Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Why did hard rock lose mainstream popularity?

70 replies to this topic
02fishera
  • 02fishera

    PSN ID: TeamTango91

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2009
  • England

#31

Posted 02 February 2014 - 10:04 PM

Meh, call it what you want. We're not exactly going to come to an agreement.

 

If you don't like the genre, then fair enough, I've got no issue with that. But that doesn't mean you can start making stupid generalizations and stereotyping those who do listen to it.

 

Fugazi are alright I guess.


Harley
  • Harley

    Cyclop 9

  • The Precinct
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2003
  • None

#32

Posted 02 February 2014 - 10:11 PM

Your hissy fit kinda falls in with the angsty teenage girl stereotype though.


Melchior
  • Melchior

    Big Homie

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • China

#33

Posted 02 February 2014 - 11:44 PM

The reason "hard rock" fell from grace was because it went from being music of rebellion and change, to long haired knobheads showing their totally amazing skill by playing hour long solos, riding in a limousine and bragging about all the girls they sleep with. Then it gave way to the DYS punk movement, and when the next generation of technically skilled musicians came onto a scene still full of punk sensibility, technology had changed and New Wave was born. 

 

It has nothing to do with grunge. Grunge was a reaction to hair metal, and was widely mocked outside the US.

  • Moonshield and Eris like this

Moonshield
  • Moonshield

    Lord Protector

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2002
  • Mongolia
  • Best Senior Moderator 2013

#34

Posted 07 February 2014 - 10:15 PM

Admittedly, I'm not a fan of Asking Alexandria, so I'm not going to defend that song. But there's no way you can define an ENTIRE genre on one band. There’s more post hardcore than just screaming. Sure, there's a lot of screamo bands, but there's a huge melodic presence within post hardcore, along with catchy upbeat songs that are great for casual listening, which is what I personally choose to listen to.

 

http://www.youtube.c...?v=toLHO9SvfxU[

 

But none of it's good.

 

Was this song released in 2002?


ShadowDog94
  • ShadowDog94

    Gaming since '94

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2012
  • Ireland

#35

Posted 08 February 2014 - 07:25 PM

 

Admittedly, I'm not a fan of Asking Alexandria, so I'm not going to defend that song. But there's no way you can define an ENTIRE genre on one band. There’s more post hardcore than just screaming. Sure, there's a lot of screamo bands, but there's a huge melodic presence within post hardcore, along with catchy upbeat songs that are great for casual listening, which is what I personally choose to listen to.

 

http://www.youtube.c...?v=toLHO9SvfxU[

 

But none of it's good.

 

Was this song released in 2002?

 

''But none of it's good.''

 

In other words, ''My opinion is right and yours is wrong.''


Mr. House
  • Mr. House

    Lucky 38

  • The Precinct
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2013
  • United-States

#36

Posted 09 February 2014 - 09:28 AM

 

 

Admittedly, I'm not a fan of Asking Alexandria, so I'm not going to defend that song. But there's no way you can define an ENTIRE genre on one band. There’s more post hardcore than just screaming. Sure, there's a lot of screamo bands, but there's a huge melodic presence within post hardcore, along with catchy upbeat songs that are great for casual listening, which is what I personally choose to listen to.

 

http://www.youtube.c...?v=toLHO9SvfxU[

 

But none of it's good.

 

Was this song released in 2002?

 

''But none of it's good.''

 

In other words, ''My opinion is right and yours is wrong.''

 

Nah, that's genuinely terrible.

  • Moonshield likes this

woggleman
  • woggleman

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012

#37

Posted 09 February 2014 - 10:37 AM

I am listening to Queens of the Stone Age Go with the Flow right now and why don't they make songs like this anymore? This is what I wish rock still sounded like.


DarrinPA
  • DarrinPA

    Orange Grove Member

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2009
  • None

#38

Posted 09 February 2014 - 07:16 PM

Besides Foo Fighters, I can't really think of any straight-up rock bands that are still making quality rock. The people may have left rock simply because the quality and quantity of bands died down. I don't blame the rap side of music. I'd place the blame on the weaker music like indie that sucked all the power and aggression out of rock and made it lame.


woggleman
  • woggleman

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012

#39

Posted 09 February 2014 - 07:31 PM

Besides Foo Fighters, I can't really think of any straight-up rock bands that are still making quality rock. The people may have left rock simply because the quality and quantity of bands died down. I don't blame the rap side of music. I'd place the blame on the weaker music like indie that sucked all the power and aggression out of rock and made it lame.

