Members Phantasm Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 (I'm not trying to start anything with this, I'm just curious for more points of view.) Why is it that folks who are a little older, in their 40s, who really like Classic Rock (Led Zepplin, Grand Funk, The James Gang, etc.) seem to dismiss the entire 90s as, well, as it was put to me recently "angst filled total garbage" EXCEPT for the following bands that seem to be "allowed": - Collective Soul- Godsmack- Creed Any clues anyone can offer? Is this just a phenomenon in this area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bnyswonger Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 (I'm not trying to start anything with this, I'm just curious for more points of view.)Why is it that folks who are a little older, in their 40s, who really like Classic Rock (Led Zepplin, Grand Funk, The James Gang, etc.) seem to dismiss the entire 90s as, well, as it was put to me recently "angst filled total garbage" EXCEPT for the following bands that seem to be "allowed":- Collective Soul- Godsmack- CreedAny clues anyone can offer? Is this just a phenomenon in this area? That's a local phemenon I'm guessing. There is 90's music I like, but those aren't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members greenshag Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I think bob is the exception to this phenomenom:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Emprov Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I think that kind of stuff happens with any generation. At some point, people become old farts and feel that the music coming out isn't as good as the music that was made in their day. My guitarist is 44 and all he wants to play is older stuff. He's a great guitarist and all but his musical development stopped about the time Santana tried to go Top 40. It happens to the best of us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 Honestly, there was always just as much crappy music, but since it's mostly forgetable, us old farts forget it and only reember the cream of the crop from back-in-da-day. The industry HAS kinda clamped down on anything not currently "trendy" compared to the early days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members thelurker Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 Honestly, there was always just as much crappy music, but since it's mostly forgetable, us old farts forget it and only reember the cream of the crop from back-in-da-day. The industry HAS kinda clamped down on anything not currently "trendy" compared to the early days. Yeah, I noticed they didn't include "Starland Vocal Band" in the original post! Still, to some extent, many of the earlier bands were considered innovators, and many who like them would tend to see the ninety's as "dumbed down". Not completely, but when you look at mainstream pop/rock, you see the slow disappearance of the guitar solo, for example, and a surge in "effects-oriented" sounds, i.e. things that are done in the studio, but difficult to reproduce live. Lotsa filters on vioices, and drum loops in play. Add in the fact hat older people tend to work longer hours than they did as kids, and get less listening time than they used to, and it starts to take it's toll. When it's $15.99 for a CD, who you gonna buy, Zepplin (who you know) or The Mars Volta (who you don't). Lastly, right or wrong, it seems that most new acts cannot generate the following of the old classics. I work many shows a year in a concert venue, and can attest to this fact. It seems like many newer acts NEED to get clustered together into festival shows to get enough traction to fill a medium-sized venue. Also, many newer acts have not learned the arena-sized art of entertaining. Much of the club-level stuff they do is considered childish by older audiences. I Think you forgot Lenny Kravitz on your list, but it should be recognized that he essentially puts on a 1970's style rock show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AntiStuff Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 Both of my parents, who were in their 40s in the 90's, loved 90s alternative rock. They still listened to their old LPs, but they liked the new stuff also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 (I'm not trying to start anything with this, I'm just curious for more points of view.)Why is it that folks who are a little older, in their 40s, who really like Classic Rock (Led Zepplin, Grand Funk, The James Gang, etc.) seem to dismiss the entire 90s as, well, as it was put to me recently "angst filled total garbage" EXCEPT for the following bands that seem to be "allowed":- Collective Soul- Godsmack- CreedAny clues anyone can offer? Is this just a phenomenon in this area? must be local.....Those bands are nothing special 'round here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bnyswonger Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I agree that we've managed to forget about a lot of the utter crap that was produced back then. Also it's a numbers game - there are so many more wannabees out there (and that increases daily) that the whole scene is diluted and it's very hard for anyone to have crossover success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jannda Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 Well I'm into 60s-70s mostly but there was a lot of good stuff from the 90s I just can't remember what it was but there was ?had to be? wasn't there? I know there was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators isaac42 Posted February 16, 2007 Moderators Share Posted February 16, 2007 I don't think I've even heard of Collective Soul. I've heard of Godsmack, but I haven't heard any of their music. I've heard Creed, and don't care for it much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Phantasm Posted February 16, 2007 Author Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I agree that we've managed to forget about a lot of the utter crap that was produced back then. Also it's a numbers game - there are so many more wannabees out there (and that increases daily) that the whole scene is diluted and it's very hard for anyone to have crossover success. I agree, there are so many bands out there finding the