Home› Other Music

Is there a correlation between drug use and quality rock music?

pjoasisrulepjoasisrule Posts: 3,412
edited September 2007 in Other Music
Ive noticed that the most popular bands today arent big into drugs while the popular bands of past decades were heavy drug users. Popular rock music is at its worst right now, do you think this plays any role?
Alpine Valley 2000
Summerfest 2006

"Why would they come to our concert just to boo us?" -Lisa Simpson
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • deadnotedeadnote Posts: 1,678
    while rockin out and druggin might seem fun i think its important to know the scarifices made to get to that point and the point of view that you take from the experience

    all we need is to see our families smile

    fuck the rockin lets start smilin
    set your laughter free

    dreamer in my dream

    we got the guns

    i love you,but im..............callin out.........callin out
  • sj.brodiesj.brodie Posts: 468
    pjoasisrule wrote:
    Ive noticed that the most popular bands today arent big into drugs while the popular bands of past decades were heavy drug users. Popular rock music is at its worst right now, do you think this plays any role?

    here is your answer
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J10w3FuCwfQ&mode=related&search=

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkA6zugNMQ&mode=related&search=
  • 12345AGNST112345AGNST1 Posts: 4,906
    yes, but pearl jam was never into drugs too bad, ed did X for a little and mike had a drinking problem, other than that no, and their music hasn't suffered at all.
    5/28/06, 6/27/08, 10/28/09, 5/18/10, 5/21/10
    8/7/08, 6/9/09
  • FinsburyParkCarrotsFinsburyParkCarrots Seattle, WA Posts: 12,223
    Depends on the drug.
  • drew0drew0 Posts: 943
    You can make good music without taking a lot of drugs, or even none at all. Pearl Jam is a good example of this - they had their fair share of weed, and I'm sure experimented, but it at least never got to the point where the public knew about it.

    However, I believe that drug use does have a strong effect on the quality of music, and definitly for the better. It doesn't mean, either, that if you take drugs you'll make good music - it has ruined numerous music careers. If you look at a lot of bands from the '60s and '70s, they were at their peak musically when the drugs were also at their peak. The Beatles' Sgt. Pepper's, the Stones' Exile On Main Street, Fleetwood Mac's Rumours, and we all know the Grateful Dead couldn't have made half the music they did if it wasn't for drugs.

    So, in my opinion, yes and no. You can make good music without drugs, and you can make bad music with drugs. However, I definitly think if used right it can make some of the greatest music ever created. It has, in fact.
    Pittsburgh 6/23/06
    Madison Square Garden 6/25/08
  • muppetmuppet Posts: 980
    What about depression? Seems a bit of a tactless thing to say but some artists seem to be at their peak when they are depressed or feeling low.

    Take a look at Chris Cornell. Or even Bruce Springsteen - I'd put Nebraska and Tunnel Of Love right at the top.

    And I kind of agree with what you're saying about drugs. They can either tear a band apart or help produce some amazing music.
  • reznors edgereznors edge Posts: 136
    Trent Reznor depressed and on drugs= DownwardSpiral and TheFragile.
    Trent Reznor happy and sober= Year Zero.
    Somebody please give Trent some drugs and alcohol! JK. But seriously, we wouldn't have many of our favorate albums without its creative influence. It's hard to deny it.
    By the way, I love that Bill Hicks part that's used in Tool's ThirdEye. Awesome.
  • deadnothingbetterdeadnothingbetter Posts: 2,202
    pjoasisrule wrote:
    Ive noticed that the most popular bands today arent big into drugs while the popular bands of past decades were heavy drug users. Popular rock music is at its worst right now, do you think this plays any role?
    i think drug users and bands who are open to spirituality play the best music.

    whatever that means.... i guess what i'm trying to say is that great bands are mainly moved by something.... whether drugs or a strong beliefs they attain to.
    This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
  • prytocorduroyprytocorduroy Posts: 4,355
    Based on my original research.... ;) .....drugs (alcohol and weed in particular) allow for one to open up fully and express themselves, if not through words, then through music. Music tells a story of one's mood, feelings, and thoughts.

    Personally I think I write just fine sober or drugged up. However when I am high or drunk I tend to create riffs that I would have only dreamed of otherwise.
  • DocChicagoDocChicago Posts: 653
    If the band in question is Aerosmith, then YES there is a correlation between drugs and good music. Because they fucking suck now. During the 70s they were unstoppable... and very very high.
    It is time to admit that we used to rock like hurricanes. It is time to run for the hills and go round and round. It is time for us to shout at the devil. We've got the right to choose it, there ain't no way we'll lose it, and we're not gonna take it anymore.
    - C. Klosterman
  • MattCameronKicksButtMattCameronKicksButt Posts: 4,317
    I hate to say this because I'm a good girl but I think drugs open your mind more.

