Is rock as we know it dead?

[danelectro]

Fair enough. Still spam or not the direction of the thread wasn't based on whether or not the OP was shilling for "new" a band. Everyone jumped into the usual "rock isn't dead" stance, yourself included. Well that and whatever else is going on in here, which I will stay out of.

[Jahfin]

Fair enough. Still spam or not the direction of the thread wasn't based on whether or not the OP was shilling for "new" a band. Everyone jumped into the usual "rock isn't dead" stance, yourself included. Well that and whatever else is going on in here, which I will stay out of.

Considering the poster that started the thread hasn't joined the conversation at all, I would consider it spam. As far as the direction the thread has gone in, no one can control that (not even the person that started the thread). Conversations tend to veer off-topic in person, the same holds true for message boards. However, it is the subject line even if the actual post is spam for some band.

[danelectro]

Considering the poster that started the thread hasn't joined the conversation at all, I would consider it spam. As far as the direction the thread has gone in, no one can control that (not even the person that started the thread). Conversations tend to veer off-topic in person, the same holds true for message boards. However, it is the subject line even if the actual post is spam for some band.

Okay in keeping with the subject matter of this thread I'll toss something in to go along with the other "rock isn't dead" posts. Pay attention to this name, Ryan McGarvey. When the Clapton rolls out the next Crossroads Fest DVD Ryan will start getting some attention. The guy isn't really my cup of tea but he is one of the hottest young guitarists I've seen in a while, chops galore. He's firmly blues based but last time I saw him he was veering towards a more rock oriented approach. Doubt he'll save the world with his guitaring or anything but he is definitely more proof that not everyone the age of Timberlake has a desire to be a pop tart.

Honestly I hate the "rock is dead" threads. It's always the same angle. Some kid that was listening to boy bands a few years ago finally stumbled on to decades old music, usually only the tip of the iceberg at that, and starts longing for the past. All the while being completely oblivious that even the cherished 60's-70's were chock full of horrid "bands" like the Archies or worse. It's revisionist history at it's worst. Google hit songs of 1968 or whatever and prepare to find that the entire decade's charts were full of the equivalent of today's pop stars.

[silvermedalist]

Take a deep breath and step away from the computer for a few moments. Once you've cleared your head, go back and read this thread again. I mean, really read it, then respond. You'll notice I never said that your are going to get banned. Nor did I say anything about "arranging" it. You seem to think I have some sort of vendetta against you and that I've somehow had something to do with your being banned from here before. Feel free to contact Sam (and/or any of the other Moderators of this board) and you'll soon learn that I have never had anything to do with you being banned. You have always managed to bring that upon yourself by going off half-cocked on various members of this board and by defending another person who always returns here even though they know they are not welcome. So, get over your paranoia with me already. I am not a threat to you but apparently you are a threat to yourself or else you wouldn't have been banned multiple times. Please read this part very carefully, I am not saying you have done anything to get banned. What I am saying is, going by your track record here it will only be a matter of time before you're banned again. Again, I reiterate that I hope you aren't but your track record proves otherwise.

I haven't "attacked" you. Disagree with you? Yes, but attack? No. That perception is all in your head. Still, you haven't made a case for why today's music is so bad. When called on it you can't even name an artist you've listened to that has caused you to form this opinion yet you go on and on about how the 70s was the best period for music, ever. If you are going to come on a message board and state such an opinion you should be able to back it up with reasons why but you are unable to do that. It's a perfectly valid opinion to hold but with no reasoning to back it up it comes across as yet another blanket statement.

I've given you my answer. Now, try this on for size. If I am such a difficult person and am truly guilty of attacking you (and reporting you to Admin as you somehow seem to think) then how come I am a member of this board in good standing and have been since around 2001 or so? I joined this board with the username "Jahfin" and have had it ever since. You, on the other hand have been banned so many times that you can't even keep up with the number of usernames you've had. According to you, you've been welcomed back by Admin under the condition that you will behave. Your history here says otherwise.

