My Morning Jacket

I got in a beer-induced discussion on the last good year for music, which was agreed (somewhat) to be 1996ish. The other side said we've never recovered, and I said the difference between the early and mid 90s and now is that there just hasn't been a cohesive scene geographically, nor has there been a cohesive merging of what is truly good music and what is popular. It's been more of a sparse post-apocalyptic landscape dotted by monumental albums and the occasional scenic view. The 90s saw great bands co-exist with great one-hit wonders that were actually awesome bands (like Nada Surf or Better than Ezra). It was then killed by the insurgence of Creed, Linkin Park, Staind, and other eyebrow ring music.

After that, bands had to stand on their own. Indie rock was marketed to extinction in the same way Grunge was, and emo became the new talentless hair metal. The biggest and best albums never got the exposure like Ten and Nevermind, and instead they seem to only have gotten to the level similar underground legends of the 90s, like Slanted and Enchanted or Experimental Jet Set, Trash and No Star. Albums like Boys and Girls in America or Z, even if not fan favorites, are put together so well that they should be as legendary in shaping the musical landscape as Ten or Nevermind, yet they never really reached the level of national acclaim that they deserved. Instead they'll live on within the realm of music snobs and hipsters who claim to be "in the know". This may not be a bad thing though.

Any thoughts? Did music die in 1996? Is there a scene outside of some mile-long stretch of dive bars in Austin that I'm missing? Certainly music doesn't suck now, but there's no real uniting force. To sum it up - there's not any one sound for a band like Candlebox to ruin.

i don't think you'll have any more scenes (let alone an epic scene like that) other than the smaller ones (baltimore, portland) w/a few bands gaining a little notoriety from pitchfork or some festival play. there are so many small labels, websites, digital resources to distribute music that bands really can start touring, distributing, getting out there w/out the help of a scene. you used to have the radio telling you what was good and what to listen to --now satellite radio, internet radio, file sharing, any kind of music is at your fingertips so you'll never have the kind of effect that an album like Ten had; just too much variety out there and too much access to everything--information overload as Jim talks about... i remember Nevermind and Ten just blowing people away because it also went against everything mainstream; now anything different IS the mainstream/ antony & the johnsons IS the mainstream;

but there area lot of bands around now that sound very forgettable as the candleboxes did of the 90s  (arcade fire, clap your hands, etc) a ton of indie bands i can never see past a few albums; they get blown up so huge and they just don't have staying power---i think as we get older, it gets easier to spot those bands

I think one of the best decades for "popular" music is this current decade. The 90s was pretty good and the 80s almost killed rock... and disco killed rock for a little while in the 70s.

I had a music history professor back in the late 80s tell my class that rock music wasn't original or innovative after 1969 and he made a compelling case: that rock and pop in the decades following the 60s did nothing new; that the artists only adapted what was created in the 60s and 50s. As much as that confused me at the time (I was pretty young), he was (and is) right. But, he also thought everything after Tommy was unworthy. I'd love to jump back in time and take on this Queen's University and future Harvard professor. I'd kick his ass. There's really a ceiling on what can be created and/or modified and popular music hit the saturation point in the late 60s - the prof was no fan of 70s Zappa, but loved the original Mothers. But things evolve and to remain rooted in any decade is short-sighted, ignorant and pathetic.  

Arcade Fire sound forgettable?
I think there will always be good music around, that won't change. It doesn't matter much to me wether it reaches the mainstream or not.

A discussion about good and bad music. Oh boy...  :-/

 ;D :D(http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu312/edtombell/big_2554093.jpg) :D ;D

Every Year = Awesome Music to be Found

What I'm getting at is not that there's a lack of truly incredible music being made, but it's more like the city states of Greece vs the Roman Empire - there are a lot of strong city state type bands that are these islands of talent, and you have your little islands full of sirens luring you in that are great, but will probably always be somewhat of local legend you whisper about to a visitor.  There's not a massive, cohesive scene, whether it be geographically or commercially, that combines great talent + recognition.

And for what it's worth, the Arcade Fire have a very forgettable sound. I'll give them credit in creating the mood, but they're a band where the songs build but never peak, they just meander along.

To me, it just feels like that a lack of organization causes people to become like the arcade fire - they meander but never go anywhere. They float from island to island/band to band. Maybe it's complacency.

I guess the only thing I feel like we're missing out on from not having that "sound" would be missing out on a feeling like Hunter Thompson described in Fear and Loathing during his "strange memories" passage:
"Maybe not, in the long run, but no explanation, no mix of words or music or memories can touch that sense of knowing that you were there and alive in that corner of time and the world"
[media]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ozFAjANZc8[/media]

If Jim is right with the information overload, then is abstinence here the best solution? Do we intentionally hold out, bring back the thrill of waiting for that album to drop and skipping our last class to be the first of our friends to get it? Do our friends even "get it"? Maybe he's right in that sense. And you have to give him credit, it seems like he's trying to build a scene the best way he can - collaborations, getting the fans involved, injecting philosophy without coming off dogmatic and Bono-esque.

QuoteWhat I'm getting at is not that there's a lack of truly incredible music being made, but it's more like the city states of Greece vs the Roman Empire - there are a lot of strong city state type bands that are these islands of talent, and you have your little islands full of sirens luring you in that are great, but will probably always be somewhat of local legend you whisper about to a visitor.  There's not a massive, cohesive scene, whether it be geographically or commercially, that combines great talent + recognition.

And for what it's worth, the Arcade Fire have a very forgettable sound. I'll give them credit in creating the mood, but they're a band where the songs build but never peak, they just meander along.

To me, it just feels like that a lack of organization causes people to become like the arcade fire - they meander but never go anywhere. They float from island to island/band to band. Maybe it's complacency.

I guess the only thing I feel like we're missing out on from not having that "sound" would be missing out on a feeling like Hunter Thompson described in Fear and Loathing during his "strange memories" passage:
"Maybe not, in the long run, but no explanation, no mix of words or music or memories can touch that sense of knowing that you were there and alive in that corner of time and the world"
[media]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ozFAjANZc8[/media]

If Jim is right with the information overload, then is abstinence here the best solution? Do we intentionally hold out, bring back the thrill of waiting for that album to drop and skipping our last class to be the first of our friends to get it? Do our friends even "get it"? Maybe he's right in that sense. And you have to give him credit, it seems like he's trying to build a scene the best way he can - collaborations, getting the fans involved, injecting philosophy without coming off dogmatic and Bono-esque.

