Comments on: Shot through the heart of rock'n'roll

Shot through the heart of rock'n'roll

Space Coyote — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:51:44 -0800

By: jjg

jjg — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:58:02 -0800

Doesn't Something Awful have forums of its own?

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:12:07 -0800

Modest Mouse is a great rock band (if you want to call them that), but I don't think they're accessible enough to "save" rock n' roll. To be truthful, I'm not sure I know what it is people think needs saving. Rock albums still sell (see: Linkin Park, Nickelback, etc.), just, by and large, not good rock albums, but the history of modern music--starting, say, in the 50's--is littered with "big" acts who don't have a great deal of talent, unless you count image as talent.

By: techgnollogic

techgnollogic — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:21:53 -0800

Huey Lewis is so great.

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:29:05 -0800

And I happen to like angst in music--and art in general--a lot more than I like an absence of it, although a bit of escapism is certainly fun now and then. Anyway, if anyone is interested, I suggest checking out Modest Mouse's The Moon and Antarctica and their upcoming album Good News for People who Love Bad News (which is floating around online and will be well worth buying when it comes out next month). There are also a number of other cool rock bands out there such as And You Will Knows Us by the Trail of Dead. Rock isn't dead--it's hiding ;)

By: Hildago

Hildago — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:47:19 -0800

Who is more rock and roll: Jack Black or Jack White?

By: abcde

abcde — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:49:14 -0800

Jack White, obviously. I don't like either of them, of course.

By: abcde

abcde — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:49:59 -0800

The only Modest Mouse song I've heard is "Teeth Like God's Shoeshine," but I can't imagine a whole band sounding like that :P

By: gen

gen — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:51:36 -0800

I used to care a lot about rock, in high school. I listened to everything from the early 1960's to grunge. There are artists and albums that I will always enjoy ("Axis: Bold as Love", for instance) but I have stopped buying and caring about rock for at least a decade. I listen to electronic/dance music now and I cannot ever see myself buying rock again. For me, rock died right about when Cobain did.

By: techgnollogic

techgnollogic — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:56:09 -0800

MODEST MOUSE?! AYWKUBTTOD?!? Are you people kidding?!?!? No wonder rock needs savin'!

By: interrobang

interrobang — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:58:55 -0800

Weird. I'm listening to "Axis: Bold as Love" right now.

By: interrobang

interrobang — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:04:52 -0800

Oh, and the article: seemed like pretty typical SomthingAwful stuff, but I wouldn't have read it if it weren't posted here. I scrolled down slowly at the end, so I could be "surprised" by the ending. I was guessing Robert Palmer.

By: croutonsupafreak

croutonsupafreak — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:08:24 -0800

Here's my secret: Find music I like. Listen to it. Why do we need a mass pop music culture? There's lots of good stuff out there, but if you want your "good" to conform to one particular style you're going to be disappointed.

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:11:55 -0800

Who is more rock and roll: Jack Black or Jack White? Does answering that serve any purpose? In many ways, Jack Black encompasses the playful "fun" (if you will) aspect of rock n' roll; he embodies a lot of mainstream rock's spirit before it was completely (as opposed to only largely) co-opted by the interests of big business. That's not really my kind of music, but you have to admire someone who really gets something and isn't afraid to enjoy at the expense of what others may think of him/her. MODEST MOUSE?! AYWKUBTTOD?!? Are you people kidding?!?!? No wonder rock needs savin'! Thanks for that critically-sound dismissal!!! I look forward to future discussions--or do I?!?!!!?

By: namespan

namespan — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:35:30 -0800

Modest Mouse has a similar problem to RadioHead. They're interesting... but ... there's nothing feelgood about them, and that's ok for what they're doing, but that's not really Rock'n'roll. Rock'n'roll has to have some feelgood to it. Gimme some Skynyrd. Or even John Mayer Pop-rock.

By: bobo123

bobo123 — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:37:43 -0800

Hmm, the ROCKSTAT criteria seems to fit the Darkness pretty well, though I really doubt they are going to save rock'n'roll. Great single though. I listen to electronic/dance music now and I cannot ever see myself buying rock again. For me, rock died right about when Cobain did. I'm pretty close to that boat, mostly listening mostly to IDM now, I really like the new Squarepusher, I'll make some exceptions for stuff like Xiu Xiu but having trouble getting into any new rock music. I like Alexisonfire but I don't think they're known outside of Canada.

