Anyone miss the days when rock music was the dominant music genre and rock bands ruled the earth?

musicismylife78

Taking a completely different side from my other post (talking about how Ed has mellowed in his hatred of mainstream pop music), I would guess alot of people on here, or at least a significant portion of PJ's fanbase, or at least the OG's, are people who got into the band in their heyday in the 90's.  Back then, rock bands were massive, Nirvana and Pearl Jam were legitimately the two biggest bands in the world.  Nowadays, its absolutely unthinkable to imagine a rock band, in 2021, becoming as big as that.  Festivals of course have legacy bands, and PJ are one of them, but the majority of slots on a festival bill are newer, EDM/pop and especially hip hop music artists.  Hip Hop is what rock was in the 1960's-90s, the dominant music genre, and the artists themselves are legitimate rock stars.  Love or hate Kanye and his views and music, but he and Drake are legitimate rock stars.  Look at the charts, its hip hop. pop, and EDM.  Thats what people listen to and like.  
Does anyone miss the days of rock ruling the land?  I like everyone else enjoys music made nowadays, and its as good or just as good as the rock days of yore, but a Shawn Mendes, Olivia Rodrigo, Billie Eilish, and Kanye, show is a hell of alot different than a PJ or Led Zeppelin, or Neil show.  And Im a fan of those pop artists, so theres no hatred intended.  
I do miss the days though, of how mythic rock music seemed in 1993, where you'd pour through Rolling Stone, wait for your favorite song to appear on MTV and on the radio, and you had people forming bands and practicing in their parents garage.  
And for anyone that has attended a festival like Coachella or Lolla in the last decade, theres rock bands, some even headline, Tame Impala headlined Coachella a few years back, as did GnR, but anyone who was there, and I was, can tell you there was a marked difference between the crowd for those sets, and the crowd at Beyonce's set, or Lorde, or Gaga, and Kendrick etc...  

Loujoe

Concerts now are 'classy'...when i saw ac/dc back in the 80s you had to look out for m80s being thrown from the nosebleeds. BOOOOOOM.
I got stopped from throwing a balloon at pj!

GlowGirl

Loujoe said:

Concerts now are 'classy'...when i saw ac/dc back in the 80s you had to look out for m80s being thrown from the nosebleeds. BOOOOOOM.
I got stopped from throwing a balloon at pj!

I remember seeing AC/DC in the 80’s. It was back when whole arenas could be sold as GA. I almost got my arm broken in the crowd rush to get in the arena once they opened the doors. It was like the Cincinnati Who concert. The good old days!

Tim Simmons

There’s a lot to unpack here. I think ultimately, it’s generational shifts in how they enjoy the artists of their era (gnr v TI crowds).

ultimately, music and shows are the same as they ever were, it’s just generation shifts and changes in societal norms that change the vibes. 

For me, I realize any longing I occasionally have for the mid 90s, or rock dominant radio/mtv, has more to do with me being older than I was 25 years ago rather than music or scene genuinely changing. But really, I’m happy rock isn’t dominant anymore. I’m enjoying the wide array of stuff. I think it pushes music in general forward. Rock music was starting to get boring by 96 (and I’d argue it was samey until the indie scene blew up in the mid aughts)

F Me In The Brain

I totally miss rock and roll being the thing, but I am stuck in the past.  I love 60s/70s/80s/90s rock.  Love it.  All types.  Wish there were more easily accessed bands coming up and killing it.  I am sure they are out there but I am an old fuck who does a shit job of trying to find it.

However, I also like some of the new stuff.  Billie Eilish's new record is fantastic.  No bullshit, I listen to that way more than I listen to Pearl Jam's latest record.  (On topic -- most of Pearl Jam's new record does not rock, at least to me.)

We listen to the local pop radio channel as much as I can stomach --- the parts I find tough are mostly the asswipe DJs talking for 5 minutes straight...but it can also be normal radio stuff in that they play the same 6 songs over and over.  

My wife and kid like it and I can usually find something about some of them to dig.

Of The Aggie

I do miss rock being the dominate genre. I don't like hip-hop or pop at all and have lamented the lack of rock for years. I just stick to my nostalgia bands of the 60s-90s.

hedonist

Thank goodness for TOOL.