Wow!  That is convoluted and all over the place (not in a bad way of course).  If you need "recognition", than you will always be searching for the unicorn.  As far as cohesion goes, I agree with PL that musical dispersion in all its localized forms is the now and corresponds with basic sociology 101 concepts that we associate with the smallest commonality that may give us identity.  While we question mainstream music, we never question the monopoly that 3 TV stations and 5 radio stations had in the 60s that produced our Stones and Dylan and Beatles.  If you seek greatness in music in the form of mainstream acceptance, it detracts from the variety and sheer numbers of musicians out there right now that are able to share their art with the public.

I guess I get where you are coming from Chode but I find great music every year and none of it is ever recognized on any large scale.  Music is personal and beautiful and sometimes doesn't require a guitar ;)

Quote

And for what it's worth, the Arcade Fire have a very forgettable sound. I'll give them credit in creating the mood, but they're a band where the songs build but never peak, they just meander along.

To me, it just feels like that a lack of organization causes people to become like the arcade fire - they meander but never go anywhere. They float from island to island/band to band. Maybe it's complacency.

this is why I cannot stand threads like this. I'm sooo glad I have reached a point in my life where I don't have to argue or justify the music I like. What a waste of breath.

There is abso-fucking-lutely nothing you can say to me to change my opinion about Arcade Fire; I dig them.

And, there is abso-fucking-lutely nothing I can say to you to change your opinion about Arcade Fire.

And there it is.

What I hope for is a day where people will get over themselves enough to realize that their opinions about music are horse shit and don't amount to anything, at all, on any level, other than romanticizing that YOUR music is the best and that YOU understand music more than anyone and that YOU get it and no one else does.

Like, feel pity for me b/c I simply just don't "get" music on the level you do.

You think there is anything, at all, on the planet, that I could say to an Animal Collective fan that would make them UNDERSTAND that they suck?   ;D ;D ;D ;D

What a fucking waste of time.

I own 22 Rush CD's. 22. And I love every one of them, even though some of them meander.

Long Live Rock

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-S5aVuKsgI[/media]

Quote

Quote

And for what it's worth, the Arcade Fire have a very forgettable sound. I'll give them credit in creating the mood, but they're a band where the songs build but never peak, they just meander along.

To me, it just feels like that a lack of organization causes people to become like the arcade fire - they meander but never go anywhere. They float from island to island/band to band. Maybe it's complacency.

this is why I cannot stand threads like this. I'm sooo glad I have reached a point in my life where I don't have to argue or justify the music I like. What a waste of breath.

There is abso-fucking-lutely nothing you can say to me to change my opinion about Arcade Fire; I dig them.

And, there is abso-fucking-lutely nothing I can say to you to change your opinion about Arcade Fire.

And there it is.

What I hope for is a day where people will get over themselves enough to realize that their opinions about music are horse shit and don't amount to anything, at all, on any level, other than romanticizing that YOUR music is the best and that YOU understand music more than anyone and that YOU get it and no one else does.

Like, feel pity for me b/c I simply just don't "get" music on the level you do.

You think there is anything, at all, on the planet, that I could say to an Animal Collective fan that would make them UNDERSTAND that they suck?   ;D ;D ;D ;D

What a fucking waste of time.

I own 22 Rush CD's. 22. And I love every one of them, even though some of them meander.

Long Live Rock

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-S5aVuKsgI[/media]

RUSH BLOWS

Quote
RUSH BLOWS

Have you heard Vital Signs? Man, that song fucking rocks! I know you would love Rush if you just heard Vital Signs. Maybe you just don't have a firm grasp on what good music is. Send me a list of all your music, and I will tell you

A) what to keep
B) what to get rid of
C) what to buy

see, I understand music, better than most people b/c what I like is the best. I am just like that, but I can help you out.

In the meantime, Vital Signs!
(you're welcome)

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z31Uk9BQJus[/media]

Quote

Quote
RUSH BLOWS

Have you heard Vital Signs? Man, that song fucking rocks! I know you would love Rush if you just heard Vital Signs. Maybe you just don't have a firm grasp on what good music is. Send me a list of all your music, and I will tell you

A) what to keep
B) what to get rid of
C) what to buy

see, I understand music, better than most people b/c what I like is the best. I am just like that, but I can help you out.

In the meantime, Vital Signs!
(you're welcome)

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z31Uk9BQJus[/media]

;D ;D ;D

Nice.  As I've said before, side 2 of Moving Pictures "IS THE MOST UNDERRATED 20 MINUTES OF MUSIC IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD."

Quote
Nice.  As I've said before, side 2 of Moving Pictures "IS THE MOST UNDERRATED 20 MINUTES OF MUSIC IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD."

I saw this tour in 81; Jr. in high school. I may have been hiiiiiiigh   ;)
Just listen to the echo in the "concert hall".

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o92nUObIWBI[/media]

Oh yeah I forgot.  Camera's Eye kicks Vital Sign's ass IMHO [smiley=vrolijk_1.gif]

here, while I'm at it, how about some more forgettable, meandering, sub-standared music?

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwHdrY_pbJI&feature=related[/media]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoNFXBWrd4Y[/media]

I think Arcade Fire puts on a better live show than MMJ and Neon Bible is kicks Evil Urges' ass. But hey, it's all a matter of opinion, eh?

Rush went downhill fast after 1982. Bring it on Tracy! All you Rush fans are militant in your love of all things Rush.

The Who's "Long Live Rock" is one of my least favourtie Who songs, and they are my favourite band (along with the Allman Brothers).

QuoteI think Arcade Fire puts on a better live show than MMJ and Neon Bible is kicks Evil Urges' ass. But hey, it's all a matter of opinion, eh?

Rush went downhill fast after 1982. Bring it on Tracy! All you Rush fans are militant in your love of all things Rush.

The Who's "Long Live Rock" is one of my least favourtie Who songs, and they are my favourite band (along with the Allman Brothers).

I think if you and I spent a couple of weeks together listening to nothing but the post 1982 Rush library you'd come around. You just don't understand music like I do...

Quote

QuoteI think Arcade Fire puts on a better live show than MMJ and Neon Bible is kicks Evil Urges' ass. But hey, it's all a matter of opinion, eh?

Rush went downhill fast after 1982. Bring it on Tracy! All you Rush fans are militant in your love of all things Rush.

The Who's "Long Live Rock" is one of my least favourtie Who songs, and they are my favourite band (along with the Allman Brothers).

I think if you and I spent a couple of weeks together listening to nothing but the post 1982 Rush library you'd come around. You just don't understand music like I do...