I agree. Rap and pop have been around for a long time and people made quality rock along side them. It was rock that decided to cut off it's balls.

  • DarrinPA likes this

Marwin Moody
  • Marwin Moody

    u in da mood?

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2008
  • Norway

#40

Posted 09 February 2014 - 09:15 PM

For a few decades hard rock was the music of the youth and it was what drove most youth culture. From Stones to Led Zeppelin to Guns n Roses to Nirvana it was some of the biggest music out there. This all changed in the 2000s and now pop and hip hop are the dominant music forms. Why did this happen and how can we bring back hard rock is the a dominant genre?

I think what caused pop music to become what it is today is purely the record labels' fault. They dictate the market, and they pretty much just spew out more of the same because it sells the most; and won't sign anyone who makes real music because that's not what sells


Moonshield
  • Moonshield

    Lord Protector

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2002
  • Mongolia
  • Best Senior Moderator 2013

#41

Posted 11 February 2014 - 08:18 PM

 

 

Admittedly, I'm not a fan of Asking Alexandria, so I'm not going to defend that song. But there's no way you can define an ENTIRE genre on one band. There’s more post hardcore than just screaming. Sure, there's a lot of screamo bands, but there's a huge melodic presence within post hardcore, along with catchy upbeat songs that are great for casual listening, which is what I personally choose to listen to.

 

http://www.youtube.c...?v=toLHO9SvfxU[

 

But none of it's good.

 

Was this song released in 2002?

 

''But none of it's good.''

 

In other words, ''My opinion is right and yours is wrong.''

 

 

No, but when a band from fairly recently is recycling the same annoying 3 chord pop-punk melodies from 15 years previous and marketing it as new music, there's something seriously wrong. They're pandering to lowest common denominator crowd that want easily-digestible muzak.

  • Failure likes this

woggleman
  • woggleman

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012

#42

Posted 11 February 2014 - 10:58 PM

Record companies have always been greedy but people have lost the ability to appreciate real creativity and talent so they don't promote it. Pop fluff has always been around but you also had real music along side it. Now all we have left is pop fluff.


ShadowDog94
  • ShadowDog94

    Gaming since '94

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2012
  • Ireland

#43

Posted 12 February 2014 - 02:50 PM Edited by ShadowDog94, 12 February 2014 - 02:53 PM.

Nah, that's genuinely terrible.

Wow, what an intriguing comment. Your post has truly helped me understand how this music is objectively awful and not down to personal taste after all. How could I have been such a f*cking dumbass before? Thank you so much for enlightening me.

 

 

No, but when a band from fairly recently is recycling the same annoying 3 chord pop-punk melodies from 15 years previous and marketing it as new music, there's something seriously wrong. They're pandering to lowest common denominator crowd that want easily-digestible muzak.

So you basically just admitted you have a problem with certain people liking the music they like. Wow, just wow.

 

 

Record companies have always been greedy but people have lost the ability to appreciate real creativity and talent so they don't promote it. Pop fluff has always been around but you also had real music along side it. Now all we have left is pop fluff.

I'm sorry but could you please define ''real music''?


Moonshield
  • Moonshield

    Lord Protector

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2002
  • Mongolia
  • Best Senior Moderator 2013

#44

Posted 12 February 2014 - 03:44 PM

 

 

No, but when a band from fairly recently is recycling the same annoying 3 chord pop-punk melodies from 15 years previous and marketing it as new music, there's something seriously wrong. They're pandering to lowest common denominator crowd that want easily-digestible muzak.

So you basically just admitted you have a problem with certain people liking the music they like. Wow, just wow.

 

Not at all what I said, but your offense is so apparent it's sad. I couldn't care less what people choose to listen to, and I have absolutely no power in choosing what they like, but when somebody purports that something like this is "the best thing ever" and I disagree, I'll give my earnest opinion. It's boring, unimaginative, uninteresting, safe garbage that's already been done before - re: what's wrong with rock music.


ShadowDog94
  • ShadowDog94

    Gaming since '94

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2012
  • Ireland

#45

Posted 12 February 2014 - 04:01 PM

 

 

 

No, but when a band from fairly recently is recycling the same annoying 3 chord pop-punk melodies from 15 years previous and marketing it as new music, there's something seriously wrong. They're pandering to lowest common denominator crowd that want easily-digestible muzak.