Sam does know I am here and they allowed me to come back. I am not responsible for the actions of others. But you have a combative nature. You always criticise my opinions. Ok, I dont back up anything? Name a band today, that could sell out Madison Square Garden for 7 nights in 45 minutes like Led zeppelin did in the 70's? Name me a current band that has as many gold record awards as Led Zeppelin or is even on the same scale as Led Zeppelin, ,the Beatles, the Who or the Rolling Stones or Pink Floyd. Not one of those I mentioned can be touched with a 39 and a half foot pole.

[Electrophile]

Since when are gold records or venue sell-outs the only mark of talent? Was there a meeting somewhere I didn't get the memo for?

[silvermedalist]

Since when are gold records or venue sell-outs the only mark of talent? Was there a meeting somewhere I didn't get the memo for?

It is a very real indicator as to how popular and succesfull a band is. You certainly cant deny that now can you Liz?

[danelectro]

Name a band today, that could sell out Madison Square Garden for 7 nights in 45 minutes like Led zeppelin did in the 70's? Name me a current band that has as many gold record awards as Led Zeppelin or is even on the same scale as Led Zeppelin, ,the Beatles, the Who or the Rolling Stones or Pink Floyd. Not one of those I mentioned can be touched with a 39 and a half foot pole.

This is a perfect example of how the past gets romanticized and the truth gets bent. No doubt LZ could sell out MSG for 7 nights but not in 45 minutes. Not even one night of tickets could have been sold that fast with the technology, or lack of technology in those days. Tickets were bought at a counter and that many people couldn't have lined up and made it through the line.

As whether or not a band can do that now, sure a big band could, MSG is nothing compared to the massive outdoor venues bands play at now. The Foo Fighters sell out the new Wembly, enough to swallow MSG many times. Gold records, lots of their awards came post 1980. It took LZ 40 years to get where they are now.

[silvermedalist]

This is a perfect example of how the past gets romanticized and the truth gets bent. No doubt LZ could sell out MSG for 7 nights but not in 45 minutes. Not even one night of tickets could have been sold that fast with the technology, or lack of technology in those days. Tickets were bought a counter and that many people couldn't have lined up and made it through the line.

As whether or not a band can do that now, sure a big band could, MSG is nothing compared to the massive outdoor venues bands play at now. The Foo Fighters sell out the new Wembly, enough to swallow MSG many times. Gold records, lots of their awards came post 1980. It ook LZ 40 years to get where they are now.

Led Zeppelin was a monster in the music industry well before 40 years my friend. In fact, in only a few years they took the world by storm and only I think the Beatles could be mentioned in the same breath. There is no band of today or since that can touch them. No way! And they did sell out MSG in less than two hours or somewhere in that neighborhood back then. There was mot just on red coated man at a window selling the damn tickets. They are on the list of the 50 greatest moments in Madison Sqaure Garden history. They will blow away anyone you throw at them in this day and age. Chew them up and spit them out.

[danelectro]

Since when are gold records or venue sell-outs the only mark of talent? Was there a meeting somewhere I didn't get the memo for?

Exactly and hello slippery slope. To even imply any of that is a measure of talent is saying Britney Spears is better than all of the classic rock era bands she outsells. Anyone here really think she's better than Free or Mott The Hoople, I don't.

[danelectro]

Led Zeppelin was a monster in the music industry well before 40 years my friend.

Huh? 40 years ago was 1970. At that point in time, read the magainze reviews from the time, Zep was still being written off by unkind critics. Ever see a picture of the Boston Tea Party, a great venue but not more than a 1000 or so seats. that's the type of venue they were selling out 40 years ago, Zep was years away from the "monster" they became.

