7 ms·

The biggest and scariest issue is that all of these celebrities are going completely unreplaced. I am a fan of rock and heavy metal, and it is clear that rock

The biggest and scariest issue is that all of these celebrities are going completely unreplaced. I am a fan of rock and heavy metal, and it is clear that rock stardom is literally dying off. The days of filling American arenas with rock concerts are quickly coming to an end, and that deeply saddens me. Where are the twenty-something kids with attitude who will replace a band like AC/DC? Is Justin Beiber the best we could do? It's pathetic. Even a guy like Bon Jovi... Who is next in that line?? Seems like nobody. It's depressing. This is why I'm going to as many shows for bands like Iron Maiden as possible right now. When it's over, rock and roll may truly be dead. This is one of those moments where I realize I'm getting old. I never understood life extention and the quest for immortality. As things change, eventually they leave you behind. Find me a 90+ year old who really cares to stay. And that's how I'm going to feel when rock and roll dies.

dominotw 10y ago
>Where are the twenty-something kids with attitude Attitude is not relavent anymore. We are all introverts now, people have wide varieties of musical tastes and preferences .there is huge amount of experimentation going on in music due to the fact that process of creating music has become much more accessible. There are tons of awesome music being produced everywhere you just have to dig deeper.
- JoBrad 10y ago
  Exactly. I personally know 3 different people who have multiple side projects where they record, mix, and produce amazing music, from their homes. It's much harder to stand out when so many people have great music.
derefr 10y ago
I almost feel like a genre has to "die" at some point in order to live (i.e. gain relevance) again. Something that stays in the public consciousness past its prime gains association with being "something your parents like" and eventually "something your grandparents like", and these are bad associations if you want something to get wildly popular. A lot of brands that have carpet-bomb "get everyone hooked at once" marketing campaigns, like Old Spice, end up with this effect where nobody wants to use the product since it's what their dad uses, and they don't want to smell like their dad. So Old Spice has set upon the strategy of letting its marketing go quiet for a few years, and then, pretty much once per generation, running a new fleet of ads claiming that Old Spice is "not your dad's deodorant", but is in fact best associated with buff 20-something men. The same happens in clothing (look at e.g. 80s clothing coming back into fashion just as everyone's mom had finally stopped wearing it.) Now, I've never seen anyone cite explicit evidence of it occurring in music as well, but it would fit the general mechanism. It might be why e.g. disco has mostly stayed dead (it's survived in the public consciousness with the image of the aging, pervy "uncle", a white guy with an afro wearing white suede and rollerblades, trying to retain his relevance); while genres like jazz are perennial (getting once again associated with being "young and cosmopolitan" at each turn of the clock.) If rock can truly die—if we can let go of "classic rock" music stations and dads sporting worn-to-dishrags "rock concert" tees—and allow the ground of the genre's image to lay fallow for a bit, we might be able to sew something new there.
- sokoloff 10y ago
  I laughed out loud the first time I heard the 2010-era Old Spice tagline: "The original. If your grandfather hadn't worn it, you wouldn't exist." Random word trivia: you want "sow" in the last line.
  - louisswiss 10y ago
    Nice. Unless it was some clever wordplay on the old tshirts mentioned ;)
k-mcgrady 10y ago
Popular genres change overtime. Right now EDM is filling arenas. That doesn't mean rock is dead and if you think it is you're not looking hard enough. There are LOTS of great rock bands - they're just playing clubs and theatres.
- s4chin 10y ago
  Can you tell me some, because I'd like to hear them out?
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
    Sure! They're not exactly new but if you haven't check out The Gaslight Anthem plus the side projects and solo work of the frontman (Brian Fallon, The Horrible Crowes, Molly and The Zombies). A few others I'm listening to: - Spring King - Hinds - Royal Blood - Diiv - Cloud Nothings - DMA's - Beach Slang - PUP - Dave Hause
    - s4chin 10y ago
      Hey, thanks a lot!
hbosch 10y ago
Rock and roll lives on in a much more potent, pure form in basements and bookstores and independent venues all over the world. Arena rock is dead, because it's bland, diluted, and controlled by corporations.
- ArkyBeagle 10y ago
  It's possibly ( I won't generalize there so I disagree ) bland and diluted now, but this was not always so. The death of radio and the rise of the CD are always my usual suspects for why any sort of musical monoculture failed. "Basements, bookstores and independent venues" dooms the practitioners to being hobbyists.