good ones is like searching for a needle in a haystack. To make it worse, the labels aren't really signing any of those good bands. The criteria these days seems to be looks, marketability of looks, willingness to accept orders, willingness to accept no pay, and then finally can they actually hold an instrument. And even worse, if a band comes up with some potential they may never reach it. Labels are very quick to drop bands these days vs. letting them grow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I don't think I've even heard of Collective Soul. A bit more pop oriented rock, GREAT hooks and unique singer. One of my fav modern bands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pickinatit Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 Add in the fact hat older people tend to work longer hours than they did as kids, and get less listening time than they used to, and it starts to take it's toll. When it's $15.99 for a CD, who you gonna buy, Zepplin (who you know) or The Mars Volta (who you don't)... Yes again!! This is probably the biggest problem I have with more recent music. My listening time is so limited! I listen to radio in the car and I'll hear something new that I like and say to myself, I'll have to look for that, but at crunch time I end up deciding to re-buy "Yes - Fragile" on CD instead. And when I get time to listen at home, do I want to spend it listening to something I may or may not like?? Or to something that I know I love ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fran da Man Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I'm in my late 40's and i can't stand classic rock. Heard it growing up and used to play it, 30 some years later "why the f**k would i want to play it"?Yes i've moved on...next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members greenshag Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I agree, there are so many bands out there finding the good ones is like searching for a needle in a haystack.To make it worse, the labels aren't really signing any of those good bands. The criteria these days seems to be looks, marketability of looks, willingness to accept orders, willingness to accept no pay, and then finally can they actually hold an instrument.And even worse, if a band comes up with some potential they may never reach it. Labels are very quick to drop bands these days vs. letting them grow. labels have been doing this with rock music since the 60's... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members T. Alan Smith Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I remember several great bands from the 90's...hell, that's the decade I made the most money playing music. Anyway, I remember MUCH more trash from the 90's...but that just how every decade is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sunburstbasser Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 labels have been doing this with rock music since the 60's... Longer than that even. Duke Ellington got hosed by labels before writing "Take the A Train," then got hosed again when his new label added lyrics for half of his royalties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bnyswonger Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 I'm totally ready for Albert Grossman to exploit the {censored} out me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members collinwho Posted February 16, 2007 Members Share Posted February 16, 2007 (I'm not trying to start anything with this, I'm just curious for more points of view.)Why is it that folks who are a little older, in their 40s, who really like Classic Rock (Led Zepplin, Grand Funk, The James Gang, etc.) seem to dismiss the entire 90s as, well, as it was put to me recently "angst filled total garbage" EXCEPT for the following bands that seem to be "allowed":- Collective Soul- Godsmack- CreedAny clues anyone can offer? Is this just a phenomenon in this area? This is going to be coming from a bit of a different angle, but here goes. First off, I'm 23, so I'm young still, and I basically grew up on what was happening in the 90's. I've heard all of the "Classic Rock" music. I've listened extensively to Led Zepplin, Cream, The Who, Pink Floyd, etc. Most of it I've thrown away. I can respect the musicianship, but the music itself is very irrelevant to me. Honestly, when I come across people my own age who are into them, I have trouble relating to them. Its tough for a struggling 23 year old listen to a bunch of 50 years olds who have done fairly well for themselves sing about struggles. I imagine it is equally as tough for a 50 year old who is doing fine to listen to a bunch of 20-somethings whine about life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Deacon_blue Posted February 17, 2007 Members Share Posted February 17, 2007 Some things I don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members One_Dude Posted February 17, 2007 Members Share Posted February 17, 2007 I'll go back a little farther to the 60' and 70's. I think that one natural thing that happens is that the better music from a bygone era continues to be heard while the crappy stuff fades away. One thing that I see happening today is that many popular performers are more about projecting an "image" than about playing good solid music. And this is exactly what the record companies want; if the listening public's attention can be diverted away from the music and on to the image of the artist the record companies have more control. They can establish image on anyone at anytime; good music is more difficult to fabricate. For instance compare Britney Spears to Creedance Clearwater Revival; one is about image, the other was about the music. Or how about Justin Timberlake to The Eagles. Again one is mostly smoke and mirrors and the other is about good music. Of course this was also done back-in-the-day; hence The Monkeys, and Kiss. Most of my parents generation thought the music of the pre Rock N Roll era was the best. To some extent I believe that is a product of whatever was popular when a person is at the age where they listen to a lot of current music. That being said, my 93 year old father-in-law has his radio set to a rock station. JR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.