Modern Music vs. The Classics


PDA

View Full Version : Modern Music vs. The Classics


austinb0309
06-22-2008, 07:08 PM
I got into this conversation today so I thought I'd throw it up here to see what you guys have to say about it. If your a teenager you probably listen to modern stuff, stuff your parents hate. You'll be throwing up the horns for All American Rejects or Taking Back Sunday while your parents would be throwing them up for Zeppelin, Clapton, Guns N' Roses, The Stones, and so forth. Its interesting to me because I'm a young guy and I'm definitely more into classic rock. Back in the day artists recorded without Pro Tools or synths and the voices and the guitars were exactly as they sounded; and best of all the guys played with heart. Their music came straight from the soul. And I guess the same could be said for more modern music with all the teen angst grunge rock going aroud, but all these new people you hear on the radio (when it isn't rap) just seem to crank the distortion on their guitar and in case it still sucks they go over it with the Pro Tools. Same goes with the voices. I could be wrong, but thats just how it seems to me. My rule is that almost anything after 2002 is pretty bad, with exceptions of course, and I was just wondering what you guys thought!

Thanks!

GuItArNeRd06
06-22-2008, 07:13 PM
i'm not gonna vote cuz i love both modern and classic rock....same 4 my parents they like modern and classic too..

pumpkins_rule
06-22-2008, 07:14 PM
Way to generalize two entire generations of people.

deadeyedick
06-22-2008, 07:14 PM
Well Its Very rare to find an Artist with more than a couple good song on their record these days, I think thats the main issue, old or new it doesnt matter to me, ALthough protest the heros new album was pretty consistent.

stratdud39
06-22-2008, 07:14 PM
samecase as you, classic rock

wablahblahblah
06-22-2008, 07:15 PM
i like my classics more but there are certainly some great moderns out there too so i'm not voting.

Slaytanic1993
06-22-2008, 07:16 PM
Both.

Modern Rock is appealing to me because I like catchy stuff every once and awhile.

Classic Rock is usually when I want something a bit more musically aware.

whitebluesboy
06-22-2008, 07:21 PM
You could be wrong and I'm pretty sure you are.

A7X4life123
06-22-2008, 07:22 PM
I agree with "pumpkins_rule", you guys just completely generalized two different eras of music. I agree that older stuff is better in the repect that they had no fancy recording gadgets, but just because you can make your music sound cool because of it isnt bad. Isnt that kinda the point of music?

ultrablue
06-22-2008, 07:31 PM
basically, you like classic rock. that's more a genre than it is an 'age' of music, as there was all sorts of **** flying about at that time too. my knowledge of current bands with the classic rock sound doesn't extend much beyond wolfmother, but as someone else said, you can't write off bands such as protest the hero, who's muscianship puts most classic rock bands to shame. music has just headed in a different direction, with guitars not featuring so much in the mainstream, but plenty of talent and feeling in the more marginalised genres.

I wouldn't say classic rock was 'more musically aware', as it's generally minor pentatonic type licks borrowed from blues music.

as for albums with only a couple of good songs on them, I don't think that's changed much through the ages.

and a cut off point of 2002? I don't see how that really fits with the classic/modern thing, as I'd consider a LOT of pre-2002 stuff to be pretty modern!

Slaytanic1993
06-22-2008, 07:39 PM
basically, you like classic rock. that's more a genre than it is an 'age' of music, as there was all sorts of **** flying about at that time too. my knowledge of current bands with the classic rock sound doesn't extend much beyond wolfmother, but as someone else said, you can't write off bands such as protest the hero, who's muscianship puts most classic rock bands to shame. music has just headed in a different direction, with guitars not featuring so much in the mainstream, but plenty of talent and feeling in the more marginalised genres.

I wouldn't say classic rock was 'more musically aware', as it's generally minor pentatonic type licks borrowed from blues music.

as for albums with only a couple of good songs on them, I don't think that's changed much through the ages.

and a cut off point of 2002? I don't see how that really fits with the classic/modern thing, as I'd consider a LOT of pre-2002 stuff to be pretty modern!

What I meant was that popular modern rock bands are three chord bands whereas popular bands that are classic (like Zeppelin or Cream) were definitely not three chord bands (usually).

And, if we're talking about different genres than just rock...metal has been up weird slops, with the only genre staying kickass throughout the ages being black metal.

clincher09
06-22-2008, 10:11 PM
I prefer modern rock, artists have had a lot more time to branch ouft and find new ways of making music, though I'm not implying that classic artists weren't creative, because they were.

I really hate people who think the classics are just the top of the totem pole and nothing else will be as good.

Sharck
06-23-2008, 12:31 AM
I voted classic, but there's good stuff nowadays, you just have to search through all the **** to find it. Check out the Black Keys. They're proof to me that music isn't completely terrible nowadays.

I'm sure it was similar back in the day, everything you heard on the radio wasn't Zeppelin and Hendrix and Cream. I'm sure they had tons of crap to sort through as well, but now, looking back, you only really see the good stuff.