will rock ever rule again

[MR W,AXL ROSE]

bring out the leathers,gnr will bring it on

[GNR_Green]

I think you've posted on the wrong board mate, I don't know any sport that involves gnr and leathers!

Rock will probably never rule again.

[norway]

I think you've posted on the wrong board mate, I don't know any sport that involves gnr and leathers!

Rock will probably never rule again.

sports? sleepy?  

we'll get inspired stuff from that i think, it's coming...

[MadmanDan]

Rock will rule again if record companies will tell teenage girls that it's cool to love rock stars, because sadly, the most retarded category of people on this planet, girls of ages between 12 and 20, are the ones that buy the most albums ( well of course there are exceptions, not all of them are like that, a few actually have a mind of their own.

Rock stars must become sexier and more popular. Bands like Bon Jovi, Def Lepard and ultimately Guns N' Roses ressurected Rock in the late 80's because,apart from the fact that their music was great, guys wanted to be like them and girls wanted to fuck them.



Oh,and bring back the guitar solos...

[mrlee]

solos are coming back in.

[Malcolm]

What are yas talking about...2005 is the year for Rock N Roll...And if it wasnt for the god damn media Rock would still rule..Instead of these crappy people that dont even sing

[MR W,AXL ROSE]

rock on to 2005 then!chinese democracy this year,gotta be? ?                                                                                                                    an hay GNR_green,have faith man 

[Axls Locomotive]

kids are being programmed...every kids tv show that has music on it will have either dance or pop music, not rock music...

in my experience, most women tend not to have a good ear for music and go for the beat rather than the lyrics or originality of the song...

and there are less guys with balls now (see the first point i made), more than ever...little boys when they "grow up" want to look like a group of miming choreographed plonkers singing cheesy love songs

so rock wont be back soon unless we have a miracle

[Mattman]

Congratulations, MR W, AXL ROSE, you have now joined the elite club of people who have put up posts about whether or not rock will make a comeback anytime soon.

My personal ideas for why rock is largely laying dormant?

No mass movement
I don't think we'll have a return to the 60s, when rock thought it was going to change the world.  But since then there's always been movements of rock 'n' roll with their own musical subgenre, fashion, outlook, etc.  Psychedelia, prog rock, punk, thrash metal, hair bands, grunge, etc.  The thing is, we seem to be at an impasse.  The last subgenre of any real kind, nu-metal, has pretty much died out but without anything solid to replace it (not that it was really that good in the first place).  There was that failed garage rock movement, but that was largely a construct of music critics.

The iPod Syndrome
Related to the last item, this is about how everybody is listening to their own tiny kind of music now.  We don't need to watch Ed Sullivan or whatever and share in the same band as everyone across the country; we can listen to our own little mash-up of Norwegian death metal or hardcore-influenced emo or whatever your own little subgenre is.  This means that people don't really share music so much anymore and it's harder to push a few great rock bands to the mainstream.

Stuck on Rewind
Checked out the newsstands lately?  All the major rock magazines devote nearly every issue now to retelling stories of old bands or making long, subjective lists.  Listened to the radio?  Almost every channel on my dial plays mostly oldies, with only a few new songs here and there.  The baby boomers are controlling the airwaves, leaving room only for the most bland new modern rock acts and pushing the more adventurous ones to college radio and stuff like that.

You know, the Darkness and Silvertide are fine.  But they don't bring anything new to the playing table.  It's fine to have old influences, but we need to mold them into something fresh, not merely rehash the past.

Age is Beginning to Show
Rock 'n' roll is almost 50 years old.  This means that it was your parents' music.  And this means that except for all but the hardest bands, if you're listening to rock 'n' roll in the 21st century, it's basically the same kind of music your parents enjoyed.  They can sing along to it.  And of course when you're a kid growing up, that's the last thing you want.  I believe this is the main reason so many kids have turned to rap - because it's an alien music that is "just noise" to parents' ears - the highest compliment to a young adolescent.

I'm afraid it's harder to get around this problem than any other.  Rock is old, and this problem will just increase as it gets older.  All we can really rely on are groundbreaking acts like Rage Against The Machine who incorporated elements of music that parents hate.

