Agreed!
God gave up on rock ( and fusion ) pretty-much when the 80's began.
This is why many kids these days tune into the 70's channels to hear Led Zeppelin, etc.
IMVHO
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.
Agreed!
God gave up on rock ( and fusion ) pretty-much when the 80's began.
This is why many kids these days tune into the 70's channels to hear Led Zeppelin, etc.
IMVHO
D
Deleted member 165050
Guest
I think you're confusing an opinion with "truth". What makes you think I'm not familiar with modern artists? It is familiarity with the music of the more recent decades that led me to create the thread (and state my opinion).
Last edited:
There was an article a few years back stating that Zack Wylde was the "Last Guitar Hero". Which in this topic Hero and God are used in the same context.
I agree that when rock started subdividing into different genres it thinned out the fans and possibly no one artist could be liked by them all. In turn famous rock players from the late 50's to the 90's have achieved legend status. Partly because the helped create different the subgenres. Black Sabbath can be linked to many different subgenres. So any one of the members of Black Sabbath can be liked by almost all rock music fans.
Geezer Butler is widely known as one of the premier bass players of all time. John Moyer or Steve Kmak are barely known outside of their genre. Which only reinforces the division of the music scene today.
Also another good quote was from Gene Simmons and to paraphrase: 'When 'Rock Stars' start acting like everyone else the magic is gone. Rock Stars are supposed to be the guys that every woman wants to be with and every guy wants to be!' That was Gene ripping on the Grunge scene in the 90's. But he has a point. Like others have said that years ago in a time before the internet music celebrities could have created stories of great magnitude. Trashing hotels, fancy cars, multiple partners to date. Again in the 20th century this amazing life style was what dreams were made of. And only added to the Legend, Hero of God status that we hold today.
Last but not least is the music. The artists that I listen to range from the 50's to today. All sorts of styles but mainly rock and pop. I find just as much musicality with Bill Halley's Rock Around the Clock to the Beatles' I want you/She's so heavy to Thin Lizzy's the boy are back in town to Peter Gabriel's Sledge Hammer to The Dave Mathew's Bands Ants Marching to Falling in Reverse's Good Girls Bad Guys. The songs and talents of these artist and many others still remain very high. I do not have any doubts that musicians of today are any less than as good/great as yesteryears were.
The music business and nature of the fans have changed dramatically over the years. I think we (musicians) look at music, as a whole, differently than most music fans. We understand it a bit deeper and know to some degree what it takes to make it. This is why we can say 'But there are still hero's in music today!' It is because we have a deeper love for the instruments and know how hard it is to come up with that riff or sound or whatever it may be. And appreciate this whether it was from 60 years ago or 60 days ago.
But alas the music scene would really need to change or one great uber musician to step up and cross the boundaries of all the genres of music today and to live a lifestyle that is what dreams of today are made of to bring that intangible magic of celebrity back to music. (If this does happen I hope it is with a bass!)
If you made it this far thank you for reading and letting me rant a bit, bass on
I agree that when rock started subdividing into different genres it thinned out the fans and possibly no one artist could be liked by them all. In turn famous rock players from the late 50's to the 90's have achieved legend status. Partly because the helped create different the subgenres. Black Sabbath can be linked to many different subgenres. So any one of the members of Black Sabbath can be liked by almost all rock music fans.
Geezer Butler is widely known as one of the premier bass players of all time. John Moyer or Steve Kmak are barely known outside of their genre. Which only reinforces the division of the music scene today.
Also another good quote was from Gene Simmons and to paraphrase: 'When 'Rock Stars' start acting like everyone else the magic is gone. Rock Stars are supposed to be the guys that every woman wants to be with and every guy wants to be!' That was Gene ripping on the Grunge scene in the 90's. But he has a point. Like others have said that years ago in a time before the internet music celebrities could have created stories of great magnitude. Trashing hotels, fancy cars, multiple partners to date. Again in the 20th century this amazing life style was what dreams were made of. And only added to the Legend, Hero of God status that we hold today.
Last but not least is the music. The artists that I listen to range from the 50's to today. All sorts of styles but mainly rock and pop. I find just as much musicality with Bill Halley's Rock Around the Clock to the Beatles' I want you/She's so heavy to Thin Lizzy's the boy are back in town to Peter Gabriel's Sledge Hammer to The Dave Mathew's Bands Ants Marching to Falling in Reverse's Good Girls Bad Guys. The songs and talents of these artist and many others still remain very high. I do not have any doubts that musicians of today are any less than as good/great as yesteryears were.
