Silver Negus
Group: Members
Posts: 357
Joined: Sep. 2007 |
|
Posted: Aug. 27 2009, 13:07 |
|
Quote (Scatterplot @ Aug. 27 2009, 12:57) | When I answered the thread, my thinking of "rock" is 4/4 time, guitars/bass/drums/vocals, commercial enough for FM airplay. Perhaps Silver should have provided a more clear definition of "rock". But she did cleverly open the door for a thread with much discussion and debate(we like that). "Rock" as I once knew it is almost dead. Years ago, it was decided "heavy metal" was a seperate genre. MO, while "rock", I consider "art-rock" like YES, Genesis, PF, all of whom -did- have moments of real "rock" or "rock n roll". I am old, which means words like "indie" mean crap to me. WTF is that? Indian? The motorcycle? The country? Native Americans? See? The label "rock" made sense in say, 1974. We would think of the Stones. Today, there is so much diversity in cultures(all relocating due to wars), we don't know WTF we are listening to! So, I simply defer to Journey and Grand Funk Railroad. That was "Rock". So was the Who, barring arty rock opera. Led Zep, Bad Company(thats rock!. Doobie brothers(the band -before- Mike Mcdonald. That's rock. Early Beatles(cavern club).....thats rock n roll. Whatever, it's to me, a commercially radio-play attractable product in 4/4 time, using 5th intervals a lot. It makes your toes tap. It makes you want to roll a doobie or drink a beer. Thats rock. |
I'm a wazzock! I didnt specify. To be honest I've been having a bad few months and I'm tired.
I did a zine on prog rock this year. Do we have to have a debate on what type of music fits in which criteria? You know if I have an opinion I'll get eaten alive if I get it wrong!
|