Is rock dead?

[2ndsout]

speaking for the US audiences:

Rock in the 60s, 70s, and even part of the 80s was still new, anti-establishment music for the young. Fathers and mothers of these kids grew up in the WWII generation. Rock was still dangerous....Elvis shook his hips on TV and - gasp - he was satan

Kids in 2013 come from second and even third generation rock listeners. Their fathers and grandfathers grew up with it. Its not rebellious anymore. Its not a middle-finger to the establishment anymore

If kids are trying to find their own way with their own music that is pissing their parents off - making them say things like "That music is crap!" or "Where is good rock at?" or "thats all loops, samples, and auto-tune", then they are only doing what my generation did to my parents with Rock

More power to 'em!

Today's youth is completely different though- in the 1970s there weren't computers in everyone's homes, and MP3s didn't exist. It was all Reel to Reel/8 Tracks, Cassettes, and Vinyl. The folks that are buying Vinyl today are collectors, and not youth. Even though Vinyl sales have been INCREASING because of groups releasing specials for Record store day; I don't think the majority of buyers are young.

Today's youth doesn't care about buying albums, they are only concerned with the newest download to put onto their Ipod. The whole "Concept" of a Concept album is dead. Society is a throw away perspective now. Unfortunately. No one cares about the "Bigger Picture" when it comes to music anymore. If there is good music still being made, it's all underground and no one is listening to it, but except for a few chosen groups.

[Vic2012]

What is ROCK?

To me "Rock" and "pop" are interchangeable. The "new rock" is whatever is popular at the moment. So, "rock" is not dead. But is guitar rock dead? No, but it's not mainstream. Someone mentioned earlier that the basic GBD (guitar-bass-drums) configuration is dead. It's true for the mainstream. It's sad to say but the last time "guitar rock" was popular (the last wave, if you will) was when the guitar/rock/heavy metal video games were really popular. It seemed like every toddler was playing a cheap, plastic guitar connected to a computer.

[Yanks2014]

speaking for the US audiences:

Rock in the 60s, 70s, and even part of the 80s was still new, anti-establishment music for the young. Fathers and mothers of these kids grew up in the WWII generation. Rock was still dangerous....Elvis shook his hips on TV and - gasp - he was satan

Kids in 2013 come from second and even third generation rock listeners. Their fathers and grandfathers grew up with it. Its not rebellious anymore. Its not a middle-finger to the establishment anymore

If kids are trying to find their own way with their own music that is pissing their parents off - making them say things like "That music is crap!" or "Where is good rock at?" or "thats all loops, samples, and auto-tune", then they are only doing what my generation did to my parents with Rock

More power to 'em!

Oh please! None of that anti-establishment nonsense means a thing to most rock fans of the post 60's era. Seriously, its just music to most people. Rebellion in rock music was never an attraction for me at all, in fact it's always been a major turnoff. Yet I became a fan anyway. I loved the energy, loved the playing, most of all, loved the sounds. As to trying to piss off one's parents, I always found that disrespectful. They worked too hard for me to intentionally try to bug them. I still managed to, but that's a different story. I knew they hated much of my music, but sometimes there was common ground. And I not so secretly enjoyed quite a bit of their music too. I just always wanted to find the best music I could, didn't matter what others thought of it. It's all about quality, or at least should be.

[Yanks2014]

What is ROCK?

To me "Rock" and "pop" are interchangeable. The "new rock" is whatever is popular at the moment. So, "rock" is not dead. But is guitar rock dead? No, but it's not mainstream. Someone mentioned earlier that the basic GBD (guitar-bass-drums) configuration is dead. It's true for the mainstream. It's sad to say but the last time "guitar rock" was popular (the last wave, if you will) was when the guitar/rock/heavy metal video games were really popular. It seemed like every toddler was playing a cheap, plastic guitar connected to a computer.

Can't agree at all. Rock is a definitive style, defined by the past 6 decades of rock music. It's morphed into many forms, but essentially at it's core has always been rock and roll. By your definition, styles like disco, electronica, and hip hop can all classify as rock. Certainly not to me.

