The hippy movement/why modern rock is shit

Yeah, I heard that shit when it first came out...My first impression of Black Sabbath was that they were cartoonish and overstated, ( Devil Rock...)
Later when more cartoonish devil rock came around (kiss) they made sabbath seem less so. Iommi was a'ieght in a way.
:coffee:
Kraftwerk;
I remember setting up my tape recorder the night they debuted their first album in the US on FM radio...It had been hyped by the station for months.
Yep, when the music started it sounded kinda cool, synths were relativly new and exciting...I didn't know what was going to happen next, where the music was going...Unfortunatly it never did go anywhere! Repetetive, boring, uninteresting. More like tech geeks than actual musicians, these guys...
Only surprise for me was how these fucks took this cool synth technology and made such boring music with it (sorry fans)...and managed to get it on the radio!?!

Having said that I aint gonna say shit about todays music 'cept for,
Y'all gets what y'all deserves...

ZW

 

Sure. The beginnings. Not very hifi but still impressive creatively. Elvis of course plus Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, Carl Perkins, Jerry Lee Lewis, Little Richard and a whole bunch of lesser rockers but still enjoyable artists like The Everly Brothers and Rick Nelson.

But for me the 60's is the motherlode. Often more pop than rock but I love both so it was all real good for me.

 

i like 40s and 50s r&b, which is half of where white people stole rock from

 

I like 50's rock as well, but I prefer later kinds of rock. It's not so much decade vs. decade here, I pick what I like from every decade. Just because in the 60's rock 'n roll evolved into different and totally new kinds of rock doesn't mean those musicians were more talented than now, although it stays impressive how well they explored new boundaries in the 60's and 70's. Can't really see that as stealing by the way, just like bands of today may obviously sound influenced by 70's rock are dubbed retro and considered to be stealing of those bands by some.

 

good artists borrow, great artists steal - picasso [most likely stolen]

 

It all counts as inspiration for me, closest thing to stealing is borrowing an entire song structure for your own without crediting it as a cover, tribute or such. Led Zeppelin is a good example, but I don't even regard that as stealing. As for the white men stealing (and raping and what not) the blues or r&b, it sounds all pretty much like an overreaction to me.

 

Man, have you guys never been to a music festival?

There are PLENTY of artists now that get on stage and just play raw music. Check out bands in the jam scene. Some of it is every bit as psychedelic as that old stuff. Some of you understand this. And yeah I like old rock too and electronica.

Times are certainly different. I do think the radio is crap and that even includes classic rock stations. It's the same thing over and over. Our generation IS much different. As a whole, the masses likes pop music Verse-chorus-verse-chorus. To me, it is boring. There IS a huge subculture though that still is into the kind of scene the OP mentioned.

Some of you have to search harder for good music, because it is still out there....

 

I heard a conversation this week that relates to this topic. Vince scelsa , a old time dj from "back in the day" who still does shows is on a xm radio station called the loft. The loft plays alot of newer singer/songwriter music from todays artists. Stuff not on the charts. Just the other day he and another dj said everyone thinks the best music was written in the 60's and 70's. Then he said, if we take the entire staff of the loft, and traveled back in time to 1973, and brought music from 2010 back with them, that music would be huge. So they beleve todays music is just as good. But then again, this station dosnt play whats on the charts.

 

I dont think our generation is much different at all except the way we consume music. thinking about some of those older groups mentioned by the op some of them were never really that big on the charts in terms of singles. The only difference is a bands album could be successful without needing to have a hit single. Because of the format music is delivered now you pretty much need a hit single to have any sort of commercial success. Pink Floyd, Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin are all instances of bands that did not become successful based on charting singles in the u.s. There has always been pop, 'bubblegum ' and light rock that's sold well since rocks inception.

 

haha exactly.
these people are ruining music by analyzing it.
even hendrix, the one the OP is referring to, said its not about the politics, in an interview, he made a point of saying its just about the music, and how it feels. now he was a real musician.

 

elvis is one of my favorite artists. so, yes. i love 50s rock.

 

wow, your example here is just a joke.

 

you rock!!!!!!!!!!!!