Where are our musical heroes of tommorow?

[The Chameleon]

This thought has been plaguing me for years....

I used to play this game when I worked at this bong shop in Toronto on the weekends. Everyday we would have the radio tuned to Q107 FM, and I would count how many song they would play that were recorded while I was alive. (I was born in 1977)

Without fail during the course of an 8 hour day, there would be maybe 5 tunes max! A couple Police tunes and U2 song and perhaps a late era Springsteen song or something.

Here's the problem, while it's all good to listen to Pink Floyd, Zeppelin and the like over and over (and we should those are amazing band that form the fabric of out pop/rock lives)..where are the next generation of these bands today? Where are the bands with that type of staying power, meaning that we'll be listening to thier albums 30 years later consistently? I submit that there are no replacements for these bands and we will pay the collective price soon.

As this is the year that the first of the babyboomers turn 60, on has to ask ones self how long until my favorite band's/artists stop touring ? I mean Phil lesh is 66...how much longer?

I beleive the real problem is that the music industry with the advancement of technology and the MTV culture has burned us and itself with substandard, image concious product which is disposable and without substance for the long haul.

I mean can you imagine if the Rolling Stones were a newer band in this millenium? They would never have made it past album number two or three at most. Now a days, there is no thought in the music biz of developing acts and staying with them through a mediocre selling album or two. In the Stones case thier record company would have dropped them right after Exile on Mainstreet, when Goats Head Soup, sold considerably less. In doing so the record company would never have fostered the culture and the band that exists today in the Rolling Stones. Also, there would have been no Grateful Dead..I mean they never sold a tonne of albums, and they certainly wern't photo genic and non of them were teen idols. (although Bobby tried hard)

Now instead of sticking with a band they beleive has vision or talent they simply dispose of them and go with the next hot chick studio creation they can manipulate. The winners are the record companies bank accounts and the loosers are us the listener who have no new icons to look up to musically and are forced to endure terrible music or rehash the good music of our parent's generation.

I know I am preaching to the choir here, but this really bothers me, especially when I see how record companies continue to fuck over artists and the public. (I work at the Candaian Musical Rights & Reproduction Association and I actually get to see the contract major artists sign. They are basically criminal and totally shocking!)

We the consumer are being fucked over, and when we're 60 we'll still be listening to Dark Side of the Moon, because nothing better has come out since.

(Caveat Emptor: Radio Head and possibly a couple Black Crowes albums may make the cut as lasting music that has come out in the last 15 years.)

P.S. When record companies tell you that file trading and CD burning is hurting the music, remember..It's hurting them, not the music. The music will always exists, the music industry may not (the way they know it).

[bradm]

Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crud. This law has held (in the case of music) all the way along; we perceive the music of yesteryears as "better" because 30- or 40-year-thick lenses filter out the crud. (And it's not just music: consider how much television from the 1960s and 1970s that doesn't get aired, while re-runs of "M*A*S*H", "Star Trek", and "All In The Family" show up again and again.)

From stuff that's been relesed in your lifetime, I think you might want to consider both The Clash and Talking Heads, who have released music that will be remembered. (ISTR The Clash's "London Calling" being named "Best Album of the 1980s" in a Rolling Stone poll, despite its having been release in 1979.) REM also has records that will stand the test of time, I think.

As for stuff that's being produced today, yes, I think Radiohead will be remembered, as will Wilco.

Aloha,

Brad

[MarcO]

there is plenty of great music being released. And there was plenty of great music released in the 1990s, and yes even in the 1980s.

Little of it fits into the self-defeating, visionless model of Classic Rock radio, and the music industry has certainly undergone profound changes but I would venture to say that there is just as much, if not more, good music produced in the last twenty-five years than in the twenty-five years before it.

"Classic Rock" is one of the big lies of the music industry.

[bradm]

I would venture to say that there is just as much, if not more, good music produced in the last twenty-five years than in the twenty-five years before it.