[SteveSly]

There is a lot of great young straight forward rock bands out there right now:

Rival Sons:



Howlin Rain:


Parlour Mob:

[SteveSly]

The Answer:



Airbourne:



The Darkness:

[Rarebird]

Music is still alive, whether you call it rock, or something else. Perhaps it sounds different than the rock some of us grew up with, but that's all. Some of you sounds just like my dad, saying swing, bop, be-bop and everything else that came after 1930, isn't jazz, because he only likes traditional jazz, made before 1930.

[Rickenbacker]

I don't know how much airplay these guys get in the UK, but they're another promising, young rock band that Elton John thought interesting enough to catch. Kind of like a reincarnated young Stones meets early Tavern/Germany-era Beatles. So while it's not the unifier that it was 40 years ago, guys like them show that rock isn't dead & gone.

[Reid]

There are still millions of kids interested in playing guitars, and other instruments. I work for a freight company, and for the past five years we have been doing all of the Guitar Center store deliveries in New York state. A couple of 53 foot floor loaded trailers full of equipment every week. That's a lot of guitars, amps, keyboards, and drum sets.

So who knows what the future holds? But the Chinese are making lots of money manufacturing all this cheap stuff. And it keeps are guys busy at work.

[klothos]

Oh please! None of that anti-establishment nonsense means a thing to most rock fans of the post 60's era. Seriously, its just music to most people. Rebellion in rock music was never an attraction for me at all, in fact it's always been a major turnoff.

That wasnt my point -- My point is, from the 50s - early 80s, Rock served as a generational dividing line...it was still relatively new and many people of older generations didnt "get it". Like anything else in life, people tend to fear what they doint understand so many older generations assumed Rock music was a subversive way of undermining moral US culture. It was "youth music", even if older generations of folks happened to like certain cuts here and there.

In 2013, its the same style of music a kids grandparents had.

What the electric guitar stood for in my generations are what computers/laptops/DAW software stands for now

My generation calling the music of the young "crap" is no different than my parents saying my music was "crap"

[klothos]

Today's youth is completely different though- in the 1970s there weren't computers in everyone's homes, and MP3s didn't exist. It was all Reel to Reel/8 Tracks, Cassettes, and Vinyl. The folks that are buying Vinyl today are collectors, and not youth. Even though Vinyl sales have been INCREASING because of groups releasing specials for Record store day; I don't think the majority of buyers are young.

Today's youth doesn't care about buying albums, they are only concerned with the newest download to put onto their Ipod. The whole "Concept" of a Concept album is dead. Society is a throw away perspective now. Unfortunately. No one cares about the "Bigger Picture" when it comes to music anymore. If there is good music still being made, it's all underground and no one is listening to it, but except for a few chosen groups.

I disagree with some of that:

The internet and fall of Corporate Music is the biggest key difference - not the medium(s)

In the 60s and 70s if you wanted to listen to music you either turned on the radio or went to a local record shop to buy a physical copy. This is key: Record Stores (be it vinyl, 8-Track, medium of choice) ONLY stocked the catalogs that the distributors carried, and these were limited to the staple of artists signed to the labels the distributors carried. The only exception would be if some band released something independently

In 2013, the internet, easy-to-use software, YouTube, and various other mediums have allowed any artist - of any genre - a means to have their music available to a worldwide audience WITHOUT a label, radio, or major distributorship. The result is what we see today: an oversaturation FLOOD of music on the internet to a worldwide audience. Billboard's charts and Grammys dont mean shit in 2013: there have been times that independent releases have outsold major label releases but Billboard doesnt recognize the tallying formats

"Shoes" by actor/comedian Liam Kyle Sullivan as Kelly is the best example of an independent song that sold an ungodly amount of downloads but never charted on Billboard, nor get any radio play, nor Network video rotation. Here is the link to the YT. The views for this YT alone are 52 Million(!) if that is any indicator on the song's popularity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCF3ywukQYA <--- Shoes video

At any time, you can get on the internet and surf and find a shit-load of bands from a ton of different genres. There are young bands with concept albums, there are young Rock bands, synth-pop, sequenced classical, metal, pop, you-name-it there are young "whatever" out there doing it

The question is: In 2013, how much credence do you put in Corporate Major Labels, large network radio play, large-network video play, and Billboard charts as the USA gauge for success or barometer for what represents the young generation? I used to decades ago before the internet -- not anymore

[Vic2012]

Can't agree at all. Rock is a definitive style, defined by the past 6 decades of rock music. It's morphed into many forms, but essentially at it's core has always been rock and roll. By your definition, styles like disco, electronica, and hip hop can all classify as rock. Certainly not to me.