By: Keyser Soze

Keyser Soze — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:47:31 -0800

Two words: Dropkick Murhpys. You say its becasue were boisterous You hate us cause we got our dignity We stand together proud and strong This is a place where we belong We got loyal friends we keep our heads held high, We'll stick together you and I Dont need no guns or drugs on our streets j ust a place to go and the boots on our feet.....

By: Joey Michaels

Joey Michaels — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:52:30 -0800

I want to stress that in conversations about music and other art, your opinion is fact and you should make sure to remind everyone that you are right and they are wrong.

By: Keyser Soze

Keyser Soze — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:56:58 -0800

Well, at least Joey understands.

By: bobo123

bobo123 — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 01:01:48 -0800

Another thing bothering me from the article: Maybe, you think, if Oasis was brand new in 2004, it would be the best new band around. Heck ten years ago they were widely considered the best new band around. Okay maybe they didn't break that big in the U.S., but by '95 I remember Oasis were heralded as the biggest best band in the world at the time, mostly by themselves but c'mon.

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 01:12:11 -0800

Modest Mouse has a similar problem to RadioHead. They're interesting... but ... there's nothing feelgood about them, and that's ok for what they're doing, but that's not really Rock'n'roll. Rock'n'roll has to have some feelgood to it. Gimme some Skynyrd. Or even John Mayer Pop-rock. Your rock n' roll does, mayhap. To pigeon-hole an entire sound to the realm of escapist exercises seems both futile and inane. It's the equivalent of suggestion that water colour paintings are only really water colour paintings if they depict something pastoral, and if they have any sense of political angst or self-loathing then they're not water colours. (and also, I'd hardly call being "interesting" a problem, but that's just me) I'd take Pink Floyd or The Pixies or Radiohead or Modest Mouse over most "feelgood" music if I had to make a choice, and I'd make much the same choice with literature and film--I'd rather watch Brazil than LOTR if I had to make a choice, though I don't see any need to make a distinction between them when choosing what is and what isn't good film. And I guess that's my point. Unless you'd like this discussion to (in my mind) devolve into a semantics argument where we split rock n' roll into a hundred different genres. They're all rock n' roll, if you ask me. Oh, and I have to ask, what happens if one of these non-feel-good bands has some feel-good tracks on an album and some that aren't? The single off Modest Mouse's new album is very positive, by and large: i backed my car into a cop car the other day well, he just drove off--sometimes life's ok i ran my mouth a bit too much the other day oh, what did i say? well, you just laughed it off and it was all ok and we'll all float on ok and we'll all float on ok and we'll all float on anyway a fake jamaican took every last dime with that scam it was worth it just to learn some sleight of hand bad news comes don't you worry even when it lands good news will work its way to all them plans we both got fired on sadly the same day well we'll float on good news is on the way And so on and so forth. For me, rock music can only be characterized--and even then only loosely--by its sound, not the content of its message, as is the case with all musical genres (are all operas by definition sad or happy? what about hip-hop music? country music?). Now, what you happen to like is completely your matter and not mine, but I think it's somewhat disingenuous for people to continually scream that rock music is dead.

By: joedan

joedan — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 01:17:06 -0800

Hmm, the ROCKSTAT criteria seems to fit the Darkness pretty well, though I really doubt they are going to save rock'n'roll. Great single though. the darkness makes me want to stab my eardrums. glam rock is dead and should stay dead.

By: interrobang

interrobang — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 01:28:51 -0800

It's the equivalent of suggestion that water colour paintings are only really water colour paintings if they depict something pastoral, and if they have any sense of political angst or self-loathing then they're not water colours. Thank you for this statement. It's useful in many, many ways. What a great comment.

By: Pericles

Pericles — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 01:36:47 -0800

I thought we'd already established that My Bloody Valentine were returning to save guitar music?

By: johnnyboy

johnnyboy — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 02:04:50 -0800

And here was me thinking it was the joy division.

By: lotsofno

lotsofno — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:49:25 -0800

they're not really around to save rock n' roll, but as long as we're pushing our music tastes on each other... there's this awesome band called Rainer Maria. here is a quicktime preview of their live DVD, where they totally rock out.

By: kahboom

kahboom — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:54:18 -0800

Hrm. Well, if it's good ole' fashioned rock you're looking for, try Spoon or The Constantines. If you really need your head kicked in, try McLusky or Les Savy Fav.

By: lotsofno

lotsofno — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:59:01 -0800

ah, here's a free mp3 from the band i mentioned minutes ago...