I know a lot of their 80s and 90s library. They are from Toronto so their music is all over the airwaves (and I see Geddy at Blue Jays games - he sits behind home-plate; you can't miss him on TV). My best friend is the biggest Rush fan I know, but even he doesn't endorse their mid and latter career albums. But, he thinks they haven't missed a beat in concert. I agree with that. I think they got less experimental, instrumentally speaking, as they got older. And too many mid-tempo tunes that were often keyboard driven.

P.S.

Would I be able to take "a couple of weeks" of just Rush? I don't know if I could take a couple of weeks of any one band, even The Beatles.

QuoteP.S.

Would I be able to take "a couple of weeks" of just Rush? I don't know if I could take a couple of weeks of any one band, even The Beatles.

I agree,but damn it seems like I went more than a couple  of months with MMJ...does that constitute a problem? I hope not cause I have plenty....you know with the chickens and all ::) :D

i thought the point of chode's original post was to question the cohesiveness of the scene(s) and whether or not you could ever have a single album or scene impact the country (or world) like the grunge impact--? i watched VH1-Classic Albums (the making of Nevermind) and once again was astounded by the overnight explosion, w/in days, w/in weeks; everyone related to that album.

[size=14]how did (yet another) thread get hijacked into a thread debating the merits of RUSH :-) ha ha[/size]

ps-arcade fire is not bad, i just don't think the songs are there; they  might be...buried deep...somewhere. i gave them a few years then they will vanish like a ton of those other indie bands.

QuoteP.S.

Would I be able to take "a couple of weeks" of just Rush?

it's different for everyone. I held my girlfriend down on the ground (literally) and made her listen to Xanadu in it's entirety and she ended up marrying me.  :-?

I think grunge hit everyone, especially younger people, because the 80s sucked ass and grunge was something totally different, something primal and honest, unlike what was around during pre-grunge: depressing whimp-pop from Britain, aging supergroups and bloated metal.

I can't see Arcade Fire going away. They have real substance. I think they are astonishingly good, especially live. One of the best concerts I've ever seen in my 41 years, beating The Who in 1988 and Pete Townshend @ Massey Hall, 1992.

Quotei watched VH1-Classic Albums (the making of Nevermind) and once again was astounded by the overnight explosion, w/in days, w/in weeks; everyone related to that album.

Hype is a great "documentary" regarding the explosion (or implosion) of the grunge movement; check it out if you haven't seen it, the whole thing is on YouTube. Here's part 1

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue2l7Mzd5iw[/media]

This pretty much sums it up for me

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnyCJDYONSU[/media]

You sure like them Toronto artists, eh Tracy? First Rush, then the Kids. What's next, Triumph, Max Webster and Neil Young?

QuoteI think Arcade Fire puts on a better live show than MMJ and Neon Bible is kicks Evil Urges' ass. But hey, it's all a matter of opinion, eh?

Rush went downhill fast after 1982. Bring it on Tracy! All you Rush fans are militant in your love of all things Rush.

The Who's "Long Live Rock" is one of my least favourtie Who songs, and they are my favourite band (along with the Allman Brothers).

(http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu312/edtombell/TommyLeeJonesimpliedfaceplam.jpg)

QuoteYou sure like them Toronto artists, eh Tracy? First Rush, then the Kids. What's next, Triumph, Max Webster and Neil Young?

(//%3Cbr%20/%3Ehttp://jdusome.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/mats-sundin-in-toronto1.jpg)

Quote[highlight]i thought the point of chode's original post[/highlight] was to question the cohesiveness of the scene(s) and whether or not you could ever have a single album or scene impact the country (or world) like the grunge impact--? i watched VH1-Classic Albums (the making of Nevermind) and once again was astounded by the overnight explosion, w/in days, w/in weeks; everyone related to that album.

[size=14]how did (yet another) thread get hijacked into a thread debating the merits of RUSH :-) ha ha[/size]

ps-arcade fire is not bad, i just don't think the songs are there; they  might be...buried deep...somewhere. i gave them a few years then they will vanish like a ton of those other indie bands.

[highlight]I got in a beer-induced discussion on the last good year for music[/highlight] chode said that.
Who gives a shit whether everybody likes a record or not, >:( or what year it came from, or if the artist has more than one record. If you like it play it!  [smiley=thumbsup.gif] The masses don't have to get it. Bono said people get the pop charts they deserve. Popular music is what I play at my house, beer induced discussions are forgotten. [smiley=beer.gif]
Funny I have 22 Rush albums too..I'm workin' on my list :)

I never understood how people get so uppity and touchy-feely when people criticize a band they like. The only fault of a discussion on good and bad music is when people can't discuss it for what it is and not wind up viewing a valid opinion of a band as an personal attack like they're the lyricist and composer of every song written by the band and each song was written about their dying grandmother.

I fucking love .38 Special, but if you want to rag on them for being the shittier version of a shitty Lynyrd Skynyrd, then go for it. It won't stop me from rockin' out to Caught Up In You while I speed down the highway.

However, there still remains one band that is universally understood as hated and unlikeable, and that is Starship. It's undeniable.

Still, as the original point was, it's not that I seek mainstream recognition of a band like MMJ. I prefer them to not have it because it'll keep ticket prices down and it will keep them at small(er) venues. On the flip side, when there is momentum behind something, the synergy may produce something truly monumental.  Yes, if you like it, play it. Yes, there's always good music. But haven't you ever wondered if we are missing out on something BIG? That the only voice of a generation might turn out to be Bono or Bon Jovi? They're like Hillary Clinton - not even from around here, and they're acting like they run the place because somehow someone keeps validating them.

Still, reducing it to an element of "it's all relative" doesn't do anything fun, meaningful, nor does it insult anyone personally, ergo it's not fun.

QuoteI think grunge hit everyone, especially younger people, because the 80s sucked ass and grunge was something totally different, something primal and honest, unlike what was around during pre-grunge: depressing whimp-pop from Britain, aging supergroups and bloated metal.

I think this is the type of generalization that I have been trying to avoid though I'm sure I'm often guilty of it myself.  I graduated high school in '96 and grew up during the so called "Seattle Movement."  What is grunge?  Is it a type of rock 'n roll?  I don't think many of the bands from that era sound alike.  Ahh but I digress.  What I was going to say was that I never personally enjoyed Nevermind or Ten.  I think they are OK but in my opinion and that's it.  I was busy listening to Jimi, Floyd, Rush, Tribe Called Quest, Bad Religion etc.