  - hbosch 10y ago
    >"Basements, bookstores and independent venues" dooms the practitioners to being hobbyists. Do you prescribe this theory to hacker culture as well?
    - ArkyBeagle 10y ago
      That's slightly different because hacker culture creates a public commons that practitioners can use to make money. It is not clear to what extent this actually happens. Perhaps EDM works like how hacker culture works. I just don't know much about that . But for more traditional musicians it seems harder to... monetize the work. But this was probably always true - it was not uncommon for touring musicians in the radio era before TV to take on sponsors. The span in which people were sustained mainly by record sales was pretty brief.
- coldtea 10y ago
  Well, basement and bookstore rock is diluted and bland too though. Plus, doomed to be relegated outside the mainstream culture, as a pastime for small circles of people with common taste (like polka lovers).
felipeerias 10y ago
The amount of music easily available today is overwhelmingly larger than it was thirty or forty years ago, and the path to fame for a new band is radically different. As a consequence, we have more music nowadays but we won't get many more of those larger-than-life stars that dominated public culture in decades past. Justin Bieber might look like a big thing, but he doesn't hold a candle to e.g. Michael Jackson in the 80s.
- dcwca 10y ago
  Michael Jackson wasn't as unique as you think, every generation is going to have their own enduring stars that release hits over multiple decades. Indeed, Katy Perry in her early 30s has already equaled Michael Jackson in terms of number of hits in the Billboard Hot 100 and the number of #1 Singles from an album release (Bad vs. Teenage Dream). Rihanna recently tied the Beatles for second place in total time at #1 on the charts. If you think these aren't as significant as [fill in your favourite act from decades past] then you're not the right demographic.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Only this assumes that the music industry and its impact on culture is a constant. Katy Perry might has "equaled Michael Jackson in terms of number of hits in the Billboard Hot 100" but those hits now came with much less sales than in Michael Jackson's era. Ever worse, at MJ's time, if you had a hit, everybody heard it -- the channels were few and not that fragmented. Nowadays you can be Katy Perry, have a #1 hit, and half of the country wouldn't even know it, much less know how to sing it. The cultural impact of Katy Perry is thus reduced to some teenage (or early teenage) kids, and tabloid gossip people reads and forgets that very minute. And of course now there are 100 other things for a young person to do, between gaming, mobile, social, internet, anime, etc -- back then music was much more crucial. >If you think these aren't as significant as [fill in your favourite act from decades past] then you're not the right demographic. That's the thing though. You didn't have to be in the right demographic to think the Beatles significant. And even in the same demographic, you can have like 90% of people not giving a shit about Rihanna, whereas you couldn't for the Beatles.
SyneRyder 10y ago
It might be a case of diving deeper to find the bands that appeal to a metal fan. The Wall Street Journal (of all places!) had an article on The Weird Global Appeal Of Heavy Metal, the rise of metal in places like Indonesia, Chile, Brazil: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-weird-global-appeal-of-heavy-metal-1455819419 http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-weird-global-appeal-of-heavy... And then you've got the heavy metal bands in Iran that are far more hardcore, facing jail time or execution for their music: http://www.metalinjection.net/metal-crimes/iranian-musicians-jailed-facing-possible-execution-for-playing-metal http://www.metalinjection.net/metal-crimes/iranian-musicians... I've personally started listening to a lot of German bands - Rammstein helped lead me to Oomph, Unheilig, Eisbrecher, Donots and others. It feels great to love bands that have had #1 albums overseas, and yet hardly anyone has heard of them where I live.
f_allwein 10y ago
This is not a new sentiment, and maybe nothing to worry about: "It is said that what is called "the spirit of an age" is something to which one cannot return. That this spirit gradually dissipates is due to the world's coming to an end. For this reason, although one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation." ― Tsunetomo Yamamoto, Hagakure: The Book of the Samurai
fiatjaf 10y ago
"The biggest and scariest issue is that all of these celebrities are going completely unreplaced." Isn't this good?
oldmanjay 10y ago
The world doesn't leave people behind. People choose to stay focused on the past for what ever reason. It's a very personal responsibility to feel relevant as the world changes, and it's assuredly more work than staying with the familiar.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
u_me_him 10y ago
