Is Rock dead?

[Ajax Knucklebones]

It always seemed my whole life this question was asked over and over and then some band rooted in rock would pop up and land on the top 10 billboard chart and the question would dissipate. Over the last several years though, I've noticed that not one band that I can think of that could somehow fall into the genre of "rock" has made the top 10. I know there's rock bands out there that are popular and have a pretty good following of fans, but none that I can think of that great commercial success. So, do any of you think the rock genre is finally slowly digging it's own grave?

[mystoo]

I'm waiting for something great to happen too. So far, nothing. I have faith though. Down with Justin Bieber!

[Raza]

I don't see what a genre being dead or alive has to do with commercial success. The question misses the point of artistic and cultural advancement.

[Mr Karl]

Rock isn't dead, it's just been around for a while and like most old rockers I know takes more naps

[Ajax Knucklebones]

I don't see what a genre being dead or alive has to do with commercial success. The question misses the point of artistic and cultural advancement.

I wasn't going for artistic or cultural advancement. That's besides my point. Being in the top ten has nothing to do with artistic or cultural advancement in my book. I think it's just that I'm afraid the more the rock avoids the headlines, so to speak, the less anybody will think about it and thus it could eventually die away. I don't want a future filled with just Biebers, Gagas, and Katy Perrys

[Mr Karl]

. I don't want a future filled with just Biebers, Gagas, and Katy Perrys

don't worry, they'll be replaced, just like new wave was, of course it probably won't be an improvement, it rarely is

[incog]

There may be fewer new rock bands, but rock is still rocking the Billboard charts. Linkin Park is number one. Robert Plant is number five. Weezer and Brandon Flowers are maybe debatable, but still very rock-influenced and on the top 10 chart. If you go to top 20, you add Disturbed and Stone Sour.

[VoldtaEngler]

Even though rock type bands don't get onto the billboard charts as much here in the USA, there are still other countries charts that are more well rounded that range from everything like Katy Perry and Ministry to Eminem & Cannibal Corpse all on the same chart. So if it's "dead" here, it's alive and well in Berlin. :^p

[Raza]

I wasn't going for artistic or cultural advancement. That's besides my point. Being in the top ten has nothing to do with artistic or cultural advancement in my book. I think it's just that I'm afraid the more the rock avoids the headlines, so to speak, the less anybody will think about it and thus it could eventually die away. I don't want a future filled with just Biebers, Gagas, and Katy Perrys

Yeah... you can say that, but you're still using 'dead' and 'die away'. Which don't apply while artistic and cultural advancement exist, which do not rely on top X charts.

Not being in the headlines won't kill it. 'F'anything, it stands every chance of making it better.

[Rockwulf]

No, I'm fine. I just don't come around much.

[Morning Glory]

It was killed by paper.

[TheDeathKnight]

The "history" of music is an interesting thing.

There are always these big breakthroughs, where some new style gets invented,
and it changes the whole playing field. Like Mozart, or Elvis.

I think rock and roll was one of the more recent forms of music that
introduced the whole rock guitar thing. That whole guitar sound thing.
And it was new, and awesome, and spawned tons of variations.

But it almost seems like once you explore all the variations,
it becomes the norm. Rock guitar is present in pop music,
country music, and everything else. So it seems like almost
any kind of rock music that comes out nowadays is going
to sound like something we've all heard before.

It seems like now pop music and rap music is about coming up
with a new loop or a new sound effect, that is catchy. Because
it's easier to come up with a new sound effect loop, than it is
to come up with a new rock guitar sound. That's why pop
is king right now. Because it's easy to come up with some
new loop or sample that is catchy. And of course there
is always the whole vocal variation. But all the music
is pretty much the same underneath. Same beats,
same style. Just with different singers, different sound effects, etc.

I really think we are over-saturated with ideas, content,
and styles. Anything and everything you might want is
out there. So many musical styles. So nothing is really
going to sound "new". So it's hard to shock people,
and get them excited about your music. I really wonder
if there will be something like that again. Like the introduction
of rock music... Something totally new, energetic, etc.

I see people being into different kinds of music, but nothing
where the whole culture suddenly gets steamrolled by some
new style that comes out of nowhere. I remember that happening
with Nirvana. But since then, it's been pretty much a slow progression,
with no big changes. You can see something like LadyGaga, as a big
new sensation, but the music itself isn't totally new and groundbreaking.
It's not changing the whole landscape of the music industry or anything.
I just wonder if that will happen again. It's kind of exciting when it does
happen, but it's been a long time...

[Mr Karl]

also, there are only so many notes in an octave so you've only got so many harmonious variations...........

[Morning Glory]

I predict the next big thing in music will be people farting into a microphone.

But really, the "new sound" that everyone's looking for is just that. There has been experiments with adding new sounds to music, such as the "noise" genre and in the age of computers the possibilities are greater than ever before. But that never really caught on into the mainstream. Raza was right in pointing out that making art and making money aren't synonymous, but there does seem to be a trend here. DK's mention of Lady Gaga is a good point of reference. Most popular music sounds the same. Most people seem to like music that sounds the same.

There's no difference between music and sound, or rather music and noise. It's just a limited number of frequencies that get the distinction of being called art and those tend to be recognized pretty universally among human culture. I'm sure that there are studies on why the brain finds certain sounds to be pleasing. I'd like to read those.

[Raza]

That limited number of frequencies would be enormous, though. The neurological basis for appreciation of aesthetic responds to patterns - or even just the relationship between any two sensory pings - rather than specific strings. Any of these can be combined and recombined, and then all of those can be executed with different sounds that share the same relative relationships, and then all of those can (and will have to) be matched with elements from the side of aesthetic appreciation that is cultural/intellectual/nurture-based.

Then keep in mind that there is no given start, no required finish and that all these sounds can also be complemented with visual (or any other sensory form) elements which have equally many possibilities off and by themselves... the options may not be infinite, but we are talking indefinitely many multiplications here. The final number of possible unique pleasant auditory experiences is more than likely one of a magnitude that we do not have a word for.

[Mr Karl]

There's no difference between music and sound, or rather music and noise..

not anymore... but wasn't there a whole philosophy based on the mathematics to do with the tonal vibrations and all that stuff, pythagoras stuff or around that time?

[Buster Friendly]

No, I'm fine. I just don't come around much.

Yeah that's about where I'm at.

Dreamt I posted here last night, so here it is bitches.

[Ajax Knucklebones]

Yeah that's about where I'm at.

Dreamt I posted here last night, so here it is bitches.

You need to do better things in your dreams.