I was forced to cover too many Nirvana and Pearl Jam songs in the bands I played in and I hated it.  I guess my point is that there is someone who actually doesn't like PJ and NIrvana that much :)

QuoteI never understood how people get so uppity and touchy-feely when people criticize a band they like. The only fault of a discussion on good and bad music is when people can't discuss it for what it is and not wind up viewing a valid opinion of a band as an personal attack like they're the lyricist and composer of every song written by the band and each song was written about their dying grandmother.

I fucking love .38 Special, but if you want to rag on them for being the shittier version of a shitty Lynyrd Skynyrd, then go for it. It won't stop me from rockin' out to Caught Up In You while I speed down the highway.

However, there still remains one band that is universally understood as hated and unlikeable, and that is Starship. It's undeniable.

Still, as the original point was, it's not that I seek mainstream recognition of a band like MMJ. I prefer them to not have it because it'll keep ticket prices down and it will keep them at small(er) venues. On the flip side, when there is momentum behind something, the synergy may produce something truly monumental.  Yes, if you like it, play it. Yes, there's always good music. But haven't you ever wondered if we are missing out on something BIG? That the only voice of a generation might turn out to be Bono or Bon Jovi? They're like Hillary Clinton - not even from around here, and they're acting like they run the place because somehow someone keeps validating them.

Still, reducing it to an element of "it's all relative" doesn't do anything fun, meaningful, nor does it insult anyone personally, ergo it's not fun.

What does it mean to be a voice of a generation?  I really don't want someone to be the voice of a generation.  You keep flip flopping.  Are you saying that you want MMJ to sell 30 million albums and Jim James become the voice for everyone or to be preserved for those "in the know" like yourself.

I'm not trying to be a dick here (really) but this is really a discussion of what should become popular in white, american rock music.  Correct?

I mean any conversation of what constitutes great music surely must exclude any foreign, non guitar and hihat, bass, snare, tom based music?

Agree to disagree I guess.  I'm lost.  I don't understand this thread at all.  Forgive me :-?

Quote

QuoteI think grunge hit everyone, especially younger people, because the 80s sucked ass and grunge was something totally different, something primal and honest, unlike what was around during pre-grunge: depressing whimp-pop from Britain, aging supergroups and bloated metal.

I think this is the type of generalization that I have been trying to avoid though I'm sure I'm often guilty of it myself.  I graduated high school in '96 and grew up during the so called "Seattle Movement."  What is grunge?  Is it a type of rock 'n roll?  I don't think many of the bands from that era sound alike.  Ahh but I digress.  What I was going to say was that I never personally enjoyed Nevermind or Ten.  I think they are OK but in my opinion and that's it.  I was busy listening to Jimi, Floyd, Rush, Tribe Called Quest, Bad Religion etc.

[highlight]I was forced to cover too many Nirvana and Pearl Jam songs in the bands I played in and I hated it.[/highlight]  I guess my point is that there is someone who actually doesn't like PJ and NIrvana that much :)

You should have BrungdaRuckus then [smiley=evil.gif]
sounds like a musical low ;)

Quote

QuoteI never understood how people get so uppity and touchy-feely when people criticize a band they like. The only fault of a discussion on good and bad music is when people can't discuss it for what it is and not wind up viewing a valid opinion of a band as an personal attack like they're the lyricist and composer of every song written by the band and each song was written about their dying grandmother.

I fucking love .38 Special, but if you want to rag on them for being the shittier version of a shitty Lynyrd Skynyrd, then go for it. It won't stop me from rockin' out to Caught Up In You while I speed down the highway.

However, there still remains one band that is universally understood as hated and unlikeable, and that is Starship. It's undeniable.

Still, as the original point was, it's not that I seek mainstream recognition of a band like MMJ. I prefer them to not have it because it'll keep ticket prices down and it will keep them at small(er) venues. On the flip side, when there is momentum behind something, the synergy may produce something truly monumental.  Yes, if you like it, play it. Yes, there's always good music. But haven't you ever wondered if we are missing out on something BIG? That the only voice of a generation might turn out to be Bono or Bon Jovi? They're like Hillary Clinton - not even from around here, and they're acting like they run the place because somehow someone keeps validating them.

Still, reducing it to an element of "it's all relative" doesn't do anything fun, meaningful, nor does it insult anyone personally, ergo it's not fun.

What does it mean to be a voice of a generation?  I really don't want someone to be the voice of a generation.  You keep flip flopping.  Are you saying that you want MMJ to sell 30 million albums and Jim James become the voice for everyone or to be preserved for those "in the know" like yourself.

I'm not trying to be a dick here (really) but this is really a discussion of what should become popular in white, american rock music.  Correct?

I mean any conversation of what constitutes great music surely must exclude any foreign, non guitar and hihat, bass, snare, tom based music?

Agree to disagree I guess.  I'm lost.  I don't understand this thread at all.  Forgive me :-?

Most of the "voices" of a musical generation are meaningless. But if you want to throw Bono out there with Bon Jovi then you're missing the point of a true voice. If everyone was as socially active as Bono then the world would be a better place. Bono has a voice and he uses his celebrity and power to try to do good for the world. I am totally down for Bono being the voice of a generation rather than someone like Kurt Cobain who could never rise above his demons; some romanticized "martyr" (against what? boredom? How using drugs at an early age stunts your emotional growth?) who made great music but is totally not someone I would try to emmulate.

It's like what Chris Rock says about Tupac and Bigge (other "spokesmen for a generation") when people say they were "assasinated". He says, those guys were shot. MLK was assasinated; JFK was assasinated; Malcolm X was assasinated.

And that's the problem. Generations are looking for pop culture stars for a voice. Bad idea.

QuoteI never understood how people get so uppity and touchy-feely when people criticize a band they like. The only fault of a discussion on good and bad music is when people can't discuss it for what it is and not wind up viewing a valid opinion of a band as an personal attack like they're the lyricist and composer of every song written by the band and each song was written about their dying grandmother.

It's the pretentiousness of it all that gets me; not as much as it used to, but some days it comes across as pious (and other days I could give a shit). I got in a beer-induced discussion on the last good year for music, which was agreed (somewhat) to be 1996ish. is one of those statements; just the idea of a conversation where people are pontificating about what year was the last good year for music.

Forgive me for not quoting specifically, because I'm lazy and it's easier this way. And I don't think you're trying to be a dick, Ruckus, it's exactly the way I hoped the conversation would progress. I've tried keeping this post short in the name of clairty, but it doesn't seem to be going that way.

I'm flip-flopping because I don't really have a stance either way, which is probably why it comes across as confusing too. On one hand, I wouldn't want Jim James to be designated as the emissary to the world on behalf of hipsters from Brooklyn or hippies from Kentucky. On the other hand, being that I agree with a lot of what he says, I would love for his voice to be heard more clearly by more people, whether it be singing or philosophizing. But I didn't start this thread with an answer in mind, and I don't expect to find one.

