Moderators MrKnobs Posted November 17, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 17, 2011 I just read Craig's discourse on why classic rock remains classic, where he suggests it's because of collaboration between a team of artists, recordists, and songwriters. I thought about that a while, and I think it's much simpler than that. There's TOO MUCH MUSIC now. We have too many choices. Choices are good, but they're also fragmenting. Back when I was growing up, there was no internet, and only three radio stations on the dial (well, English language stations anyway). They all played mostly the same stuff. Your choices were Beatles or Elvis, plus a few dozen lesser British acts that came and went (e.g. Herman's Hermits) and some crooners who stubbornly wouldn't retire. What was going on was that music was being heavily filtered. Making records cost a lot of money back then, you had to convince a record label that your band was ready, that you could make them a big profit or they'd lose the huge investment they were making in recording and promoting you. The record labels controlled the radio stations, both directly in (now) illegal ways and indirectly by deciding who got recorded and promoted. The stations couldn't play music they didn't have. The artists were powerfullly assisted in their development, bringing to bear any asset that was needed from songwriting to grooming to PR to bail money to detox to image management to publicity to tour management to the best lawyers money could buy. To be blunt, this was because the labels OWNED the artists and had every reason to protect their FEW investments at great cost to themselves. Were there other bands besides the Beatles, the Stones, Elvis, The Ventures, and the dozens of others who received this massive airplay and are now considered classic rock? Of course. We don't remember them because we never heard them. And the ones we did hear, didn't receive the huge team effort to refine, improve, develop and promote that Craig speaks of in his article. We were told what was good by the labels, and sold on it by repetition as the same songs played again and again on all the radio stations. Simple as that. And of course, it's all new again to the younger folk. Terry D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 The high school kids around here sometimes will say that it sounds "real". By the way, talk to any guitar teacher and ask what kids are asking to play. You'll be amazed at the response. Rarely does any teenager ever ask to play anything current. It's metal, classic rock, hard rock from 20 or 30 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 Who needs you if you are not an original. Insist upon yourself. Be original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 Huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 Huh? As said, originality is the one thing which unoriginal minds cannot feel the use of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 or in plain English, nobody needs some bands who sound sumilar to Led Zeppelin, or any other original band Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted November 17, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 17, 2011 I agree with Craig's points. Collaboration. And... I think there's an element of newness to the way the classic stuff was performed. Those were fresh ideas at the time. They're performed like that too. An excitement in the idea. Listen to White Room and hear the digging in Clapton does. Now listen to Fall Out Boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Zooey Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 I know young kids who listen to stuff like the Cure, the Smiths, U2, REM, etc. and know how to play it, too. That music is 20+ years old. Should we call it classic rock? Considering Zepplin, the Beatles, the Stones, etc. is pushing 40 years old, shouldn't we really call that "oldies?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 Rudangeleinstein, a lot of the kids are learning older songs because they're not inspired by the new ones, and they listen to the older songs because they're not inspired by current music. It may not be as original, but there's something to be said for listening or learning music that is inspiring to you as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 Rudangeleinstein, a lot of the kids are learning older songs because they're not inspired by the new ones, and they listen to the older songs because they're not inspired by current music. It may not be as original, but there's something to be said for listening or learning music that is inspiring to you as well. hobbyist do all sorts of useless things yes, I fully analyzed one Stravinsky score, one of Beethoven and one of Mozart once when I was a young boy, that was it, but unfortunately it didn't had any effect on me, and the pop/rock stuff is like playing Schnipp Schnapp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted November 17, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 17, 2011 So that's why you pop stuff sounds that way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 So that's why you pop stuff sounds that way? doesn't all pop sound like Schnipp Schnapp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dimebonics6604 Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 Just my quick $0.02USD, but all those classic rock bands had labels behind them, essentially investing in them as parents do their children to make them the best they can be. Nowadays record companies only really care about is signing on when a band is the "in" thing, hoping to make a quick buck before they sizzle out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rasputin1963 Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 It was important for me to read your OP thoroughly, because (as far as San Antonio radio stations are concerned), "Classic Rock" has a rather circumscribed meaning: Local radios have decided that "Classic Rock" means things like Thin Lizzy, Led Zep, Heart, Boston, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, Foghat, Edgar Winter, Aerosmith, Jethro Tull, Alice Cooper. In other words, "headbanger" stuff from about 1969--1985. They would consider Rolling Stones to be Classic Rock... but not The Beatles. I know; I don't quite understand their criteria, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators MrKnobs Posted November 17, 2011 Author Moderators Share Posted November 17, 2011 The high school kids around here sometimes will say that it sounds "real".By the way, talk to any guitar teacher and ask what kids are asking to play. You'll be amazed at the response. Rarely does any teenager ever ask to play anything current. It's metal, classic rock, hard rock from 20 or 30 years ago. It's generally pretty easy to play (simplified in some cases) and fun to learn the classic riffs. I think that might be part of it. Terry D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 17, 2011 Members Share Posted November 17, 2011 what is so difficult to invent some new riffs which are as good as the old ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 It's generally pretty easy to play (simplified in some cases) and fun to learn the classic riffs. I think that might be part of it. Terry D. Sometimes, although they're asking for Maiden, Priest, and Zeppelin, so not always easy. But the point being that they know and like and are inspired by these riffs, these songs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rasputin1963 Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 Any guitarist worth his salt can play the intro lick to "All The Young Dudes". (-; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Raymar Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 A great deal of Classic Rock was blues based rock. When you remove the blues element rock gets a bit hollow or even euro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nat whilk II Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 Lee Flier said something a while back to the effect that there is a cultural move towards tradition going on that makes current popular music more like a type of folk music than a progressive-cutting edge sort of activity. I hope I'm roughly on target with my memory of her comment. I think that's a fascinating insight. The 50s-60s-70s were obsessed with pushing into new places, in innovation, in the myth of the creative artist forging new worlds through creative genius, etc. It got really pretensious - and the 80s looks to me almost like a conscious parody of "creativity" as the vibe was so hopelessly mannered and aggressively artificial. Personally, I think the minor arts are just as important in terms of supporting society as a whole than the major arts. In human terms - how many people enjoy hobbying around, putzing around with tunes or painting or writing stories or making quilts or playing the recorder, whatever - 10 million kids making dance music with plug-ins and sequencers is a minor art, along the lines of making model cars or birdhouses. I think it's a really good thing regardless of how serious the products are. The obsession with fame and the famous, with geniuses and the cutting edge, with "revolution" in the arts, gets a bit tiresome after a few decades. In popular art, it just devolves to the cult of the marketed idol. Let's just jam on 4 chords for a while on the porch, take it all down to just folks doing fun things, and maybe we'll have better geniuses later on once we all get over ourselves. nat whilk ii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A. Einstein Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 minor art, major art... just laughed my ass off art is a personal desideratum !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nat whilk II Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 minor art, major art... just laughed my ass offart is a personal desideratum !!! I learned long ago to not take any proposition seriously that began with "Art is....." nat whilk ii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rasputin1963 Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 Ich m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cpage86 Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 I'm 25 now, and when I was 13(ish) I was digging out my dads LPs and record player. Music today is a joke. It is complete garage, I mean unless you actually like to hear songs about being in the club, smoking weed, and getting busted for child support. Some of us don't give a crap about being "original" either, some of us are playing for the fun of playing, it is relaxing. Pretty much all I do is play Pink Floyd, well because David Gilmour is the man, and it is fun. Do I look to "make it" playing Floyd tunes? No. Not a chance. I am realistic. I could also ask, "Why do older dudes love Nickelback?" (That is a VERY good question) Dig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dingoist Posted November 18, 2011 Members Share Posted November 18, 2011 Talking about classic rock, i heard Nirvana's cover of The Man who Sold The World on a classic station s few days ago. The classics are recognizable because they are time tested. Crap songs have already been weeded out over time, so whats left? The second thing, you can hum the classics. The melody are well known. Try humming or playing along to a Katie Perry tune and see how truly hard it is to differentiate from other songs of this era. And with the crazy production and synthetics it is almost impossible to play. CCR is easy to play and immediately recognizable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.