I don’t listen to the radio so I pretty much choose whatever genre appeals to me at the moment. Much modern “rock”, I’ve found, is banal, lacking in decent lyrics, and unimaginative.

 I’m open-minded/open-eared, but much out there, regardless of type of music, is so…unchallenging.

Don’t really care what dominates — and dominates who, others? — as long as my soul is full of the good shit. Thankfully, I can always find it.  

brianlux

Being a long-time rock fan and an "OG"  (I'm poking fun here- it's so common to see acronyms in posts these days and I can't keep up with them so, y'all, "OG", in this case, means "older generation", ha!)...

...anyway, as a long time rock fan and old fart, it's a bit hard for me to wrap my head around rock taking a back seat to other forms of music.  But then, not really because as I have aged and explored other musics, I now see it as a continuum.  Historically, at least for recorded music, what was most popular went from dixieland and big band, and vocal jazz (and blues in some regions) to crooners like Bing Crosby, Perry Como, et al, to early rock and pop, to 60's and classic rock, to later rock (including Pearl Jam, etc),  to rap and hip hop, and to whatever the hell EDM is (sorry, but goddamn those acronyms, haha!).

Along that continuum, there were developments in music that will better stand the test of time.  Big band (including Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong and maybe Glen Miller and others) has stood the test of time.  Same with early rock (Elvis, the Beatles and the Stones).  Same with classic rock (Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Grateful Dead, etc.)  
Will later rock (Pearl Pearl, etc.)  have that kind of longevity?  Will rap/ hip hop (Kanye, Wu Tang Clan, etc.) stand the test of time? 

And what about punk rock? 

It's too early to tell but I would venture to guess later rock and most popular forms of music today will have very little staying power.  I can't see, for example, Kanye West maintaining  the long-lived respect Duke Ellington has garnered.  Or Pearl Jam being remembered the way the Beatles or Dylan will be. 

And look at it this way: though not fans, my parents (G.I. generation folks) knew who Elvis Presley, the Bealtes, the Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, and Bob Dylan were.  The average boomer like me today cannot name more than maybe one or two contemporary artists.  I just don't see them having staying power.  Time will tell.

JeBurkhardt

brianlux said:

Being a long-time rock fan and an "OG"  (I'm poking fun here- it's so common to see acronyms in posts these days and I can't keep up with them so, y'all, "OG", in this case, means "older generation", ha!)...

...anyway, as a long time rock fan and old fart, it's a bit hard for me to wrap my head around rock taking a back seat to other forms of music.  But then, not really because as I have aged and explored other musics, I now see it as a continuum.  Historically, at least for recorded music, what was most popular went from dixieland and big band, and vocal jazz (and blues in some regions) to crooners like Bing Crosby, Perry Como, et al, to early rock and pop, to 60's and classic rock, to later rock (including Pearl Jam, etc),  to rap and hip hop, and to whatever the hell EDM is (sorry, but goddamn those acronyms, haha!).

Along that continuum, there were developments in music that will better stand the test of time.  Big band (including Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong and maybe Glen Miller and others) has stood the test of time.  Same with early rock (Elvis, the Beatles and the Stones).  Same with classic rock (Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Grateful Dead, etc.)  
Will later rock (Pearl Pearl, etc.)  have that kind of longevity?  Will rap/ hip hop (Kanye, Wu Tang Clan, etc.) stand the test of time? 

And what about punk rock? 

It's too early to tell but I would venture to guess later rock and most popular forms of music today will have very little staying power.  I can't see, for example, Kanye West maintaining  the long-lived respect Duke Ellington has garnered.  Or Pearl Jam being remembered the way the Beatles or Dylan will be. 

And look at it this way: though not fans, my parents (G.I. generation folks) knew who Elvis Presley, the Bealtes, the Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, and Bob Dylan were.  The average boomer like me today cannot name more than maybe one or two contemporary artists.  I just don't see them having staying power.  Time will tell.