It is probably just a sign that your era has or is ending. It is supposed to be like that. Remember when rock first appeared there must've been people just like you complaining about their dying era and how this new Elvis guy was pathetic. Is better to adapt and discover new genres. It's fun. Just keep an open mind. To me is far worse to be stuck in the past.
agumonkey 10y ago
It's the thing when one goes too high, the fell is worse. I can't be objective but I believe the post ww2 era was a special spot culturally for western cultures that cannot be replicated. Less boundaries, new mediums, new industries, new market and economy, with a decent post war peace mindset (post cold war, Berlin wall). Nowadays it's a plateau and the people who made it emerge are going away and the spirit of the era with them. At one point I guess we'll have to embrace it and celebrate a new space for new forms and art, because the giants impose a reference, a scale to measure art and productions against[1]. It may unleash new growth, new qualities. Even though I wonder what really new thing can happen. Internet promises are thin (to me). Maybe large scala computation + medicine will yield something deep but somehow I fear it touches on the human species altogether (current times are caressing SF, droids, SDVehicles, automated space, biotech). It's odd. [1] see the never ending reboot movies. ps: although I also have a strong feeling that classics are what remains even after an era goes. Timeless ideas like shakespeare's drama you know.
PerfectElement 10y ago
There are only so many cool riffs you can put together before every thing starts to sound too similar. Progressive rock/metal bands explore a wider range of combinations, but they're harder to get into, so they'll never reach that level of popularity.
fsloth 10y ago
"I am a fan of rock and heavy metal, and it is clear that rock stardom is literally dying off. " I would claim all you need to rock is a guitar. Good electric guitars have never been as cheap or accessible, nor have pedagogical offerings as advanced. Exceptional ability really does not create huge artists nowadays as much as marketing does. Outside of big bucks marketing I would claim all sorts of music is thriving.
- dcwca 10y ago
  Guitars are expensive, you don't already have them, plus you need an amp. Then you either need to convince your friends to buy instruments and form a band (or join one), or buy a bunch of expensive recording equipment because recording drums and guitar well is difficult (and did I mention expensive?). Kids already have computers and with a cheap USB mic can make non-rock music that is ready to be released on the radio in their bedroom for $200.
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
    Completely disagree. You can get a guitar+amp starter package for less than $200. That's all you need to jam with some friends in a garage. Then start gigging with other friends bands - you don't need to record anything. But if you want to record you don't need expensive equipment. I recorded my first band with Cubase on a shitty home build tower PC. I had no audio interface. I had a headphone splitter than I plugged two mics from a 'sing star' (rock band for singing) PS2 game into and used those to mic the bass drum and throw one over a rafter in the garage as an overhead mic. Quality obviously wasn't great but listening back now it's actually good enough and if I had the mixing experience I do now could be a whole lot better. And I think it's that last point that's key. If you want to make electronic music you need a DAW with decent VST's (so Logic at £199.99 is your best value) - then you need to spent a long time learning how to write, how to mix, master, sound design. As someone who has been in bands and produces electronic music the latter is much more difficult to get started in. You can get with two other friends in a garage, learn three chords on a guitar and start writing songs or playing covers of other songs and have a hell of a lot of fun. Electronic music is time consuming to create, requires a much steeper learning curve before you can create anything good, and it's pretty solitary.
DIVx0 10y ago
You're clearly not looking hard enough. There is so much new music available. In my opinion we're in a sort of golden age of music. It is trivial for artists to publish new music and it's even easier for consumers to get it. Discoverability remains a problem but even still, it's a lot easier to find new stuff than it was just 10 years ago. You still have to do some work if you want to find new examples in genres you like. Arena filling artists are not all that different now than they were at any other time. It's pop music to one degree or another. The genres that are more popular get the bigger venus. AC/DC style hard rock enjoyed a run in the 80s but is currently 'out' but that does not mean it's dead or will die but the next Iron Maiden won't be shoveled to you via top 40 radio, you'll have to discover them and i guarantee you they're out there.
gonzo 10y ago
> I am a fan of rock and heavy metal, and it is clear that rock stardom is literally dying off. "Rock is Dead" -- The Who

