#1
I was driving to work this morning and had my ipod on shuffle. The Ramones came on and I got to thinking. Do you think any older acts would be famous if they emerged in 2007? Example, if instead of coming out in the 70's the Ramones were starting in 2007, do you think they would be as famous?
#2
I think they probably not be as famous because they woudn't be "mainstream"
That or they would be famous but complete sell-outs
hue
#3
The circumstances have a huge role in success to. Think the era, the music that hadn't yet existed, etc. So no, I wouldn't say so at all.
Don't tell me what can not be done

Don't tell me what can be done, either.



I love you all no matter what.
#4
Quote by nightwind
The circumstances have a huge role in success to. Think the era, the music that hadn't yet existed, etc. So no, I wouldn't say so at all.



Thats my thinking.
#5
I think about this sometimes.. Like I think if Oasis emerged today absolutely nobody would listen I don't think.

About the Ramones, I think there's too much bullshit that's come out of pop punk that is around today for them to make such a huge impact like they did back then
#6
things like the ramones were different then. It was something new. if the ramones were 18 now, they'd probably be playing local clubs and would probably give up on the band by the time they were 25
#7
I think today they'd probably be underground, but they wouldn't be as popular cos they wouldn't be original.

Actually, if you think about it....if the Ramones didn't exist back then, would Punk music ever have become popular in america?

I am pretty sure, however, that if you take their greatest hits and publish them again tomorrow, they'll be at the top of the charts, without young people realising that this is what some of their parents used to headbang to.
#9
The major labels don't take risks with original music anymore; they would have been an underground success, but the only way to make it on a major label these days is to copy someone else, which they never did.
Death to Ovation haters!
#10
They would probably not be the same style of music and they probably wouldnt have influenced many people. I think that all the time... but with metallica and stuff... what would the music we listen to today be like if all the major bands who defined genres were not to have done so?
#11
I'd buy thier records! They'ed be better then that sh*t they play on the radio...

On a non-personal note , I think they would have had some success, think about the adverage age of people here, and how many bought thier records!

They might not have had as much success with singles though... people just dont buy them anymore!
#12
Quote by ClashCR46
I'd buy their records! They'd be better then that shit they play on the radio...

On a non-personal note , I think they would have had some success, think about the average age of people here, and how many bought their records!

They might not have had as much success with singles though... people just dont buy them anymore!


To be fair, they never had the success with singles they deserved the first time round. I think it was their insachiable knack of releasing the 'worst' possible songs as singles. I mean, they could have released songs like 'California Sun' or 'I wanna be your boyfriend', but instead they released 'Carbona not Glue'.


As stated before, I think that if they were just starting out today they'd be just another underground pop-punk band. Or they'd have been signed up to some major label and be on MTV - and everyone would call them sell-outs.
Which is dumb, because Joey in particular always said he wanted to write hit singles.
Super Leeds and Classy Cas!
#13
people would listen to it because its punk rock -- vocal and repetitive.


thats the kinda music on the airwaves now.