I also wonder if the music medium/format might have something to do with it. So much is streamed now, rather than physically having to remove vinyl or even a CD from a shelf and put in on to play. Vinyl and CDs sit in view, and just seem more tangible, while streaming music seems more fleeting, since you just open an app and push play. You are seeing more new music released on vinyl now, but a large majority never make it past the digital version.   

brianlux

JeBurkhardt said:

brianlux said:

Being a long-time rock fan and an "OG"  (I'm poking fun here- it's so common to see acronyms in posts these days and I can't keep up with them so, y'all, "OG", in this case, means "older generation", ha!)...

...anyway, as a long time rock fan and old fart, it's a bit hard for me to wrap my head around rock taking a back seat to other forms of music.  But then, not really because as I have aged and explored other musics, I now see it as a continuum.  Historically, at least for recorded music, what was most popular went from dixieland and big band, and vocal jazz (and blues in some regions) to crooners like Bing Crosby, Perry Como, et al, to early rock and pop, to 60's and classic rock, to later rock (including Pearl Jam, etc),  to rap and hip hop, and to whatever the hell EDM is (sorry, but goddamn those acronyms, haha!).

Along that continuum, there were developments in music that will better stand the test of time.  Big band (including Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong and maybe Glen Miller and others) has stood the test of time.  Same with early rock (Elvis, the Beatles and the Stones).  Same with classic rock (Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Grateful Dead, etc.)  
Will later rock (Pearl Pearl, etc.)  have that kind of longevity?  Will rap/ hip hop (Kanye, Wu Tang Clan, etc.) stand the test of time? 

And what about punk rock? 

It's too early to tell but I would venture to guess later rock and most popular forms of music today will have very little staying power.  I can't see, for example, Kanye West maintaining  the long-lived respect Duke Ellington has garnered.  Or Pearl Jam being remembered the way the Beatles or Dylan will be. 

And look at it this way: though not fans, my parents (G.I. generation folks) knew who Elvis Presley, the Bealtes, the Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, and Bob Dylan were.  The average boomer like me today cannot name more than maybe one or two contemporary artists.  I just don't see them having staying power.  Time will tell.

I also wonder if the music medium/format might have something to do with it. So much is streamed now, rather than physically having to remove vinyl or even a CD from a shelf and put in on to play. Vinyl and CDs sit in view, and just seem more tangible, while streaming music seems more fleeting, since you just open an app and push play. You are seeing more new music released on vinyl now, but a large majority never make it past the digital version.   

Good point, Je.  Most of what I seek out in the way of vinyl are either older recordings or the very small handful of contemporary rock artists I follow (PJ, Dinosaur Jr, Wynn/Dream Syndicate, Juliana Hatfield).  Vinyl is in this interesting phase of nostalgia and a kind of nouveau fad.  So I'm curious, is the vinyl format being used for any of these current acts or is it all streamed now?

JeBurkhardt

brianlux said:

JeBurkhardt said:

brianlux said:

Being a long-time rock fan and an "OG"  (I'm poking fun here- it's so common to see acronyms in posts these days and I can't keep up with them so, y'all, "OG", in this case, means "older generation", ha!)...

...anyway, as a long time rock fan and old fart, it's a bit hard for me to wrap my head around rock taking a back seat to other forms of music.  But then, not really because as I have aged and explored other musics, I now see it as a continuum.  Historically, at least for recorded music, what was most popular went from dixieland and big band, and vocal jazz (and blues in some regions) to crooners like Bing Crosby, Perry Como, et al, to early rock and pop, to 60's and classic rock, to later rock (including Pearl Jam, etc),  to rap and hip hop, and to whatever the hell EDM is (sorry, but goddamn those acronyms, haha!).

Along that continuum, there were developments in music that will better stand the test of time.  Big band (including Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong and maybe Glen Miller and others) has stood the test of time.  Same with early rock (Elvis, the Beatles and the Stones).  Same with classic rock (Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Grateful Dead, etc.)  
Will later rock (Pearl Pearl, etc.)  have that kind of longevity?  Will rap/ hip hop (Kanye, Wu Tang Clan, etc.) stand the test of time? 

And what about punk rock? 

It's too early to tell but I would venture to guess later rock and most popular forms of music today will have very little staying power.  I can't see, for example, Kanye West maintaining  the long-lived respect Duke Ellington has garnered.  Or Pearl Jam being remembered the way the Beatles or Dylan will be. 