Well, again to me "rock & roll" or "rock" are just "pop" music. If you follow the history of R&R from the 50s you'll see that "rock" morphed into something else in the early 60s. We get this idea that R&R just developed into this separate genre of music back then. It was a mixture of country, hillbilly (which became Rockabilly), Gospel, blues, rhythm and Blues, doo wop, etc. In many cases the main guy (the frontman) usually played piano or saxaphone. Rock & Roll didn't really become "guitar rock" until the early 60s. That's what I remember. After the 50s, with the death of Buddy Holley, Big Bopper, Ritchie Valens, Eddie Cochran, and Elvis joining the Army and totally tanking his career with one cornball film after another, then we had the teen idol era (Fabian, Frankie, etc.). It really wasn't until The Beatles and the British Invasion that my generation really heard some guitar rock. After seeing the Beatles on Ed Sullivan (as cliche as it sounds, but I swear it's true) I wanted to play drums. That year I got a toy drum kit for Christmas .

But during the Invasion Motown was starting to explode, and "girl groups" were very popular too. It was all Rock & Roll. It really wasn't until around 1966-67 that "gutar/bass/drums rock" and the vocal groups (the Motown groups) started going in different directions (and it was divided among white and African Americans cultures). And then we had the "guitar hero" era and that was the seed of what became hard/rock and heavy metal.

So yes, I'd include R&B, blues, heavy metal, Hip-Hop, prog, electronica, jazz/rock, etc., etc. under the "pop" (or "rock) umbrella. And this is why so many have a problem with the R&RHOF calling itself the "Rock & Roll" HOF. I think "Rock & Roll" as a genre label is dead (or should be dead). It's meaningless today.

[Gruno]

Steve Sly (and others), thanks for the vids of new-ish rock bands. THIS is a main reason why I visit PE. I find new stuff that I can sink my ears into.

[SteveSly]

Steve Sly (and others), thanks for the vids of new-ish rock bands. THIS is a main reason why I visit PE. I find new stuff that I can sink my ears into.

I have actually discovered pretty much all of these through Classic Rock Magazine. They cover a lot of crap, but but sometimes they hit the mark.

Steve Sly

[Banquo]

Rebellion in rock music was never an attraction for me at all, in fact it's always been a major turnoff. Yet I became a fan anyway. I loved the energy, loved the playing, most of all, loved the sounds. As to trying to piss off one's parents, I always found that disrespectful. They worked too hard for me to intentionally try to bug them.

LOL! Dude, do you have kids? Just askin'.

[Scrotum Scissor]

Yes. But PROG, however, is apparently very much alive! I just read something called 'PROG magazine', and they have decided this. PG's So allegedly somehow contributed in saving it while rock at large was nearing its deathbed.

Someone please contact Richard J. Evans.

[mnprogger]

[Trane]

Exactly. Which is why we need to define the words "alive" and "dead" in this context. It's not the most popular music for the current generation, but we live in fragmented times so the tastes of youth will be fragmented as well. I think rock is a lot more alive than anyone realizes. Search a little deeper than radio and you will find it. As I stated previously, I have uncovered many bands that play a variation on the rock I grew up with. They're not blazing new trails ( and this may be where the 'dead' argument stems from) but they are playing with the excitement and exuberance of youth. Listen to the Wo Fat link Jerjo posted above and tell me that isn't rock. It's not being played by dinosaurs either!

It isn't dead, it just doesn't matter.

A generational music, the thing that made Rock what it was in the 60s and early 70s--that effervescent flash that made it a revolutionary force--simply no longer exists. The spirit that animated the music itself died. Everything that had given 60s culture its passion, energy, and creativity had disappeared and been replaced by fatigue and exploitation. Hence, Rock "died" with the very circumstances that gave rise to it. The revolution was over. New times call for new music.