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:02:42 -0800

I listen to electronic/dance music now and I cannot ever see myself buying rock again. You can really make that kind of a fixed, static decision? Geez, it's all good, man. Don't get sucked down the path where you think rock went crap, so you stop caring about rock, which means you'll stop searching for any good new rock, which means you will ignore it when it stares you in the face. I don't know man - I can't stick to listening to a single style of music for more than a week, let alone since 1994... Probably the best thing in that article, though, is the emphasis on melody - one of the main reasons I can't handle modern "R'n'B"-tinged pop is that the melody is almost completely lacking. Warbling, weak singers whine over mixed-up sampled instrumentation that doesn't even hold a chord progression. Where's the melody? Pop music in the 80s, no matter how cheesy, just sounds...nicer than modern Top 40, because of the smart, clear melody lines. This is something some of the more "twee" rock bands have taken advantage of. Disclaimer: I retain the write to discuss my opinion of music as if it were fact, as per this prior ruling

By: ciderwoman

ciderwoman — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:03:00 -0800

There has only ever been one rock and roll band. True perfection.

By: divrsional

divrsional — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:15:50 -0800

Get Over It!

By: john m

john m — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:18:47 -0800

RIGHT NOW is a golden age for underground metal... There are truly great bands like Lamb of God, Unearth, Floor, HIMSA, Blood Has Been Shed, Hatebreed, Weedeater, EyeHateGod, etc. This has been picked up by MTV with the new Headbangers Ball, but the sounds are such that most of it just can't be over-commercialized. But I think that article blames the music for the radio station's failure. I'd love to turn on the radio and hear The Shins or Denali or Blonde Redhead or The Faint, but the bastards won't play it.

By: Witty

Witty — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:27:25 -0800

Music is bizarre.

By: dydecker

dydecker — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:39:16 -0800

I listen to electronic/dance music now and I cannot ever see myself buying rock again. So you missed the rise and rise of Yo La Tengo, the best rock conversion tool for incorrigible dance music fans :)

By: mischief

mischief — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:39:50 -0800

Why does (most) everyone forget that the Beatles and Jimi Hendrix were also corporate whores? Even true rock 'n' roll, like Chuck Berry and Elvis, was a commercial venture. In ten years, the kids who like Linkin Park and Nickelback will be whining about the next generation's music. It's all so cyclic.

By: yerfatma

yerfatma — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:48:37 -0800

Counting the days 'til Good News releases.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:14:05 -0800

Hard to imagine anyone waxing nostalgic over Nickelback... but then again, people probably felt the same way about Foghat.

By: alumshubby

alumshubby — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:24:05 -0800

Wow. His qualifying criteria for rock'n'roll saviorhood sounds exactly like why I liked (and still like) Talking Heads so much.

By: alumshubby

alumshubby — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:24:25 -0800

Oh, yeah...and the Kinks, too.

By: glenwood

glenwood — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:43:34 -0800

word, alumshubby. and let's add DEVO to that list. oh and by the way, all of your opinions are wrong!

By: saladin

saladin — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:47:49 -0800

To throw my hat in the ring... his criteria clearly pointed to one choice, and that is Piebald.

By: Holden

Holden — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:51:33 -0800

Similarly, punk music, in its backlash against traditionalist rock and prog-rock, provided an exciting alternative to kids who didn't like Pink Floyd. No sentence could better distill how I felt in the late 70s. Perfect. For me, rock died right about when Cobain did. Ditto. It wasn't so much that the music died as my willingness to embrace a band. Cobain's death hurt. Hurt bad. Ten years later I'm still heartsick. The Huey Lewis solution was very funny, though.

By: glenwood

glenwood — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:54:24 -0800

oh and by the way, the wrens are going to save rock and roll, if you'll fucking LET them.