And look at it this way: though not fans, my parents (G.I. generation folks) knew who Elvis Presley, the Bealtes, the Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, and Bob Dylan were.  The average boomer like me today cannot name more than maybe one or two contemporary artists.  I just don't see them having staying power.  Time will tell.

I also wonder if the music medium/format might have something to do with it. So much is streamed now, rather than physically having to remove vinyl or even a CD from a shelf and put in on to play. Vinyl and CDs sit in view, and just seem more tangible, while streaming music seems more fleeting, since you just open an app and push play. You are seeing more new music released on vinyl now, but a large majority never make it past the digital version.   

Good point, Je.  Most of what I seek out in the way of vinyl are either older recordings or the very small handful of contemporary rock artists I follow (PJ, Dinosaur Jr, Wynn/Dream Syndicate, Juliana Hatfield).  Vinyl is in this interesting phase of nostalgia and a kind of nouveau fad.  So I'm curious, is the vinyl format being used for any of these current acts or is it all streamed now?

There are a good number of new artists putting their stuff out on vinyl. I don't know how wide spread it is though. 

Loujoe

F Me In The Brain said:

I totally miss rock and roll being the thing, but I am stuck in the past.  I love 60s/70s/80s/90s rock.  Love it.  All types.  Wish there were more easily accessed bands coming up and killing it.  I am sure they are out there but I am an old fuck who does a shit job of trying to find it.

However, I also like some of the new stuff.  Billie Eilish's new record is fantastic.  No bullshit, I listen to that way more than I listen to Pearl Jam's latest record.  (On topic -- most of Pearl Jam's new record does not rock, at least to me.)

We listen to the local pop radio channel as much as I can stomach --- the parts I find tough are mostly the asswipe DJs talking for 5 minutes straight...but it can also be normal radio stuff in that they play the same 6 songs over and over.  

My wife and kid like it and I can usually find something about some of them to dig.

True. It all sounds the same at first, but after a while I can appreciate it.

brianlux

It may just be a matter of being my age or whatever, but I'll never understand this notion of "rock is dead" or why it is not so popular with younger people.  Is classical/orchestral music dead?  No, it's been around for 100's of years in varying forms.  Are blues or jazz dead?  Hell no, that music has been around for well over 100 years.  So why would something as energizing and exciting as great rock of various styles be dead?
Some people have said (elsewhere) that it's because all of the facets of rock have been explored.  But you could say that about most types of music.  And yet orchestral scores are composed quite regularly- if for no other reason, for movie soundtracks- and news rock songs are written all the time, etc. 

And when I look at the history of rock, I don't see a lot of major changes in that form of music in the first place.  What has always made certain bands and artists interesting to me are some of the components of the music besides the basic form (and rock, in general, is fairly basic in the first place).  The components that set many rock acts apart from the rest include things like:

-Stand out, distinctive vocal sound and quality.  Think of the great rock singers- their voices are instantly recognizable:  Neil Young, Eddie Vedder, Juliana Hatfield, Roger Daltry, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Rod Stewart... all of them.  You hear their voices and almost instantly know who they are.

-Guitar is a major component and guitar stylings are less varied today, not because there is no way to play distinctively, but because too many people try to sound like someone else.  Like the voices above, many guitarists are quickly recognizable.  One of the first things my guitar teacher told me way back in high school was that by listening to as many guitarists as possible and learning a little bit about differing styles, you will be more likely to develop your own style.  I may not be a great guitar player (I'm definitely not), but at least I have a fairly distinctive style of playing. 

-Presentation is also what sets the best apart from the average.  Too many bands try to emulate cliched rock poses and such.  Nobody is going to windmill like Pete Townshend windmills.  Faggedaboudit! If everyone else is dying their hair fluorescent orange or green, try something different.  Like Robert here, for example:

Zod

I don't think they mean dead, when people say dead the mean it's more or less on life support.   Some people listen to it, the pop culture and the masses have moved on kind of thing.

It's now mostly older people that appreciate rock music.  Yes some young people like it, but they are much smaller in number than when we were young.