[silvermedalist]

Huh? 40 years ago was 1970. At that point in time, read the magainze reviews from the time, Zep was still being written off by unkind critics. Ever see a picture of the Boston Tea Party, a great venue but not more than a 1000 or so seats. that's the type of venue they were selling out 40 years ago, Zep was years away from the "monster" they became.

What, two or three years away? Come on. Give me a break. Mott the Hoople is a blast from the past. I knew a kid that loved them. Didnt they do "all the young dudes?" Anyway, the sales and awards do stand for something. What is your point. Name your current or 90s band that you are saying can touch Led Zeppeliin, Pink Floyd, the Beatles, The Who or the Rolling Stones? Dont strain your brain too hard. You are not going to come up with one. No way. Over and out!

[Jahfin]

Honestly I hate the "rock is dead" threads. It's always the same angle. Some kid that was listening to boy bands a few years ago finally stumbled on to decades old music, usually only the tip of the iceberg at that, and starts longing for the past. All the while being completely oblivious that even the cherished 60's-70's were chock full of horrid "bands" like the Archies or worse. It's revisionist history at it's worst. Google hit songs of 1968 or whatever and prepare to find that the entire decade's charts were full of the equivalent of today's pop stars.

I agree that's usually the case but this time we have an adult that grew up on Zeppelin who firmly believes the best decade for music was the 70s and nothing that's being made now is worthy of attention. Of course, you also have to take into account that this person hasn't even made an attempt to actually listen to any current artists. Each decade has it's noteworthy artists but as you so succinctly point out, no decade is exempt from teenybopper artists either.

What confounds me to no end is how any fan of Zeppelin can be so narrow minded when they were a band that thrived on innovation and openly welcomed a wide range of diverse musical styles into their repertoire. Even during the height of the punk era Page had no problem saying he loved The Damned. While I don't expect every fan to share Zeppelin's varied taste in music (both on and off the stage) I still find it baffling to encounter so many fans that only want to hear the familiar and don't want to be challenged by anything new or different.

[silvermedalist]

I agree that's usually the case but this time we have an adult that grew up on Zeppelin who firmly believes the best decade for music was the 70s and nothing that's being made now is worthy of attention. Of course, you also have to take into account that this person hasn't even made an attempt to actually listen to any current artists. Each decade has it's noteworthy artists but as you so succinctly point out, no decade is exempt from teenybopper artists either.

What confounds me to no end is how any fan of Zeppelin can be so narrow minded when they were a band that thrived on innovation and openly welcomed a wide range of diverse musical styles into their repertoire. Even during the height of the punk era Page had no problem saying he loved The Damned. While I don't expect every fan to share Zeppelin's varied taste in music (both on and off the stage) I still find it baffling to encounter so many fans that only want to hear the familiar and don't want to be challenged by anything new or different.

You notice I mentioned other bands and not just Led Zeppelin? Monsters of the day and of eternity. Not fly by night one hit wonder nobody's that will fade away into oblivion. Name your band!!!!!! Come on!!!! Pony up!!!! All three of you that want a piece of me. Electro I know you are there. Go ahead. Make my day!!!!!!

[Electrophile]

You can't compare music from the 1970s to music from today. It's like comparing a Mustang to a Porsche 911. Bands like Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd and The Rolling Stones......they're one in a million. For every Led Zeppelin there was a Bay City Rollers. You keep forgetting that. Maybe in 30 or 40 years people will be talking about Muse and Sigur Ros the same way they talk about Floyd and Zeppelin. Who knows. No one knew then that those groups would turn into the megaliths that they did, hell....most of pop music journalism couldn't stand them. I'm sure there were people then saying that the only good music was Sinatra and Elvis. They ended up wrong and you're going to end up wrong too.

Good God, there's more to music than what you get shoved down your throat on "classic rock" radio. Led Zeppelin isn't the only band in the world, they aren't even the only good or great band in the world. You can be a Zep fan and not be such a narrow-minded musical snob.

