[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="Lockedge"] LOL and here come the rockists. Your sense of authenticity is skewed.Lockedge
There's no stand out Jazz or Classical music either. Sense of authenticity? What the hell is that? Think your some kind of amazing music critic with great powers of perception because you think your taste in music is fantastic? Well guess what mate, it's not. It's just like anyone else's, utterly random and subjective. I consider myself sane enough not to want to listen to depressing self indulgent crap, but that's just my taste. Regardless of what your taste in music is it's still complete and utter nonsense to say music has not changed since the 50's,60's,70's etc.
You make a note about how "There's no great pure rock bands any more" and how "music wasn't entirely synthetic" back in the day. I can assure you that musicians today are just as pure as the ones back, then, at least in 'rock bands'. What is synthetic anyways? Ever since recording technology came around, music has been synthetic. The only difference is in the aesthetics and the instruments.I'm not saying it's bad to have disdain for today's music. But calling it less pure and more synthetic is laughable and it falls in line with the whole rockist notion that modern music as a whole can't compare to older music because it's less authentic(pure, sincere, organic, etc.).Music HAS changed over time, absolutely, and argue the quality all you want in general. That's subjective. Don't argue the characteristics of a genre though. I don't think myself a great music critic. I just hate when people go on about how X genre is worse these days, no bands these days can stack up to old music. That's hardly accurate, and that's what I find absurd. My taste in music is equal to yours, and everyone else in the world, but I'm willing to give music from all eras a chance without writing any off. Sorry, it's just a bit of a pet peeve pf mine. A bunch of my friends are classic rock hard-on pros who won't listen to anything else and who declare their hatred for everything outside of the 1960-1985 period..
Pure means complete as in a total rock and roll band, like Led Zepplin or the Rolling Stones. You're reading in to it too much. Synthetic means synthetic vocals, as pointed out in the bolded parts, again your going off on a tangent that means nothing.
My problem is not with the concepts of purity, I'm fairly open to new ideas and genres, but what bothers me is the whine of modern rock music. Less virtuosity, which isn't that important for all good rock bands, but when you replace good musicianship with crappy indulgent depressing lyrics about how the world is falling or some crap, or how **** some guys life is, that is when it starts to bug me. When musicianship does come in to these bands don't have any self control, and it ends up sounding like crap. That would be the majority of metal artists. Bands now a days are either too minimalistic or too over the top, there's no balance, and they are all starting to sound the same because they endlessly copy each other. Artists are too afraid to innovate, to far up their own hero's asses to attempt to take it one step further. Always playing it safe. Now there's probably a few bands that are the exception to this rule, but it just dosn't seem as common as it has been in the past. The late 80's, 90's had some fairly good bands like Nirvana, Pearl Jam, R.E.M., Sonic Youth etc, but what the hell has the 00's got that people will remember 10 years down the line?
Log in to comment