Unless rock has a resurgence at some point, it will continue to dwindle as our generation dwindles.

It's like how often do I put on a classical or jazz record.  Yes some people like that music, but not anything like it's hey day. 

That's my thoughts.  I remember in the later 90s I become less and less enfranchised with modern rock music.  I got corporate, forumulaic, and bland.  Indie rock (for the most part) all sounds the same to me.  No stand out lead singers any more.    The funny thing when I hit that spot in the 90's I started going backwards.  When I couldn't look to the present for new music I started going back to the 70s and 60s.   That's when I developed my love of Zeppelin, The Who, The Beatles, etc...

The thing I wonder is, with the addage that your brain develops it's taste for music when you're young, and it sticks with you.   Why did my brain turn against modern rock, but had no problem going backward in time to classic rock bands.. I figured it my brain wasn't willing to accept new music, it would of loathed both.

brianlux

Zod said:

I don't think they mean dead, when people say dead the mean it's more or less on life support.   Some people listen to it, the pop culture and the masses have moved on kind of thing.

It's now mostly older people that appreciate rock music.  Yes some young people like it, but they are much smaller in number than when we were young.

Unless rock has a resurgence at some point, it will continue to dwindle as our generation dwindles.

It's like how often do I put on a classical or jazz record.  Yes some people like that music, but not anything like it's hey day. 

That's my thoughts.  I remember in the later 90s I become less and less enfranchised with modern rock music.  I got corporate, forumulaic, and bland.  Indie rock (for the most part) all sounds the same to me.  No stand out lead singers any more.    The funny thing when I hit that spot in the 90's I started going backwards.  When I couldn't look to the present for new music I started going back to the 70s and 60s.   That's when I developed my love of Zeppelin, The Who, The Beatles, etc...

The thing I wonder is, with the addage that your brain develops it's taste for music when you're young, and it sticks with you.   Why did my brain turn against modern rock, but had no problem going backward in time to classic rock bands.. I figured it my brain wasn't willing to accept new music, it would of loathed both.

It's now mostly older people that appreciate rock music.

I've read that very thing many times on other music sites, particularly the Hoffman music forums. I think that is somewhat true but also dependent on what the media is.    Among the used records I sell at my wife's  bookstore, rock tends to do fairly well across a wide spectrum of age groups.  Boomers and early Gen X like it because that's what they grew up on.  Younger folks like rock vinyl because it's retro-trendy.  The CD's on the other hand that sell better tend to more contemporary.  I don't get a lot of Led Zeppelin LPs but when I do, they fly out of there.  But the Zep CDs tend to linger a good bit. 

And of course, non of this address what people stream, and that's another story all together.

The thing I wonder is, with the addage that your brain develops it's taste for music when you're young, and it sticks with you.

That's probably true as well (and in fact, I had just read that elsewhere recently).  Most of the fellow boomers I know are so stuck in 60's rock, it's almost embarrassing.  Sure, the first Crosby, Stills and Nash record is great and it's a classic, but that's still your favorite record?  And not to be putting them down.  I saw that band in '71 or '72 with Neil Young and they were awesome.  But to arrest one's musical interests at that point seems like such a loss of listening opportunities!  Why not work back to the great music that came before our time (Imagine having never listened to Ellington or Parker!), and move forward.  I've asked a number of my contemporaries what they think about Pearl Jam.  A lot of them know a little about them.  But if I ask about Dinosaur Jr or Television or Sonic Youth or Government Mule, or even a band that goes back as far as Kraftwerk, I often get blank stares.  That seems sad to me.

Poncier

F Me In The Brain said:

I totally miss rock and roll being the thing, but I am stuck in the past.  I love 60s/70s/80s/90s rock.  Love it.  All types.  Wish there were more easily accessed bands coming up and killing it.  I am sure they are out there but I am an old fuck who does a shit job of trying to find it.

I could have easily typed this exact same paragraph.

Merkin Baller

hedonist said:

Thank goodness for TOOL.

I don’t listen to the radio so I pretty much choose whatever genre appeals to me at the moment. Much modern “rock”, I’ve found, is banal, lacking in decent lyrics, and unimaginative.