I agree, with one proviso: it's possible to have both more and less good music produced. If the number of "good" albums doubles, but the total number of albums triples, you have more, in terms of the number of albums, but less, in terms of the percentage of overall music.

Luckily, the internet (both via downloading and promotion) makes it easier for small artists to get known, but at the same time it makes it harder for a listener, as we have more to choose from.

Aloha,

Brad

[payce-ley]

there is plenty of great music being released. And there was plenty of great music released in the 1990s, and yes even in the 1980s.

Little of it fits into the self-defeating, visionless model of Classic Rock radio, and the music industry has certainly undergone profound changes but I would venture to say that there is just as much, if not more, good music produced in the last twenty-five years than in the twenty-five years before it.

"Classic Rock" is one of the big lies of the music industry.

well put

lots of great music out there for sure, but the mainstream has evolved to backing easily replacable, mediocre talents... just means you're as likely to find a great CD at the local bar on the weekend as you are in HMV

word of mouth is always a better means of discovering talented bands and performers than music industry marketing anyways

[Rob Not Bob]

From stuff that's been relesed in your lifetime, I think you might want to consider both The Clash and Talking Heads, who have released music that will be remembered. (ISTR The Clash's "London Calling" being named "Best Album of the 1980s" in a Rolling Stone poll, despite its having been release in 1979.)

To be fair to Rolling Stone, while it was released in England in December 1979, it wasn't released in the US until early January, 1980.

[SmoothedShredder]

[Freak By Night]

The canoe.ca poll today is related to this topic:

Generally, how would you rate the state of today's music?

Excellent

Good

OK

Lousy

I voted "Excellent", because even though 90% of everything is crud, the other 10% is worth dying for.

I think lip synching is the biggest lie of the music industry.

[The Chameleon]

I agree with y'all and respectfully disagree on some things.

I agree that we look back with fondness as time has filtered out the stuff that sucks. However, even though there was decent music released in the 80's and 90's I think there was dramitically less of it that will stand the test of time than in the 50's, 60's or 70's.

The real test is will you be listening to certain artists/albums in 30yrs. I also agree classic rock radio is bullshit.

I think the main problem is the maturation and shift in the record industry. In the 60s and 70s the record industry was just maturing and was in the business of seeling music and for the most paret they let the artists determine the content. I think this is why so much good music came out of that time. then by the late 70s they record companies realized they could dicate and thought they could predict what the public wanted. This is the root of the problem.

Edited February 9, 2006 by Guest

[Jaimoe]

I'm watching a video right now by a band that will stand the test of time: "The Denial Twist" by The White Stripes.

[SmoothedShredder]

[SmoothedShredder]

I agree with y'all and respectfully disagree on some things.

I agree that we look back with fondness as time has filtered out the stuff that sucks. However, even though there was decent music released in the 80's and 90's I think there was dramitically less of it that will stand the test of time than in the 50's, 60's or 70's.

The real test is will you be listening to certain artists/albums in 30yrs. I also agree classic rock radio is bullshit.

I think the main problem is the maturation and shift in the record industry. In the 60s and 70s the record industry was just maturing and was in the business of seeling music and for the most paret they let the artists determine the content. I think this is why so much good music came out of that time. then by the late 70s they record companies realized they could dicate and thought they could predict what the public wanted. This is the root of the problem.

I'd like to see your Venn Diagram of this. It's all perception... and I think your facts about the record industry may be historically true your fears<?> about its future I do not share. Also in general, there's always going to be "music buisness", it's not all bad, but it's made up of many many small units (bands), and I'll admit there has been more competativeness and low level anger then there is comrodary (between bands/venues/newspapers/fans) in my experience. The problem I see is solidarity, and team work. It was this lack of pride as an industry and as group that allowed the record companies to divide and conquor taking advantage of bands by choke holding potential album sales through their only real valuble asset: Distribution rights. BAnds had an hard keeping themselves together let alone thinking outside themselves and teaming up collectivley. You can just look at the broken social scence to see how this has changed. Changed back to like it was in the 60's before most of this BS, and it was about keeping each other safe, fed and on the move like it was during the Coffee house circuit around Lake Ontario which introduced Neil to Joni. The internet has made handy work of this new/old reality, and it has already dawned on the new era. Your musical hero's of the future are alive and well today. You just have to look at this very message board to see how things have already drastically changed, as if night has now become day when it comes to musically related issues to what they were say... in 1986. Here is where you'll find your heros.

