time for moz to do a little growin' up

Nebraska is incredible

The weed today is just too damn strong.

jamiethekiller wrote:Nebraska is incredible

i read the thread backwards and thought this was an opinion on the state and was like 'yeah that makes sense for this thread'.

mozartpc27 wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Billy Joel is the very worst prominent recording artist of all time.

This is wrong, because the answer is Journey.

Not a fan of The Boss either, outside of Nebraska, which is a great album.

Never cared for Springsteen though my oldest friend worshipped him since he started.
Journey - yuck!
Billy Joel was of a time - and it doesn't hold up. Not really my bag either then or now.

What fascinates me - and I live now, in a small town of 7500, Hippie Capital of the world in the 60's rivaling even Haight Ashbury. Out in this town, there are still a large group of people who are stuck in 45 years ago ethos. Grateful Dead, etc... it cracks me up.

It's as if in 1972 someone said, "yeah man, I'm still down with that Al Jolson track from '37" -

Rock-n-Roll is dead. The data metrics are easy now - and pop and hip-hop dominate -- it's if somehow 5 decades of people have this notion that music means a "band" with guitar, bass, drums, maybe a keyboard and vocals... there's a lot more out there than that format. I like a nice acoustic track here and there - and a nice singer-songwriter or alt-band from time to time - but if I never hear the majority of older bands from the 70's especially - the little shabby gym I belong to in town - ONLY plays rock from 1970-1980... it's brutal... I don't need to hear Bad Company BTO, Nazareth and Wishbone Ash - let alone Journey, Eagles, Supertramp, ELO, EVER AGAIN!!

you're stuck in 45 years ago ethos, playback track draft classes.
memory lanes all come from the same place

So how old should a band be before you shouldn't like them anymore?

Slowhand wrote:So how old should a band be before you shouldn't like them anymore?

As we age, many people find themselves enjoying music they listened to in the late teens and early twenties a lot. And that's fine. But it's pretty narrow minded to say "the music in those days was so much better than it is today."

I tend to listen a lot more to music from that time in my life than is warranted by its relative quality. However, I also pretty much still dislike bands from that era I disliked then. And, unfortunately, that's a lot of the music that is played on "80s" stations today. So I don't hate Billy Joel (or Journey) because it's old, I hate it because it sucks. (OK, maybe Billy Joel pre "Scenes from an Italian Restaurant" doesn't suck, but you hardly ever hear that stuff.)Then there are lots of songs (Stairway to Heaven, Like a Rolling Stone, Satisfaction) that I once liked, but I never need to hear again. (In general, and in fitting with the "unpopular opinions" theme, these are the songs that often show up near the top of the "greatest songs of all times" list. There's also tons of stuff that simply doesn't really hold up or sounds dated. There's also a lot of stuff that goes in and out of fashion, much of which deserves reconsideration. (It seems the Beach Boys for instance have a much higher reputation now than they did in the 80s.) Finally, there's a tiny number of true classics, songs that still seem somehow relevant (at least to me) today--much of Buddy Holly's work, the Beatles at their best, Prince at his best, Otis Redding, and so forth.

I would also say that few bands make compelling music for much more than 10 years, though there are exceptions. So when a band decides to tour, probably what most of their audience wants is their old hits. It's probably easier to keep making decent music if you're a solo act, but Springsteen fans are still going to want to hear "Born to Run" no matter how silly it sounds coming from a successful sexagenarian.

classic rock radio is a special case outside of some equation like 'music should be retired after X years'

if you're still thrilled by Slow Ride or American Woman after hearing them one million times with each of those listens carrying an opportunity cost, I think it's fair to say you're doing it wrong

TenuredVulture wrote:I would also say that few bands make compelling music for much more than 10 years, though there are exceptions.

that's a silly thing to say

Houshphandzadeh wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:I would also say that few bands make compelling music for much more than 10 years, though there are exceptions.

that's a silly thing to say

Well, most bands hang it up well before 10 years are up, so maybe you're right.

yes, if you're talking relatively among everyone who ever picked up a guitar, it's few, even though there are thousands of musicians and bands with multi-decade inspired careers

gotta qualify every fuckin thing around here

Houshphandzadeh wrote:yes, if you're talking relatively among everyone who ever picked up a guitar, it's few, even though there are thousands of musicians and bands with multi-decade inspired careers

gotta qualify every fuckin thing around here

Also should qualify things that don't fuck.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:classic rock radio is a special case outside of some equation like 'music should be retired after X years'

if you're still thrilled by Slow Ride or American Woman after hearing them one million times with each of those listens carrying an opportunity cost, I think it's fair to say you're doing it wrong

Why do people listen to music? Is it to feel an emotional connection? Is it to be surprised, like the first time you watch Mission Impossible or some movie like that? Is it to travel back to a different time, and remember how it felt to be a certain age?

You and I are around the same age, and I suspect that when I hear certain 90s songs in my car, I will never change the station (Yes, I still listen to the radio). Wonderwall. Semi-charmed life. It's not that these are the best songs ever, but they still bring joy to listen to them. It reminds me of youth, and I know all the words, and I don't want to be "challenged" by new music all the time. I don't want to listen to 21 pilots and OneRepublic on repeat, even though I'm a big fan of their music.

I feel like you're just calling me judgmental (which is fair) and then throwing out the baby with the bathwater. do you really not think the classic rock format is pretty bankrupt at this point? there's a middle ground between indulging nostalgia sometimes and not adding anything to the rotation for 30 years or even expanding perspectives on the 70s era they're focused on. I'm not saying everyone has to listen to noise rock all the time

Not my intent to accuse you. Merely defending folks who like to listen to the music of their youth. That may be us in 20 years.

As an aside, would "classic rock" be as popular today if it didn't have a cool name like "classic rock?" What do we call a station that plays stuff from the 90s? (Don't say "garbage") An era needs to be branded for its music to last... it's helpful to be able to easily answer the question "what kind of music do you listen to?" with a phrase that denotes both era and style of music.

I think people listen to what they like to listen to. Some of that is because of familiarity. That's pretty much the only reason people still care about Bret Michaels around here.

I have tried to find new music to like every year, but talking to a lot of my contemporaries, they just say, "today's music sucks", and that's it. That being said, I'm really into the Pillar Point album now.

Classic Rock a few years ago was just 60s and 70s. Now it's extended- my local "Classic Rock" station even plays Counting Crows. I think that's a little ridiculous.

popular music has always been and will always be marketed toward a younger demographic, so most people will latch onto older stuff because it's what was made for them when they were in that bracket. it also becomes harder and harder to keep up with new and interesting music as we get older. it's why classic rock stations change their rotations just like top 40 stations do.

Camden Yards is a fucking dump and a terrible place to see a baseball game for the most part.

jamiethekiller wrote:Camden Yards is a fucking dump and a terrible place to see a baseball game for the most part.

Oh wow this is a real hot one