Rock Music - let's be honest

Sick Boy

All about pride and egos
From posting on this message board over the course of the last few months I get the impression that many people on here are mostly in favour of new electronic music, as opposed to new rock music. I sort of get the impression that the issue of rock music even being DEAD is one that is debated here, with threads based on the topic, and a lot of threads based on cynical outlooks or critical rapings of current popular trends in rock music. I believe someone even suggested a dystopian/utopian-like (take your pick) scenario where guitars were banned!

Now this, to me, sounds a lot like the Hip Hop is Dead issue that really burns my ass. I get very upset because, like many on this board, I feel it's not fair for someone who maybe doesn't understand or prefer new hip hop to dismiss it as being shit, or even more audaciously, being the cause of the entire genre's death.

I, as well as many of my friends, have been guilty on numerous occasions of sneering at new rock music and dismissing the new, popular rock crowd as being sort of culturally backwards or lost. I realize this may not be fair now, and perhaps my general lack of understanding or involvement in the whole guitar music scene causes me to dismiss it in the same way new Southern hip hop is popularly dismissed.

So I wonder: Are there any people on this board who really rep new rock music the way I rep new hip hop, or grime, or dubstep? I'd like to hear someone's position on new rock music who actually feels very strongly about new rock music and doesn't have any "true-school" biases, or prejudices against it that arise from primarily being interested in another genre.

It's funny because for a period in my youth, I listened to a lot of stuff that was coming out around the whole Brit-pop era: Blur, Radiohead, Oasis, Supergrass, Super Furry Animals, Pulp. In High School I listened to a lot of different kind of rock bands here and there too, taking a particular liking to a lot of old punk music, but still the Britpop stuff always strikes a chord with me.

This reveals to me that at one point I was perfectly ok with and throroughly enjoyed popular, mainstream rock music, and probably still would if I heard something like that. The last band I remember liking was Queens of the Stone Age.

So no rock snobs here - just enthusiasts. Reveal yourselves and tell me what's really really good. Seperate the good from the bad. Tell me what you think of the notion of "rock being dead". Are we all just a bunch of genos and skids who are up our own asses?

Just for interest's sake.

...and possibly to ignite a self-righteous mass lynching of boys in tight jeans with make-up on.
 
Last edited:

3underscore

Well-known member
I would do if there was anything about. Most bands doing anything interesting are mixing it up a bit at the moment, so traditional rock stuff is almost taking a break.
 

Sick Boy

All about pride and egos
Well I'm not really particularly interested in "traditional rock" really. I'm not such a fan of tradition anyway.

I'm particularly interested in who is generally seen by fans of rock music to be upping the levels these days.
 

3underscore

Well-known member
Beirut's album is excellent. Sufjan Steven's songwriting and leaning to orchestral arrangement is interesting and worth following. LCD soundsystem are rewriting the book a bit and sound of silver is an excellent album.
 

Rambler

Awanturnik
Don't know how much it counts as traditional or new, but Sonic Youth's last one is a perfect two-guitars-bass-drums-vocals album. There's more music in 5 seconds of that record than in all yer Kassabians, Muses, Kaiser Chiefs, etc. A really great band absolutely on top of their game like they haven't been for about 15 years, and it reminded me what I like about rock again.

It's not really upping the levels though, it's a stripped down, back to basics sort of thing, just done really really well.
 

STN

sou'wester
Do groups like Ghost, Clinic, Polysics and OOIOO count at all? I'll bang the drum for them...
 

dHarry

Well-known member
I was just about to start a related thread from another angle. Sorry if this seems like a hijack, we can move to a new thread if anyone cares, or is even interested.

The fundamental problem comes in that there is nothing, as far as I can see anyway, new that can be done with guitars that would create an even vaguely pop-amenable sonic end-product.
(from http://www.dissensus.com/showthread.php?t=4270&page=17)

This is the party line around here, and an interesting issue.

While I tend to agree I wonder sometimes if it's valid? It's equally possible that we've heard every conceivable combination of synth sounds by now also. And the nature of artistic creativity is that it's unpredictable, so it should be theoretically possible to do something interesting with guitars (and popularly, not just in a High Art Concept way e.g. stroking guitars with paintbrushes in a gallery or something) - they're all just tools to be ab/used.

Or is it that synths will always sound like the future/alien by their very nature, the sound of electronic voltage oscillation/filtering/lfo etc. rather than strings twanging, tubes being blown or skins being bashed? It's funny that the electric guitar is seen as luddite, old-fashioned folk-derived etc when it is an electronic instrument also - ignore the strumming aspect for a moment and it's just the sound of a magnetic sensor reacting to vibrating strings, translating it to voltage. Throw in heavy distortion and it sounds not unlike a saw tooth synth waveform.

The idea of the Klaxons sounded interesting at least i.e. guitars playing ardkore, but the reality is a disappointment. My Bloody Valentine threatened to come up with a creative guitar reaction to jungle but failed to get it together in the 90's. So - can guitars be reinvented at this stage?

Do groups like Ghost, Clinic, Polysics and OOIOO count at all? I'll bang the drum for them...
Never heard any of them, so convince us!
 

elgato

I just dont know
i guess for me, i loved 'classic' rock for a long time (i was particularly into Hendrix), and played guitar for 7 years or so, and now i just cant help but find the very sound of the guitar offputting. unless its heavily processed, but at that point the line between 'guitar-based' and 'electronic' music pretty much disappears. having seen the places to which Hendrix took the possibilities, i find a lot of more experimental styles fairly tame in comparison

i have some hope for the likes of the Klaxons, Kitsune, DFA and Hot Chip though, havent heard much which really hits my spot yet, but it seems like an interesting direction
 

woops

is not like other people
Bands

Ghost - Japanese, psychedelic, fragile, spidery, pick your adjective.