    Maybe that's why?
  • deadnothingbetterdeadnothingbetter Posts: 2,202
    MattCameronKicksButt wrote:
    I hate to say this because I'm a good girl but I think drugs open your mind more.

    Maybe that's why?
    or it could be a great feeling that comes over you that's not necessarily caused by drugs.... as a performer myself, not to brag, but when there are certain emotions that overcome me i have a tendency to feel more "elevated". and people have said they can feel that energy while i perform.

    anyways.... i wasn't always to sure what they were talking about, but i guess it's probably the same kinda deal when someone is high... that the music actually sounds good.
    This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
  • MattCameronKicksButtMattCameronKicksButt Posts: 4,317
    deadnothingbetter wrote:
    or it could be a great feeling that comes over you that's not necessarily caused by drugs.... as a performer myself, not to brag, but when there are certain emotions that overcome me i have a tendency to feel more "elevated". and people have said they can feel that energy while i perform.

    anyways.... i wasn't always to sure what they were talking about, but i guess it's probably the same kinda deal when someone is high... that the music actually sounds good.

    Good for you... It sounds like you should make your art more public!
  • somebodyelsessky2020somebodyelsessky2020 Posts: 1,173
    that's a very good question. i'd say with all the evidence in front of us, yes i do believe that drugs may have very well played a big part in alot of the greatest rock music ever made. however it also has been the cause of death for alot of great musicians as well.
    Oh dear dad
    Can you see me now
    I am myself
    Like you somehow
    I'll ride the wave
    Where it takes me
    I'll hold the pain
    Release me
  • deadnothingbetterdeadnothingbetter Posts: 2,202
    MattCameronKicksButt wrote:
    Good for you... It sounds like you should make your art more public!
    nah, people wouldn't buy it.

    i've tried out for other bands and they don't seem to like it :o

    i can always start my own band though.... since my friends and relatives have always encouraged me to do so. but my passion is in film at the moment.
    This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
  • MattCameronKicksButtMattCameronKicksButt Posts: 4,317
    deadnothingbetter wrote:
    nah, people wouldn't buy it.

    i've tried out for other bands and they don't seem to like it :o

    i can always start my own band though.... since my friends and relatives have always encouraged me to do so. but my passion is in film at the moment.

    Do whatever. There should be more creative, passionate people on this planet. :)

    I can't sing or play a note to save my life. :D
  • deadnothingbetterdeadnothingbetter Posts: 2,202
    MattCameronKicksButt wrote:
    Do whatever. There should be more creative, passionate people on this planet. :)

    I can't sing or play a note to save my life. :D
    thanks. i'm currently learning to play the guitar. soon i'll be rockin :cool: :)
    This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
  • geishagrrlgeishagrrl Posts: 130
    I personally believe that drugs may have caused people to think differently than they might have if they were sober but that it is not a factor as to whether those people could create great music. It just means they made different music than what they would have made if they were clean. Fugazi never needed or used drugs or alcohol and I personally feel they made some of the greatest music out there. There has always been really shitty popular music and I'm sure you could find that many of those people were also doing drugs. I think the cause of the decline in popular music is much bigger than whether people are doing drugs. I think you would have to look at the music business, who the major labels are pushing and why, the slow death of rock radio, the lack of music on music television, the rise of the internet and the increase of indie labels. I also think there is a lot of great msuic being made right now, it just doesn't get the coverage that maybe it deserves.
  • MattCameronKicksButtMattCameronKicksButt Posts: 4,317
    geishagrrl wrote:
    I personally believe that drugs may have caused people to think differently than they might have if they were sober but that it is not a factor as to whether those people could create great music. It just means they made different music than what they would have made if they were clean. Fugazi never needed or used drugs or alcohol and I personally feel they made some of the greatest music out there. There has always been really shitty popular music and I'm sure you could find that many of those people were also doing drugs. I think the cause of the decline in popular music is much bigger than whether people are doing drugs. I think you would have to look at the music business, who the major labels are pushing and why, the slow death of rock radio, the lack of music on music television, the rise of the internet and the increase of indie labels. I also think there is a lot of great msuic being made right now, it just doesn't get the coverage that maybe it deserves.