[silvermedalist]

You can't compare music from the 1970s to music from today. It's like comparing a Mustang to a Porsche 911. Bands like Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd and The Rolling Stones......they're one in a million. For every Led Zeppelin there was a Bay City Rollers. You keep forgetting that. Maybe in 30 or 40 years people will be talking about Muse and Sigur Ros the same way they talk about Floyd and Zeppelin. Who knows. No one knew then that those groups would turn into the megaliths that they did, hell....most of pop music journalism couldn't stand them. I'm sure there were people then saying that the only good music was Sinatra and Elvis. They ended up wrong and you're going to end up wrong too.

Good God, there's more to music than what you get shoved down your throat on "classic rock" radio. Led Zeppelin isn't the only band in the world, they aren't even the only good or great band in the world. You can be a Zep fan and not be such a narrow-minded musical snob.

Oh, now Im a snob. So its come down to this again. People did know it then how big they were and knew they would be big forever. I was there. You were not

[Electrophile]

Oh wow. You were there. That's like, such a compelling argument.

[Rock N' Rollin' Man]

You notice I mentioned other bands and not just Led Zeppelin? Monsters of the day and of eternity. Not fly by night one hit wonder nobody's that will fade away into oblivion. Name your band!!!!!! Come on!!!! Pony up!!!! All three of you that want a piece of me. Electro I know you are there. Go ahead. Make my day!!!!!!

Maybe you should listen to some of the bands I posted links to. Who knows maybe you'll like one of them if not thats fine but you should give it a shot.

[silvermedalist]

Oh wow. You were there. That's like, such a compelling argument.

It means I experienced the seventies and I knew how big Led Zeppelin and the Stones were. I lived it. But you seem to have this arrogance about you that you are always right and I know nothing. Thats enough of this for tonight. To the poster below, I will check out your link tomorrow when I have more energy. Dont mean to be disrespectfull. I will give it a listen. I owe that much. These other two just make a living out of attacking me on here. I know you cant stand me Liz, you are very smart and knowledgable but you are not right all the time. The supergroups of the seventies were special. I challenge anyone to say that any band post 1980's was as good, big or will survive the test of time as they have.

[danelectro]

You notice I mentioned other bands and not just Led Zeppelin? Monsters of the day and of eternity. Not fly by night one hit wonder nobody's that will fade away into oblivion. Name your band!!!!!! Come on!!!! Pony up!!!! All three of you that want a piece of me. Electro I know you are there. Go ahead. Make my day!!!!!!

For one it's tough to make an apples to apples comparison because you haven't stated any criteria. If it's about attendance records LZ were broken long ago simply because venues got bigger with time. However since you started with that type of statistic by bringing up MSG one thing you need to remember is the percentage of how many seats they sold back in the day weren't drastically more than other popular bands of the day. I can't say for sure but I don't think a band like the Stones or Who worried about whether or not the could get it noted in the press whether they sold 49000 or 58000 seats at whatever the biggest venues of the day were. It really is a somewhat unimpressive difference, it's not like LZ selling 50X more seats to shows than their peers.

If LZ had an advatage it's they were able to take the momentum they built back then and turn it into massive record sales post 1980, in no small part due to Stairway. Is that a sign of musical greatness, lcuk or marketing savy? Probably a little of everything. Shit some of the LZ box sets and repackage stuff outsells the actual records they made in their prime. No doubt that they are blessed with a lot of interest but it's as much about nostalgia a massive radio hit and luck as anything.

[Jahfin]

Sam does know I am here and they allowed me to come back.

I have heard that before and have no doubt it's true but haven't you been banned again since then and are now back again under yet another persona?

I am not responsible for the actions of others.

No, you're not but who ever said you were? I didn't get that memo.

But you have a combative nature.

I do? Remind me again how many usernames you've had and just how many times you've been banned from this board? Yeah, you're right. That must make me the combative one.

You always criticise my opinions.

You say criticize I say "disagree".

Ok, I dont back up anything?

