wikipedia says the genre's been around since the 90's. I've never even heard of it. A band I really like calls their genre "Polytechnic cajun slam grass". Not very crowded in that circle.....but, I suppose it means there's a genre for everyone.
Well, im sure youve heard the Foo Fighters, Creed, Stereo Fuse, Marcy Playground, Bush, Audioslave, Goo Goo Dolls, Matchbox 20... the list goes on...
Well in that case, I loved it because that would include bands such as Neutral Milk Hotel, Pavement, My Bloody Valentine, The Hold Steady, Built To Spill, Guided By Voices, Elliot Smith, Modest Mouse, The Dismemberment Plan, Slint, and many many more. People really underrate the 90s music scene as a whole. The 90s brought us power pop and boy bands which put a huge scar on music forever, but if you do your research, you will find some really innovative bands that sound eerily similar to the minimal styles of the best bands of today.
I was thinking about this the other day, it's funny how music is evolving (for lack of a better term). People and many radio stations still play 80's hair band music like it was still 1989. To a lesser extend, 90's music including grunge is still getting some airtime. 2000-2010 is like a big blank in the music scene, nothing. Obviously some people will disagree but I believe as a whole this is true. Right now I believe we are at a crossroads in the music scene, a new style of music needs to be born to rejuvenate peoples interest in new music.
2000-2010 has been the golden age for music. Not because it's better per say, but because of the access that the common person has to millions of bands via the internet. Before the internet, there were some incredibly unique and creative bands, but nobody heard of them because they did not have the resources to get their sound out. Nowadays, if you are good, some music blog will discover you, start pimping you, and before long you are all over the big blogs (Stereogum, Pitchfork, Aquarium Drunkard, etc). I discover new bands every week. In the 90s, the only way to discover a new band was for them to tour through your town or word of mouth. We were all relegated to MTV and local FM radio.
A lot of it has to do with age. Once you reach a certain age, "new" music begins to sound worse and worse. At least this seems to be the case with most people. I'm not exactly sure what the magic age is when people think, "they don't make good music anymore"...but it does exist.
Very true, and I often wonder when they day will come that I no longer have time to sit on the interwebz hours at a time searching for new bands and reading blogs. I'll just stare at my vinyl collection and mutter to myself about the good ol' days when musicians experimented with new sounds and layering instead of writing formulaic songs in order to on an iPad commercial.
It's funny you say that because this proves that bands from this era don't have the longevity that prior years do. Of the bands you've quoted so far, how many of these bands do you hear on mainstream radio today? Keeping in mind that radio stations are a business so they are going to go where the markets are.
I agree with this. There are so many bands that we have access to nowadays, that it will be difficult for the "super" bands to exist of the magnitude of a U2. Everyone wants to find the new, hot bands. Once a band becomes overexposed, it's no longer cool to like them. If a band is good, then they are good. I don't care if they are overexposed or not. The bands I quoted earlier were popular (in certain demographics) in the last 90s. None of them received heavy mainstream radio time. Does that mean their quality of music was lesser than bands that received heavy mainstream radio play? In the late 90s, boy bands ruled. Are you saying that they were the greatest bands of that era? Mainstream radio appeals to the lowest denominator. I hate the "nobody had ever heard of them, so they can't be any good" argument so very much. It's the epitome of ignorance.
I'm sure they had they had their fans, but everyone has their own tastes, I can't understand why everyone doesn't love the first 5 years of AC/DC when Bon Scott was the lead singer but not everyone does. I personally hate boy bands, but obviously someone like them because of the popularity in the 90's. You can argue that mainstream radio appeal to the lowest denominator but the fact is they go where the money is and play what people want to hear, that's how they make money. Obviously not everyone is going to listen to this, including you but if playing Neutral Milk Hotel and Pavement was going to make them money, then they would play it. Does this mean they aren't any good? If they didn't have talent then no one would have heard of them at all - obviously some people are listening to them. If you define this as the epitome of ignorance then I would love to have your life...... Actually I never said anything near this, in fact I said the opposite. I said a new style of music needs to be born to rejuvenate peoples interest. The fact is, all music styles will have some fans, otherwise they wouldn't exist, but just because you or I like them, doesn't mean squat to anyone else. One thing though, in todays digital world, it's easier than ever to be discovered. Look at justin beeber. Also my original point was about the longevity of music, not the popularity - big difference.
