Once Again: It's great playing in a band with people that at least listen to.........

[Zeromus-X]

Going off on a bit of a tangent here, sorry guys.

 

 

Yeah, most of the guys I play with are like that, but the old stuff is ALL they know. It's good to be grounded like that, for sure, but to some of the guys I play with STP and Pearl Jam is "new".

 

 

Ugh, you hit a nerve on that one. I can't tell you how many bands locally say they play "modern rock" and when I ask them for details I get "We play some Nirvana, Soundgarden, you know, modern rock." The last Nirvana album came out in 1993 and you're not even playing anything off that one. That's 18 years old. That album is old enough to vote now. And Black Hole Sun isn't much more {censored}ing modern.

 

Then I started doing a bit of research in our local market. Of interest to me is the fact that our "modern rock" radio stations still tend to play these artists/songs, too. I don't think our local "modern rock" station has changed its playlist with any permanent additions in the last 15 years. How can you call something "modern" when people in bars were born after the song first came out? So, I decided to grab our "modern rock" radio's on-air playlist, from Tunegenie (all songs played in the last 48 hours). And no {censored}, here's the last songs:

 

Are You Experienced - Jimi Hendrix

Black Hole Sun - Soundgarden

Another Way To Die - Disturbed

Smells Like Teen Spirit - Nirvana

Rock And Roll All Night - KISS

Patience - Guns n Roses

Backwater - Meat Puppets

My Hero - Foo Fighters

The Adventures of Rain Dance - RHCP

I Hate Everything About You - Three Days Grace

The Four Horsemen - Metallica

Mama I'm Coming Home - Ozzy

Heading Out To The Highway - Judas Priest

Your Decision - Alice In Chains

Rainbow In The Dark - Dio

 

How many of those songs would you consider to be "modern rock"?

[New Trail]

New genre: "Modern Classic Rock" or "Classic Modern Rock" or "Modern Rock Classic"?

[kmart]

 

How many of those songs would you consider to be "modern rock"?

 

 

Depends...

 

What year are you asking from?

[New Trail]

 

.... And no {censored}, here's the last songs: Are You Experienced - Jimi Hendrix Black Hole Sun - Soundgarden Another Way To Die - Disturbed Smells Like Teen Spirit - Nirvana Rock And Roll All Night - KISS Patience - Guns n Roses Backwater - Meat Puppets My Hero - Foo Fighters The Adventures of Rain Dance - RHCP I Hate Everything About You - Three Days Grace The Four Horsemen - Metallica Mama I'm Coming Home - Ozzy Heading Out To The Highway - Judas Priest Your Decision - Alice In Chains Rainbow In The Dark - Dio How many of those songs would you consider to be "modern rock"?

 

 

I would consider the ones in bold to be 'modern rock' although not current rock if that makes sense.

[Zeromus-X]

So you believe that a song which came out in 1991 should be considered "modern rock"? That seems to fail every definition of "modern" that I can come up with.

 

A car can be considered a "classic" model after 20 years...

[New Trail]

 

So you believe that a song which came out in 1991 should be considered "modern rock"? That seems to fail every definition of "modern" that I can come up with. A car can be considered a "classic" model after 20 years...

 

 

Only in the sense of "Modern Rock" (capitalized) as a genre, as opposed to modern rock, as in current. I think of RHCP, Foo Fighters, and bands like that, post-Grunge bands, to be modern rock I guess. Music shouldn't be labelled but it always is.

 

This thread was originally about current music, anyway, not "Modern Rock".

[wardjames]

Going off on a bit of a tangent here, sorry guys. Ugh, you hit a nerve on that one. I can't tell you how many bands locally say they play "modern rock" and when I ask them for details I get "We play some Nirvana, Soundgarden, you know, modern rock." The last Nirvana album came out in 1993 and you're not even playing anything off that one. That's 18 years old. That album is old enough to vote now. And Black Hole Sun isn't much more {censored}ing modern. Then I started doing a bit of research in our local market. Of interest to me is the fact that our "modern rock" radio stations still tend to play these artists/songs, too. I don't think our local "modern rock" station has changed its playlist with any permanent additions in the last 15 years. How can you call something "modern" when people in bars were born after the song first came out? So, I decided to grab our "modern rock" radio's on-air playlist, from Tunegenie (all songs played in the last 48 hours). And no {censored}, here's the last songs: Are You Experienced - Jimi Hendrix Black Hole Sun - Soundgarden Another Way To Die - Disturbed Smells Like Teen Spirit - Nirvana Rock And Roll All Night - KISS Patience - Guns n Roses Backwater - Meat Puppets My Hero - Foo Fighters The Adventures of Rain Dance - RHCP I Hate Everything About You - Three Days Grace The Four Horsemen - Metallica Mama I'm Coming Home - Ozzy Heading Out To The Highway - Judas Priest Your Decision - Alice In Chains Rainbow In The Dark - Dio How many of those songs would you consider to be "modern rock"?

 

Interesting...

