*** Post-1979 Album Draft - Commentary Thread ***

[BuckyBuckner]

See the "new " Mith and Bucky agree quite often

Haha. In all seriousness, I've always felt that if we met in person we'd get along just fine. I'm glad you are back.

[johnnya24]

The question should be then...will 16 year old kids be rushing out to hear the latest Radiohead record or Arcade Fire record in 20 years?

Why not both.

We all go back don't we. We've all done the Beatles, Floyd, Stones, Dylan thing. You can throw Radiohead into that mix for sure. Arcade Fire ... they will probably be there if they keep going.

Other post 1980 bands who meet some of the 4 criteria (longevity, popularity, continuous quality, current relevance):

REM ... 30 years, 14 good-great records, 1 average record. Still headlining festivals 30 years later.
U2 ... gigantic unit. But I think the U2 draft showed that the quality of music overall doesn't match their popularity. Especially post Actung Baby.
Metallica ... huge ... their early work will always be relevant, like The Beatles or Zep. But their post-1990 releases aren't anything special.

Who else?

RHCP ... popular, but too musically erratic.
Pearl Jam ... longevity, popularity ... but not really making groundbreaking music since the late 90's.
Nirvana / Pixies etc ... weren't around long enough in their prime.

If nothing else, it shows how radically the music industry changed after the late 70's. It's also interesting how the classic rock guys still revere these 70's rock giants, who went on to create some fucking awful music. People have selective memories. The Stones are a great example. If you dared to say Radiohead or REM are better than the Stones, a classic rock guy would bust a vein ... it just doesn't compute. The Stones early stuff is pure fluff, they had 5 records from 1968-1973 when they were brilliant, then 30 years of irrelevant shit. Their fame is as much from the fact that they were around at the right time. I don't get how a band that has released as much tripe as The Stones can be regarded as so much better than the bands that came afterwards ... who didn't release tripe.

[johnnya24]

What does Rush' popularity in today's music scene have to do with a discussion of GOAT band? The greatest band of all time, LED ZEPPELIN, aren't relevant to today's audience either Rush's last album "Clockwork Angels" is a blast of hard rock. Probably their best album in 30 years, so they still can make a damn good record.

As far as pushing boundaries goes, that might not always be a good thing.

I just don't see the fascination with Radiohead. And the more i think about them, the more they seem to fit the same mold as Rush does in that they have a dedicated group of followers, probably white males in their 20's and 30's..and are they relevant to today's music scene, i don't know...except Radiohead are darlings of the all-important critics

This fake comparison between Rush and Radiohead et al is quite amusing ... huge congrats for smuggling an almost irrelevant act into the discussion! You should get extra points for that

I wonder how many festivals would have gone bankrupt over the last 20 years if Rush were the headline act. Stick Radiohead, REM, U2, Metallica, Arcade Fire on the poster it'll sell out. Put Rush on the headline ... you'll get 500 50 year guys with washed-out official tour T-shirts from 1981

[johnnya24]

Radiohead are extremely overrated. They are far from the greatest band of all time. To suggest they are is laughable.

Sounds like you're ready to put your money where your mouth is ... Bucky's list of the greatest bands ever are:

[revo]

This fake comparison between Rush and Radiohead et al is quite amusing ... huge congrats for smuggling an almost irrelevant act into the discussion! You should get extra points for that

I wonder how many festivals would have gone bankrupt over the last 20 years if Rush were the headline act. Stick Radiohead, REM, U2, Metallica, Arcade Fire on the poster it'll sell out. Put Rush on the headline ... you'll get 500 50 year guys with washed-out official tour T-shirts from 1981

Oh puh-leeze. Rush is getting inducted into the Rock HOF in a couple of months, while "Radiohead" CDs will be as valuable as my Hideo Nomo rookie cards in 20 years.

[johnnya24]

Oh puh-leeze. Rush is getting inducted into the Rock HOF in a couple of months, while "Radiohead" CDs will be as valuable as my Hideo Nomo rookie cards in 20 years.

Ahem ... I get that you don't like them. But I'd be careful saying something like that in case someone replies "wanna bet" ... and then ... "so how much have you got?"

Rush belong in the HoF. I don't have any doubt about that. Then again, they have been eligible since 1999, so it's not like there has been a mad sprint to get them in.

[Fresno Bob]

It's crazy to me that my 16 year old nephews listen to Zep and Pink Floyd, it would be like me listening to Glenn Miller and big band stuff when I was 16

[swampdragon]

This radiohead/rush argument is interesting/silly and just shows how much opinions (personal and critics) can be a huge part of music

I get it, you both adore your respective favorite bands - and that is OK

[Mithrandir]

Haha. In all seriousness, I've always felt that if we met in person we'd get along just fine. I'm glad you are back.

Agreed.

[Erik]

Ok, then. Can we get to the next topic at hand: 311 sucks.

[ManCalledFoot]

It's crazy to me that my 16 year old nephews listen to Zep and Pink Floyd, it would be like me listening to Glenn Miller and big band stuff when I was 16

It is crazy, I think about that all the time, but there was a paradigm shift in popular music when electronic amplification entered the picture right after the big band era, making Glenn Miller an instant relic. That basic loud-guitar sound of the late 60s-early 70s is still the template for modern rock today, it really hasn't moved on that much. Kids into rock today can move throughout the last 4 decades without much variance.

Reminds me to post this one, it had me roaring with laughter. You could have easily inserted my 13-year-old daughter into this:

[DMT]

Ok, then. Can we get to the next topic at hand: 311 sucks.

I guess 'even though they're pretty much shite now' wasn't clear enough if you thought this would induce an argument from me (or anyone else).

[BuckyBuckner]

Ok, then. Can we get to the next topic at hand: 311 sucks.

Agreed. It's interesting that when you have a band that is great like the Beastie Boys who create a new sound with rap/rock that all the bands that try this sound are just awful. I've yet to hear another rap/rock band that is even remotely listenable.

[BuckyBuckner]

Sounds like you're ready to put your money where your mouth is ... Bucky's list of the greatest bands ever are:

Thin Lizzy

[revo]

It's crazy to me that my 16 year old nephews listen to Zep and Pink Floyd, it would be like me listening to Glenn Miller and big band stuff when I was 16

I've been a big Beatle fan since I was 10, and when I was 14-15 or so, I split my radio listening equally between Top 40, Classic Rock & pure Oldies. I'd go every few months to Tower Records in the Village to get 45s of obscure '60s and '70s tunes. And I distinctly recall among my first few cassette purchases were the greatest hits albums of The Lovin' Spoonful and The Rascals. I also gravitated towards older bands that were still producing hits then, like The Who, The Kinks, The Stones, etc.

By the time I got to college I was pretty much pure classic rock, but I had basically come to the conclusion then that hell, good music is good music and it didn't matter when it was recorded. I didn't feel forced to listen to whatever was popular at the time, and as I noted before, my neighborhood in Brooklyn didn't get wired for cable until the mid-90s, so I didn't have MTV or VH1 to influence anything.

And heck -- my 6 year old already loves the Beatles!