Where is rock music headed?

[Jazzman23]

Hey everyone,

The glory days of rock music are long gone, wouldn't you agree? It seems like, for the most part, rap and hip hop has taken its place as the voice of the youth. Hip hop certainly sells WAY more than rock music does; just take a look at the top songs and albums on itunes.

Whereas the past four decades seemed to churn out international rock stars at breakneck pace, I think the world has seen a dramatic shift in music during the 2000's. Hip Hop is now the behemoth of the industry, and rock has taken a backseat. Think about it: how many rock acts today are capable of filling out arenas? Not very many, and a lot of those bands are in the twilight of their careers (U2, RHCP, Pearl Jam, etc).

Not only do hip hop acts fill out major venues on a regular basis, its important to think about the level of cultural influence the hip hop scene has had on the world, especially North America. You don't see the kids running around wearing Pink Floyd or Oasis t-shirts anymore. Now they wear the clothing lines of Jay-Z and Eminem.

I think rock music has yielded to hip hop for a number of reasons, but one that stands out for me is the fact that rock has gotten BORING! Certainly, there are innovative rock bands out there, but for the most part, these are not the bands that get popular attention. Where are the Beatles, the Led Zeppelins, the (older) Red Hot Chili Peppers of today?? Bands that push the envelope of rock on an artistic and cultural level but also appeal to the mass audience?

I could go on for awhile, but lets open up the floor. Where do you guys think rock music is going? Is it making a comeback? *Could* it make a comeback? Or are the best days of the guitar and bass gone, replaced by MC's and DJ's?

At least we have the Jonas Brothers.

 

[5StringBlues]

Rigor Mortis

 

[capnsandwich]

All roads lead to emo. Sorry but it's true. Either that or Link Removed

 

[CBgaragebassist]

Good rock music and it's fans are still here. Just not getting attention because its not the 'in' thing right now. I'm glad to say i dont listen to any mainstream acts from this century. I still listen to Hendrix, Pink Floyd, Zeppelin, etc. The sad truth now is that with the way music is right now, if those bands were (hyothetically) just starting now, they would never have the major success they had then. They'd be underground now. Now i must return to the bunker so the crap from the music scene now wont get to me.

 

[TOOL460002]

Rigor Mortis

it seems that way, doesnt it?

i mean, i know its not dead, but it seems like most new stuff i listen to happens to be a mix of rock and electronica. i really felt more in touch with good, new rock bands like ten years ago, and not so much now. theres a pretty decent amount of good metal coming out that kind of up on, but i just dont see a band like stone temple pilots out there. i cant think of someone like them: classic rock sound, solid, classic song structure, where every member is just awesome and tight.

so, my answer is that rock is going to fuse with electronic music more, probably because its so easy and cheap to get a low key home studio going, and its easy to add little electronic stuff, but drums require all kinds of mics and sound isolation, and more inputs, and cables and stands and all that. running instruments direct and owning something like a shure mic and a stand for vocals, and maybe one of those small usb keyboards is just so easy and cheap.

 

[Mystic Michael]

If one is young enough to have never before observed a major cycle occur in the genre, then the first time one sees it may seem like "the end of rock music as we know it".

I've been around long enough to have witnessed at least three or four such cycles. I haven't gotten worked up about them in quite some time...

A longer-range view will reveal several key considerations:

* Once a genre - practically any genre - is established, it never entirely goes away. But its degree of contemporary relevance may fade. (Ex. Dixieland swing, Delta blues, Gregorian chant. You get the drift.)

* The development and evolution of a genre can be influenced by multiple factors, i.e. technological, economic, demographic, cultural. Rock music in the 1950s originated from a distinct blend of social/cultural factors that no longer exist in quite the same way today. The music has changed since then because the world has changed. The music must continue to change and adapt in order to remain vibrant and relevant.

* The music tends to ebb and flow its way through various phases and trends - or swings of the pendulum - because this is the way that culture itself tends to change and evolve.