dominotw 10y ago

>Where are the twenty-something kids with attitude Attitude is not relavent anymore. We are all introverts now, people have wide varieties of musical tastes and preferences .there is huge amount of experimentation going on in music due to the fact that process of creating music has become much more accessible. There are tons of awesome music being produced everywhere you just have to dig deeper.

JoBrad 10y ago
Exactly. I personally know 3 different people who have multiple side projects where they record, mix, and produce amazing music, from their homes. It's much harder to stand out when so many people have great music.

derefr 10y ago

I almost feel like a genre has to "die" at some point in order to live (i.e. gain relevance) again. Something that stays in the public consciousness past its prime gains association with being "something your parents like" and eventually "something your grandparents like", and these are bad associations if you want something to get wildly popular. A lot of brands that have carpet-bomb "get everyone hooked at once" marketing campaigns, like Old Spice, end up with this effect where nobody wants to use the product since it's what their dad uses, and they don't want to smell like their dad. So Old Spice has set upon the strategy of letting its marketing go quiet for a few years, and then, pretty much once per generation, running a new fleet of ads claiming that Old Spice is "not your dad's deodorant", but is in fact best associated with buff 20-something men. The same happens in clothing (look at e.g. 80s clothing coming back into fashion just as everyone's mom had finally stopped wearing it.) Now, I've never seen anyone cite explicit evidence of it occurring in music as well, but it would fit the general mechanism. It might be why e.g. disco has mostly stayed dead (it's survived in the public consciousness with the image of the aging, pervy "uncle", a white guy with an afro wearing white suede and rollerblades, trying to retain his relevance); while genres like jazz are perennial (getting once again associated with being "young and cosmopolitan" at each turn of the clock.) If rock can truly die—if we can let go of "classic rock" music stations and dads sporting worn-to-dishrags "rock concert" tees—and allow the ground of the genre's image to lay fallow for a bit, we might be able to sew something new there.

sokoloff 10y ago
I laughed out loud the first time I heard the 2010-era Old Spice tagline: "The original. If your grandfather hadn't worn it, you wouldn't exist." Random word trivia: you want "sow" in the last line.
- louisswiss 10y ago
  Nice. Unless it was some clever wordplay on the old tshirts mentioned ;)

k-mcgrady 10y ago

Popular genres change overtime. Right now EDM is filling arenas. That doesn't mean rock is dead and if you think it is you're not looking hard enough. There are LOTS of great rock bands - they're just playing clubs and theatres.

s4chin 10y ago
Can you tell me some, because I'd like to hear them out?
- k-mcgrady 10y ago
  Sure! They're not exactly new but if you haven't check out The Gaslight Anthem plus the side projects and solo work of the frontman (Brian Fallon, The Horrible Crowes, Molly and The Zombies). A few others I'm listening to: - Spring King - Hinds - Royal Blood - Diiv - Cloud Nothings - DMA's - Beach Slang - PUP - Dave Hause
  - s4chin 10y ago
    Hey, thanks a lot!

hbosch 10y ago

Rock and roll lives on in a much more potent, pure form in basements and bookstores and independent venues all over the world. Arena rock is dead, because it's bland, diluted, and controlled by corporations.