The music business and nature of the fans have changed dramatically over the years. I think we (musicians) look at music, as a whole, differently than most music fans. We understand it a bit deeper and know to some degree what it takes to make it. This is why we can say 'But there are still hero's in music today!' It is because we have a deeper love for the instruments and know how hard it is to come up with that riff or sound or whatever it may be. And appreciate this whether it was from 60 years ago or 60 days ago.
But alas the music scene would really need to change or one great uber musician to step up and cross the boundaries of all the genres of music today and to live a lifestyle that is what dreams of today are made of to bring that intangible magic of celebrity back to music. (If this does happen I hope it is with a bass!)
If you made it this far thank you for reading and letting me rant a bit, bass on
The "age of the gods" in rock actually ended in about 1977, by which time the "canon" was all but fixed. Up to that point, it was a very open-ended art form, fueled by influences from all kinds of different genres of music and by the exuberant energies of a novel "youth culture" that, for the first time in world history, defiantly rejected the tastes and values of society's teachers and parents. The Beatles and the Who, Hendrix and the Doors, the Dead and the Airplane, the Zeps and the Sabs, ELP and Genesis, and all the rest had no "rock" predecessors to copy. In an era of heady experimentation, they fashioned new and hitherto unimagined musics from all manner of sources--Blues and R&B, folk, skiffle, jazz, and classical. And to a point, some more progressive elements in the record industry of the time encouraged them to do this. But after about 1977, there is a perceptible shift. The established acts either chose or were forced to pursue less ground-breaking, safer, more commercial sounds. The new acts were now schooled in the "canon" of rock and less likely to be fertilized by the sensibility-broadening influences from other forms, the inevitable results being, with a few notable exceptions, pretty "derivative." And since then, as whatizitman points out, even the canon itself has been relentlessly commodified, its once revolutionary sounds now endlessly pumped out of the ceilings of supermarkets.
I couldn't care less about rock gods. But rock is alive and well.
no bigger act in 1970. $7.50 - $10.00. most acts could be seen for $5 to $7. Minimum wage was $1.45.
concert ticket was 5x Minimum wage. 7x for top acts.
2018 Federal minimum wage is 7.25. This is deceiving since State Minimum wages have been passed and range from 7.25 to 12.50 per hour. safe to use 9.50 as the average minimum wage.
Looking on ticketmaster, I can buy tickets to the Eagles starting at $62.
Carrie Underwood start at $49.
These are tickets for top acts that can be bought for 6.5x minimum wage. And this is ticketmaster, the most expensive place to purchase tickets. I can beat those prices on other sites very easily.
Math tells me your "facts" are suspect.
Attachments
I was born in the 80s, so didn't live through the 60s-70s era discussed here, and therefore have no sense of nostalgia for it. But putting the quality of old vs new music aside for a moment, this has a lot to do with why many my age don't idolize musicians and the rock and roll lifestyle in the same way people used to:
List of pop musicians who died of drug overdose - Wikipedia
And I'm not just saying this was just problem back then, because this list stays a little too full even into the current decade. Admire the music itself (both old and new), yes. Admire the lifestyle, I most certainly don't.
List of pop musicians who died of drug overdose - Wikipedia
And I'm not just saying this was just problem back then, because this list stays a little too full even into the current decade. Admire the music itself (both old and new), yes. Admire the lifestyle, I most certainly don't.
Last edited:
This is so ridiculous that it bares repeating.
I was a teenager in SoCAL in the 80s , smack dab between the broadcasting ranges of two of the most prominent and ground breaking "Alternative" stations in the US (not called alternative then. But you get the picture). These were the only stations to play Talking Heads, much less this particular song.
I worked in a grocery store ~86-87. It was MUZAK. All. Day. Every. Day.
Once again for posterity...
MUZAK SOCAL 1987 versus TALKING HEADS WV 2018.
But, please tell me again that we need a new rock god.
I remember going grocery shopping with my mom in the 70s. Muzak would fill the air, and Mom would sometimes be humming along to a tune she remembered from the good old days. I thought a lot of it was crap, but also remember enjoying a few of the melodies.