On a related note, I just got an e-mail from a Long time friend... Gorlash... he can't make it to Bonnaroo this year cause he's getting married. Note to self: NEVER GET MARRIED.

[SmoothedShredder]

I agree, with one proviso: it's possible to have both more and less good music produced. If the number of "good" albums doubles, but the total number of albums triples, you have more, in terms of the number of albums, but less, in terms of the percentage of overall music.

Did you just say 2/3rd of what I listen to is crap?

[The Chameleon]

SmoothedShreddar I hope you're right. And I also agree never get married.

[livingstoned]

On a related note, I just got an e-mail from a Long time friend... Gorlash... he can't make it to Bonnaroo this year cause he's getting married. Note to self: NEVER GET MARRIED.

well who the fuck am i gonna marry then!

[SmoothedShredder]

I suppose there is a loophole: Get married at Bonnaroo, or some other outdoor festival. Sorry, I didn't mean to remove all hope.

[Alexis]

no no smoothy, never get married to a woman who books the bonnaroo weekend for your nuptuals

i think solidarity definitely has something to do with what y'all are talkin about. whatever happened to that rock and roll mentality of us against them? them being the squares, those who just don't get it. we're still 2 different groups, some get it, some don't, we just choose to fight amongst ourselves over what sub genre of post modern mod rock this or that band fits into and so on and on. fight the squares, not your guitar wanking buddies.

there will be SO many bands that we remember and love and listen to 30 years from now for their talent. there are lots of groups and people writing musically and lyricly relevant tunes and albums. everyone has those albums they love to listen to from whenever. mine's pop goes the world by men without hats. another is beck's midnight vultures and so many others. but will these songs made in the time span you speak of be played on as massive a scale as their current counterparts in years to come? i don't think so. i think the demographics of the baby boomer generation is a driving force in how much exposure some of these very taltented bands get today. if our generation doesn't have the numbers to demand the same treatment in 30 years, i don't think it'll happen.

that being said. huey lewis's i need a new drug gets played almost daily at our house.

[deranger]

smoothshredder - are you hitting b-roo gain this year or is that a stupid question since you've gone to all of them and I can only assume will continue to.....?

There is so much good music out there right now it makes my eyes water. There was so much good music out there you could start resarching now and never run out of new discoveries. There is and always will be so much good music out there the only thing that changes is we get older and die.

[SmoothedShredder]

Yup, it's in the works.

[SmoothedShredder]

The beauty about the Baby boomer analogy is we get to hear their music, and ours. There's no dobut that a solid foundation in music history (i.e. a love of Jimi and Zep) has allowed me to recognize the good music of today. Those that posses similar characteristics or overtones to those artists which have already withstood the test of time. I can only assume this trend will continue for generations to come. Of couse the playing field is changing daily, if not hourly now.

The evolution of music and broadcasting is such, that 100 years ago we had barely recorded sound, and didn't even have "simple" radio towers yet. Now, I bet 10-40% of the people on the board (maybe even more?! we do all have computers) have the capabilities and skill sets to either:

a) record and album

and/or

start a radio station

I wouldn't underestimate these new realities and what giants steps could be made for the future. I always look at the heart of the potntial of the change in the future and go for it. It is these realities which have led me to the bottom rung of a career in music.

[Thorgnor]

This is just kinda funny to me... a guy says he was listening to classic rock radio looking for modern music and everybody tries to answer why without saying that there are hunbdreds of other radio stations...

don't hear anything modern, change the dial.

Don't hear anything you like, blame your tastebuds.

BTW, Hiphop wasn't a fad. As a style it is here to stay just like rock. I bet there's at least one rapper who will be remembered for a long time, and chances are you didn't hear their music until after '86.

