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.
Do you have any anecdotal evidence that is more recent that half a century ago?
Seriously, though, do you foresee a cyclical and inevitable return to guitar-wielding rock stars?
My Dad used to advise, "Plenty of room at the top, it's the bottom that's crowded." That being somewhat true, where is the great American rock back to rise out of nowhere and not only reclaim the crown but save the entire genre? It is pretty curious that there is not ONE young bandleader with the chops, strategic smarts and players to tailor a band that can fill the void that only grows larger with the death of each Scott Weiland or Chris Cornell.
Either the audience is not there, or there simply is no worthy band in the country today. Which is it? Maybe both?
I agree, that price is way too high considering the way her audience skews. It should be more Matt Freeman MIM priced.
Do you have any anecdotal evidence that is more recent that half a century ago?
Seriously, though, do you foresee a cyclical and inevitable return to guitar-wielding rock stars?
My Dad used to advise, "Plenty of room at the top, it's the bottom that's crowded." That being somewhat true, where is the great American rock back to rise out of nowhere and not only reclaim the crown but save the entire genre? It is pretty curious that there is not ONE young bandleader with the chops, strategic smarts and players to tailor a band that can fill the void that only grows larger with the death of each Scott Weiland or Chris Cornell.
Either the audience is not there, or there simply is no worthy band in the country today. Which is it? Maybe both?
Well..... I can see that sarcasm isn't always conveyed effectively in a web forum. lulz.
Actually I don't see a return to rock stars in the near future. However, there will always be guitar gods, well known or not.
I was just kidding, too, and I got your point: They've been saying guitar music is on the way out for 55 years.
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,939
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
Like I mentioned in my comment, it was not an apples to apples comparison. While an instrument maker like Fender or Gibson doesn't have that much reach, there is plenty they could do. They could push video and written content with the numerous musician magazines/websites/YouTube-channels, they could put out content on their own social media platforms, they could push advertisements into music shops where their products are sold, they could help the guitarist in question with tour planning to get them more lucrative venues/dates, they could do heavily sponsored tours/events. I think in the scheme of things, even pushing all of that would be a relatively minor expense for a big company like Fender or Gibson, and they could potentially bring someone really talented to the forefront.
I mentioned earlier in this thread somewhere that I think the concept of a "corporate rock millionaire" is dead...but the more thought I put into this idea I think that might not be true. The idea of a musician becoming popular on their own and rising up to a "corporate rock millionaire" type status is probably dead, but the idea of a company making their own "corporate rock millionaire" sounds pretty new and fresh to me. Sure, they'd immediately be (rightly) labeled a sellout...but in the scheme of things that may not be a bad thing.
Like I said, it's not an apples to apples comparison. Disney is easily a zillion times bigger and more influential than Fender. That said, I believe it's definitely within the realm of possibility. I don't think it'd be anywhere near millions for Fender to do something like that, either.
wintremute
mediocrity at its finest
- Oct 16, 2014
- 6,942
- 29,551
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Langstrom Carrot Farms
All the guitar makers sponsor loads of people, and that has been going on forever. I'm talking about a bigger push/investment around a single artist.
If today, Fender plucked up a young, handsome, and talented guitarist, and over the next 5 years put his face on the cover of magazines, did loads of videos with him, helped him travel around the world on tours with big artists, and more-or-less made that guitarist THE Fender guy, I imagine all of us would know his name.
It's no problem...we're just chatting on TB...no pressure here.
Fully understanding that it's impossible to take them seriously, look at Babymetal and other "idol" musicians in Japan/Korea. Talent agencies just pick some people up, lay out a path, push them down it, and there you go...
Lots of today's big artists on the scene are really heavily tied to brands...Pepsi/Coke, Beats, Apple...etc...is it really a stretch to think that someday a major guitar player, say on the caliber of Eric Clapton, is a guy Pepsi sponsored from the beginning? If some company sees the value in them and puts money behind them, why can't they be the next Guitar God? It's really just an extension of how sponsorships have worked for brands in the past.
Sure, it's corporate shill music, but if the artist behind it is talented would anybody care that much?
A big part of this is that guitar driven music isn't super popular right now...but these things tend to be cyclical.
No proof but it's not going away. I play country and there guitar is still king
Markets cycle, fads cycle, music trends will too.
Rush 2112 : Discovery
The boys saw the re-birth of the guitar long before the nay-sayers thought if its demise!
Rush 2112 : Discovery
The boys saw the re-birth of the guitar long before the nay-sayers thought if its demise!
Sure does. The rapture of the nerds is probably as unlikely as the other kind. I assume machine intelligence will outpace us handily in short order, but I doubt any kind of transference will be remotely possible.