ArkyBeagle 10y ago
It's possibly ( I won't generalize there so I disagree ) bland and diluted now, but this was not always so. The death of radio and the rise of the CD are always my usual suspects for why any sort of musical monoculture failed. "Basements, bookstores and independent venues" dooms the practitioners to being hobbyists.
- hbosch 10y ago
  >"Basements, bookstores and independent venues" dooms the practitioners to being hobbyists. Do you prescribe this theory to hacker culture as well?
  - ArkyBeagle 10y ago
    That's slightly different because hacker culture creates a public commons that practitioners can use to make money. It is not clear to what extent this actually happens. Perhaps EDM works like how hacker culture works. I just don't know much about that . But for more traditional musicians it seems harder to... monetize the work. But this was probably always true - it was not uncommon for touring musicians in the radio era before TV to take on sponsors. The span in which people were sustained mainly by record sales was pretty brief.
coldtea 10y ago
Well, basement and bookstore rock is diluted and bland too though. Plus, doomed to be relegated outside the mainstream culture, as a pastime for small circles of people with common taste (like polka lovers).

felipeerias 10y ago

The amount of music easily available today is overwhelmingly larger than it was thirty or forty years ago, and the path to fame for a new band is radically different. As a consequence, we have more music nowadays but we won't get many more of those larger-than-life stars that dominated public culture in decades past. Justin Bieber might look like a big thing, but he doesn't hold a candle to e.g. Michael Jackson in the 80s.

dcwca 10y ago
Michael Jackson wasn't as unique as you think, every generation is going to have their own enduring stars that release hits over multiple decades. Indeed, Katy Perry in her early 30s has already equaled Michael Jackson in terms of number of hits in the Billboard Hot 100 and the number of #1 Singles from an album release (Bad vs. Teenage Dream). Rihanna recently tied the Beatles for second place in total time at #1 on the charts. If you think these aren't as significant as [fill in your favourite act from decades past] then you're not the right demographic.
- coldtea 10y ago
  Only this assumes that the music industry and its impact on culture is a constant. Katy Perry might has "equaled Michael Jackson in terms of number of hits in the Billboard Hot 100" but those hits now came with much less sales than in Michael Jackson's era. Ever worse, at MJ's time, if you had a hit, everybody heard it -- the channels were few and not that fragmented. Nowadays you can be Katy Perry, have a #1 hit, and half of the country wouldn't even know it, much less know how to sing it. The cultural impact of Katy Perry is thus reduced to some teenage (or early teenage) kids, and tabloid gossip people reads and forgets that very minute. And of course now there are 100 other things for a young person to do, between gaming, mobile, social, internet, anime, etc -- back then music was much more crucial. >If you think these aren't as significant as [fill in your favourite act from decades past] then you're not the right demographic. That's the thing though. You didn't have to be in the right demographic to think the Beatles significant. And even in the same demographic, you can have like 90% of people not giving a shit about Rihanna, whereas you couldn't for the Beatles.

SyneRyder 10y ago

It might be a case of diving deeper to find the bands that appeal to a metal fan. The Wall Street Journal (of all places!) had an article on The Weird Global Appeal Of Heavy Metal, the rise of metal in places like Indonesia, Chile, Brazil: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-weird-global-appeal-of-heavy-metal-1455819419 http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-weird-global-appeal-of-heavy... And then you've got the heavy metal bands in Iran that are far more hardcore, facing jail time or execution for their music: http://www.metalinjection.net/metal-crimes/iranian-musicians-jailed-facing-possible-execution-for-playing-metal http://www.metalinjection.net/metal-crimes/iranian-musicians... I've personally started listening to a lot of German bands - Rammstein helped lead me to Oomph, Unheilig, Eisbrecher, Donots and others. It feels great to love bands that have had #1 albums overseas, and yet hardly anyone has heard of them where I live.

f_allwein 10y ago

This is not a new sentiment, and maybe nothing to worry about: "It is said that what is called "the spirit of an age" is something to which one cannot return. That this spirit gradually dissipates is due to the world's coming to an end. For this reason, although one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation." ― Tsunetomo Yamamoto, Hagakure: The Book of the Samurai

fiatjaf 10y ago

"The biggest and scariest issue is that all of these celebrities are going completely unreplaced." Isn't this good?

oldmanjay 10y ago

The world doesn't leave people behind. People choose to stay focused on the past for what ever reason. It's a very personal responsibility to feel relevant as the world changes, and it's assuredly more work than staying with the familiar.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

u_me_him 10y ago

It is probably just a sign that your era has or is ending. It is supposed to be like that. Remember when rock first appeared there must've been people just like you complaining about their dying era and how this new Elvis guy was pathetic. Is better to adapt and discover new genres. It's fun. Just keep an open mind. To me is far worse to be stuck in the past.