Lack of Visual Appeal
The current music world is largely about visual appeal.  This explains why shit "artists" like Britney Spears remain atop the pop charts - they're more about what people see than what they hear.  While I think this is a deplorable trend, I think that rock should at least make a few concessions to give people some visual interest.  Bands like KISS used that to go to the top way back when.

Largely, Not Very Fun
Say what you will about the hair metal era, but at least it was fun.  Grunge may be "cooler", but it took away that sense of good hard rockin' fun that had been there before.  And wasn't that supposed to be the original goal of rock music in the first place?  Now we're stuck with bands filled with bland guys who dress like regular people, don't draw attention to themselves, don't play guitar solos (because it would be too flashy or because they don't have the skill?), and sing constantly about being betrayed or whatever.  It's depressing.  At least when old-school heavy metal bands like Sabbath, Metallica or Megadeth sang about angry things, they did it with a sense of wicked fun and showmanship, and the subject range was broader.  Today's bands seem to be joylessly going through the motions.

All except for punk-pop, and here's where I disagree with a lot of people here.  While I largely don't like the second-tier wave of punk-pop acts like Good Charlotte and Simple Plan, they do at least supply a bit of fun antidote to the boring angst of more "serious" modern rock acts.  And these are just the talentless bands.  The first wave of punk-pop groups like Green Day and Blink-182 were fun groups that wrote catchy songs and are now among the most talented bands out there.  Rock shouldn't be afraid of embracing its pop side, as far as I'm concerned.

[Metallifuck]

Mattman, I love your post.  It sums up my feelings almost to a tee.  Rock is the loser in the way music has been downgraded from something that's supposed to be 'artistic' and 'emotional' to packaged, sugar coated music for wimpy assholes.

Right now the kids have a few choices.  These are:

'old skool' (GN'R, Sabbath, Crue, Metallica, Maiden etc)
pop-punk (cos kids don't know what real punk is)
nu-metal (cos it's got fake angst and anger and pretends to be metal)
rap (cos it's faux-macho shit about bitches, drugs and caps up people's asses)
dance/pop/rnb (cos kids love dancing to this shit)
indie (piss poor, whiney, soft rock for wimps)

I admit these are generalisations, but I'm largely right.  The only one of these categories to encourage musicality is old school stuff.  Even hair metal had talented guitarists and probably better singers than the other categories I've named.  There are of course actually a few good bands and artists in the world, although 'the kids' I'm talking about would either slag them off or have never heard of them.

TV is a major drawback as it doesn't promote music, rather it's obsessed with the image.  They don't talk to 'musicians' about how they came up with their music, they're more interested in their houses, clothes or how they get on in those fucking awful 'reality tv' shows.  Part of the reason they don't discuss music is cos most people in the charts don't even make it anyway, it's made for them.

Let's study this case - Busted.  Most people hate Busted, usually because they make a terrible noise.  The articulate listener will note that when they 'play' they aren't actually playing at all.  I saw them on tv the other day and the bass 'player' was strumming in the most random way possible.  They were probably miming but I changed channels too quickly to see.  How is this good in any way?  If anyone can tell me ONE good reason why such a thing can exist please let me know.  There's no merit in this shit at all, the only people who profit are the record labels and tv stations.  The people lose out.  Even the people who like Busted lose out because they miss the point.

Too many people are missing the point.  It's quite sad though because you can't tell people this.  The people who buy this garbage have all been so brainwashed they can't grasp the concept of why they basically have been screwed.  It's no different to paying McDonalds ?3 for a Big Mac when it's probably worth less than the dog turd they stepped in on the way into the restaurant.

I'm beginning to think none of this is a problem, it's just that the worse it gets, the more ignorant, stupid people there will be and the less decent, innovative music there will be.  Some of the future Axl Roses or Steve Vai's have probably turned into fat kids who do nothing but play Xbox games listening to Eminem.  Sad but true.

[GNR_Green]

The last post was in fact posted by me, only my brother (Metallifuk) left himself logged in and I didn't notice.