 I’m open-minded/open-eared, but much out there, regardless of type of music, is so…unchallenging.

Don’t really care what dominates — and dominates who, others? — as long as my soul is full of the good shit. Thankfully, I can always find it.  

I'll trampoline off your post here, Hedo, and throw out some appreciation for not only Maynard Keenan, but also Mike Patton, Josh Hommes & Jack White as IMO some of the most consistently interesting artists over the last 20+ years. 

90s rock is long gone, but these guys continue to evolve and take hard rock in new, awesome and, to your point, challenging directions. I've always appreciated about Tool & Queens of the Stone Age in particular, that I've never "got" any of their albums after only 1 or 2 listens. I have to put time and effort into listening, to digest what they're giving me, a process I very much enjoy. 

& I don't think anyone has challenged me more than Mike Patton, the term GOAT is cliché, but IMO he's it for me... I hope he gets over his current issues and gets back to performing soon. 


Thank God for Radiohead too... I don't love 100% of their content, but Goddammit if they aren't one of the more consistently innovative and interesting groups that keep me coming back after 25 years. 

cblock4life

I remember standing in line for tickets at a national department store (Journey tix in the early 80’s) and when the gate opened everyone rushed in and the China displays got crushed.  We left….just couldn’t believe how people could act like that. But it was stupid to have the China set up there.  So I’m so happy how ticket purchases have evolved. 

As for music…….as long as it’s not country I love any and all music as long as it makes me move.  Anything from the 50’s through today, no matter the age of the artist, etc.  I can’t stay in one decade or type…..too much great music out there. Pearl Jam to Lady Gaga, 50 cent…..it all works for me. 

hedonist

Merkin Baller said:

hedonist said:

Thank goodness for TOOL.

I don’t listen to the radio so I pretty much choose whatever genre appeals to me at the moment. Much modern “rock”, I’ve found, is banal, lacking in decent lyrics, and unimaginative.

 I’m open-minded/open-eared, but much out there, regardless of type of music, is so…unchallenging.

Don’t really care what dominates — and dominates who, others? — as long as my soul is full of the good shit. Thankfully, I can always find it.  

I'll trampoline off your post here, Hedo, and throw out some appreciation for not only Maynard Keenan, but also Mike Patton, Josh Hommes & Jack White as IMO some of the most consistently interesting artists over the last 20+ years. 

90s rock is long gone, but these guys continue to evolve and take hard rock in new, awesome and, to your point, challenging directions. I've always appreciated about Tool & Queens of the Stone Age in particular, that I've never "got" any of their albums after only 1 or 2 listens. I have to put time and effort into listening, to digest what they're giving me, a process I very much enjoy. 

& I don't think anyone has challenged me more than Mike Patton, the term GOAT is cliché, but IMO he's it for me... I hope he gets over his current issues and gets back to performing soon. 


Thank God for Radiohead too... I don't love 100% of their content, but Goddammit if they aren't one of the more consistently innovative and interesting groups that keep me coming back after 25 years. 

Many of those you mentioned were in my head too. That kind of talent and care put into the craft doesn’t strike me as important to manny “artists” out there right now.

Reminds me of the emperor’s clothes. I just don’t see it!

Poncier

cblock4life said:

I remember standing in line for tickets at a national department store (Journey tix in the early 80’s) and when the gate opened everyone rushed in and the China displays got crushed.  We left….just couldn’t believe how people could act like that. But it was stupid to have the China set up there. 

I remember waiting in line inside a Filene's for tickets. Strange place for it to be sure.

Loujoe

brianlux said:

Zod said:

I don't think they mean dead, when people say dead the mean it's more or less on life support.   Some people listen to it, the pop culture and the masses have moved on kind of thing.

It's now mostly older people that appreciate rock music.  Yes some young people like it, but they are much smaller in number than when we were young.

Unless rock has a resurgence at some point, it will continue to dwindle as our generation dwindles.

It's like how often do I put on a classical or jazz record.  Yes some people like that music, but not anything like it's hey day. 