So you basically just admitted you have a problem with certain people liking the music they like. Wow, just wow.

 

Not at all what I said, but your offense is so apparent it's sad. I couldn't care less what people choose to listen to, and I have absolutely no power in choosing what they like, but when somebody purports that something like this is "the best thing ever" and I disagree, I'll give my earnest opinion. It's boring, unimaginative, uninteresting, safe garbage that's already been done before - re: what's wrong with rock music.

 

So what if someone thinks this kinda stuff is the best thing ever? That's just their opinion. It doesn't give you the right to act all superior.


Moonshield
  • Moonshield

    Lord Protector

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2002
  • Mongolia
  • Best Senior Moderator 2013

#46

Posted 12 February 2014 - 04:23 PM

There are such things as objective opinions in art when you can argue what works and what doesn't, and those objective opinions tend to carry more weight than "well I like it."


troysayshi
  • troysayshi

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2013
  • None

#47

Posted 12 February 2014 - 08:29 PM

Record companies have always been greedy but people have lost the ability to appreciate real creativity and talent so they don't promote it. Pop fluff has always been around but you also had real music along side it. Now all we have left is pop fluff.

 

Record companies are insidious however the rise of crap talent(less) shows has proved the final panacea in musics coffin. 

 

Unfortunately 99.9% of all music is fluff whatever the genre nowadays and that includes what you'd term real music and of course I am waiting eagerly to to hear what you determine as real music.

 

Me I have a like for all kinds of music, long as it's good, though if you had to pin me down then yes pop would be my genre of choice. Having said that I'm not talking of the fluff you mention, not that you've given any examples just a generalisation, because I'd probably think that type of pop was fluff as well. 

 

saying pop is fluff is simplistic. As I said before in the "What are you listening to ?" thread... I'm listening to Supernature by Goldfrapp. Now that is pop but it's definitely not fluff.


ShadowDog94
  • ShadowDog94

    Gaming since '94

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2012
  • Ireland

#48

Posted 13 February 2014 - 03:10 AM

There are such things as objective opinions in art when you can argue what works and what doesn't, and those objective opinions tend to carry more weight than "well I like it."

Objective opinions? Sorry but that's about the biggest oxymoron I've ever heard. How the hell can an opinion be objective? Care to provide an example of this?


Jc_39a
  • Jc_39a

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2013
  • None

#49

Posted 13 February 2014 - 03:40 PM

Because, this generation of teenagers are mindless sheep and will listen to any stupid sh*t like Lil Wayne and Drake. For some reason, teenagers like these "artists" that only make songs about partying, or bragging about how much money they have.  And I have to call these dumbasses "my generation".


It's there opinion soo..

Eris
  • Eris

    Grill

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2013
  • None

#50

Posted 14 February 2014 - 08:24 PM

 

There are such things as objective opinions in art when you can argue what works and what doesn't, and those objective opinions tend to carry more weight than "well I like it."

Objective opinions? Sorry but that's about the biggest oxymoron I've ever heard. How the hell can an opinion be objective? Care to provide an example of this?

 

Objective opinions are opinions based on facts and empirical evidence. I think most people can agree that metalcore is the same recycled sh*t and that record companies continue to sign these bands knowing that there is a demographic that will love it no matter what. 

  • Moonshield likes this

Luna Fortuna
  • Luna Fortuna

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2011

#51

Posted 15 February 2014 - 06:14 PM

 

 

There are such things as objective opinions in art when you can argue what works and what doesn't, and those objective opinions tend to carry more weight than "well I like it."

Objective opinions? Sorry but that's about the biggest oxymoron I've ever heard. How the hell can an opinion be objective? Care to provide an example of this?

 

Objective opinions are opinions based on facts and empirical evidence. I think most people can agree that metalcore is the same recycled sh*t and that record companies continue to sign these bands knowing that there is a demographic that will love it no matter what. 

 

Objective opinion is such a bad name as it implies truth. When it may hold more weight than say an opinion marred by bias and emotion, it is still an opinion and not fact or truth. 

I'd agree that metalcore is generally recycled but I still find it to be relatively enjoyable; mainly the early stuff like Killswitch or atreyu, but Asking Alexandria do have some good songs.


Sir Michael
  • Sir Michael

    Meep.

