Sadly speaking, the modern day music is slowly evolving into a puddle of mud. Gone were the days when music had meaning an feeling. Now, it's all about money. Most "bands" you hear now a days just sling guitar and scream vocals. It's all about letting the kids feel "cool" and unleashing the rebellious behavior of the kids. It's not about the music now; it's all about the money and fame. With nearly 14 years of professional music training, I stick to Classical music. It's always so expressive and full of emotions. I love it.
Uh, I was unaware there was one. Yeah, that's a big fat EYEROLL (except for that one band, Puddle of Mud). Sorry you're too old and stuff to enjoy music, gramps. Neutral Milk Hotel, album: The Aeroplane Over the Sea. Pretty expressive with emotions, no screaming, and they're definitely not in it for fame or money.
People have been saying the same thing about rock and roll since I was in high school and my mother said it about Elvis! The only respite was in the early to mid 1970s. The stuff that they call wimp-rock now: James Taylor, Seals and Crofts, etc. Parents could tolerate that. And the progressive rock bands like Yes and Renaissance. Classical music fans in their thirties and forties who grew up with rock and roll and then lost interest didn't exactly like it and they thought it was "hopelessly middlebrow" to quote one reviewer, but at least they could understand it. Other than that, from Little Richard to Janis Joplin to Led Zeppelin to AC/DC to Metallica to Soundgarden to Kid Rock to Velvet Revolver, people who don't like rock and roll have always dismissed it as screaming guitar slingers and people who do like it have always loved the screaming guitar slingers best of all. The essence of rock is rebellion and nothing expresses the spirit of rebellion musically quite as well as screams accompanied by power chords. If you think it's all about money and fame now, you must not have been around in the late 1970s when the term "corporate rock" was coined for bands like Foreigner and Journey. Or in the late 1950s when the term "payola" was coined for songs that became popular simply because they were played so often on the radio that people got used to them and the reason they were played so often was that the DJs were paid under the table to do so. If you don't share the tastes of the masses there's just as much (or perhaps more) astoundingly good slightly offbeat music to choose from as there ever was. I have a soft spot for female vocalists and there are hundreds of them who listen to their own muse. Charlotte Martin and Alana Davis come to mind immediately. If you like really creative virtuoso stuff that's just plain weird, a la King Crimson, check out The Mars Volta. Or if you really just don't happen to care for screaming vocals with loud blues guitar riffs, listen to Gorillaz. Don't limit yourself to English-language music, the music world is no longer Americentric except on American radio. Céline Dion's songs in her native French have not been homogenized by the Hollywood machine; she's been hailed as the next Edith Piaf for songs like "Le Monde Est Stone." Ditto for Shakira in her native Spanish (interspersed with her equally native Arabic); "Ojos Así" is a masterpiece. Laura Pausini's Spanish version of her lovely Italian song "Como Si No Nos Hubiéramos Amado" has a Spanish guitar and no screaming and is a big hit on Latin American radio--sorry I don't know the original Italian title. I told you I was a girl-singer freak, but there are just as many male performers out there doing stuff with indoor voices and no heavy metal. You just won't find them where everybody else hangs out. There is music with feeling. But don't be my mother and dismiss straight-up guitar rock as not having feeling just because the feeling it has is rebellion. That's a pretty common feeling in today's world.
I guess I think you're program is askew here. 1) Actually, all bands tend to be bad, and the ones that aren't popular are at least as bad, if not worse. 2) Some bands, of which most are bad, become popular. Also, neutral milk hotel is great, i like it - but someone who likes classical music will probably squirm at the out of tune-ness of it (although to you and I it might make it more expressive). Sufjan Stevens, come on feel the illinoize, is pretty cool. It is hard to make happy music, and he pulls it off.
How dare you insult Jethro Tull and The Beatles. Heathen! Slay the Blashphemer! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - N
I get very sick of people say 'music was great in my day but it's all crap now'. 'The lyrics meant something in my day but not now' ect ect. This is simply not the case. There is good new music out there you just need to have an open mind and put in a bit of effort to find it.