By: oh posey

oh posey — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 06:22:02 -0800

STFU

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 06:55:39 -0800

Who is more rock and roll: Jack Black or Jack White? Jack Black is a good representation of your typical rock and roll fanatic, and Jack White's band is OK ("Fell in Love With A Girl" is a great single), although people who treat them like the saviors of rock have no sense of history, since the White Stripes basically sound like better-than-average Yardbirds imitators with more more posturing. I (for once) am not gonna stomp on anybody else's favorite band, but just try and explain my perspective. I'm probably one of very few people who loves '70's warhorses like the aforementioned Pink Floyd (and other far less fashionable ones like Grand Funk Railroad and Deep Purple) and punk and postpunk stuff like the Ramones and the Buzzcocks and the Replacements. And I still listen to a lot of old R&B, Country, etc. In the early eighties when I hit adolescence the top 40 was littered with horrendous synth-pop, so I went in for heavy metal, since it at least had a pulse, from there I worked my way back to 70's and 60's stuff and onward and spent a good portion of the decade ignoring the culture of my own time cause I was so repulsed by it. I investigated college radio and while some of the stuff was great, other stuff seemed way too remote and "cool," for me and the culture seemed alienating and unwelcoming to someone like me(with the end result being that I became someone who liked punk without ever becoming a punk). By decades end it seemed to be coming together with Metal finding it's balls, some underground stuff beginning to chart and rap reaching maturity. Then around '96 or so (I liked Nirvana, but I didn't consider Kurt the savior of a generation, but his death didn't help) it all petered out. And where are we now? The pop scene is totally mechanical and soulless with no sence of the nuances that make for great top 40. Hard rock is moribund and formulaic. Ditto, hip-hop. The indie scene seems incurably factional and way too distant and ironic. And there's wasy too many pointless revivals going on. I'm not just talking about the culture, but the music too. Almost none of it is appealing to a traditional rock fan or punk fan, and it's too bad. I'm just waiting for something to reach out and grab me, and believe me, I look hard but ultimately I keep winding up listening to older music almost exclusively. And it's too bad. I'm only 33 and I'm way too young to be a crotcety old man.

By: The Michael The

The Michael The — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 06:55:53 -0800

I'll grant you Piebald, saladin, but the singer is far too bad for mall punks to appreciate. Rock music really could be saved if everyone knew about British Sea Power. Is there anything the Brits can't do better?

By: the fire you left me

the fire you left me — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 06:58:05 -0800

Look to the North: Broken Social Scene

By: Goofyy

Goofyy — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:28:44 -0800

I'm terribly confused. I thought the last rock album was "Final Cut". It SAYS 'final' after all. But, uh, um...yea. Rock isn't dead. It just transcended to another plane, even another airline. Someplace past your FM dial, you know?

By: Laugh_track

Laugh_track — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:31:16 -0800

Hmm... I whole-heartedly agree with criteria one through four. Five makes a lot of sense until the part about acting. And number six is just dead wrong. Innovation is always available.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:34:43 -0800

the perceived need to "fix rock and roll" is silly. rock is just a reflection of you (and has nothing to do with labels, sales, turn it off. go buy some dean martin albums, or frank sinatra - that bad ass was singing about cocaine before clapton was out of short pants. or - here's a clue: MAKE SOME BETTER ROCK AND ROLL YOUSELF. really, man. i never would have beleived, back in the early seventies, that there could possibly be such a mass of whining analytical humpnozzles talking about rock and roll as we have had for the last 20 years or so. SHUT UP AND PLAY.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:37:54 -0800

hrm. a largish chunk of my preceding post seems to have vaporized between preview and posting, a part which began with an amperand and appeared after "labels, sales" and before "go buy some dean martin." fuck rock and roll, fix metafilter.

By: jfuller

jfuller — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:42:43 -0800

> And I happen to like angst in music--and art in general--a lot more than I like an > absence of it, although a bit of escapism is certainly fun now and then. Dashboard Confessional is so great, especially to escape. > fuck rock and roll, fix metafilter. God wants to know what you did with the real quonsar.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:44:26 -0800

....and God Gave Rock & Roll To You, God Gave Rock & Roll To You...Put it in the soul of everyone... [/argent]

By: 2sheets

2sheets — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:45:53 -0800

"rock died right about when Cobain did" That's funny, I thought rock was saved from neurotic crybabies when Kurt "I have a stomach problem" Cobain went to Constantinople.

By: kgasmart

kgasmart — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:58:21 -0800

Broken Social Scene blows. Aimless. Like a bunch of stoned kids who picked up instruments and all decided to play something different. To save Rock and Roll you've gotta have a sense of history, a sense of bombast, and be firmly in touch with reality. Much as every generation thinks it can reinvent the wheel, the wheel is never going to be reinvented. So why can't we refine and redefine the styles that have proven to be lasting? You wanna impress me, make an album that could have been Volume 2 to the Beatles' "Revolver." Though Cotton Mather's "Kon Tiki" might have come close.

By: tsarfan

tsarfan — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 08:05:16 -0800

tsar duh

By: yerfatma

yerfatma — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 08:07:29 -0800

) Just closing quonsar's parenthetical aside. Sorry for everyone who got caught in that.