 

I was having lunch with an exec of a local country station and he told me something that probably applies to your question. He said that if a song lasts 3 years in rotation on a modern country radio station it's "Country Gold" and you'll basically be able to play it forever. However, they also cut off songs done before 1990 son they don't appear to be old.

 

This has given us some valuable insight in song choice as a "Modern Country" band. While we do some stuff that's currently on the radio, the bulk of what we do is post 1990 stuff that's still in rotation on Modern Country radio.

 

It seems to me that the station you're listing has the same idea, although I think a few of those songs were pre-1990.

[wardjames]

Is there anybody who really HAS to cover songs they don't want to play? I hear the "I'm glad I don't have to do play this or that" comment thrown around a lot, but I don't know anybody who is actually in that position.

 

I agree with the premise. There's a big difference between not being able to play songs you'd like to play and playing songs you hate to play.

[stratotastic]

 

Only in the sense of "Modern Rock" (capitalized) as a genre, as opposed to modern rock, as in current. I think of RHCP, Foo Fighters, and bands like that, post-Grunge bands, to be modern rock I guess. Music shouldn't be labelled but it always is.

 

 

Yep. It's just a reference point, probably not really meant to be taken literally. Think about other genres. "Oldies" is usually 50s-60s early rock, "Classic Rock" late 60s through the 70s, "Alternative" mostly early 80s-early 90s, Grunge, Metal, any random word with "core" at the end of it, etc. All just labels.

 

That being said "Modern Rock" can be a little tricky, depending on who's saying it. It'll mean something different to a 15-year old into Paramore & Avenged Sevenfold vs. a TGP basement bloozer that thinks the Black Crowes is a "new band."

[SpaceNorman]

 

......current music. I've talked about this before...most musicians that I know and work with don't even attempt to keep informed about current music. My one band that does was on hiatus and just re-formed. It's so great to be able to mention "the new Bruno Mars song" or the "I Whip my hair band and forth" song, not to learn them or anything, but just in passing, and they don't look at me funny...it's refreshing!

 

 

There's something about this post that just hits me as condescending. Perhaps it strikes that chord for me because I've heard so many variations of it over the years - listening to bandmates argue about song selection. Music is a matter of personal taste - with the choice of what to listen to or play - sitting squarely in the ears of the individual listening to it or playing it. I can't help but feel that comments that in essence pass judgement on other players because of what they choose to listen to or to play as variation on the "my tastes are superior to your tastes" theme.

[pinkfloydcramer61]

Who DOESN'T have to cover some songs they really don't want to play? I do- for example, I don't really want to play Gimme 3 Steps (my least fave Skynard song). But the band wants to do it so I "take one for the team". At least it's not something worlds removed from the essence of ME (such as rap, Lady Gaga, etc.). I have more in common with a drunk rednuck slumped over a jukebox than a 14-year-old mall rat).

 

BTW I do seek out new music (mostly instrumental acid/soul/smoove jazz). I just don't feel the need to know what Justin Beiber sounds like. Bruno Mars, MAYBE (he's been mentioned by 2 different posters:))

[New Trail]

 

There's something about this post that just hits me as condescending. Perhaps it strikes that chord for me because I've heard so many variations of it over the years - listening to bandmates argue about song selection. Music is a matter of personal taste - with the choice of what to listen to or play - sitting squarely in the ears of the individual listening to it or playing it. I can't help but feel that comments that in essence pass judgement on other players because of what they choose to listen to or to play as variation on the "my tastes are superior to your tastes" theme.

 

 

I certainly didn't mean it that way. I was trying to say that, while most musicians that I deal and work with have a narrow scope of music that they like, listen to, and are aware of, that it is refreshing to work with some guys that are seemingly aware of lots more, including current hits. And, while I personally don't understand someone in the 'music business' not knowing about, or wanting to know about, music that is outside their comfort zone, it wasn't meant to be any kind of judgment.

[TrickyBoy]

Getting back to the OP, I'd change it to "It's nice to play in a band with people who are open-minded about music". New music, old music, different genres, whatever.

 

We do plenty of stuff that at first glance, might be considered "cheesy" or whatever... But in the context of how we do it, it really works. But if the folks I played with were totally closed minded about stuff we'd never even get far enough to see that it actually does work...

 

I don't like country music, but we've incorporated two country songs into our set...

[flemtone]

Oy vey...

 

[vanlatte]

 

I'd say the opposite. I find it more refreshing when the guys I play with know the old stuff. And I'm not just talking 50's and 60's but 40's, 30's, and 20's too. I couldn't care less about what came out this month.

 

 

 

Dad?

[Wenrealityhurts]

I think if your engaged in selling music as a product, you need to be listening to music....in there lies many ideas, inspirations, thoughts...know what the other people know and all that...