Given these considerations, I would agree that rock music will incorporate more and more new sounds, production & performance techniques, and themes & motifs borrowed from the sub-genres of electronica, trance, ambient, and to some extent world music - driven largely by the proliferation of new software instruments offered by the very sophisticated digital music production applications available now - with the world music influence coming from the ever-increasing "global neighborhood" consciousness being generated by the international interdependence that defines contemporary life.

It's a great time to be a musician - IF you can think outside the box...

MM

 

[Valerus]

It's just not popular. It's not dead. for sure. you just aren't looking in the right places

 

[Lunarfall]

I dunno, Muse and Coheed and Cambria do a damn good job at appealing to the mainstream, and they're pretty good at what they do.

 

[rcarraher]

Rock is still going strong, lets not confuse popular music (what sells the most and tops The Charts) with the "genre" of rock. Groups like Greenday, Kings Of Leon, Blink 182, Dave Mathews, Wilco, et al still play good, original rock, no matter what sub genre we try and put them in. They just aren't dominating the charts of popular music the way we like to think that the bands did in the hay days. Rocks demise has been announced before, in the mid to late 70's Disco Dominated the charts and unless you were an Eagle, Fleetwood Mac, Bob Seeger, or Pink Floyd or a "softrock" group, or singer song writer (Think James Taylor, Dan Folgerberg, Carly Simon et al) you couldn't get in the pop charts. Same thing could be said for the late sixties. Here was a group of years, arguably at the height of rock creativity with The Beatles, Stones, Doors, Janis Joplin, Cream etc... and acts like Herb Albert, Hugh Montenegro, Jeanie C. Reiley, Bobby Goldsboro, OC Smith along with R&B acts and Motown groups were at least as strong in the pop charts and for the most part dominated them as far as number of acts charting. I just pulled up the pop charts for this week in 1968 and there was one Beatles song, Hey Jude, no Stones, one Doors song Hello I Love You and one from Cream Sunshine of Your Love, In the top forty. The rest of the groups that could be considered rock n roll were mostly one hit wonders. Anyone remember John Fred and The Playboy Band?

I do think that you make a point when you say that rock bands don't have the cultural impact that they did in the past, but I think in the long run, rap and hip hop won't have nearly the "impact" and long term effects on our musical culture. I think it maybe on the wane even now. The truth is that rock has had a run, that if you date it from 1955 or so, is a 50 plus year run. That really is phenomenal for a particular genre of music. Big Band had a hay day of maybe 15 years. Jazz, in all of its different incarnations was maybe 20-25 years as a force on culture and pop music. Country is arguably long lived although it hard for me to put Hank Williams on the Same Family Tree as Billy Ray Cyrus.

I think rock acts are still stronger than ever in the big venue, arena/stadium concert area even if the top grossing tours are lead by the likes of RHCP, Springsteen and others considered in the twilight of their careers. What we are missing is the dominant voices; Jim Morrison, Janis, etc...and the great songwriting teams Lennon & McCartney, Jager & Richards, etc... that are capable of writing and turning out kick assed rock AND over whelming pop.

 

[StyleOverShow]

It's just not popular. It's not dead. for sure. you just aren't looking in the right places

I dunno, Muse and Coheed and Cambria do a damn good job at appealing to the mainstream, and they're pretty good at what they do.

It has splintered into many more streams than previous eras, due in some part to the multi-channel marketing of the internet. There do seem to be fewer rock anthems than before. Did a wedding in NYC recently and the 80's-90's stuff really rocked the house.

A couple of LA DJ's joked on air a few years back when the last Steely Dan CD raced to the top of the charts, that boomers didn't know how to download and that explained the CD sales. It's sad but true.

There still is rock and roll out there. A couple of bands in LA that I like including Curious Primate, killer bass player Eric on a Marcus Miller. It's just all over the place at the moment, with live music competing with djs.

 

[Jazzman23]

What we are missing is the dominant voices; Jim Morrison, Janis, etc...and the great songwriting teams Lennon & McCartney, Jager & Richards, etc... that are capable of writing and turning out kick assed rock AND over whelming pop.