Rock in the 60s became a middle class expressive form at the height of post-war prosperity and possibility, a musical and social phenomenon, but one that was essentially exhausted as a musical form and drained of its cultural force by the mid-70s (at the latest). Good, bad, or indifferent, what has followed since would appear to derive its significance only to the extent that it derives its sound from something that has already happened before.

Can rock speak with its former power in a time of cruel austerity, diminished expectations, increasing inequality, political paralysis, elite indifference, economic neo-feudalism, all while a narcotized citizenry seems content--or merely resigned--to "dance in the distraction factory?" These times call for a new music. Or something else altogether. Perhaps technology is the new rock music.

Dudes, we're just assuming that our generation was a monolithic block, and I can garantee you it wasn't nearly as much as one would think: we probably project what our high school buddies and us listened to... I knew tons of people that simply weren't into "rock"... first, a lot of girls and preppies were either into "pop"... "Middle Class kids", geeeezzzzz... did we all speak of/with the same voice??? I dare say no...

And there were tons of kids our age who were into classical, or in the prairie states probably lots were into country music... or simply not that much in music at all, so they didn't discuss it all, and even avoided the subject, in order to avoid looking strange to us... Did we pay any attention to the nerds' music tastes in our HS classes?? How about the recent immigrant kids (I was one of them, but of European stock, so integration was "easy" for me), but were "coloured" immigrants kids listening to "rock", or into their own culture's music forms, even in a modernized form?

I'd say that we assumed that Tom, Rick of Jim did listen to the same music we did, but I was sometimes surprised that some I assumed did were not at all.. some brainers thought it was a waste of time, others were just content of listening to whatever was dished out to them on radio (AM more often than FM in their cases)... So yeah, AOR was a major tendency... we could even say that it was mainstream, because it seemed dominant , but was it that much so??? What was the percentage of AM or FM stations that were actually "ROCK" ... and not "POP/ROCK"... or country, or classical/jazz, or "easy listening"/MOR.

Furthermore, was Tangerine Dream "ROCK" music?? Yes, by our accepted prog terms... But to get TD accepted as prog rock on ProgArchives back in 2005, it was a big internal debate, partly because some didn't view it as "rock music"

[Trane]

Quote Originally Posted by Yanks2009 View Post
Rebellion in rock music was never an attraction for me at all, in fact it's always been a major turnoff. Yet I became a fan anyway. I loved the energy, loved the playing, most of all, loved the sounds. As to trying to piss off one's parents, I always found that disrespectful. They worked too hard for me to intentionally try to bug them.

LOL! Dude, do you have kids? Just askin'.

OK, although I haven't met Thomas in person, but through his posts throughout the years, I learned/know that man was not what you'd call a "normal" kid, for reasons that you may not know, but that most more ancient members do know... But as I said (or hinted" in my previous post, what was a "normal" teen??

Sooo, in Tom's case, I would not only say that it was normal to be thankful to his parents and not bug them, intentionally or not >> is teen rebellious nature really about intentionally bugging their parents anyway?

[Vic2012]

I really think it's all semantics. The music has to be called "something" but we get our shorts in a wad over the word "pop." Because in our culture "Pop" = the two Justins, the Madonnas, Micheal Jackson, Miley, and 10,000 other pop tarts, etc. But we wanna call it "rock." It's really all the same shit.

[jupiter0rjapan]

Rock is not dead. Not even close. The only times I would say rock was close to being dead is when it was making the most money. Good rock music comes from times when it has it's back against the wall. Go see one of the many awesome rock bands in small clubs. It is alive, sweaty and immediate. The way it should be. Will rock make a comeback in the charts? Most likely.

Being a metalhead from way back, I remember people saying metal was dead after "grunge" (which to me was just rock music) got big. Funny, most of my favorite metal bands were doing just fine during that period. The bands that fell away were mostly clones of the big names, and the big names got soft. Now people say metal is back and I think it is a very anemic scene full of the Lamb of God clones.

I remember people saying The Strokes were saving rock when they came out. I gave them a listen and said to myself "if that is saving it, I'd say let it die!" Fortunately a lot of other bands of that time were doing just fine.