It's like what Chris Rock says about Tupac and Bigge (other "spokesmen for a generation") when people say they were "assasinated". He says, those guys were shot. MLK was assasinated; JFK was assasinated; Malcolm X was assasinated.

And that's the problem. Generations are looking for pop culture stars for a voice. Bad idea.

I guess the other sad thing is that there is a lack of inspiring figures. Not none, but not many either. If people are going to look for a voice, is it better to have a Dylan instead of a Bon Jovi? Or is that irrelevant? My other point is that the big voices are not from this time - Bruce, Bono, Bon Jovi, so who is going to be this generations' Bruce, Bono, etc?

Re: good music excluding that without the guitar, hi-hat, bass-snare-tom etc:

Someone like Bela Fleck is never really going to hit it "big" in the sense of U2 big. It is undoubtedly talented, excellent stuff, but it's not of the sort to go to top. It's just that plain rock'n'roll is the big thing for the past 60 or 70 years, so that's where the most chips will lie when discussing the overlap between "big" and "popular". Also, it's not purely about "good" and "bad" music, but my general theory goes like this:

The overlap between best and popular music always has the message to go with it. Whether it be political or social in nature; Nixon or Free love is irrelevant. That is what we seem to be missing out on.

It seems that people are going to look to pop culture for their leaders, is it fair to expect them to have to lead? If so, don't we want to have people with something to say having the voice? Is it all on Eddie Vedder?

I hear you on the pretentiousness too, Tracy. In fact, I was not the one who brought it up, but my main idea was are we better or worse off without having that unified "movement" or "scene", or are we better or worse off having a bunch of smaller "cliques" of fans, and who cares if the rest of the world cares?

I hope this clarified it a bit and didn't kill the thread because I enjoy the discussion.

housekeeping
(http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu312/edtombell/bullshit.jpg?t=1238439600)

Sheriff, you crack me up.

No it is not on Vedder cuz' I don't give a rat's ass about what Eddie Vedder thinks in "leading us".

And no, people do not look to pop culture figures as leaders.  Some may but many don't.

Perhaps I'm wrong but I will reiterate that this so called cohesion between good music and the mainstream is a transparent fiction (i repeat - good music is everywhere).  I like Coheed and Cambria.  Sorry, can't help it.

Again, with the access that we have to such a variety of music through such a variety of mediums, the likelihood of some consensus, music centered socio political movement may seem a little bit more difficult.

I'm happy as is.  It's nice that I can step out of my house in B'more and check out a new and different act every night if I want to.  That is sweet.

Quote

QuoteYou sure like them Toronto artists, eh Tracy? First Rush, then the Kids. What's next, Triumph, Max Webster and Neil Young?

(//%3Cbr%20/%3Ehttp://jdusome.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/mats-sundin-in-toronto1.jpg)

Sundin's a Swede and plays for the Canucks, but I like your post! He's still a god in Toronto.

Quote

QuoteI think grunge hit everyone, especially younger people, because the 80s sucked ass and grunge was something totally different, something primal and honest, unlike what was around during pre-grunge: depressing whimp-pop from Britain, aging supergroups and bloated metal.

I think this is the type of generalization that I have been trying to avoid though I'm sure I'm often guilty of it myself.  I graduated high school in '96 and grew up during the so called "Seattle Movement."  What is grunge?  Is it a type of rock 'n roll?  I don't think many of the bands from that era sound alike.  Ahh but I digress.  What I was going to say was that I never personally enjoyed Nevermind or Ten.  I think they are OK but in my opinion and that's it.  I was busy listening to Jimi, Floyd, Rush, Tribe Called Quest, Bad Religion etc.

I was forced to cover too many Nirvana and Pearl Jam songs in the bands I played in and I hated it.  I guess my point is that there is someone who actually doesn't like PJ and NIrvana that much :)

I don't want to write an essay about my perceived generalizations, but I think grunge was partly born as a reaction to the 80s music scenes. Perhaps not as political or angry as punk's creation in the 70s, but I still think the core of the grunge movement was reactionary and also driven by a great deal of angst.

Quote

Quote

QuoteI think grunge hit everyone, especially younger people, because the 80s sucked ass and grunge was something totally different, something primal and honest, unlike what was around during pre-grunge: depressing whimp-pop from Britain, aging supergroups and bloated metal.

I think this is the type of generalization that I have been trying to avoid though I'm sure I'm often guilty of it myself.  I graduated high school in '96 and grew up during the so called "Seattle Movement."  What is grunge?  Is it a type of rock 'n roll?  I don't think many of the bands from that era sound alike.  Ahh but I digress.  What I was going to say was that I never personally enjoyed Nevermind or Ten.  I think they are OK but in my opinion and that's it.  I was busy listening to Jimi, Floyd, Rush, Tribe Called Quest, Bad Religion etc.

I was forced to cover too many Nirvana and Pearl Jam songs in the bands I played in and I hated it.  I guess my point is that there is someone who actually doesn't like PJ and NIrvana that much :)

I don't want to write an essay about my perceived generalizations, but I think grunge was partly born as a reaction to the 80s music scenes. Perhaps not as political or angry as punk's creation in the 70s, but I still think the core of the grunge movement was reactionary and also driven by a great deal of angst.

I'll agree to that, just as much as the popularity of it is what eventually killed it. A lot of people saw a lot of party-time music being made when there wasn't necessarily a reason to party.

Quote

QuoteI think Arcade Fire puts on a better live show than MMJ and Neon Bible is kicks Evil Urges' ass. But hey, it's all a matter of opinion, eh?

Rush went downhill fast after 1982. Bring it on Tracy! All you Rush fans are militant in your love of all things Rush.

The Who's "Long Live Rock" is one of my least favourtie Who songs, and they are my favourite band (along with the Allman Brothers).

(http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu312/edtombell/TommyLeeJonesimpliedfaceplam.jpg)

I'm not a huge Arcade Fire fan, but their concert last year floored me. I've seen MMJ four times and their 2003 concert in Toronto ranks in my Top 10 ever, but it wasn't better than the Arcade Fire show, which is surprising (and M. Ward opened for MMJ!).

Everybody has a classic song from a favourite band that for some reason, they just don't like. I just don't like "Long Live Rock." I don't like "Squeze Box" either.

As for you defending post-1982 Rush? You proved my point.

Quote

Quote

Quote

QuoteI think grunge hit everyone, especially younger people, because the 80s sucked ass and grunge was something totally different, something primal and honest, unlike what was around during pre-grunge: depressing whimp-pop from Britain, aging supergroups and bloated metal.

