Spin: Is rock dead?Dave Grohl: Yes. But I believe in Necrophillia.
Except it's Kurt Cobain's corpse that he's been fucking. I haven't heard the new Foo Fighters yet, but is anyone else a little concerned by the big fourth quarter rock releases from the major labels? Those are: Foo Fighters, Pearl Jam, Nirvana and Audioslave (Cornell + RATM). This makes the already obvious now painfully so: the nu-garage movement was a wet pipe dream in Jann Wenner's Prada boxers, if that, and that the majors have no new ideas for rock and the figureheads of the movement have just as few. Which isn't a problem. Nu-Ideas = overrated and all too often just old ideas that we've forgotten about. Only now nu-ideas are ones from less than a decade ago. It's depressing to say the least (especially for someone like me whose job it is to cover it) that these are the key bands and that GN'R's tour is the biggest news since po' Kurt done shot himself. I'm perfectly happy with the music world in general, so don't think that this one of those rants. Here's all that I'm asking: If I turn on to Generic Rock Station at least let me be surprised by something -- whether it be a nice guitar sound, a beat that grabs my ass, a lyric from leftfield. Is this too much to ask?
― Yancey (ystrickler), Wednesday, 13 November 2002 23:56 (twenty-three years ago)
― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Thursday, 14 November 2002 00:04 (twenty-three years ago)
I think there are lots of reasons that rock is not dead. Just they're all Scandinavian, leftist, both, or The Mooney Suzuki.
The Mooneys, BTW, put on a fantastic live show.
― Tom Millar (Millar), Thursday, 14 November 2002 00:08 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 14 November 2002 00:22 (twenty-three years ago)
All the bands you mentioned are really tired and old and haven't done anything good in ages. Shit, Nirvana took eight years to put out one fucking new song! What kind of bullshit is that? And the video is just old footage from the past! And it sounds like all they've been listening to is Godsmack in the interim.
So yeah, when did rock radio not suck? Classic rock at least has a decent rhythm section most of the time.
― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Thursday, 14 November 2002 00:30 (twenty-three years ago)
My main (rhetorical) question is this, then: why do modern-rock-radio band continue to have such shitty, shitty names?
― Nick Mirov (nick), Thursday, 14 November 2002 02:16 (twenty-three years ago)
― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Thursday, 14 November 2002 02:27 (twenty-three years ago)
Jann Wenner is an advertisement for cancer.
I don't know anything about radio anymore...I've got a 79 Monte Carlo with an 8 track. All I ever listen to is NPR or my boombox.
― earlnash, Thursday, 14 November 2002 02:57 (twenty-three years ago)
In all honesty, Foo Fighters were never really grunge, a little too poppy, but I like their new song. Queens of the Stone Age I had heard bad things about, (I was gonna see them and And You Will Know Us By Our Amazingly Pretentious Name, live but everybody I knew said "NO WAY MAN THEYRE HEAVY METAL!"), but I enjoy their song as well. Love Audioslave, and it's not really grungy either. And Pearl Jam are pretty much indie rock now.
― David Allen, Thursday, 14 November 2002 03:14 (twenty-three years ago)
Rock and Roll dead my crotchety white ass.
It's simply necessary that you acknowledge the significance of the current basement guitar+drums+yelling=rock movement.
Really. Or I'll KILL ALL YOU WHITE FAGGOT MOTHERFUCKAZ
― Tom Millar (Millar), Thursday, 14 November 2002 03:26 (twenty-three years ago)
But no, those bands are good. I actually like Weezer a lot too. They were better circa Pinkerton when their lyrics weren't so much peanut butter. But they still rock.
― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Thursday, 14 November 2002 03:56 (twenty-three years ago)
― Nick Mirov (nick), Thursday, 14 November 2002 05:59 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 14 November 2002 06:32 (twenty-three years ago)
― jq higgins, Thursday, 14 November 2002 15:12 (twenty-three years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 14 November 2002 15:19 (twenty-three years ago)
― Yancey (ystrickler), Thursday, 14 November 2002 15:49 (twenty-three years ago)
Hardly.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 14 November 2002 16:11 (twenty-three years ago)
As much as I empathize w/ Yancey's quandry (though it's more the fault of the Powers That Be in the industry and the media than the bands), there's something to be said for striving for greatness / what have you via constant refinement (cf. Foo Fighters). And who's to say that a group like Pearl Jam isn't taking chances? Granted, they haven't strayed too far from their original starting point, but there's definitely some measurable growth (especially if you start from the beginning).
Of course, most of the groups & performers mentioned here aren't taking many chances outside of plying their tradies in traditions established well before they existed, so I can't see any sort of earth-shattering siesmic shift of the modern-rock status-quo occurring in the near future. Besides, any little glimmer of "originality" / strangeness / uniqueness is invariably assimilated and recycyled for easier consumption by folks at large - it's the nature of the beast.
I could be more portentious, if you prefer.
― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 14 November 2002 17:01 (twenty-three years ago)
― David Allen, Thursday, 14 November 2002 19:11 (twenty-three years ago)
― Yancey (ystrickler), Thursday, 14 November 2002 19:14 (twenty-three years ago)
If you get over looking for obvious "revolution" in radio, you'll be surprised how much can be enjoyed in the viewpoints and nuances found in the seemingly generic shit on there.
― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Friday, 15 November 2002 02:44 (twenty-three years ago)