I'm not "OLD". I'm probably half the age of any given person in here. I enjoy a few bands myself. Linkin Park (Their "earlier" stuff), for example, has always captivated me. Because they are INNOVATIVE, and have their own style. Metallica is another one for me. Though I cannot stand extended exposure to their music. I like music with meaning, and a sense of creationism in them. None of this screaming vocal crap. My point is that the modern day music market is infested with bands that just want to make money. I'm not saying all artists suck, but a lot of them do. If you played Limp Bizkit (Though I do give them some credit, for singing 48 F-words in one song), followed by SlipKnot (Which has a few good songs), you'd scarcely hear the difference. It's just the same deal, over and over again. While some people may find this acceptable, I don't. I guess I'm just different, and have different tastes than everyone else.
Linkin Park? Limp Bizkit? Slipknot? And who's calling you old? Roman? Oh, man .... Old? I mean, there are a few other choice words I might use for your musical taste, but that's just me. In the meantime, keep your eye on the upcoming payola scandal. It will explain much about the successes of certain bands. :m:
WhisperBlade I actually don't mind a bit of Slipknot, Linkin Park ect but there is a lot better than that out there.
I actually find that very few people who say they like classical music actually like classical music. It's sort of the snob retreat when they find out that top 35 sucks and make no effort to find music they like; beyond what they heard in their growing up years. Read on; it turns out he likes Slipknot, Linkin Park and Metallica. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! He misled me: See?
I never said I like SlipKnot. I listened to them at one point but never really said I liked them. Nor did I say I like Limp Bizkit. I gave them CREDIT for originality (IE The HotDog Song I think. Had something like 48 F'bombs in it.), and New Abortion by Slip was a VERY popular piece at one point here in Vancouver, Canada. Since everyone loved that noise, I suppose we can call it "good". After all, popularity justifies the means. I admit I like like Linkin Park because of their originality. Their earlier works brought in sections of Techno, Rap and Rock and made it a whole new type of sound. I listen to Metallica here and there. This is because they were (nearly) the first band to come out with this "rebellious" music. Though there were hard rockers, Metallica was the early "metal" genre, and crafted the true original heavy metal sound. I like them for the fact that they, again, are innovative. Classical Music? I love classical music (Though that's not the correct term, I'll live with it for the sake of explanation). Especially the Romantic Era, where Artists such as Schubert, Chopin and Berlioz existed. I go to orchestral concerts almost every other week. So in no way am I using a "snob retreat". Which brings me back to my point. I merely stated that the music market is infested by gold miners. And I just read that Payola Scandal..... never knew something like that even happened. Shocking what people do to gain fame.
Well, I'm not old, and I will say that there wasn't any great music in my day, nor is there any great music today. All the good stuff is in the past. Very few artists perk my interests making me go "wow, what's that", and even fewer can get past that first step and actually be considered a "great band". I agree that there's some gems in the underground scenes as all of this pop crap is well, crap. When you have bands doing nothing but singing to backing tracks, not even having a real consistant band only filled with stand-ins, and have other's write songs for you, well, whatcha expect? Yay for "Pop". And too bad most of the music is that style these days. Agreed. What, like 50 Cent having the most hit singles since The Beatles? Hell, just that right there shows something is wrong with music these days. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - N
wow, linkin park might be a bit catchy, but its so repetitive. its unnecessarily angsty and depressive. and, comparitively, it is by no means original. as for metallica, they were a great band i really like a lot of their older stuff, but they are far from the first rebellious band. you might want to check out late 60's the who. i would say that the who was probably the first punk band (without inventing punk) before the ramones and the sex pistols. but metal is nowhere near as rebellious as punk is.
have to take into account the inflation of population and the growing number of people in other countries who want to listen to american music (even though they might not understand it) and especially rap music.
Let it be known that much of punk rock or heavy rock has its origins in the rocknroll of the 60s and 70s. Has today's music degenerated? Perhaps not; it's just more ramified. Although I do not associate well profusely with rock music I listen enough to like a few songs. What are examples of 'fantastic' and 'rubbish' in your taste of rap?
"All bands tend to be bad", is my phrasing for another idea as differentiated from , "popular bands tend to be bad". What I am saying is - most bands are bad, that is why most of the popular bands are bad. I actually mention the beatles in an earlier post before this- the etc.etc.etc. is where you get to put in jethro tull (I wouldn't). Actually, there is some point to saying that music in general used to be better, because when you turn on the radio (in los angeles) you are probably not going to hear anything recent.
Radio in L.A. and most big cities is being taken over by the Spanish-language market. Even Washington DC just got its first Spanish station last year. Anglophones outside the Bible Belt are moving to satellite.