That's my thoughts.  I remember in the later 90s I become less and less enfranchised with modern rock music.  I got corporate, forumulaic, and bland.  Indie rock (for the most part) all sounds the same to me.  No stand out lead singers any more.    The funny thing when I hit that spot in the 90's I started going backwards.  When I couldn't look to the present for new music I started going back to the 70s and 60s.   That's when I developed my love of Zeppelin, The Who, The Beatles, etc...

The thing I wonder is, with the addage that your brain develops it's taste for music when you're young, and it sticks with you.   Why did my brain turn against modern rock, but had no problem going backward in time to classic rock bands.. I figured it my brain wasn't willing to accept new music, it would of loathed both.

It's now mostly older people that appreciate rock music.

I've read that very thing many times on other music sites, particularly the Hoffman music forums. I think that is somewhat true but also dependent on what the media is.    Among the used records I sell at my wife's  bookstore, rock tends to do fairly well across a wide spectrum of age groups.  Boomers and early Gen X like it because that's what they grew up on.  Younger folks like rock vinyl because it's retro-trendy.  The CD's on the other hand that sell better tend to more contemporary.  I don't get a lot of Led Zeppelin LPs but when I do, they fly out of there.  But the Zep CDs tend to linger a good bit. 

And of course, non of this address what people stream, and that's another story all together.

The thing I wonder is, with the addage that your brain develops it's taste for music when you're young, and it sticks with you.

That's probably true as well (and in fact, I had just read that elsewhere recently).  Most of the fellow boomers I know are so stuck in 60's rock, it's almost embarrassing.  Sure, the first Crosby, Stills and Nash record is great and it's a classic, but that's still your favorite record?  And not to be putting them down.  I saw that band in '71 or '72 with Neil Young and they were awesome.  But to arrest one's musical interests at that point seems like such a loss of listening opportunities!  Why not work back to the great music that came before our time (Imagine having never listened to Ellington or Parker!), and move forward.  I've asked a number of my contemporaries what they think about Pearl Jam.  A lot of them know a little about them.  But if I ask about Dinosaur Jr or Television or Sonic Youth or Government Mule, or even a band that goes back as far as Kraftwerk, I often get blank stares.  That seems sad to me.

I spin tunes with a dude who has 10 years on me and he always surprises me with his collection. 

DewieCox

Isn’t this the poster that was consistently slamming people for listening to dinosaur music/being out of touch with a strong holier than thou attitude regarding fans of a rock band favoring other rock music?

Tim Simmons

I believe so

brianlux

DewieCox said:

Isn’t this the poster that was consistently slamming people for listening to dinosaur music/being out of touch with a strong holier than thou attitude regarding fans of a rock band favoring other rock music?

I'm either really tired or stupid.  I'm not sure what you are saying here Dewie.

In any case, anyone who slams people for listening to Dinosaur music should give this a try ( )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgTJtdn6VjM

Tim Simmons

OP used to generally call out the forum, saying people were too caught up in the music of the past and were ignoring great music happening now. 

I mean, he's not wrong, but its sorta funny he made this thread.

cp3iverson

Never bothers me.  

People of this background generally hated 97-2002 right?   For rock radio yeah it sucked, but I remember loving Neutral Milk Hotel, Jimmy Eat World, Sunny Day Real Estate, the Shins, etc.  So I love that era of music. 

the good stuff always comes through.  Even in pop.  I think Olivia Rodrigo is horrid but we’ve loved Billie Eilish from the beginning.  Rock is an afterthought at festivals now but so what?  ACL and Coachella are no longer put together for us.  

There is always good music coming out. 

brianlux

cp3iverson said:

Never bothers me.  

People of this background generally hated 97-2002 right?   For rock radio yeah it sucked, but I remember loving Neutral Milk Hotel, Jimmy Eat World, Sunny Day Real Estate, the Shins, etc.  So I love that era of music. 

the good stuff always comes through.  Even in pop.  I think Olivia Rodrigo is horrid but we’ve loved Billie Eilish from the beginning.  Rock is an afterthought at festivals now but so what?  ACL and Coachella are no longer put together for us.  

There is always good music coming out. 

Jimmy Eat World... never followed them much but I should go back to them again.  They were great on Letterman.  Bass player dude speared his amp righteously with that guitar!