I was in the grocery store a few months ago, and caught myself singing along to a Mellencamp song out loud, which then made me laugh out loud. I know my kids like certain songs and bands from my generation, but to them, the majority is probably looked at as Muzak.
Oh, how I wish they would bring back Count Chocula.
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.
Yes, but you can't blame the artists for touring when someone dangles a $50 million carrot in front of them. Heck, I'd go back out for half that!
Well, then, your opinion is completely flawed. At the very least, it's just a tired statement that falls into the category of "older generations complaining about younger generation's taste in music".
What exactly is your definition of this supposed "rock god" anyway?
Guitar virtuosos? They still exist.
Bass players pushing sonic boundaries? They absolutely exist.
Lead singers known for danger or sex appeal or reckless drug behavior? They still exist too.
Musicians blurring lines of classification or genre? Yup, we have those too.
So what is it then?
No, you had a very particular set of label approved artists that everyone could agree on because you didn't have access to literally hundreds of artists with a push of a button.
ANY artist from an earlier era would have trouble making it in the music business today. Many of those same artists have said so.
Saturation, parasitic bleeding by industries, and fracturing of listening habits are overwhelming obstacles that talent simply can't overcome.
What the 50-70s have is nostalgia. That's it.
ANY artist from an earlier era would have trouble making it in the music business today. Many of those same artists have said so.
Saturation, parasitic bleeding by industries, and fracturing of listening habits are overwhelming obstacles that talent simply can't overcome.
What the 50-70s have is nostalgia. That's it.
That is logically impossible. Something that isn't objective can't be proven to be right or wrong.
If you aren't liking what's being offered, then offer something better. Crying about "the good ole days" won't change anything. And ageist attitudes (like those expressed in this thread) just show your bias and ignorance. If some band of old guys in their 70's can still fill a venue what's it to ya? You are not entitled to a career ... you earn it by producing what other people want to hear. If they want to hear for the next 50 years, all the better.
your forgot one....
In the '60s and 70's (and most 80's) radio DJ's were allowed to play stuff they wanted to throw in if they thought it sounded cool and thought people would like it.
I posted that a few weeks ago.
There is nothing more guaranteed to get grumps angry than to remind them that grumps said the exact same thing about their music when they were younger.
The Gene Simmons quote may be to the point, or another valid way of looking at it - the "idol" as "the person who doesn't play by the rules of mere mortals." Unfortunately, however, another term that carries that definition is "sociopath." Society was willing to allow these celebrities exemption from the boundaries of ordinary people's lives. But that's an idolatry that couldn't ever have been sustainable. It leads too easily to ugly, unromantic deaths by suicide and overdose. It also leads you to Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein, also once "idols" in their respective fields.
I cannot sort out all the redoubled negatives of this sentence to figure out what it's supposed to mean.
I agree, in part, with the last point, as far as top 40 pop is concerned - that there's much less willingness on the part of major labels to nurture artists to their potential and take risks, rather they stick to plugging safe "sure things." But popular music has ALWAYS been a commodity, no less in 1977 than any time since.
I would disagree with setting an end date to the Age of Idols in 1977. I mean, come on, the 80s had Billy Idol! Seriously, though, I think acts like U2 and Van Halen still carried the sense of "rock idols" that had existed earlier. As an 80s teen, me and my friends certainly looked at them that way. And 80s artists were, if anything, MORE obsessed with incorporating new influences - reggae, African music, and for that matter the 80s guitar shredders were rediscovering classical music and going back to Bach for ideas in a way that had been foreign to rock and roll until then. @tb4sbp above set the Age of Idols as 50s to 90s, and I think that's accurate; I would argue Kurt Cobain was the Last New Rock Idol.
That probably has some truth to it. Since the 90s radio DJs are strapped to a predefined playlist of about 10 songs they put on repeat. Many stations don't really have DJs through out the whole day anymore either. Its just robo-music and commercials.
My wife listens to pop radio. We can drive somewhere, and a song will be on. We will get lunch, shop, whatever, and the exactly same song that was on when I got out of the car will come on.
That's why the radio is a totally dead medium now. It is the thing you have on in the background when you don't have your phone or CDs with you. It used to form opinions or move a band's popularity. Now, by the time it hits the radio it is old news. Some of the "biggest" artists that are Pop culture icons don't even really get played on the radio anymore. Its a joke.
