Trendy NME/MM/etc type groops that actually sound good NOW!
- Thread starter Buick6
- Start date
Well, they didn't even put Antony on the cover and Conor even justified it with that half-arsed claim, if you remember.swears said:
About the bands: we all know that same-old-same-old about being able to look for alternatives beyond what's on offer on the big mass media outlets. It's all fine and with some valid points, but I ask you two questions: 1) Are the majority of kids really interested in expanding their horizons; 2) And even if they were, isn't this catering-to-your-audience atmosphere very conductive to the kids themselves starting to develop way too much self-conscioussness about what they should be doing in order to have real chances of "making it"? It's a vicious circle, if you ask me.
Indie kids frightened of Gays and Black People? Hold the front page... but yeah, hanging onto guitars when making them produce new sounds gets increasingly tricky is officially a bad idea. But NME is just hunkering down in their bunker, desperately clawing back inluence and readership, reverting to core values etc etc...
Yeah, true. I was more referring to those particular artists, but yr right they love Bloc Party (black lead singer) and various drecko garage rockers are undoubtedly gay... All the same their current policies are a legacy of the late 90s/early 00s NME, (which was OK actually) where they put Destiny's child on the cover one week, then Godspeed You Black Emperor!, then the Beta Band... and their sales figures collapsed.
swears
preppy-kei
gek-opel said:
Ha! Yeah, it wasn't so bad then.
I even think they had a go at MM for doing that issue where they slagged off two step.
I remember Aphex, Aaliyah, Missy Elliot, all kinds of stuff on the front, (even Andrew WK was a fun alternative to nu-metal) then The Strokes came along...
swears
preppy-kei
hint said:
I genuinely believe in the whole idea of radical form/radical content.
I think even if an musician doesn't have anything explicitly political to say, that longing for innovation or something different to the mainstream is where the real "soul" (for want of a far better word) of music comes into play. When I first heard "Windowlicker" it sounded far more revolutionary to me, personally than any punk band.
Well, let's not lose perspective here. In 1976, I'm pretty sure punk - as music per se - was revolutionary by mainstream standards. After all, what did hit the charts before the Sex Pistols? ABBA? Brotherhood Of Man? The Carpenters? Eric Clapton? Barclay James Harvest? Bay City Rollers? Tony Christie (oh well, this one's still there, as we're talking)? And did hit the charts by 1999? Catatonia? Boyzone? Blur? Another Level? Andrea Bocelli? Britney Spears? I'm pretty sure you get my point.swears said:
swears
preppy-kei
jaxxalude said:
Of course it was, but to me as a teenager in 1999 it meant Blink 182, Offspring, everybody getting tattoos and piercings, The Sex Pistols reforming to make a few quid, it meant fuck all. Things change and move on, I'm not denying the power of punk rock back in the 70's.