Polysics - Devo worshippers from Japan, quite robotic stuff with also a lot of mess, comparable to banging jungle in terms of hectic-ness.

Clinic - My favourite from this list, raw songs about drugs and such, with one of those heavy 60's electric organs, their keyboard player looks like reg from the bill which scores points with me at least. They play (or played live) in yer actual blood splattered surgery gowns.

OOIOO - Yoshimi from Boredoms' girl band. Their first album was what i always think no wave would have sounded like if I could have afforded that Eno compilation. Then they went on a more generic krautrock straight ahead one chord tip which some people rate highly but, eh y'know its been done better.

I don't really see the thread connecting these bands [ well except that in each case the early stuff is best ;) ] - none of them particularly stress the electronic angle or share much stylistically. Three of them are Japanese where these things are known to be done with a higher level of attention to detail.

I suppose even more education is in order...

Can I just usher all readers over to the cassette swap thread... thanks.
 

Woebot

Well-known member
my feeling about rock music is that as a form
(guitars/bass/drums/musicians/people)
it holds masses more potential than
(computer/synth/non-musician)
it's just that at the moment that no-one's even half close to making the right noises.
i'm not talking about over-complexity either
i suppose the assumption is that nerds like me would like to see rock being more "progressive"
or more studio-processed
but not at all
i've been listening to sabbath and the stooges recently and in one way their music
is infintely simpler than your average indie band
there's a directness and clarity that seems to have been lost since
(ironically) post-new wave's drive for pseudo concision

-

and sorry but nothing that ever comes out of japan's rock scene, or the sludge metal thing does it for me
 

Blackdown

nexKeysound
my feeling about rock music is that as a form
(guitars/bass/drums/musicians/people)
it holds masses more potential than
(computer/synth/non-musician)
it's just that at the moment that no-one's even half close to making the right noises.

What Jamie Woon does live here with some new technology, an old blues song and his own voice is remarkable. you just don't need to go down the same (guitars/bass/drums...) route every time.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I like 'rock music' in a broad sense but I know next to nothing about the current crop of indie bands - to be honest, I'd be hard pressed to tell Kaiser Chiefs from Arctic Monkeys. Then again, I don't actually listen to the radio or watch music TV!

One thing I have noticed, though, is the trend that was seemingly started (in its modern incarnation) by Blur about ten years ago and has been carried on by the Streest, Lilly Allen and so on for writing songs about the mundane details of everyday life. Should 'Tesco' ever feature in the lyrics of a pop song? In a way I think I'd rather hear Robert Plant wibbling on about Vikings and Ringwraiths, or Gary Numan wanking himself silly over a cold, future-fetishistic dystopia complete with SEXY ROBOTS.

Just a thought.
 

elgato

I just dont know
i also cant actually believe that you posit 'non-musician' as the necessary figure in electronic music. why not plural and why not musicians? have i caught the wrong end of the stick?
 

mms

sometimes
What Jamie Woon does live here with some new technology, an old blues song and his own voice is remarkable. you just don't need to go down the same (guitars/bass/drums...) route every time.

that's pretty much what jamie lidell does but on a much more sophisticated level building tracks out of his own voice with tracking and mixing

here absolutely insane

there are loads of things people can go with guitars bass and drums imo but it helps to have keyboards. electronics as well.
battles for instance absolutely superb, and any number of bands.
 
Last edited:

gek-opel

entered apprentice
Yes, Battles are very good indeed, extremely kinetic and exciting live rock music built out of massively fluid deployment of live sampling of guitars/basses in a Steve Reich/Young Gods kind of manner...
 

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
there are loads of things people can go with guitars bass and drums imo but it helps to have keyboards. electronics as well.
My current thinking is that boring drummers are more of a problem than boring guitarists. Bands know that they need a drummer because that's what bands are supposed to have, so they get one of their mates to have a couple of drum lessons and learn to go boom-tikka-booma-tikka and then have him do that over all their tunes. This locks everything else into the same basic rhythm and results in loads of dull music. Notice that the Libertines actually had some interesting drums and their guitars and bass reshaped around them - I suspect indie would be a lot more interesting if more Libertines copyists had picked up on that element rather than just the mockney romantic / rogue character and the 'hey it's cool to play guitar again' thing.

Maybe someday soon someone's going to come up with some midi controller / software combination that's usable and flexible and responsive and physical enough to make bad drummers obsolete, and people can start thinking about their rhythms rather than being stuck doing the one thing that the drummer knows how to do.
 
N

nomadologist

Guest
To be critical of a lot of new bands who play rock is not to necessarily say rock is "dead" or to dislike rock. I absolutely love a lot of cannonized rock, I love krautrock, I love psychedelic rock. To say that I dislike the Queens of the Stone Age is not to be a "snob" who is up their own ass, necessarily. It's to have very pointed taste and high expectations. When a genre is so well-trod formally it is important that those who continue to work within it try to keep it fresh and exciting.

It's not as if the "Rock is dead!" mantra is being incanted (i just made that word up, i think) from the electronic music fans corner--it's mostly something I hear very serious classic rock fans say.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I have a CD by a trashy punk rock band called Electric Frankenstein which has the following printed in inlay:

"Rock is dead" - Billy Corgan
"Smashing Pumpkins are dead" - Rock


It also says "Fight the anti-rock conspiracy!" printed down the spine.

Obviously tougue-in-cheek, but you can tell they really mean it, too. :)
 
Top