agumonkey 10y ago

It's the thing when one goes too high, the fell is worse. I can't be objective but I believe the post ww2 era was a special spot culturally for western cultures that cannot be replicated. Less boundaries, new mediums, new industries, new market and economy, with a decent post war peace mindset (post cold war, Berlin wall). Nowadays it's a plateau and the people who made it emerge are going away and the spirit of the era with them. At one point I guess we'll have to embrace it and celebrate a new space for new forms and art, because the giants impose a reference, a scale to measure art and productions against[1]. It may unleash new growth, new qualities. Even though I wonder what really new thing can happen. Internet promises are thin (to me). Maybe large scala computation + medicine will yield something deep but somehow I fear it touches on the human species altogether (current times are caressing SF, droids, SDVehicles, automated space, biotech). It's odd. [1] see the never ending reboot movies. ps: although I also have a strong feeling that classics are what remains even after an era goes. Timeless ideas like shakespeare's drama you know.

PerfectElement 10y ago

There are only so many cool riffs you can put together before every thing starts to sound too similar. Progressive rock/metal bands explore a wider range of combinations, but they're harder to get into, so they'll never reach that level of popularity.

fsloth 10y ago

"I am a fan of rock and heavy metal, and it is clear that rock stardom is literally dying off. " I would claim all you need to rock is a guitar. Good electric guitars have never been as cheap or accessible, nor have pedagogical offerings as advanced. Exceptional ability really does not create huge artists nowadays as much as marketing does. Outside of big bucks marketing I would claim all sorts of music is thriving.

dcwca 10y ago
Guitars are expensive, you don't already have them, plus you need an amp. Then you either need to convince your friends to buy instruments and form a band (or join one), or buy a bunch of expensive recording equipment because recording drums and guitar well is difficult (and did I mention expensive?). Kids already have computers and with a cheap USB mic can make non-rock music that is ready to be released on the radio in their bedroom for $200.
- k-mcgrady 10y ago
  Completely disagree. You can get a guitar+amp starter package for less than $200. That's all you need to jam with some friends in a garage. Then start gigging with other friends bands - you don't need to record anything. But if you want to record you don't need expensive equipment. I recorded my first band with Cubase on a shitty home build tower PC. I had no audio interface. I had a headphone splitter than I plugged two mics from a 'sing star' (rock band for singing) PS2 game into and used those to mic the bass drum and throw one over a rafter in the garage as an overhead mic. Quality obviously wasn't great but listening back now it's actually good enough and if I had the mixing experience I do now could be a whole lot better. And I think it's that last point that's key. If you want to make electronic music you need a DAW with decent VST's (so Logic at £199.99 is your best value) - then you need to spent a long time learning how to write, how to mix, master, sound design. As someone who has been in bands and produces electronic music the latter is much more difficult to get started in. You can get with two other friends in a garage, learn three chords on a guitar and start writing songs or playing covers of other songs and have a hell of a lot of fun. Electronic music is time consuming to create, requires a much steeper learning curve before you can create anything good, and it's pretty solitary.

DIVx0 10y ago

You're clearly not looking hard enough. There is so much new music available. In my opinion we're in a sort of golden age of music. It is trivial for artists to publish new music and it's even easier for consumers to get it. Discoverability remains a problem but even still, it's a lot easier to find new stuff than it was just 10 years ago. You still have to do some work if you want to find new examples in genres you like. Arena filling artists are not all that different now than they were at any other time. It's pop music to one degree or another. The genres that are more popular get the bigger venus. AC/DC style hard rock enjoyed a run in the 80s but is currently 'out' but that does not mean it's dead or will die but the next Iron Maiden won't be shoveled to you via top 40 radio, you'll have to discover them and i guarantee you they're out there.

gonzo 10y ago

> I am a fan of rock and heavy metal, and it is clear that rock stardom is literally dying off. "Rock is Dead" -- The Who