By: lescour

lescour — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 08:20:54 -0800

My name is Tanya Headon and I hate music. /obligatory

By: crank

crank — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 08:42:33 -0800

I prefer the old Modest Mouse lyrics to the new ones like in 'Float On.' Isaac Brock is becoming a little too, oh I dunno, 'Bono,' with his life-affirming drivel for my taste.

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:04:08 -0800

Rock has no gravity in space, stay young: it's now "Hip n' Roll" as in hip hop...tho can you gyrate your hips in it ?

By: Quartermass

Quartermass — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:07:17 -0800

GBV! GBV! GBV! The only rock n' roll I need: Guided By Voices.

By: the fire you left me

the fire you left me — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:16:01 -0800

You wanna impress me, make an album that could have been Volume 2 to the Beatles' "Revolver." You mean, "if you wanna impress me, you must be old, bloated, and only look to the past, because it's all I have." Abbey Road is great, Sgt. Pepper was influential but now not so important (Day in the Life the only track that doesnt sound stale), and the Stones' Exile on Main Street is the most overrated tribute album ever recorded. You may have missed Wire, the Pixies, or Bjork, but many did not. So don't mind us; just keep listening to Taxman over and over and over.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:22:19 -0800

Who will save rock'n'roll? Who will save Big Band Swing? Who will save Dixieland? Who will save Ragtime? Who will save Baroque?

By: yerfatma

yerfatma — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:43:18 -0800

I prefer the old Modest Mouse lyrics to the new ones Don't do it man. Yes, it'll suck if they become popular and you'll wanna corner kids in the mall and yell that you listened to them way back when, but the new disc sounds good. There are only so many "Trailer Trash" or "Paper Thin Walls" in one artist's career.

By: MsVader

MsVader — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:46:50 -0800

Maybe the return of quality music (whatever style) will happen when people get over this whole "image" thing. When did it become a requirement that you have to be a model to make great music? Lots of great music was made by conventionally "unattractive" people.

By: kgasmart

kgasmart — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:51:31 -0800

So don't mind us; just keep listening to Taxman over and over and over. Eh, I liked Wire Train as much as Wire, Frank Black never impressed me much and Bjork was bjoring. I thought Dodgy might have saved rock and roll, had it translated from the English. Tsar is a good call, and GBV is as well, but neither were bombastic enough. Bunch of us got to talking about U2's "Joshua Tree" the other day and I recalled the video for "Where the Streets Have No Name." Total ripoff, but you hadda have cojones to do that, U2 did, and it worked - both the video and the song.

By: chicobangs

chicobangs — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:25:04 -0800

Alright, I gotta say something. I dig Jason & the Scorchers, Mooney Suzuki and the Fastbacks, as well as many of the bands already mentioned, but -- Rock and Roll doesn't need saving. It's just not at the Grammys or on Clear Channel as much these days, is all. I've never been to a town where there weren't a few pretty good Rock and Roll bands in the local scene. They may be glam or grunge or garage or -- some other subgenre starting with G, but they're never not there. The great thing about Rock and Roll is that the building blocks are easy to work with. All you need is passion for the form and a sense of rhythm, and the thing runs on its own gas. It's fucking glorious when you see it, and it works best live, three to five beers (or your personal equivalent) into a night. Get out of the cupboards, you boys and girls, and go see a band you never heard of sometime this weekend, wherever you are. That's where Rock and Roll fits best, and where it's always gonna be if you can't find it anywhere else.

By: harja

harja — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:28:28 -0800

Wholeheartedly agree w/ MsVader. Also, I don't believe rock is dead. Many of the genres of music that we have now are simply morphed versions of rock - rock with new and different instruments. Isn't that what we constantly do with music - evolve? Secondly, most of the great rock works from the 70s - 80s, never got radioplay during their own time. Disco music was all the rage. Most of those great works we hear on the classic rock stations, all the time now, were considered "underground" during their own time. If you didn't like disco, your source for new music was not radio or TV - it was from your network of friends or frequenting your favorite music store.

By: Hildago

Hildago — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:31:54 -0800

Who is more rock and roll, Frank Black or Barry White?

By: boneybaloney

boneybaloney — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:47:28 -0800

A lazy example I know, but when you can go to an indie-rock club and here this sort of stuff in one night, I find it pretty hard to say rock is dead. Defy enjoying yourself to that. Apart from Jet, who need fucking shooting. Who cares about rock though? Scenesterism dilutes the best music - I'm thinking of Tony Wilson in '24hr Party People' doing the double helix here - and the genius occurs in the bardo states between scenes. Part of the problem is people want art quality and disposable entertainment fun. Hell, what's wrong with listening to Abba and having the time of your life (woo-ooh-ooh), then going home and reflecting to Radiohead?