There is still great rock on the charts, even though it is dwarfed by country, rap and pop. The Black Keys are doing alright for themselves. Foo Fighters, Muse, The Killers, Queens Of The Stone Age, Arcade Fire, Arctic Monkeys, Cage The Elephant, Stone Sour, Vampire Weekend, Young The Giant, Drive-by Truckers, Imagine Dragons and Silversun Pickups happen to be doing pretty good for themselves. Jack White is doing pretty damn good. I can list them all day. Maybe you might not like all of those bands, but they are very much rock music.

and as long as Keith Richards, Lemmy and Neil Young are here on earth, ROCK LIVES.

[Rufus]

Is it eck!!!!
In addition to barbecues, vacations and oppressive humidity, July always brings with it a spell of best-of-the-year-so-far lists. The newest one of interest to classic rock fans reveals that Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen and the Rolling Stones have taken win, place and show in the list of the Top Grossing Concert Acts for the first half of 2013.

[JJ88]

^Well you've just proved the point. Those are all old bands, doing big stadium gigs. There haven't been many new rock bands making it big in the mainstream for many years.

That whole, Strokes/Libertines, so-called 'new rock revolution' was a sort of 'meat and potatoes' rock to me, no experimentation in that sound so it didn't appeal to me personally. (They were seen as 'saviours' because of what had preceded them-that whole 'nu metal' thing and also that Travis/Stereophonics period). What they influenced was much worse, if you remember the so-called 'landfill indie' era. That's the last time I remember new rock bands regularly on the British charts. The two issues are directly related IMHO.

No, it's not dead, that's too dramatic. But it's certainly hidden from view.

[KGHofSF]

No, Ragtime is dead. Rock has entered a somewhat uncomfortable late Middle Age. . .

As Noted.

The Black Keys are doing alright for themselves. Foo Fighters, Muse, The Killers, Queens Of The Stone Age, Arcade Fire, Arctic Monkeys, Cage The Elephant, Stone Sour, Vampire Weekend, Young The Giant, Drive-by Truckers, Imagine Dragons and Silversun Pickups happen to be doing pretty good for themselves. Jack White is doing pretty damn good. I can list them all day. Maybe you might not like all of those bands, but they are very much rock music.

Or Tame Impala, Chrome Hoof, Wooden Shjips,Radiohead, The Decemberists or the Mars Volta, if you'd rather. Heck even Earthless, a rather uncompromising vocal-less (but GOod !) Stoner band, can get itself a european tour. Which is to say that there is MORE "rock" music being made in more formats, genres, and disguises (Miracles of Modern Science, anyone?) than ever before. And thanks to guitar hero / Jack Black etc most young (boys) anyway grow up with some familiarity with the classics / guitar rock canon.

So Enjoy

What HAS changed is that the Marketing & Promoting apparatus (e.g the Not so MAJORS anymore) has abandoned rock. Just as in the late 40s the nascent record industry stopped pushing all those big band 78s and started wanting vocal music. Without the impetus provided by all of those marketing $$$s casual observers (by far the majority) can get the impression that Beyonce, Gaga, One Direction, Idol of the week, Kayne & Kim are all that is actually happening. Pop fans, I suppose can rejoice in the 3rd great Pop era (early 50s, early 60s, Now) but as other's have noted Pop (vocal) music never goes away (the 70s were filled with HITS for ABBA). It just waxes and wanes in influence.

My own, completely unsupported, supposition is that we will muddle along like this for a while until someone, somewhere, comes up with a laptop / instrument / Stick / guitar hero hybrid that would make fully computerized music something that allowed for some level of virtuosity to enter the mix. Or (to put it another way), when the electric guitar is replaced - THEN rock will have entered its Old Age. . .

regards
KGH

[glawster2002]

It's alive but it's on the edges, in the underground, in the clubs. It's were it should be, in all the dangerous places. Go take a look at the stoner rock thread, plenty of nasty guitar riffs and bad attitudes there.

That's exactly my view.

Is Rock dead? No, of course it isn't. It is thriving.

I go to a lot of gigs here in the UK, from small venues to arenas and they are all virtually sold out. That isn't the sign of a genre that is dieing.

What is encouraging is that there are a lot more young people, both male and female, attending gigs, it isn't just us "old 'uns".

It is the same with Festivals here in Europe, Rock am Ring, Wacken Open Air, Download, Sonisphere, Bloodstock, etc, all selling out most years.

Many people on here might not like much of the music, but it is far from dead.