When exactly did rock n' roll die?

Here, here!!:hat:......and I DO HONESTLY believe that when all this crappy hullaballoo over Jacko's HIGHLY OVERRATEDmusic and death fades away (King of Pop my ass!!)....because it will FADE AWAY, rock'n'roll will be the sole survivor like it has shown us over the many moons since its outbreak in the 50s

 

I think the answer is a matter of opinion...

Personally, I think the best music came out in the 60's & 70's...

And in early to mid 80's, you noticed music took a nose dive...

late 80's were pretty bad...

In the 90's the music scene got a little better...

and in the 2000's music in general was at a all time low...

the last 10 years good new music was rare & hard to find...

All of this is my ''opinion'', of course.

(((I don't even know if I answered the question or not? - but there you go anyway!)))

 

:cheers2::cheers2:WOW PR.....I couln't have summed up all that better myself!!!! In MY book, you answered the question VERY well. In a nutshell, the 80s could have been safely REMOVED....musically speaking of course...off the calendar!! They did nothing to renew the music and were plastic musically, politically and socially....there ya go!

 

9/11/2001

 

Naaaaw!! I believe r'n'r survived that one too!!:toetap05:

 

This thread gets a bit retarded. Why don't we come with facts or proof like people do generally when the question rises if something died.

 

^ well, where's the facts?

Again, I think it's a matter of opinion for this particular question.

I don't think you can look up answer on Wikipedia.

It's just conversation...for fun.

 

Wikipedia

I'll post some good proof that it's far from dead tomorrow

 

There's really no proof to produce on this matter.....it's hard-boiled facts.....just like the sun rises up every morning.....I know, I know, they are scientific facts that can be proved, but it's also true that Albert Einstein said: "Everything is RELATIVE" .
One thing is for sure though, I'm NEVER gonna riduculize myself LIKE JACKO FANS ARE DOING...by stating that MJ is the King of Pop because he can dance better than any other artist, sing better than any other singer and is a complete showman....now that's what I call SHEER silliness and ignorance on the matter of music. MJ fans had better come up with WAY BETTER "proof" that he was the K.O.P.!!

 

What are you blathering about? This thread is about rock 'n roll and proof the worth of an unofficial title like the 'king of pop' is a total different thing compared to the death of a genre.



For the rock 'n roll lovers who are tragicaly misguided, here's some proof rock 'n roll only died in your mind:



Endless Boogie - Focus level



Siena Root - Kaleidoscope



Dead Man - selftitled



Greenleaf - Revolution rock


These bands did all start in the by some people proclaimed dark age of rock , they're alive and kicking and these albums are all from this millenium.
I refrained from putting details about genre and descriptions since I might get lost in it and miss the point. Anyway, this is what rock today is all about. Not solely of course, there's still all the other kinds of rock (from Radiohead and RHCP to U2 and indie rock, etc. etc.) you might have encountered and liked or disliked and may convinced you real rock has died. I say, if you haven't heard this stuff you're opinion isn't well informed.
I'm kinda sorry I can't provide the links to the albums but it didn't work out. Ah well, that's how it went in the golden years as well: search and find this stuff yourself. It's not too hard at all.

 

^ See, that's not proof that rock isn't dead...

to some - those bands could be the reasons why they think rock is dead. (LOL!)

BTW, I'm not saying those bands suck or anything, because I haven't heard of them...

Also, I'm NOT saying rock is dead - it's just on life support...

the ''glory days'' of Rock & Roll are over, in my opinion.

 

Can you really pinpoint the exact time of anyone or thing's death? Wouldn't it be reduced to some kind of singularity as time dwindles down to some kind of nonexistence? Are consciousness and time intertwined and inseparable, and, if so, is death a possibility?

So I don't know.

 

The glory days that it was new and in the picture are over indeed, the glory days of experiment and grooving I'm not sure about.
And I can see that these albums could be the reason for some people why they think rock is dead, because I know I had the same feeling when exploring todays rock scenes and I was deeply dissappointed since I liked my rock 'n roll also more like the stuff I knew . BUT these albums are not in the picture and if you don't look for them you haven't heard it. And it can only be the reason why they consider rock 'n roll dead when they have checked it. How can you say it's dead if you don't listen to it, right?

 

That's what bothered me about the statement in the first place. I can fully understand people thinking rock is dead because most modern rock is quite dissappointing for me as well if I compare it to my favourite bands from the past. Point is, there's more out there that is still refreshing but also closer to original rock (blues rock, space rock, prog rock, hard rock, psychedelic rock, crossovers, etc.) than most of today's rock that might made the people here think it has died.

 

Yes, but I never said ''rock is dead'' - personally, I just think it's in a sad and sorry state.

I don't think ''rock'' music will die, it will live on forever, like classical music (Beethoven, Mozart, etc)

Also, I do think there is still new good rock music being made today, BUT it's hard to find.

And that's the worst point - you have to check out tons & tons & TONS of new crappy new rock bands just to find ONE decent new rock band - and who has time for that?

The market is flooded with lame wanna-be rock stars. So, it's very easy for a rock music fan (of any age) to think rock is dead - so, I can fully understand when someone says ''rock is dead''. I won't argue too hard with their opinion.

BTW, when I get a chance, I'll check out some of those bands, but to be honest I've been let down by so many new bands that people have recommended to me (telling me they're ''pretty good'' and ''they rock''), my expectation level is not too high - but hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

I hope you like them as much as I of course, let me know please! I am aware it all depends on your personal view on good rock.

Yes, it's a fact it's hard to find and there's lots of rock being promoted that doesn't fullfill rock fans needs. That's a big bummer, because it does take time and a little bit effort to find the good stuff. Although I also find that if you're a bit into it and found the channels (good blogs, for instance, or other review websites, and a good download program or a little insight in rapidshare so you can give it a good listen) it's relatively easy to keep abreast of the latest releases.
Rock is much diverse then in the early decades and it's only logical only a part of it suits your taste. Same here. But I find it such bullshit to proclaim it dead if you never heard of for example these bands. I only listed 4 now because I couldn't add more sleeves but it's only the top of the iceberg :biggrin:

By the way I ment 'you' in general in that former post where I quoted you!

 

Wait a minute, this argument is STILL going on??

*looks around, sees and hears rock n'roll everywhere, blinks*

Some people seriously need to open up and "be all ears", so to speak...

 

HIGHLY A-PPROVED MAN
Here's living proof that r'n'r arose from the OBNOXIOUS 80s (with all their Jacko (RIP) = jackass aura around them....but the DARK AGES of rock didn't keep r'n'r down and in the late 90s, bands like Hooverphonic, etc. started to point their rock antennas in the RIGHT direction....thank you beautiful people from Belgium....I saw the future of r'n'r


By blackglove at 2009-09-12

By blackglove, shot with DSC-W100 at 2009-09-14

 

:cheers2:

 

:cheers2:Right on man....and thanx for the heads up on that marvy band