Exactly. I certainly wasn't arguing that rock is dead, because its obviously not. But it HAS fallen behind hip hop in terms of mainstream appeal. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but I think the reason why it has been yielding to other genres of music is because we are missing the "dominant voices" of the old greats.

Maybe the mainstream conciousness regarding music is simply too varied nowadays for a single band or artist to be embraced the way, say, the Stones were back in the day.

HOWEVER, I woud love to see a resurgance of creativity and talent in rock that is capable of knocking the socks off anyone, achieving mainstream success like the hip hop artists of today (Kanye West, Beyonce, etc). Not just a select niche of fans. I mean, *Green Day* is one of the top rock acts today...that is truly troubling. Again, I'm not arguing that being popular makes the music better, but it does lead to a certain historical and sentimental value that people will always have a place in their heart for.

I suppose that its social forces that make music popular, not the music itself.

 

[lunarpollen]

There are millions and millions of kids out there who can't stand hip hop and who are into rock music. Rock is here to stay and although it may not be on the front page or the top of the charts every day, it's doing quite well and is in no danger of becoming extinct. And saying kids are into hip hop now because rock has gotten boring doesn't make sense, because the majority of the hip hop that makes the charts is incredibly boring and formulaic and often rips off rock songs via "sampling" (which more and more often = just completely stealing the whole song and just talking in an affected "urban" accent over the top of it and saying "yih" and "ih" a lot. Not very exciting).

Anyway, it's the underground where most of the exciting music is happening. Both rock and hip hop. The charts are meaningless except to people in the retail industry.

 

[tinjenbass]

I suppose that its social forces that make music popular, not the music itself.

Look at MTV as a primary culprit. When I was growing up, I was watching the Videos of Dire Staits, the Police, Van Halen. Now you look at the heaping piles of garbage they put over the airwaves it makes me sick. I grew up with a strong appreciation of music in my house. My father played me the Beatles, Beach Boys, Crosby Stills and Nash to name a few... But I knew what ARTISTS were supposed to sound like. Now adays MTV puts on the garbage hip hop stuff all the time and its become the trend. Now girls are going to clubs to listen to the same rap beat on repeat for 4 hours, and they think its great. Dare I say that 30 years ago in the 80's(!!!!) Those same impressionable girls were at the Van Halen and Motley Crue shows, because it was cool. Trends is all it boils down to. We do need a revival of rock, but we also need the "suits" behind MTV and other massive media outlets to back it as well. It would be nice to hear music on the radio because it is good. Not just because they have a dance for it(soldja boy's pathetic "hit") In 50 years from now is someone who might be a grandma at that time going to play that for their grandkids? Not a chance ever. Bring back the talent!!!

 

[FailOutBoy]

And saying kids are into hip hop now because rock has gotten boring doesn't make sense, because the majority of the hip hop that makes the charts is incredibly boring and formulaic and often rips off rock songs via "sampling" (which more and more often = just completely stealing the whole song and just talking in an affected "urban" accent over the top of it and saying "yih" and "ih" a lot. Not very exciting).

While many artists still use sampling to some extent, hip hop has come a long way since looping "Funky Drummer" and adding rhymes was the status quo. The genre has long since moved to a more producer-driven format, with (for the most part) original beats. I never got why people see hip hop as less creative or original than what every single "retro" throwback/ripoff/cover rock band does on the radio today.

Anyway, it's the underground where most of the exciting music is happening. Both rock and hip hop. The charts are meaningless except to people in the retail industry.

This pretty much sums up my feelings. If there's a truly all-time-great type rock band out there today, they're probably getting a percent of a percent of the exposure that the Beatles or Stones enjoyed during a simpler time. Unfortunately the only "rock" groups I see with serious label backing and ubiquity now are Green Day and the Jonas Brothers. And even they might be the same three guys...

 

[RAM]

There are certainly a number of factors at play here. For one, there's definitely been an ebb-and-flow issue with rock over the years, and each lull has seen, and given way to junk (or what's junk, IMO, of course).