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2013
  • United-States

#52

Posted 16 February 2014 - 07:56 PM

It slightly has to do with a dumbed-down culture. Nowadays, music has no meaning; it's just somebody talking to an interesting beat. Nobody is changing the demand, so the record companies assume that this trash that's coming out is what the public wants... and unfortunately, the consumers buy the crap, fueling the revenue for said company.

It's basically whatever is selling at the moment that the record companies want. Right now, it's Hip-Hop, R&B, and Electro-Pop. The trend will change eventually, but when that happens is a mystery to everybody.

The reason Rock lost its luster is because the media doesn't blast it as much as the genres I've listed above. It's a business, and whatever is "popular" is what the record companies will put out to the general public. Like I said, it's all about money; regardless if the music is amazing or sh*tty, they'll do anything to make that extra dollar.


Moonshield
  • Moonshield

    Lord Protector

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2002
  • Mongolia
  • Best Senior Moderator 2013

#53

Posted 17 February 2014 - 04:41 PM

It slightly has to do with a dumbed-down culture. Nowadays, music has no meaning; it's just somebody talking to an interesting beat. Nobody is changing the demand, so the record companies assume that this trash that's coming out is what the public wants... and unfortunately, the consumers buy the crap, fueling the revenue for said company.

 

I definitely agree with you, but the problem with that is that's been happening since the late 60s. KISS was pop rock band with an image designed to sell records to the hard rockers. They put out a f*cking disco album. The Monkees were an engineered pop folk 'boy band' with music to mimic the pop and that the Beatles popularized at the time - none of the members wrote any of the music (it was in their contract) until they essentially left their show and continued as The Monkees as a band.

 

With the inception of music videos, the hair metal bands in the 80s were almost selling their image instead of just their music, and music execs were making huge money thanks to MTV.

 

Now that MTV barely shows music videos, and the internet has basically replaced most record labels for exposure for bands, what the f*ck else are they going to do but rely on safe musical acts that they know will sell - whatever's popular on the radio and take artists and have them marketed as "the next (insert artist popular a year ago)." It's factory muzak that has no meaning to it and I don't see the trend ending any time soon. Big labels don't give a sh*t about the content of their releases - just as long as they're selling.

  • Tyler and Sir Michael like this

woggleman
  • woggleman

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012

#54

Posted 17 February 2014 - 04:59 PM

With the internet and digital downloads and you tube it makes me wonder why more artists and bands don't do the DIY thing. There are tools than ever for people to put out their own music and do quite well at it.


I<3GTAV
  • I<3GTAV

    I LOVE GARY PAYTON NO ONE UNDERSTANDS

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2012
  • United-States

#55

Posted 21 February 2014 - 12:48 AM

Rock was the voice of the youth for around 40 years. It was inevitably going to get replaced by something in the 90s, and was; by rap music. Rap music originally was a genre about struggle, but since it's mainstream arrival has evolved into being a genre about having fun, partying, and living life to the fullest, no matter how dumb some of it might be. Rock's only hope of coming back into the mainstream light is Alternative, which has somewhat.


Tyler
  • Tyler

    bubblingbubblingbubbling

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2009
  • NATO
  • Newcomer of the Year 2010

#56

Posted 21 February 2014 - 02:56 AM

I think the reality of rock and hip hop is a lot different than the more black and white image you paint. Though to be fair your panda lenses might be holding you back on that one.

 

Every genre is liable to transform in themes. Jazz was the music of the poor minorities, combining African rhythm and cheap brass instruments to make something that was completely new. Everyone's parents hated it and the ones associated with it were reefer-smoking freaks. Nowadays it's the music of old people for most of the world -- obvious exception to places where it remains a cultural constant like New Orleans. Same story with Rock and roll -- crazy new music adopting older aspects and cultures and generally looking ridiculous to parents. Though nowadays you'll be hard pressed to find a dad who isn't wearing awful jeans and listening to Led Zeppelin. Music simply changes and nothing, no matter how edgy and defining it was in it's prime, will be subject to exist in a vacuum. Fans age but retain their taste. Older people appreciate different genres for the first time. The point is that when you exist long enough you're going to have some different age groups appreciating you, and that goes true for rock and hip hop. 