I think this is the type of generalization that I have been trying to avoid though I'm sure I'm often guilty of it myself.  I graduated high school in '96 and grew up during the so called "Seattle Movement."  What is grunge?  Is it a type of rock 'n roll?  I don't think many of the bands from that era sound alike.  Ahh but I digress.  What I was going to say was that I never personally enjoyed Nevermind or Ten.  I think they are OK but in my opinion and that's it.  I was busy listening to Jimi, Floyd, Rush, Tribe Called Quest, Bad Religion etc.

I was forced to cover too many Nirvana and Pearl Jam songs in the bands I played in and I hated it.  I guess my point is that there is someone who actually doesn't like PJ and NIrvana that much :)

I don't want to write an essay about my perceived generalizations, but I think grunge was partly born as a reaction to the 80s music scenes. Perhaps not as political or angry as punk's creation in the 70s, but I still think the core of the grunge movement was reactionary and also driven by a great deal of angst.

I'll agree to that, just as much as the popularity of it is what eventually killed it. A lot of people saw a lot of party-time music being made when there wasn't necessarily a reason to party.

And grunge music for the most part is pretty serious and unfunny. Great music though and it ages very well. Gritty guitar-based music and great bands have a way of doing this.

I, ah....I see your point ;)
(http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu312/edtombell/6a00d83451c0bf69e200e54f688e8c8833-.jpg?t=1238442203)
Jmo,How did I prove your Rush point? edit: militant sure. Downhill since 1982 shit man that is dumb.
As far as AF vs MMJ that's a bold statement,  ;D I guess everyone likes different things. A band would probably have to kill the promoter,play all night and give the gate money back to rock me harder than the jacket
did in 2008 but that's just my opinion :) carry on [smiley=beer.gif]

Quote...the difference between the early and mid 90s and now is that there just hasn't been a cohesive scene geographically, nor has there been a cohesive merging of what is truly good music and what is popular.

I'd agree that the first part of that statement is true - not since 90s Grunge and Britpop has there been a large volume of generally regarded "good" music coming from one region, that has also made an impact on commercial radio. (And yes, I'm talking rock radio - while I'm not a big fan, even I noticed the sales numbers that Southern rappers were collectively getting around 10 years ago.) The second part of your statement is completely subjective, but I think I know what you're getting at.

The thing about Grunge, is that it changed radio station formats, gave birth (in many American markets) to commercial "Alternative" radio, and created a whole new kind of rock icon. That "scene" had such an impact, that record companies spent the next decade+ trying to force the next Grunge. Remember the swing music "craze", or when 3rd wave ska was getting mad radio play. Rap-rock, eyebrow ring music (that's awesome, btw), all pushes for the new explosive sound and image. But none of them even came close to sniffing the importance that Grunge had. It seems like the last several years we haven't had the push for packaged scenes like the mid/late 90s. While I wouldn't call it universally "good" music, the Grunge era certainly had more cultural impact than anything we've seen since in popular music. (and Mudhoney STILL RULES!!!)

I feel pretty out of touch when it comes to popular music these days, so I can't comment on what I think of it, but there's great music being released every month, from large and small labels. I feel pretty confident that there will be a geographically based music scene getting huge exposure again in the future though, and the music might even be "good".  

Quote...unlike what was around during pre-grunge: depressing whimp-pop from Britain...

I love 80s wimp-pop from Britain!!!  ::)  ;D  8-)



Oh, and Arcade Fire rules HARD!!!

Quote

Quote

The thing about Grunge, is that it changed radio station formats, gave birth (in many American markets) to commercial "Alternative" radio, and created a whole new kind of rock icon. That "scene" had such an impact, that record companies spent the next decade+ trying to force the next Grunge. Remember the swing music "craze", or when 3rd wave ska was getting mad radio play. Rap-rock, eyebrow ring music (that's awesome, btw), all pushes for the new explosive sound and image. But none of them even came close to sniffing the importance that Grunge had. It seems like the last several years we haven't had the push for packaged scenes like the mid/late 90s. While I wouldn't call it universally "good" music, the Grunge era certainly had more cultural impact than anything we've seen since in popular music. (and Mudhoney STILL RULES!!!)

I think this is spot on and goes back to I think what chode was kind of going for. 1 of the big radio stations in Pittsburgh is 105.9 The X that was born around 93 or so playing that music. However, still to do this day, Id say a good 65% of what they play is the popular stuff from the 90's - grunge, alternative, to beck or RATM. Its 1 of 2 radio stations I can ever leave on for more than 2 songs.

If another subgenre like that occurs, I dont see it happening soon.

Quote

Any thoughts? Did music die in 1996? Is there a scene outside of some mile-long stretch of dive bars in Austin that I'm missing? Certainly music doesn't suck now, but there's no real uniting force. To sum it up - there's not any one sound for a band like Candlebox to ruin.

I think your argument fits perfectly for hip hop, but like numerous people have said, theres plenty of good music being made, and even some of it I'd consider semi-popular like MMJ.

Good mainstream hip hop died in 1998, but that doesn't mean there's nothing good in the underground, there's actually tons of good stuff. Good hip hop gets only as popular as Common, Mos Def, The Roots, Outkast, etc., but even in those cases, they've all fallen off once they got popular.

Quote

You think there is anything, at all, on the planet, that I could say to an Animal Collective fan that would make them UNDERSTAND that they suck?   ;D ;D ;D ;D

Im glad we can agree on something

THis is the song that officially buried music!

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Pga4ax5aus[/media]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The thing about Grunge, is that it changed radio station formats, gave birth (in many American markets) to commercial "Alternative" radio, and created a whole new kind of rock icon. That "scene" had such an impact, that record companies spent the next decade+ trying to force the next Grunge. Remember the swing music "craze", or when 3rd wave ska was getting mad radio play. Rap-rock, eyebrow ring music (that's awesome, btw), all pushes for the new explosive sound and image. But none of them even came close to sniffing the importance that Grunge had. It seems like the last several years we haven't had the push for packaged scenes like the mid/late 90s. While I wouldn't call it universally "good" music, the Grunge era certainly had more cultural impact than anything we've seen since in popular music. (and Mudhoney STILL RULES!!!)

I think this is spot on and goes back to I think what chode was kind of going for. 1 of the big radio stations in Pittsburgh is 105.9 The X that was born around 93 or so playing that music. However, still to do this day, Id say a good 65% of what they play is the popular stuff from the 90's - grunge, alternative, to beck or RATM. Its 1 of 2 radio stations I can ever leave on for more than 2 songs.

