Page 1 of 7

Classic Rock is mediocre

Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 11:05 pm
by Joon 'Loki' Yang
I understand a lot of people has received a tremendous amount of influence over the Classic Rock bands, but it doesn't interest me.

I'm not nostalgic, but I don't want to hear bands that been outdated by current bands that did that and more.

Does anyone else feel that way?

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:22 am
by jemgirl
no absolutly not,"old bands"" still have an effect on me ,and i think on a lot people,take jimi hendrix or rory gallagher or eric clapton,those will remain forever imao , i know there are alot better newcombers today but don`t give up the "oldies" they still do fine,and inspired a lot of young new guitarist. 8)

peace,

patricia

Re: Classic Rock is mediocre

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:56 am
by Jeroen
Joon 'Loki' Yang wrote: I'm not nostalgic, but I don't want to hear bands that been outdated by current bands that did that and more.
What is 'outdated'? What is 'more'?

How do you outdate something like Stairway? Which current bands can do that?

Re: Classic Rock is mediocre

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:30 am
by GGGrev
Jeroenn wrote:How do you outdate something like Stairway? Which current bands can do that?
Linkin Park and Blink182 obviously. :roll:

Re: Classic Rock is mediocre

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:31 am
by Joon 'Loki' Yang
Jeroenn wrote:
Joon 'Loki' Yang wrote: I'm not nostalgic, but I don't want to hear bands that been outdated by current bands that did that and more.
What is 'outdated'? What is 'more'?

How do you outdate something like Stairway? Which current bands can do that?
Stairway is overrated. Achilles Last Stand is a much better song than Stairway. Hell, Immigrant Song is a better song that Stairway.

I meant that artists nowadays can replicate the sound that the classic rock bands had, and enhance from that. Adding eccentric scales and chords or whatever.

Re: Classic Rock is mediocre

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:33 am
by Joon 'Loki' Yang
GGGrev wrote:
Jeroenn wrote:How do you outdate something like Stairway? Which current bands can do that?
Tool, Muse, A Perfect Circle, Steve Vai, Joe Satriani, Dream Theater, Symphony X, Radiohead, Yoko Kanno & The Seatbelts, The Flaming Lips, Incubus and Liquid Tension Experiment obviously. :roll:
Fixed.

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 3:02 am
by GGGrev
They come close, but they just can't touch it, thats what i think.

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 4:42 am
by shader
...

Incubus?


...


lay of the ganja, dude

Re: Classic Rock is mediocre

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 4:54 am
by summer_sky
Joon 'Loki' Yang wrote: I meant that artists nowadays can replicate the sound that the classic rock bands had, and enhance from that. Adding eccentric scales and chords or whatever.
oh, so, artists nowadays use the innovations of classic rock bands? hmmmm, hardly makes the classic rock sound 'outdated' then, does it?

my question is, why don't artists nowadays be innovators in their own right?

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:00 am
by brainpolice
Yea im going to have to strongly disagree. People of the past were innovators. Without them, all of your favorite modern bands WOULDNT EXIST. Lets go further back. Without jazz and blues, rock wouldnt exist. Pretty much ALL of the old 50's 60's rockers we're obcessed with blues. Plenty of old rock can be thought of as just blues with a faster tempo, and a different kind of attitude.
The fact of the matter is, alot of old bands did things that the new bands will never touch upon. Something great has been lost in the music world. Do you think any of these new popular bands dont have influences? Do you think there would be Steve Vai as you know it without there having been Frank Zappa as you know it first? Do you think there'd be any blues players out there at this moment without there having been the likes of Buddy Guy and BB King first? The simple answer is no.
Sorry to break it to you, but the older artists invented the game. If you can't handle that, then you need to re-analize some things.

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:44 am
by Fretboard Wizard
I've always been that way. I hardly ever listen to straight up rock music. Say...umm...Sevendust for example, or the Smashing Pumpkins. Cool heavy music, but rather tiresome to me. I don't listen to heavy stuff just because it's heavy and jammable to. That's just the way I am; I usually prefer progressive metal, fusion, jazz, and blues.

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:55 am
by Psychlone
The vast majority of what I listen to is older music. Maybe it was the recording technique, maybe it was the personalities, maybe it was just the vibe, I dunno, but no band I've heard today can give me any kind of thrill like, say, Queen or Pink Floyd. For me, bands today just don't do it.

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 10:22 am
by Mr. Canadian
Come on guys. This guy is obviously trolling for a response.

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:19 pm
by Fretboard Wizard
Psychlone wrote:The vast majority of what I listen to is older music. Maybe it was the recording technique, maybe it was the personalities, maybe it was just the vibe, I dunno, but no band I've heard today can give me any kind of thrill like, say, Queen or Pink Floyd. For me, bands today just don't do it.
Probably because that's what had the biggest impact on you at the time. I'm sure kids growing up now days will say sometime in the future, "Yeah....Dream Theater...that was the band...", know what I'm saying? It's ok too, because as a 17 year old I'm into a loooot of bands and artists that started their career waaay before I was born. Some are dead, but others still live on, and probably will for a long time, such as my good friend steve. :P

Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:19 pm
by Joon 'Loki' Yang
brainpolice wrote:Yea im going to have to strongly disagree. People of the past were innovators. Without them, all of your favorite modern bands WOULDNT EXIST. Lets go further back. Without jazz and blues, rock wouldnt exist. Pretty much ALL of the old 50's 60's rockers we're obcessed with blues. Plenty of old rock can be thought of as just blues with a faster tempo, and a different kind of attitude.
The fact of the matter is, alot of old bands did things that the new bands will never touch upon. Something great has been lost in the music world. Do you think any of these new popular bands dont have influences? Do you think there would be Steve Vai as you know it without there having been Frank Zappa as you know it first? Do you think there'd be any blues players out there at this moment without there having been the likes of Buddy Guy and BB King first? The simple answer is no.
Sorry to break it to you, but the older artists invented the game. If you can't handle that, then you need to re-analize some things.
I don't question their influence, it's just their music that seems repetitive and not interacting.

I repeat, in comparison of newer bands of the 90s and 00s, classic rock sounds obsolete.
shader wrote:...

Incubus?


...


lay of the ganja, dude
I thought S.C.I.E.N.C.E was great. Same with their new album A Crow Left Of The Murder. Morning View sucked though.
summer_sky wrote:

oh, so, artists nowadays use the innovations of classic rock bands? hmmmm, hardly makes the classic rock sound 'outdated' then, does it?

my question is, why don't artists nowadays be innovators in their own right?
You don't get my point. Bands nowadays know the elements of Classic Rock and expand from that. It's obvious that the music that replicate it's not innovative, but they can add to it to seem more interesting.

Again, I don't question the Classic Rock's influence and overall innovation, but compared to bands of today and tomorrow, it sounds obsolete.