Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Maybe...
Well partly that, but largely a comment on how little real musical development there has been in the last 30 years and how everything has become so safe and bland. Everything is derivative, or is the past "rediscovered". And the stars of today just aren't like they were in the old days
I suppose with so many more people and so much music being created everything just gets diluted.
You might want to turn off the top 40 radio station or TV music award shows then and seek out some proper music, which I can assure you, is still being made today.
Yes, modern pop music sucks. We all know that. It's designed to be simple and easy to sell though, get over it. I don't assume all country music sucks because Rascal Flatts exists.
The rock gods are still there for today's youth. They just stand on a different platform.
These threads are never as deep as the posters assume they're going to be. It just makes those people sound jaded.
He's a perfect example. He's a sad old man trying to relive the 60s singing (kind of) to thousands of sad old men trying to relive the 60s. Nothing "rock" about that. There are more orthotic shoes at a Stones concert than at a Dr.Scholls warehouse. Likely 80% of the audience had to grab a nap before to make sure they were awake at the end. Coffee likely sells more than beer.
I disagree. Millions of fans still want to see him, including me. He makes millions on ticket sales. He still does a better show than most performers in any genre. He's not a "sad old man" at all. He's a rock star.
Last edited:
This just sounds like "WAH! Someone doesn't like what I like" taken to the generational level. I work with millennials every day and we talk music at times. Many of them know my generation's music and appreciate it. They just don't buy into the worship angle because that social context and lifestyle is not relevant to them.
Our whole family subscribed to Apple Music for a fee, and my two sons also subscribe to Spotify for a fee. There’s very little free music in this house except YouTube, and that’s not because I preach it, I don’t. And there’s no radio except Sirius, which I pay for. We switched to family sharing of Apple Music because I was spending 2-3 times that every month buying music on iTunes.
Maybe artists should form unions or lobby groups to negotiate with Apple and Spotify on their behalf. But IMO amp musician or actor or director “deserves” to be a multimillionaire any more than Apple’s board deserves it.
buldog5151bass
Kibble, milkbones, and P Basses. And redheads.
Music, and entertainment in general, is less of a generational thing. Used to be your career in rock was over at your first marriage or 21st birthday (50s, early 60s). Then it was rare to be making a career as a rock musician after 40 (1970s). When you got "old", you stopped listening to rock. No more.
"Rock Gods" are some of the reasons punk and alternative came about. Up close and personal. Pioneers? Yes, some. I, for one, am glad music became de-centralized...fair trade *double entendre*.
...and none of us would be here without Elvis. Legend.
No Chuck Berry, Lil' Richard, Bill Haley, Beatles, Zepplin, Hendrix, or even Queen... When someone is "pushing" it in my face, I take a step back and ask, "Why?" Cui Bono...
...and none of us would be here without Elvis. Legend.
No Chuck Berry, Lil' Richard, Bill Haley, Beatles, Zepplin, Hendrix, or even Queen... When someone is "pushing" it in my face, I take a step back and ask, "Why?" Cui Bono...
Well said and, I think, a pretty complete analysis of the circumstances. Things change and people don't like change. We all seem to be stuck in our youth and long for legendary "good ole' days".
We're just going about being humans.
Your responses are always so cryptic. What are you trying to say here???He's a perfect example. He's a sad old man trying to relive the 60s singing (kind of) to thousands of sad old men trying to relive the 60s. Nothing "rock" about that. There are more orthotic shoes at a Stones concert than at a Dr.Scholls warehouse. Likely 80% of the audience had to grab a nap before to make sure they were awake at the end. Coffee likely sells more than beer.
D
Deleted member 165050
Guest
The period from the 50s through the 70s though was a time of huge social and technological change, and I think the music and the individuals who made it reflected that.
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,941
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
Not saying this was the cause, but I feel the rock god/goddess thing started to die when Ozzie did the Osbornes.
That was a very sad moment in R&R history for me. Ozzie was a rock God to me growing up. That show took that all away. Made him into nothing more than a troubled, drug riddled buffoon.
That was a very sad moment in R&R history for me. Ozzie was a rock God to me growing up. That show took that all away. Made him into nothing more than a troubled, drug riddled buffoon.
Can't at all disagree about that. The change was in the music, too. We went from Bill Haley and the Comets to Chuck Berry to The Beatles, The Stones, Cream, Led Zeppelin, and on from there. But, I think the social upheaval now is more pronounced than it was then.
My Maserati does one-eighty-five.
I lost my license, now I can’t drive.
Do only "rock" gods count? Are Beyonce and Taylor Swift not "goddesses" because the music they play (and have hordes of worshiping fans for) isn't "rock?" What's the difference between a "god" and a "celebrity" other than that the person bestowing the title is or isn't impressed by the candidate personally? What about Blues Gods and Jazz Gods?
Another angle on all this is the dynamic of the "classic." There may well have been smarter philosophers than Plato since the 4th century BC, but nevertheless "all philosophy is footnotes on Plato," because... well, Plato is the classic. There may be greater English writers than Shakespeare, but we'll never see it that way because Shakespeare was the genius who defined the field of English literature, in some sense. In any given field of human activity, you have the "classic" historical moment when the field blossoms to its potential and the masthead figure at that moment becomes the standard by which all subsequent activity is measured.
In the same way, today there are guitarists who could play circles around Hendrix, there are songwriters just as clever and meaningful as McCartney, there are singers more powerful than Elvis. But they will never have the title of "rock gods" bestowed on them because Hendrix, McCartney and Elvis already existed and defined the field as its "classic" artists.
Another angle on all this is the dynamic of the "classic." There may well have been smarter philosophers than Plato since the 4th century BC, but nevertheless "all philosophy is footnotes on Plato," because... well, Plato is the classic. There may be greater English writers than Shakespeare, but we'll never see it that way because Shakespeare was the genius who defined the field of English literature, in some sense. In any given field of human activity, you have the "classic" historical moment when the field blossoms to its potential and the masthead figure at that moment becomes the standard by which all subsequent activity is measured.
In the same way, today there are guitarists who could play circles around Hendrix, there are songwriters just as clever and meaningful as McCartney, there are singers more powerful than Elvis. But they will never have the title of "rock gods" bestowed on them because Hendrix, McCartney and Elvis already existed and defined the field as its "classic" artists.
I stumbled on this video from Adam Neely. Cliff notes version - research shows you prefer the music you grew up listening to in your early teenage years. So the rock gods didn't disappear. Your gods are still there and new ones are being created for the current generation.
ha. I was just going to say that taylor swift definitely fits the rock god archetype except for her music. The cult of personality that surrounds popular performers is still alive and well it's just present in different genres of music. Youth (since as long as there have been people) is more susceptible to putting people they admire on a pedestal and that age and life experience generally counteract such idealization.
I’m going to hit 50 next month, but if I ever turn into the old fart that wants to live in the 80’s and just stay there ‘cause everything today sucks, please shoot me in the head.