If another subgenre like that occurs, I dont see it happening soon.

By this same reasoning, you can say that pop country and  club banging radio stations also were spawned by an sudden mainstream explosion and exist to this day.  What is being is argued is that a lot of you guys seemed to enjoy that music a lot and were young during its explosion and therefore its effect is personal.  Now if a 60 year old tells me that, I might drink the kool aid.

No one still has explained to me what grunge is.  It's not a type of music.  Just a hyped term.  Thanks Kurt Loder ;)

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The thing about Grunge, is that it changed radio station formats, gave birth (in many American markets) to commercial "Alternative" radio, and created a whole new kind of rock icon. That "scene" had such an impact, that record companies spent the next decade+ trying to force the next Grunge. Remember the swing music "craze", or when 3rd wave ska was getting mad radio play. Rap-rock, eyebrow ring music (that's awesome, btw), all pushes for the new explosive sound and image. But none of them even came close to sniffing the importance that Grunge had. It seems like the last several years we haven't had the push for packaged scenes like the mid/late 90s. While I wouldn't call it universally "good" music, the Grunge era certainly had more cultural impact than anything we've seen since in popular music. (and Mudhoney STILL RULES!!!)

I think this is spot on and goes back to I think what chode was kind of going for. 1 of the big radio stations in Pittsburgh is 105.9 The X that was born around 93 or so playing that music. However, still to do this day, Id say a good 65% of what they play is the popular stuff from the 90's - grunge, alternative, to beck or RATM. Its 1 of 2 radio stations I can ever leave on for more than 2 songs.

If another subgenre like that occurs, I dont see it happening soon.

By this same reasoning, you can say that pop country and  club banging radio stations also were spawned by an sudden mainstream explosion and exist to this day.  What is being is argued is that a lot of you guys seemed to enjoy that music a lot and were young during its explosion and therefore its effect is personal.  Now if a 60 year old tells me that, I might drink the kool aid.

No one still has explained to me what grunge is.  It's not a type of music.  Just a hyped term.  Thanks Kurt Loder ;)

Yeah, it's just a hyped term...a brand name for a collective of bands. I did enjoy a little Grunge at a point in my life where music was really starting to matter. But as I said above, Grunge was much more than another musical brand that Gen X/Y remembers fondly and talks up because they were there to see it happen...it sold like crazy and created a mainstream, commercial legitimacy to what until then had been "College Radio" music. Country music turned toward the mainstream - the stations have always been there. And electronic music has never reached the sales levels that grunge did, and certainly doesn't have the reach into parts of America that alternative radio does/did.  

Don't forget the post-grunge rap/rock movement: Kid Rock, Linkin Park, Staind, Slipknot, System of  A Down, etc... those guys sold millions of records, were in movies, soundtracks, video games, sporting events, hanging with the stars. And this "attitude", this hyper-masculinity, embraced by the X game skaters/BMX people and also the Jack Ass guys. This "style" sort of stuck, too. Pretty influential post grunge movement.

Or is rap/rock not "good" music?

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKAIlrkSZOg[/media]

Quote

Or is rap/rock not "good" music?

No it's not..except for System of the Down and when the beastie boys did it 20 years ago.  :-)

Quote What is being is argued is that a lot of you guys seemed to enjoy that music a lot and were young during its explosion and therefore its effect is personal.  

:-?

QuoteDon't forget the post-grunge rap/rock movement: Kid Rock, Linkin Park, Staind, Slipknot, System of  A Down, etc... those guys sold millions of records, were in movies, soundtracks, video games, sproting events, hanging with the stars. Definently a post grunge movement.

Or is rap/rock not "good" music?

So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

It was definitely something new, and it sold a shitload, BUT......this guy does not make good music, and he was the king of that shit!!!

(http://trendliest.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/durst-fred-photo-xl-fred-durst-6209268.jpg)

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Well, I can't give you a completely objective, universally agreed upon argument, and that's why we got to page 4 of this thread!

But look, we're all music snobs here, and in our wider community, there's generally regarded "good" and "bad" music. Rap/rock = "bad", those guys are clowns, and that's why they're not a valid movement. Their music sucks. Period.

I guess its the codeine and other meds raveging my brain, but what the hell is the point of this thread? There are are always movements/periods in music, whether they are good or bad and music is so fucking subjective. Yes Rock/Rap is fucking horrible, yes the current garbage that is dubbed "Emo" is fucking horrible (for the record it's not emo, Emo is Elliot Smith, Weezer's Pinkerton, early early Jimmy Eat World not MCR). But someone likes that stuff and it speaks to them. I'm sure outsiders thought we were tards for running around in flannal and ripped up old jeans. Just as I think white guys who dress the hip hop part look like total fucking tools.

I have no point other then like what you like. Music isn;t dead and it never will be. Certain aspects are (like Radio) but that doesn't mean this isn't fantastic shit out there. Oh and several people said the 80's sucked? Huh? The 80's gave us a lot of great bands and music. People need to get past the pop culture bullshit of the one hit wonders and crappy pop music of the 80's that you see ad naseum on the flashback shows that VH1 shows. There is way more there then people realize or remember.

Quotewhat the hell is the point of this thread?

The point of this thread is to prove that somewhere out there, there's one guy (or gal) who knows more about music than anyone else ever. We're on a quest to find that person.

now, where was I... Oh yeah, shitty music from the 80's

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpcDj5tLnqA&feature=related[/media]

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Was anyone arguing it wasnt? I think you were the first person to bring it up.

I'd add Korn or KoRn or whatever it is to your list too. Id actually say they were the band that bridged that grunge to rap/rock gap. I thought their music was some of the worst of that period as well.

And I know I'll get ripped for it, but I still enjoy Kid Rock's debut Devil Without A Cause to this day, love me some early (hed) PE, and though I dont listen to it anymore, Limp Bizkit's debut was actually pretty good. Their music after that was laughable.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4k1V45b-Ww[/media]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2KiEFW5PyU[/media]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dvmSWyKkzM[/media]

Quote

Quote

Or is rap/rock not "good" music?

No it's not..except for System of the Down and when the beastie boys did it 20 years ago.  :-)

id add rage against the machine to that short list

Quote

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Was anyone arguing it wasnt? I think you were the first person to bring it up.

the whole gist of this thread is that the last "good" rock culture/scene was grunge. My guess is you won't have to look to far to find people who dismiss rap-rock as credible music.

Quotenow, where was I... Oh yeah, shitty music from the 80's

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpcDj5tLnqA&feature=related[/media]

Exactly my good friend. Exactly.