Thus far you haven't. You've answered a question with a question but you've yet to name any current artists you've listened to. Out of one side of your mouth you said, "The newer stuff is shamefull (sic) compared to music of the seventies. It does not even compare." Then, out of the other side of your mouth you state, "I have heard bits and pieces and I will admit I probably have not heard enough to make a fair judgement." Then, you go on to say, "I still have not heard anything recent that is as good as the music from super groups like Led zepplein, Pink Floyd, Beatles, Stones, Eagles, or lets even say Steely Dan, Beach Boys, Tull, Aerosmith, Purple, and on and on." So, have you or have you not actually listened to any current music? The way you continue to dodge the question I'm guessing you haven't.

[ninelives]

It's all so subjective and a matter of taste when you come right down to it. Liz made a good point about a lot of contemporary bands (say post 80s) and their impact on the history of music - too soon to tell. I have always been of the opinion that sales don't equate to a good band. Take someone like Britney Spears - she's sold millions, her tours have always sold out etc. but I personally don't think she has much talent. A band like the Velvet Underground sold very little but their influence on bands is still felt 40 years later.

I have older siblings who were heavily into the music of the 60s and 70s so that was a huge part of my early musical experiences. No denying the impact that music had. Music post that is different as it should be. It would be boring if music never evolved. There's been a ton of amazing bands/artists since that time. Jahfin I agree with when he said it's impossible to keep up with it all.

But as I said - this is a moot argument because you're arguing people's taste.

[danelectro]

The supergroups of the seventies were special. I challenge anyone to say that any band post 1980's was as good, big or will survive the test of time as they have.

Like being around one more decade, the 70's, is some massive accomplishment? That's not the test of time, that's the test of ten years. How will we know what artists are appreciated in the future, we'll be gone. All of this is relatively new, what with recorded music dating back about 85 years or so. Your talking about classic rock era bands like they're unearthed treasure from a forgotten eons old civilization. As long as Jimmy Page is repackaging LZ for some "new" holiday release every 2-3 years they will continue to sustain popularity, when that stops who knows.

[Jahfin]

You notice I mentioned other bands and not just Led Zeppelin? Monsters of the day and of eternity. Not fly by night one hit wonder nobody's that will fade away into oblivion. Name your band!!!!!! Come on!!!! Pony up!!!! All three of you that want a piece of me. Electro I know you are there. Go ahead. Make my day!!!!!!

Please remind all of us again who the combative one is? I've asked you in the most polite manner I know how to name the current artists you've listened to that have caused you to form the opinion that there is no good music today. So far all you've managed to do is lash out at folks and avoid the question. You have every right to that opinion but your inability to back it up with examples shows you've chosen a very weak argument.

[silvermedalist]

Please remind all of us again who the combative one is? I've asked you in the most polite manner I know how to name the current artists you've listened to that have caused you to form the opinion that there is no good music today. So far all you've managed to do is lash out at folks and avoid the question. You have every right to that opinion but your inability to back it up with examples shows you've chosen a very weak argument.

I am the one asking you to give me a band that is better than those in the seventies I have mentioned. So you have this twisted somehow. There is no band I know of that is in the same league as the ones I have mentioned. And I have not called anyone names like Electro did, calling me a snob. she is very good at bringing it at me. Very good. Just tryiing to push my buttons to get me in trouble. Well, its not happening tonight. have a nice night. I know who the next post is coming from and I know its going to be full of vigor. Ill read it tomorrow Liz so take your time and chose your words carefully. I only am trying to say, I do not think todays music measures up to the seventies. I am quite sure there are others out there that would agree.

[Aquamarine]

Just popping in to mention that Prince sold out the O2 for days on end (20, I think?), not that long ago. Michael Jackson, if he'd lived, was going to play 50 sold-out shows there. And other bands have sold out multiple nights there and elsewhere.

Just sayin'.

Popping out again.