    ...apparently Frank Zappa didn't take any drugs either. Not sure how true this is?
  • pjoasisrulepjoasisrule Posts: 3,412
    muppet wrote:
    What about depression? Seems a bit of a tactless thing to say but some artists seem to be at their peak when they are depressed or feeling low.

    Take a look at Chris Cornell. Or even Bruce Springsteen - I'd put Nebraska and Tunnel Of Love right at the top.

    And I kind of agree with what you're saying about drugs. They can either tear a band apart or help produce some amazing music.

    Why does Chris Cornell have to be mentioned in every thread? He isnt even that great, why not talk about him on his forum or a Soundgarden forum?
    Alpine Valley 2000
    Summerfest 2006

    "Why would they come to our concert just to boo us?" -Lisa Simpson
  • pjoasisrulepjoasisrule Posts: 3,412
    I really think drugs have to play a huge part in the decline of rock music

    The Doors (one of the most popular 60's bands) vs. My Chemical Romance (one of the most popular peices of shit today)
    Alpine Valley 2000
    Summerfest 2006

    "Why would they come to our concert just to boo us?" -Lisa Simpson
  • Matt LukinMatt Lukin Posts: 647
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=Qm1870K22lc
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=Tatannze-s8
    The car's on fire and there's no driver at the wheel
    And the sewers are all muddied with a thousand lonely suicides
  • BlyssBlyss Posts: 166
    pjoasisrule wrote:
    I really think drugs have to play a huge part in the decline of rock music

    The Doors (one of the most popular 60's bands) vs. My Chemical Romance (one of the most popular peices of shit today)

    I disagree that drugs influences the quality, i think if my chemical romance took drugs they would still sound awful, i don't know if they do or not but just saying.

    I can see that for example, jimi hendrix made "different" music while he was on drugs, it was hyped up with big riffs or something but i do believe that hypothetically if he was clean he would have been just as good.
  • lalalalaaaaaaaalalalalaaaaaaaa Posts: 2,445
    It's not like drugs will magically turn you into a great musician or artist. Look at Leif Garrett for chrissake. You either have that creative thing in you already or you don't.

    But I do think drugs can help some people reach deeper into themselves and get more in touch with that creative thing inside them.

    Some people meditate, some people use drugs, some people go fishing...but they're all doing the same thing really...just getting more in touch with their subconscious.
  • Oh, JimmyOh, Jimmy Posts: 957
    Pink Floyd
    Waters and Wright were regular reefer smokers and tried acid a few times, but there is a pretty wide misconception that these guys were fucked out of their gourds on drugs.

    I think they're a perfect example. You can write some awesome, trippy music w/o bein stoned all the time.

    I think drugs, most of the time, end up destroying egos.


    PJ
    Up until Binaural, Mike was into some heavy drug use. Good to see his probs are behind him.

    Also, I bet Mike and Ed smoke gratuitous amounts of pot. Maybe not now, I suppose.

    On TB2K I am pretty sure Mike puffs on some sort of pipe during the little backstage part, then Ed is over by him for a sec, turns around and smiles.

    Then when I seen them in 03 at St Lou, Ed walked over behind all the gear cases on the stage, lit something(not a cigarette) then came back out and blew out about the biggest puff of smoke I have ever seen.
  • muppetmuppet Posts: 980
    pjoasisrule wrote:
    Why does Chris Cornell have to be mentioned in every thread? He isnt even that great, why not talk about him on his forum or a Soundgarden forum?

    I just mentioned him in passing. I don't think he should be excluded from any musical discussion just because a couple of fangirls post 100 topics about his eyes. I think it's pretty fair to say that the man has declinded in quality ever since he got sober, which is basically what this thread is talking about. So what's your problem?
  • KannKann Posts: 1,146
    Blyss wrote:
    I can see that for example, jimi hendrix made "different" music while he was on drugs, it was hyped up with big riffs or something but i do believe that hypothetically if he was clean he would have been just as good.

    Not just as good, different. I agree with your point, you take a talented musician, give him drugs (but not too much or for too long) and you get great music.
    I remember seeing a santana interview were he was speaking of his performance on soul sacrifice in the original woodstock. He said he took some acid some 4 hours before they went to play, but there had been a problem with other bands and less than an hour after dropping the organisers ask santana to go on stage and play now. So on stage he goes, on his high, and he says he felt his guitar neck was behaving like a snake and tried to slip out his hand, visual and audio hallucinations etc.
    It's one of the best versions of that song I've heard. Drugs are bad, but sometimes they're great to hear.
Sign In or Register to comment.