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Was anyone arguing it wasnt? I think you were the first person to bring it up.

the whole gist of this thread is that the last "good" rock culture/scene was grunge. My guess is you won't have to look to far to find people who dismiss rap-rock as credible music.

well, since only about half the gist of this thread is actually on that, it skipped my mind for a minute.

but yeah, not only was it not as cohesive and geologically centered as the scene 5 years earlier, it wasnt as good.

disregarding the good or bad part though, either rap/rock or the whole boy band/pop princess explosion were probably the last big movement type deals

I believe I covered the whole rap-rock area with the eyebrow ring music classification. I think that genre is just what happened when the labels took the style and tried to "innovate it"

I think it's interesting to point out how the grunge explosion birthed the modern "alt-rock" radio stations, especially since the flagship one in NYC just went under.

Regardless of whether you or I think a particular style of music is the cat's ass or cat shit there is probably some kind of scene behind it. If it draws some attention and there is money to be made the sky is the limit. I just picked up a cape and a little towel for to wear on my head at Macy's :)

First Power Trio
(http://www.space1999.net/catacombs/main/images/space/tfc/sptfc063.jpg)

Early Emo
(http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00470/Neanderthal_280_470743a.jpg)

(http://us.st12.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/eparty_2045_227335528)

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Was anyone arguing it wasnt? I think you were the first person to bring it up.

the whole gist of this thread is that the last "good" rock culture/scene was grunge. My guess is you won't have to look to far to find people who dismiss rap-rock as credible music.

Yeah, this guy thinks that shit's genius.

(http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l69/bradenbill/Ultimate_wigger.jpg)

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Was anyone arguing it wasnt? I think you were the first person to bring it up.

the whole gist of this thread is that the last "good" rock culture/scene was grunge. My guess is you won't have to look to far to find people who dismiss rap-rock as credible music.

Yeah, this guy thinks that shit's genius.

(http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l69/bradenbill/Ultimate_wigger.jpg)

;D

Edit: the numchucks and knives on the wall make it  ;D ;D

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Was anyone arguing it wasnt? I think you were the first person to bring it up.

the whole gist of this thread is that the last "good" rock culture/scene was grunge. My guess is you won't have to look to far to find people who dismiss rap-rock as credible music.

Yeah, this guy thinks that shit's genius.

(http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l69/bradenbill/Ultimate_wigger.jpg)

That right there kids is Balla 101. Holla

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Was anyone arguing it wasnt? I think you were the first person to bring it up.

the whole gist of this thread is that the last "good" rock culture/scene was grunge. My guess is you won't have to look to far to find people who dismiss rap-rock as credible music.

Yeah, this guy thinks that shit's genius.

(http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l69/bradenbill/Ultimate_wigger.jpg)

That right there kids is Balla 101. Holla

Fuck yeah!  And look at that stache!  Tom, eat your heart out.  ;D

QuoteI, ah....I see your point ;)
(http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu312/edtombell/6a00d83451c0bf69e200e54f688e8c8833-.jpg?t=1238442203)
Jmo,How did I prove your Rush point? edit: militant sure. Downhill since 1982 shit man that is dumb.
As far as AF vs MMJ that's a bold statement,  ;D I guess everyone likes different things. A band would probably have to kill the promoter,play all night and give the gate money back to rock me harder than the jacket
did in 2008 but that's just my opinion :) carry on [smiley=beer.gif]

I don't like Arcade Fire anywhere near as much as I like MMJ (one of my favourite bands this decade), but the AF show at Massey Hall - in Toronto - was better than the four MMJ shows I've seen over the years, which surprised the hell out of me.

 

Quote

QuoteI, ah....I see your point ;)
(http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu312/edtombell/6a00d83451c0bf69e200e54f688e8c8833-.jpg?t=1238442203)
Jmo,How did I prove your Rush point? edit: militant sure. Downhill since 1982 shit man that is dumb.
As far as AF vs MMJ that's a bold statement,  ;D I guess everyone likes different things. A band would probably have to kill the promoter,play all night and give the gate money back to rock me harder than the jacket
did in 2008 but that's just my opinion :) carry on [smiley=beer.gif]

I don't like Arcade Fire anywhere near as much as I like MMJ (one of my favourite bands this decade), but the AF show at Massey Hall - in Toronto - was better than the four MMJ shows I've seen over the years, which surprised the hell out of me.

 

Hey, Thanks for that. :)I guess I need to get out more then. Sounds like the show to have been to. Wish I could have seen the jacket in the early times though (bars & small clubs) :-[
Toronto's a rockin' place 8-)

A very good friend of mine and her hubby saw AF once and pretty much said the same thing. It's not that their music is better, its the pure raw gut wrenching emotion that came off the stage. That's saying a lot because MMJ put their heart and soul into each show (at least the ones I've been too) and I feel that and the shows I've been to have been epic. I cannot imagine a show where it's more then that. Sadly AF skipped St Louis their last round of tours so I cannot attest.

And Toronto crowds are notoriously polite, but Arcade Fire's Win Butler got the entire sold out Massey Hall audience to come down to the front of the stage and dance and groove for the entire show. This is no easy task when there's 2 balconies and assigned seating.

However, I think MMJ will be playing at the historic Massey Hall sooner rather than later and I'll be somewhere near the front and not sitting.

I'm not trying to slight AF, because I just went through last.fm and youtube and tried (again) to see what the fuss was about. I could sort of dig Black Mirror, but it also really bored me. The video in the elevator was one of the most pretentiously dumb things I've ever seen. I'm not going to say they're horrible, because it wasn't offensive to my ears. I just didn't get the hype.

I've also seen them live, but it was half assed because I was working at the show. I was annoyed that they cried on stage.

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote
So, I take it you're a big rap/rock fan, 'eh Tracy?  Personally, I LOVE me some rap/rock ;D

I can't stand it. I was working in high schools when that broke and there was nothing but gangstas, lil Fred Dursts and goth kids.

I just want to hear why it wasn't a valid movement. A lot of the white pro atheletes totally took on that culture and it is still kicking today. Whereas "grunge" ate itself. Of course, I was wearing ripped jeans and flannel when I was 5...

Was anyone arguing it wasnt? I think you were the first person to bring it up.

the whole gist of this thread is that the last "good" rock culture/scene was grunge. My guess is you won't have to look to far to find people who dismiss rap-rock as credible music.

Yeah, this guy thinks that shit's genius.

(http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l69/bradenbill/Ultimate_wigger.jpg)

The funniest thing about this asshole is he only has about 160 bucks....real baller ;D