Edited February 9, 2006 by Guest

[d_rawk]

Where are our musical heroes of tommorow?

(Those are good fuckin' points Thorgnor and Alexis, both ... and Midnight Vultures still makes me grab my belt buckle and shake my butt a little, for the record)

[The Chameleon]

This is just kinda funny to me... a guy says he was listening to classic rock radio looking for modern music and everybody tries to answer why without saying that there are hunbdreds of other radio stations...

don't hear anything modern, change the dial.

Don't hear anything you like, blame your tastebuds.

BTW, Hiphop wasn't a fad. As a style it is here to stay just like rock. I bet there's at least one rapper who will be remembered for a long time, and chances are you didn't hear their music until after '86.

WOW that was a lot of assumptions. All of which are pattently wrong. I only made the Q107 refference as it was what was playing at work, which was not my decision.

Furthermore, I listen to an extremely eclectic array of music.

I am also very critical of rock. In fact what I really dislike is the fact that everyhting these days be it Hip-Hop, Pop, Electronic music or whatever has a rock influence in it that is pervasive and swallows everything.

For my taste the whole moderm rock thing is really bland and genrally bores me to tears.

BTW: The hundered radio stations you reffer to are all just as bad only the flavour changes. this is why in my own time at home I never listen to the radio. I listen, collect and currate for compilations various rare funk, disco, soul, dub, ,experiemtal electronic music and anything improvised. I made the rock call as it is the most obvious genre where new talent is not being promoted or fostered by the mainstream channels.

When you assume you make and ass out of u and me.

Edited February 9, 2006 by Guest

[StaggerLee]

Chameleon, your first post didn't limit the topic to just rock as you seem to imply in your most recent post, but even if you look at just rock I think there are many examples of great music recorded post 1980. Are you asking about our own personal tastes and whether or not we'll be listening to modern stuff in years to come, or are you refering to mainstream tastes and whether or not modern music will one day be considered by the masses to be classic?

I'm gonna guess you mean the mainstream rock since you refered to what's on the radio. If this is the case think about Nirvana, U2, the Clash, the Police, Guns & Roses, Pearl Jam, INXS, No Doubt, Duran Duran, RHCP's, Talking Heads, REM, Bruce Springsteen, Prince, Metallica, Beck, Rage Against the Machine, etc. If you move away from just what's on the radio to the "alternative" mainstream stuff then you've got Sonic Youth, Violent Femmes, Weezer, Tool, Jane's Addiction, Liz Phair, Portishead, Pixies, etc.

The list goes on and on. If you don't like this stuff that's fine, I don't like all the bands I've mentioned, but they are just a few of many that I think will stand the test of time. This topic as you presented it is very subjective. When I think of bands that are considered classic rock, I think a lot of it is pretty lame, or as you said, "bland and bores me to tears." I also think that if you could get ahold of some radio playlists from back in the day, you would find just as much crap on the radio back then as there is now.

You're assertion that all other genres of music have "a rock influence in it that is pervasive and swallows everything" is also pretty subjective. One could say that all music has a blues influence that is pervasive and swallows everything and it would be equally true. All music is derivative to some extent. I don't see any particular genre as more influential or more derivative than any other.

As for the music industry not supporting bands and just churning out music they think the public will want, there is some truth to this, but I would say these practices were alive and well even back in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. Even with Nickleback and their kin dominating the charts these days, I think things are getting better with the internet making it possible for independant companies to reach large audiences.

[Thorgnor]

Dude, You asked where our musical heroes of the future are. Apparently your not looking for them, your criticising them and looking backwards for them.

If you don't like what other people are playing perhaps the only musical hero you have is yourself and your un-influenced-by-rock-band.

Do shit or talk it... one or the other.

BTW, when you make a statement such as "For my taste" you stop referring to quality and begin to speak about subjectivity, which is at best subjective, friend.

As for what StaggerLee just said about turning out music for the masses... three words, Tin Pan Alley.

Edited February 9, 2006 by Guest