[pickinatit]

Given an unlimited amount of listening time, yeah, I can see making it a point to listen to all kinds of music from all kinds of genres and time periods. But for a lot of us, especially if we have day jobs and families that require most of our time and attention there is a....let's call it a "cost / benefit ratio" to consider. I don't play in a band that plays "current" music. I have just about enough time to listen to and practice the songs that we do/are going to do. The little bit of time I have to listen purely for the enjoyment of relaxing & listening...well, I don't want to waste that precious little time on stuff that I may or may not particularly like. I'll stick to a known commodity. I do try to do a certain amount of listening to "modern or current or whatever you want to call it, but I have to decide how to divy up the precious little time I have. Am I a bad person because I couldn't name a Justin Bieber song?

[vanlatte]

Given an unlimited amount of listening time, yeah, I can see making it a point to listen to all kinds of music from all kinds of genres and time periods. But for a lot of us, especially if we have day jobs and families that require most of our time and attention there is a....let's call it a "cost / benefit ratio" to consider. I don't play in a band that plays "current" music. I have just about enough time to listen to and practice the songs that we do/are going to do. The little bit of time I have to listen purely for the enjoyment of relaxing & listening...well, I don't want to waste that precious little time on stuff that I may or may not particularly like. I'll stick to a known commodity. I do try to do a certain amount of listening to "modern or current or whatever you want to call it, but I have to decide how to divy up the precious little time I have. Am I a bad person because I couldn't name a Justin Bieber song?

 

I think you are missing the point; it's not so much how much time is devoted to keeping up on current music as being open to discussing the possibilities. Anytime I have been approached with "Hey we should give this song a shot" and I don't know what it is I am more than happy to at least listen to it.

 

We can all probably relate to knowing at least one person that would not even be willing to discuss it let alone listen

 

Think that is the tone of this topic.

[kmart]

 

Am I a bad person because I couldn't name a Justin Bieber song?

 

 

I am absolutely of the mind that an active musician should probably be OPEN to the idea of letting themselves be aware of current/new music/artists on a surface level alone (at least)...

But that being said: If that's being bad, I don't want to be good.

[New Trail]

 

... Am I a bad person because I couldn't name a Justin Bieber song?

 

 

No, and I can't name one either, but at least you know the name, you're aware of him. I'm talking about a previous band with guys that, seriously, I mentioned learning a Jack Johnson song and none of them had ever even heard of him.

[troyguitar]

I've got over 25000 songs in the library on my computer and I've barely begun to scratch the surface of music that I like and I'm adding things to it all of the time. It's really easy to be "behind the times" on music as it's next to impossible to ever catch up to the present if you really are a music fan. I like an extremely narrow band of the music spectrum and have next to nothing that was released outside of roughly 1973-2003 (excluding classical and opera) and still find something "new" to me from that time period every time I look. I'm certain that there is tons of stuff I like from before and after that but I just haven't gotten there yet. So despite being familiar with TONS of music, I still don't recognize 50-90% of the songs on most of the set lists posted on this forum.

 

The only way I can figure that anyone can actually keep up to date on music is if they ignore and refuse to listen to the vast majority of it - I wouldn't call that being very open-minded.

[vanlatte]

The only way I can figure that anyone can actually keep up to date on music is if they ignore and refuse to listen to the vast majority of it - I wouldn't call that being very open-minded.

 

Jeebus, you guys are really fatalistic and literal, aren't you.

 

Again the point is being open minded enough to consider stepping out of a comfort zone, not being required to give up any semblance of life just to be able to listen to everything that ever comes out.

 

Gawd, I wouldn't wish that on anybody.

 

Well, maybe that bathrobe wearin' troll.....

[kmart]

 

No, and I can't name one either, but at least you know the name, you're aware of him. I'm talking about a previous band with guys that, seriously, I mentioned learning a Jack Johnson song and none of them had ever even heard of him.

 

 

FAR worse things in the world.

 

As I did have to learn a JJ song for a wedding I played a few years ago, I wouldn't mind never having heard of him myself...

[snapperz]

 

No, and I can't name one either, but at least you know the name, you're aware of him. I'm talking about a previous band with guys that, seriously, I mentioned learning a Jack Johnson song and none of them had ever even heard of him.

 

 

I have no idea who jack johnson is.

 

In this day and age, if the song is popular enough to play in a bar - you will probably hear it somewhere other than the radio (TV show, movie, etc). If I haven't heard it in my daily life - it probably isn't worth putting the time in at practice for. It isn't that I'm close minded; I'm just picky.

[New Trail]

 

.... If I haven't heard it in my daily life - it probably isn't worth putting the time in at practice for. It isn't that I'm close minded; I'm just picky.

 

 

Yeah, that's pretty much exactly the excuse the guys in my previous band said, in a lord-it-over-you kind of way. "I won't listen to Top 40, It's all crap, and beneath me." That's tired! One guy said exactly what you said that if he hadn't heard the song (basically without listening to the radio) then it wasn't worth playing. The song we learned that we DID learn that he said at least he had heard was, at that time, 11 years old.

 

You don't have to listen to Top 40 or watch MTV or VH1 videos all day long, just be aware!