What seems to be different these days is a complete erosion of the music industry. Record labels seem to be so quick to find the latest thing they rarely take time to develop artists anymore. This is actually a paraphrase from a recent interview I've read by several of the older cats, such as Gregg Rollie and Steven Van Zandt - two artists who've been involved in hugely significant super groups. Couple that with the fact that exposure to new music is eroded with the internet. While I agree the internet takes some of the power out of the record labels' hands, bands that rely on alternative distribution methods by bypassing the major labels and traditional outlets don't reach the masses in the same way they used to.

Because of this new format, I don't have a lot of faith we'll see a resurgence on quite the same level that we've enjoyed in the past. There will most certainly continue to be super groups, but they will, IMO, be fewer and farther between. Perhaps, and I'm being (excessively???) optimistic that we'll see the pendulum swing back again. I'm just not that confident.

 

[rcarraher]

While many artists still use sampling to some extent, hip hop has come a long way since looping "Funky Drummer" and adding rhymes was the status quo. The genre has long since moved to a more producer-driven format, with (for the most part) original beats. I never got why people see hip hop as less creative or original than what every single "retro" throwback/ripoff/cover rock band does on the radio today.



This pretty much sums up my feelings. If there's a truly all-time-great type rock band out there today, they're probably getting a percent of a percent of the exposure that the Beatles or Stones enjoyed during a simpler time. Unfortunately the only "rock" groups I see with serious label backing and ubiquity now are Green Day and the Jonas Brothers. And even they might be the same three guys...

This is absolutely spot on. Its over produced and formulaic. Its where rock was in say 1958, 1959. The record companies were making "stars" and to a great extent dictating what was "cool" or trying to. It had gotten away from that "wild" thing that Elvis brought to the forefront, that Chuck Berry laid on the stage, Little Richard had been beaten into submission and when Buddy Holly died, well....I don't know if the music died, and I would have bet that Buddy Holly would have ended up doing Vegas shows too. But then here came the Beatles, The Stones, Animals, Kinks, Who and they led to Airplane, The Dead, Hendrix...and rock woke back up again.

In away, thats what I appreciate about Green day, not so much the music speaks to me personally but that they say what they want to say.

Anyway, thats an old farts take on the situation.

 

[tom e smith]

Back in the late 70's Rock was supposedly "dethroned" by Disco and we all know what happened there. Rock has been for the most part the driving force of music for the last 60years. Most of us who have been around for a while are used to the Next Big Thing being just around the bend. The last "Big" Thing was probably Grunge which is now pretty long in the tooth. Don't get me wrong I like a lot of the new rock but it just seems safe. The evolution from Rock N Roll, Psycho delic, Hard Rock, Glam, Grunge to Emo? Seems a little wimpy. We Want The Next Big Thing!!!! Rock isn't dead just a little too complacent.

 

[Lesfunk]

As long as Uriah Heep lives, So Lives ROCK!!!!!!

 

[xzzy]

What we are missing is the dominant voices; Jim Morrison, Janis, etc...and the great songwriting teams Lennon & McCartney, Jager & Richards, etc... that are capable of writing and turning out kick assed rock AND over whelming pop.

The voices are out there. There's just so many people shouting, you can't hear 'em above the ruckus.

Is both the best and worst feature of living in the internet era. There's so many people out there making music (not at all a bad thing) that I think the days of megastars are over.

 

[Discount Saint]

+1 on Muse -- they are a perfect example of a band that is able to make catchy music that people like without producing watered down mainstream modern-rock slurry like a lot of the popular "rock" acts are doing right now.

But again, Muse, unlike a lot of bands, are real innovators who aren't afraid to incorporate technology new and old into their sound, and write and put out what they like rather than what will necessarily make them tons of money. Yet they still manage to put out some very mainstream-friendly tunes that are also genuinely wicked-awesome.

I think what frustrates me the most about "Modern Rock" is firstly that it is really, really horrible and generic, and that unfortunately, while most people you talk to tend to belittle bands like Nickelback, they still go out and buy their CDs in the millions but somehow forget to do the same for all of the really innovative and creative bands they profess to like better.