By: Dr. Boom

Dr. Boom — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:48:10 -0800

Fey Ray will save rock and roll. (and two of 'em are MeFites!)

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:48:55 -0800

I dig Jason & the Scorchers, Mooney Suzuki and the Fastbacks, as well as many of the bands already mentioned, but -- Rock and Roll doesn't need saving. It's just not at the Grammys or on Clear Channel as much these days, is all. I'd add The Supersuckers, Southern Culture On The Skids, the Muffs, the Bottle Rockets and our beloved Zambonis to that list, chico. But the last sentence rings true. Rock is alive but just being listened to by a coeterie of aficionados, like Jazz. But that breeds staleness. That's kind of what happened in the mid 70's when the hard rock warhorses went stale. When rock gets to the forefront is when the great leaps forward happen and lives get changed.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:53:15 -0800

Part of the problem is people want art quality and disposable entertainment fun. The best rock and roll delivers both.

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 11:23:36 -0800

Dashboard Confessional is so great, especially to escape. That's not the type of angst I meant. I was referring more to an ironic awareness of the world, which is why I, personally, am not a real big fan of most Top 40 acts. jonmc: I'm at a real loss. Who cares what's in the Top 40? That was my entire point. I don't know how you can say the entire indie scene is too "distant", either, but that might have something to do with me not having any idea what makes music "distant" to you. Stop listening to the hype other people give bands and you might experience them for what they are instead of having an immediate they're-not-floyd or the-pixies-did-it-better reaction to the band. Again, it's hard to have this discussion because you can't legislate taste. If you liked Floyd, though, I can't imagine you'd really have that much trouble with bands that put to much thought into their rock. Did you ever hear And You Will Knows us by the Trail of Dead? They're not messiahs, but they can lay down a good rock song (or at least the kind of rock song I like). Modest Mouse might be too distant or ironicly detached for you, and a lot of people I get to listen to it think it sounds "weird". There's a new group called TV on the Radio that just put out their first full-length album; again, perhaps not the straight-up "rock" you were looking for, but very cool. Songs: Ohia was a wicked sort of alt-country band when they were together and I highly recommend the last two albums they put out. Also, if any of you like Bjork, check out Tujiki Noriko. The vocals are all in Japanese, so you won't have clue one what she's saying, but the music is gorgeous. And Cat Power. Everyone should buy Cat Power.

By: black8

black8 — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 11:42:51 -0800

Thanks Boom! Personally, I'm diggin' Spoon, GBV, Franz Ferdinand and The Desert Fathers...

By: KirkJobSluder

KirkJobSluder — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 11:48:37 -0800

Is it really a failure of Rock & Roll, or is it more a failure of the industry to promote good rock music? There is a lot of great stuff out there, but it isn't getting onto radio markets and it certainly isn't getting onto MTV or into the pages of Rolling Stone. Pretty much the only radio I find listenable these days is either community access/college stations, or the weekly appearance of Little Steven if I get lucky. It seems like all genres are suffering from popular exposure. There is actually some great country music being written and performed out there but you are most likely to hear the oveproduced pap that is Top 40 pop with a twang. Yeah, I'll agree that the White Stripes are neither the best musicians or the saviors of Rock Music but on the other hand, tracks off of Elephant were the only thing to pop out of the static last year. Other than "Three Nation Army", I can't remember a single song that got airplay last year. Something about that opening riff just grabs your attention in a way that makes for a classic song. Who will save Big Band Swing? Who will save Dixieland? Who will save Ragtime? The Squirel Nut Zippers managed to produce two of my favorite albums with songs with early 20th century style melodies and late 20th century lyrics. On a smilar note, it is interesting that movies like O Brother and The Ladykillers with soundracks produced by TBone Burnett are managing to bring back some great stuff. Who will save Baroque? Friends tell me I really should pick up some Rachel Podger one of these days. As a former violist and violinist I've only heard a snippit of a track and her use of Baroque rather than modern violin highlights the brilliance of Bach. I think that the main difference between these genres and Rock & Roll is that people who love swing, jazz, country, and baroque (or in my case, just about anything that becomes ear chewing gum) don't cry out for a savior every time the promoters decide to push the next new thing on radio. In fact, perhaps the dominance of HipHop will save Rock & Roll from the producers looking for the next top 40 hit.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 12:02:07 -0800