Merkin Baller

cp3iverson said:

Never bothers me.  

People of this background generally hated 97-2002 right?   For rock radio yeah it sucked, but I remember loving Neutral Milk Hotel, Jimmy Eat World, Sunny Day Real Estate, the Shins, etc.  So I love that era of music. 

the good stuff always comes through.  Even in pop.  I think Olivia Rodrigo is horrid but we’ve loved Billie Eilish from the beginning.  Rock is an afterthought at festivals now but so what?  ACL and Coachella are no longer put together for us.  

There is always good music coming out. 

Sunny Day Real Estate was the shit. 

musicismylife78

Tim Simmons said:

OP used to generally call out the forum, saying people were too caught up in the music of the past and were ignoring great music happening now. 

I mean, he's not wrong, but its sorta funny he made this thread.

DewieCox said:

Isn’t this the poster that was consistently slamming people for listening to dinosaur music/being out of touch with a strong holier than thou attitude regarding fans of a rock band favoring other rock music?

To be fair I havent posted much on the forum since 2013 or so, and was heavily posting more so in 2003-2008 or so.  I joined in 2003, Tim looks like you joined during Yield days, so you've beat me on that!  
But a lot has changed in my life and in the world since 2013, or 2008 or 2003.  I would guess you both have changed too.  I'd hope so at least. My other thread about Ed softening in his anger towards mainstream pop music fits as well.  In 1993, would Ed have been friends with the pop stars of the day and be attending pop shows (even if a large part is his kids).  Him going to the 1995 equivalent of One Direction/Harry Styles, Lana and Billie Eilish, and seeming to have a genuine respect for their craft, Id say thats a million years from the Ed we of the OG 90's era PJ fandom grew up with.  
Have you changed, haha?  I'd sure hope you arent the same person you were in 1998!  

musicismylife78

But in terms of the statement though, I dont remember being extremely pro new music and calling old music dinosaur music.  I actually remember doing the exact opposite.  I remember in the W days, and being pissed that bands weren't politic and speaking out like Neil and PJ about Iraq, and honoring all the 60's greats and saying, 2003 generation, where are your protest songs.  I absolutely have changed in that respect.  I couldnt give a damn about political music now.  In fact, I prefer music that isnt.  

Lerxst1992

brianlux said:

It may just be a matter of being my age or whatever, but I'll never understand this notion of "rock is dead" or why it is not so popular with younger people.  Is classical/orchestral music dead?  No, it's been around for 100's of years in varying forms.  Are blues or jazz dead?  Hell no, that music has been around for well over 100 years.  So why would something as energizing and exciting as great rock of various styles be dead?
Some people have said (elsewhere) that it's because all of the facets of rock have been explored.  But you could say that about most types of music.  And yet orchestral scores are composed quite regularly- if for no other reason, for movie soundtracks- and news rock songs are written all the time, etc. 

And when I look at the history of rock, I don't see a lot of major changes in that form of music in the first place.  What has always made certain bands and artists interesting to me are some of the components of the music besides the basic form (and rock, in general, is fairly basic in the first place).  The components that set many rock acts apart from the rest include things like:

-Stand out, distinctive vocal sound and quality.  Think of the great rock singers- their voices are instantly recognizable:  Neil Young, Eddie Vedder, Juliana Hatfield, Roger Daltry, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Rod Stewart... all of them.  You hear their voices and almost instantly know who they are.

-Guitar is a major component and guitar stylings are less varied today, not because there is no way to play distinctively, but because too many people try to sound like someone else.  Like the voices above, many guitarists are quickly recognizable.  One of the first things my guitar teacher told me way back in high school was that by listening to as many guitarists as possible and learning a little bit about differing styles, you will be more likely to develop your own style.  I may not be a great guitar player (I'm definitely not), but at least I have a fairly distinctive style of playing. 

-Presentation is also what sets the best apart from the average.  Too many bands try to emulate cliched rock poses and such.  Nobody is going to windmill like Pete Townshend windmills.  Faggedaboudit! If everyone else is dying their hair fluorescent orange or green, try something different.  Like Robert here, for example:

Fripp-tastic pics!