#1
Ok i was thinkin are bands really that good and by that i mean, are they really good at playing there instruments? do u have to be pro like slash, eddie to become famous?
#2
all you need these days is some power chords and a catchy chorus. the age of needing actual talent is long gone IMO.
i used to be a mod, then i took an arrow in the knee.
#3
Quote by mikeyElite
all you need these days is some power chords and a catchy chorus. the age of needing actual talent is long gone IMO.


cuz i was listening to some of the scremo bands and thats all they are power chords, do u think they can play really good but they just dont wanna?
#5
strange question..
but i would say no; i mean just look at the majority of music that is successful these days

it seems like people are always bashing bands like fall out boy and the jonas brothers (i hate both by the way) but the sad truth is, they're what sells..
#7
isn't one of the main points of Punk that you don't
have to be a virtuoso, just able to express yourself?
and if 3 chords is how you do that, its alright

and to answer your question, i don't think there that good to start with, but im sure those screamo bands get better the more time they spend gigging and practicing

if you look at the sales of Yngwie malmsteen this year vs. the jonas brothers this year, that'll tell you how important skill is these days
( I know the Jonas brothers aren't punk, but they do lack talent)
Quote by guitardude34875
be the music, not the scene
#8
I hate modern rock, with the exception of A7x, The Slip (if you consider them rock, but they play guitars so...) Inner Party System (More dance than rock). I also hate modern metal, IMO it's too technical. I hate modern music... no originality, no soul.

I HATE FALL OUT BOY!!!

To answer your question... No
#9
Quote by ShredGod George
isn't one of the main points of Punk that you don't
have to be a virtuoso, just able to express yourself?
and if 3 chords is how you do that, its alright

and to answer your question, i don't think there that good to start with, but im sure those screamo bands get better the more time they spend gigging and practicing

if you look at the sales of Yngwie malmsteen this year vs. the jonas brothers this year, that'll tell you how important skill is these days
( I know the Jonas brothers aren't punk, but they do lack talent)


so true
#10
A "band" doesn't necessarily mean that only the guitarist must shine and be the star. There's the vocalist, drummer, bassist, [insert other instrument].

All these people combined make the "band" and shape the talent surrounding them.

And yes, Fall Out Boy and Jonas Brothers can burn for all I care.
#12
Quote by GREENRulezd00d
A "band" doesn't necessarily mean that only the guitarist must shine and be the star. There's the vocalist, drummer, bassist, [insert other instrument].

All these people combined make the "band" and shape the talent surrounding them.

And yes, Fall Out Boy and Jonas Brothers can burn for all I care.

thats why i said, if they were good at there instruments, i gave guitarist as examples
#13
Quote by GodofGuitar1991
look at Lamb Of God...MM and Willie are ****ing awesome.


lamb of god isnt really that good i when to the metallica concert monday in seattle and lamb of god played first they were a lil crappy
#14
Quote by mikeyElite
all you need these days is some power chords and a catchy chorus. the age of needing actual talent is long gone IMO.


I blame The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and The Who, but mostly The Beatles.

Please hear me out...

Before The Beatles songwriting and performance were separate entities. So you could have bad songwriters but talented musicians (like Yngwie) doing all the playing while you had the good songwriters but poor musicians (like Kurt Cobain) doing all the songwriting. Sure, you had your occasional Bob Dylan, but this was an exception rather than the rule. Johnny Cash didn't write "Ring of Fire". After The Beatles, this became less and less the case. Bands were expected in many cases to write their own material. The response from the labels was to favor songwriting over musicianship (probably the right choice).

Then there was the other part of it.

In the late 60s, rock music had taken over the planet. A lot of the bands for the first and only time in history became bigger than their record labels. Then the executives suddenly realized that guys like Keith Moon weren't the most professional of individuals in their business dealings. Bands would cancel tours without notice because one of the members decides to vacation in Venezuela for a few months, and cost their labels millions of dollars. The response was for future signings to be put on short leashes, and in many cases, royally screw the bands over. Well, that's not entirely fair; labels were royally screwing bands (Chuck Berry) before rock music turned a few of them into all-time legends.

So what we have today is bands needing to be both talented enough as musicians to perform their songs live well and being able to write good songs. They can't be too original (never could) because that's risky business. Meanwhile, they have to be upstanding of character enough that they won't flake out on the label. They have to be foolish enough to sign a contract that all but requires them to go Platinum with each album in order for the band members to earn a decent living. Oh, and the label is breathing over their necks the entire time to be absolutely sure the band doesn't slip up. The result is... mainstream music as it is today.
Please don't assume I care enough about your guitar rig, your general thoughts on life, the funny things people have said about you, or anything else not related to the topic at hand to have the view signatures option turned on. I don't.
#15
Quote by FlyingBeerman
I blame The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and The Who, but mostly The Beatles.

Please hear me out...

Before The Beatles songwriting and performance were separate entities. So you could have bad songwriters but talented musicians (like Yngwie) doing all the playing while you had the good songwriters but poor musicians (like Kurt Cobain) doing all the songwriting. Sure, you had your occasional Bob Dylan, but this was an exception rather than the rule. Johnny Cash didn't write "Ring of Fire". After The Beatles, this became less and less the case. Bands were expected in many cases to write their own material. The response from the labels was to favor songwriting over musicianship (probably the right choice).

Then there was the other part of it.

In the late 60s, rock music had taken over the planet. A lot of the bands for the first and only time in history became bigger than their record labels. Then the executives suddenly realized that guys like Keith Moon weren't the most professional of individuals in their business dealings. Bands would cancel tours without notice because one of the members decides to vacation in Venezuela for a few months, and cost their labels millions of dollars. The response was for future signings to be put on short leashes, and in many cases, royally screw the bands over. Well, that's not entirely fair; labels were royally screwing bands (Chuck Berry) before rock music turned a few of them into all-time legends.

So what we have today is bands needing to be both talented enough as musicians to perform their songs live well and being able to write good songs. They can't be too original (never could) because that's risky business. Meanwhile, they have to be upstanding of character enough that they won't flake out on the label. They have to be foolish enough to sign a contract that all but requires them to go Platinum with each album in order for the band members to earn a decent living. Oh, and the label is breathing over their necks the entire time to be absolutely sure the band doesn't slip up. The result is... mainstream music as it is today.


wow nice, u are completely right my friend it all came clear once i read this.