Jump to content

We're due a BIG band....


MrBen

Recommended Posts

With The Stone Roses reforming and Noel Gallagher's Flying Birds released last week I can't help but think we've been stuck in a period of stale musical rehash that comes along every decade or so.


I can't recall it being this bad since the days of Jazzy Jeff, Alannah Myles and Madonna in.... 1990.


Are we not due for a massive band to break that would form the soundtracks to our lives? A modern day Stones, a recessionary slap in the face from a Pistols equivalent, a new New Order....hell...even a new Blur would be great.


All the ingredients are here...economic gloom, world strife, and a mass market neutered by X Factor. Can a BIG, IMPORTANT FOR ITS TIME rock band ever emerge again?


Or is it just how we all feel getting older? (I hope not)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arf! It'd just be history repeating itself. The last time we had similar circumstances (recession, lack of jobs, no money) the punk scene exploded but that was 35 years ago. More musical rehashing if does. There's always room for expressing the times though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I wouldn't look up to them, and think they were so cool now, probably because I'm older than most of them. The Arctic Monkeys for example, my main problem with them was the fact that I thought they were annoying little scrotes, rather than any problem with their music.


Hot Fuss by The Killers was huge for me, but I guess that was a while ago now, so I was only mid 20s.


Anyway, I'm still 2 years off 35, so I'm like, way cooler than you B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost everyone is way cooler than me Otta, and you certainly are.


My main issue with the Artic Monkeys was that they sounded shite live. The BIG bands that I'm talking about (and craving) all nailed it live. The Stones still do, even if watching them at the O2, in a padded armchair and eating free hot dogs is a world away from a rough arsed south london club circa 1964.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'd expect a technology-based innovation to

> unexpectedly bring about something genuinely new

> and different.

>

> As it happens, if you've got a spare $6000, you

> can buy it already.


But that's 24 years old *Bob*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not everyone is as swift to embrace the future as they ought to be, Jah. But give it another fifty years or so and mark my words - magical musical instruments which instantly open a dimensional portal to anywhere in the galaxy - will be two a penny.


And all this business about these polar monkeys and their silly guitars will be soon forgotten.


Keith Richards will have one, of course - because The Stones will still be playing (the O3)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> doubt it will happen anyway - it's not a

> generational thing to look at the music business

> in 2011 and see that it's highly unlikely an

> artist can have the same impact again.


Not sure I would agree... I don't think the state of the industry would be a barrier to a band breaking through and capturing the imagination of the public. I don't remember Nirvana getting a huge marketing push.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Nirvana signed to Geffen for that record, so you may or may not remember a push but it was there. And it was (as we can't escape) 20 years ago anyway


But comparing Glenn Miller to, say, the 1990s is false. Advances like cassettes and cds changed little of the landscape. Since mid 90s and even mid 2000s, after decades of pretty much a few tv channels and radio and music albums, the landscape is significantly more fractured and varied



I don't thing that makes me gloomy or cynical btw - whatver the next "big thing" is it just won't involve keyboards or guitars. "young people's music" as a vehicle for "something big" lasted a few decades. Not bad but the world changed before it and it'll change after it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, Nirvana went major, and there was a budget for promotion, music videos, etc... but it wasn't huge. Geffen never expected Nirvana to become household names. There was a $30K-$50K budget for the Teen Spirit video - a tiny fraction of the money spent on Lady Gaga and Rihanna videos these days. But the thing proved popular on MTV, and it just took off... it was the 90s equivalent of "going viral".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

all true Jeremy - but back then MTV played music videos and people were looking for stuff


10 years later a video goes ballistic - say Hey Ya by Outkast - but does it lead to them becoming huge? Not really.


to take the Pistols argument from the OP - that was surely only possible because of the rules in place at the time. these days pretty much anything goes - if not on TV then on a billion internet sites.


Something in the shape of the pistols would be laughed out of town now


(or at the very least they would have lots of forumites solemnly asking them "what their point was" or "im sorry but if you can't articulate your message better than that then I'm afraid I don't have to listen")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True.. once you've been to a gig where mass brawling breaks-out, the police are called, the venue gets smashed-up and the artist has to scarper through the rear door for his own protection, well.. where do you go from there?



Of course that was opening of The Rite of Spring - back in 1913.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...