jonmc: I'm at a real loss. Who cares what's in the Top 40? That was my entire point. I don't know how you can say the entire indie scene is too "distant", either, but that might have something to do with me not having any idea what makes music "distant" to you. Basically, what I meant by "distant" is that a lot of it (and I work in the margins of the music business, so a lot of music passes my desk every day) seems to have very little emotional investment in it's content, and a kind of detached air about it, which is kind of a dealbreaker for me. Stop listening to the hype other people give bands and you might experience them for what they are instead of having an immediate they're-not-floyd or the-pixies-did-it-better reaction to the band. I do try and do that. Sadly, the problem is too often that they do remind me too much of something that I've heard before. I've listend to ...Trail of Dead and they just didn't grab me, but that brings me to my next point... Again, it's hard to have this discussion because you can't legislate taste. Agreed. A big part of my aversion to a lot of what's out there is that it's just not my bag. Or stuff that purports to be my bag, just seems artificial. I mean, I love hard guitar rock, but there's a world of difference between Led Zeppelin and Nickelback. Perhaps the time for my kinda music has passed. I can accept that, but I don't neccessarily like it.

By: GrahamVM

GrahamVM — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:04:18 -0800

Lotsa good suggestions here. I would've said that The Darkness was closer to Led Zep than Nickelback. They seem to have a knack rubbing people up the wrong way who probably think Coldplay are the shit, rather than just shit. An army of Darkness clones would get annoying, though. I wouldn't run around claiming that The White Stripes are the greatest band evah, but I did enjoy Elephant. Same thing with Interpol's Turn On The Bright Lights, though they might be a too Joy Division for some. As your attorney I advise that you all go out and buy the entire Super Furry Animals back catalogue, especially Mwng, which is all sung in Welsh. Probably the Australian band I would most like to get more exposure overseas are Augie March. I think it is a heinous crime that we are currently represented by Jet (unimaginative You Am I knockoffs) and The Vines (OK, but nothing special). If we could get Magic Dirt over the line that'd be good too. And finally, though this doesn't have much to do with rock, I am enjoying the new Stereolab album, after taking the usual first few listens to get used to it.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:12:10 -0800

Friends tell me I really should pick up some Rachel Podger one of these days. As a former violist and violinist I've only heard a snippit of a track and her use of Baroque rather than modern violin highlights the brilliance of Bach. No, you don't get it--who is composing creative, original, non-derivative baroque music these days? Who is the equivalent of Bach among these theoretical contemporary composers of baroque today? In that sense, who is the Duke Ellington of today? Who is the Scott Joplin of today? Answer: no one. There aren't any. The genres are done. There will always be interpeters but interpeters are interpeting a known, finite, finished canon. Or they perhaps parody, er, update the genres--think A Fifth of Beethoven by The Big Apple Band. Nothing is new forever, everything has an end. There is no Bach of today.

By: Tlogmer

Tlogmer — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 19:44:22 -0800

Jack White, obviously. I don't like either of them, of course. Of course. This is metafilter, after all. :P

By: dg

dg — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 20:42:39 -0800

... you must be old, bloated, and only look to the past, because it's all I have My life in a nutshell. I guess, as painful as it may be, what we know as rock music has passed its use-by date and will never be what it once was. Whether this is a good or a bad thing depends entirely on your point of view, of course. The problem that I see is that there is nothing to replace it - what passes for mainstream music today is homogenised and artificial with not a trace of soul in it (with very few exceptions). While it is easy to forget that what we now call "classic rock" is simply the cream that has floated to the top and the rest has been mostly forgotten over the years (and the same is true for classical music, baroque etc), I honestly cannot see much today that anyone will still be listening to in 20 or 30 years time and saying "those were the days, my friend..."

By: divrsional

divrsional — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 20:57:31 -0800

"Nothing is new forever, everything has an end. There is no Bach of today." Bullshit. Matthew Herbert, for one. Just cuz he don't play a harpsichord don't make him NOT a genius.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 22:07:00 -0800

For me, rock music can only be characterized--and even then only loosely--by its sound, not the content of its message, as is the case with all musical genres ~~MLK~~ TGC : I have a dream that my favorite band will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the nature of their skin but by the content of their message. I have a dream.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 22:07:40 -0800

Fuck. 'Nature of their sound.' Stepped on my own damn joke.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:23:08 -0800

Matthew Herbert, for one. Matthew Herbert is not a Baroque composer. He does not compose music or metamusic recognized to be in the Baroque canon. Genius or not, it's a bit of a parody of an apples and oranges argument to say he is the next Bach.