 

Anyway, as for why rock lost it's popularity, it's simple: self-aggrandizing douches who took themselves too seriously made rock a genre full of asswads and lameness. This was happening all the way back in the late 60s. You'd be blind to not see how rock split into enthusiasts of various aspects of it in the 70s and 80s. Heavy metal, punk -- you name it. By the 80s your straight-up "mainstream" rock was just party music, though this was true for the most part of the late-70s too. It's just more pronounced in the 80s because everyone began wearing make-up because... that's rebellious? No, it's because it was ridiculous and these groups had nothing to say beyond "let's get loaded and f*ck around" which is completely fine. It's just that people for one reason or another got tired of it and by the late 80s and early 90s more alternative genres were taking precedence. Grunge, sure, but also ska and hip-hop and breakbeat rave culture and industrial music and just alternative musicians in general. The 90s exploded with post-punk fury and after people proved you didn't have to conform to expectations of sh*tty guitar solos and wearing make-up [which is what rock was by the end of the 80s], people began to push the boundaries of music in various directions past just regular old rock.

 

That's ignoring a huge portion of music history, though. You could spend days talking about the evolution of music during and after the 1960s. As instruments got cheaper and more music rolled around, people began to get influenced by this and that, and then they rehashed or explored this theme or that theme in a different way. The availability of musical resources is what really changed how popular music worked, but those seeds were sowed decades before rock met it's supposed end.

 

At the end of the day I think it'd be a more interesting question to ask how the availability of instruments lead to the diversity we see in music today. Rock is an important genre but asking about only it ignores that it wasn't birthed in a cultural vacuum -- it's got its roots in blues music and just like any other genre it is born of young people getting together to play rhythms and maybe do things to each others bodies. It existed right alongside jazz and folk golden eras. It's a mainstay of music but that doesn't mean it's the best kind or the only kind. Still, it transformed to meet the needs of several generations. That's why nowadays something as ambiguous as "classic rock" can mean everything from British Invasions to Heartland ballads to Psychedelics and Funk to Make-up clad clowns to -- oddly enough, grunge. For that reason I don't think it being on the pop charts matters too much. Maybe it's seen its heydey and other genres will be more relevant from now on. That doesn't negate its influences or mean that no more rock music will be made. Nor does it mean it's more important than hip-hop or electronic music.

  • Moonshield and DarrinPA like this

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#57

Posted 11 March 2014 - 06:59 AM

Commercial POP music or DISCO has always sucked, to be honest, even in the 1980s, the 1970s, 60s, there were horrible songs on the top charts, the mass public seemed to like it, but my ears don't lie to me, as far as I'm concerned, what I've heard and then re-listen to over the years, if it stands up to repeat listening, and it's generally considered a lost gem, or iconic classic, chances are you're on to something.

 

Hard Rock and Heavy Metal to me is honest, wholesome music because it comes from the same place historically as the earliest BLUES music origins, US African American slave music, in many respects. Blues inspired all manner of Rock and Roll, add to that elements of Jazz, which also predates it.

  • gnad.1992 and ExtremoMania like this

im_stoned
  • im_stoned

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2013

#58

Posted 14 April 2014 - 01:18 AM Edited by im_stoned, 14 April 2014 - 01:19 AM.

Rock was one of the first victims of the feminist movement. Woman want to weaken men. They want to take their manhood away. Rock was a sign of manhood so it must be wiped out. Sure it still exists but we're talking about mainstream popularity here

 

Look at the current direction of music it's all about woman empowerment and weak men who worship woman like Bruno mars for example his not a man his a weakling !

 

if you think im lying go ahead and name any musical artist in the mainstream whos a man maybe Rihanna when shes beings serious but that's the only one I can think off !!!

 

f*ck look a linkin park they were the biggest band in the world at their height so how did they follow up their amazing success ? turned into maroon 5

 

I mean holly sh*t if this isn't all about of the feminist agenda then its even worse these guys turned into fa**ots willingly holly sh*t  


Eris
  • Eris

    Grill

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2013
  • None

#59

Posted 14 April 2014 - 01:43 AM

OXCwnPD.png


Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#60

Posted 14 April 2014 - 02:43 AM

I comment on aspects of this all the time, but part of the reason is the factioning of music outlets, or splintering of how media gets to us in the modern age. It's a lot more a'la carte then in years past. and the Rock fans are supposedly more inclined to support their bands on tour, which we hear is a major income outlet for most artists. Record companies lost or dropped the ball long ago, and many can't find their head with both hands when it comes to trying to invigorate the music industry





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users