybe not as concise)

      replyreport
      1. 60

         kerouac1986posted 12 years agoin reply to this

         i think everyone made a good point here, with everyone debating is a good thing and it proves rock is not dead or no one here would be having this discussion in the fist place

         replyreport
         1. 83

            TheMagicianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Agreed!
            
            and thanks, Janco, for those examples. I appreciate it. Always good to learn more about music... the exact same thing happened with pop-punk and hardcore, so I can understand better now
            
            But like Kerouac said, rock is definitely not dead! I'd like to think we're the majority in terms of the music as an umbrella term, actually! Or at least almost...

            replyreport
9. 77

   MickeySrposted 12 years ago

   Rock music isn't dead, at all, but - if you really, and honestly, consider your introductory notion that "Every generation rock n roll has changed and transformed into something else" you discover that, even today, we are still running of the fumes of the 60s. American popular music is all based on the Blues, that's where it all comes from, and if you follow the trail, you see big, giant, foundational changes from Benny Goodman to Elvis and from Elvis to Cream and from Cream to . . . nothing - you can assert that Disco and/or Punk and/or Rap, etc, were all additional contributions, but that didn't move things into a new sound like Benny Goodman, Elvis, and Cream did.
   
   Disco was just Soul music with a bumped-up beat, Punk was a return to the garage band Rock sound of the early Kinks & The Who, etc, and Rap is Soul music minus melody and resting nearly fully on rhythm . . . and simultaneous with Disco, Punk, and Rap (as well as with Metal, Funk, Grunge, alternative, etc, which were merely variations on Soul & Rock, etc) there was 60s style Soul & Rock being produced. Think about it; Elvis didn't sound much at all like Benny Goodman, and Cream didn't sound much at all like Elvis . . . from decade to decade music really, really changed - but 40 years later you still have bands that sound very much like the music Cream colored the 60s with.
   
   You may have something that stands out in the 70 or so that is a throwback to Swing music, you might have something in the 80s or 90s that is a throwback to early Rock & Roll, etc - but artists like Stevie Ray Vaughan, Green day, Jet, have a sound that isn't a throwback to the 60s, it's simply the same music . . . and you still have artists like Eric Clapton, The Who, Joan Jett, etc, putting-out music and selling-out arenas - that didn't happen with Swing bands or early rock & Rollers.
   
   Rock music isn't dead, but it hasn't developed, grown, matured into anything new, or I should say, away from the 60s yet . . . we are still running on the fumes of the 60s.
   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlG2Ghm_E9E

   replyreport
   1. 76

      spartucusjonesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      All rock music has the same DNA which is basically different forms of roots music (blues, jazz, folk, country, etc...). For example Elvis was blending country and blues together (but even then he wasn't the first rockabilly artist he just was the most popular). Cream was a heavier form of the blues (and they weren't the only British rock band of that time period that had a heavy blues influence). So the fumes that you are referring to are the same fumes that rock music always ran off of. But every decade has had their innovators that have put a fresh spin on things. For example just like Cream was blues but heavier, the Ramones where bubblegum but faster & louder. Then today you have bands like Arcade Fire who have popularized the "Baroque Rock" sound. The elements weren't new, but they did put a fresh spin on things. So music is always moving in new directions, but the basic DNA never changes.

      replyreport
10. 0

    kimberlyslyricsposted 12 years ago

    @ MickeySr 

    replyreport
    1. 61

       SomewayOuttaHereposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       ..kewl!...hey KL!

       replyreport