By: KirkJobSluder

KirkJobSluder — Thu, 18 Mar 2004 10:29:05 -0800

y2karl: No, you don't get it--who is composing creative, original, non-derivative baroque music these days? Who is the equivalent of Bach among these theoretical contemporary composers of baroque today? No, I get it. However, I would argue that there was no Baroque music when Bach was alive either. "Baroque" was a label attached to music of a certain time period and location after the fact. I think that if Bach was classifying the genres he was writing for, he would be more inclined to think in terms of chamber music, dances, and religious music. In terms of religious music, I would say that Arvo Paert would qualify as the Bach of the 20th century, the 21st century is still young but I'm certain than someone more in touch with contemporary composers can clue both of us in. In that sense, who is the Duke Ellington of today? Who is the Scott Joplin of today? Answer: no one. There aren't any. The genres are done. Well dang, perhaps I'm just spoiled living in a city with active Jazz composers. But I already gave one example, The Squirell Nut Zippers recorded mostly original music that would stand well alongside Ellington and Waller.

By: meehawl

meehawl — Thu, 18 Mar 2004 10:34:26 -0800

Fünf Sterne Deluxe

By: y2karl

y2karl — Thu, 18 Mar 2004 12:38:25 -0800

Well dang, perhaps I'm just spoiled living in a city with active Jazz composers. Swing was jazz but contemporary jazz is not swing. Dixieland was jazz but contemporary jazz is not dixieland. Your description of the Squirrel Nut Zippers as standing head and shoulders with Ellington or Waller is an opinion in the minority of one: They cut their second album live to a single mike because they don't just love old jazz--they love old jazz records, which is also why Katharine Whalen thinks the way to channel Billie Holiday and Betty Boop is to scrunch up your tonsils. However sincerely they disavow nostalgia, they're not good enough to escape it--striving for the life they hear on those records, they're neither acute enough musically nor blessed enough culturally to get closer than a clumsy imitation. Mix in a soupcon of postloungecore eleganza and you end up with a band that's damn lucky to have written a couple of dandy songs. And if they purloined that calypso novelty hit they put their name on, I hope the teeth that get extruded are their own. Retro swing =| Swing: It Don't Mean a Thing ...if it ain't got that swing. Ironic, postmodern, revival and retro are four modifiers that do not signify new, creative, innovative or original. A re-creation of an old sound is not the creation of that sound new as playing in the style of is not so much playing the style but play-acting it. Paul Butterfield was not the equal of Little Walter and contributed but little to the style of microphone amplified blues harmonica which Little Walter created. Big Bill Morganfield can not sing blues like Muddy Waters even though he has his father's vocal tones. You can't step into the same river twice. Ry Cooder can play Blind Willie Johnson's Dark Was The Night (Cold Was The Ground) nearly note for note and has spun a whole soundtrack from it but the copy is a ghost, a xerox of a xerox of a xerox compared to the original. Also, Scott Joplin composed ragtime. Ragtime was not jazz.

By: KirkJobSluder

KirkJobSluder — Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:30:43 -0800

y2karl: A re-creation of an old sound is not the creation of that sound new as playing in the style of is not so much playing the style but play-acting it. It is so rare to see a sentence that is simultaneously so convoluted, and yet, so meaningless. Paul Butterfield was not the equal of Little Walter and contributed but little to the style of microphone amplified blues harmonica which Little Walter created. Big Bill Morganfield can not sing blues like Muddy Waters even though he has his father's vocal tones. You can't step into the same river twice. Which is an interesting paradox in your position here. If the music evolves (as is the case with chamber music from Bach to Paert), then it's dead. If the music stays static and is only maintaned through repeated performance, then it is also dead. I'm wondering what the heck "live" means to you. I think it is premature to call a genre dead as long as there are performers, composers and listeners.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Thu, 18 Mar 2004 19:48:22 -0800

"Isaac Brock is gonna kick all of metafilter's ass" -- Mark Abraham, in my blog comments.

By: GrahamVM

GrahamVM — Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:25:46 -0800

Rock is not about authenticity. It is about ecstasy. And indeed, you could say the same thing about other forms of music... Bugger where an artist might sit in the scheme of things; do they make you feel alive in some way?