A
Alarm
Nah, saw Fleetwood Mac a while back and the place rocked.
Sponsored Links
M
Mickymoody
Great discussion. The thread seems to state that late 50's/60's music is the preferred choice, and hardly a mention of '80's/90's? Which is my preference also..but that might be due to the age group of people responding? I'm an early 70's creation, but listened to my parents music.
How do people think about groups reforming? My band of favour, G & R, reformed, and died on it's ar$e, but some songs on there are so heartfelt, and moving. I cannot think of any reformed group being as sucessful 2nd time round? Which is a shame for REM, that just split up.
(I was in two car crashes when REM was on the radio - but shucks - Everybody hurts!) -true.pun intended.
How do people think about groups reforming? My band of favour, G & R, reformed, and died on it's ar$e, but some songs on there are so heartfelt, and moving. I cannot think of any reformed group being as sucessful 2nd time round? Which is a shame for REM, that just split up.
(I was in two car crashes when REM was on the radio - but shucks - Everybody hurts!) -true.pun intended.
L
longdogs
I can easily listen to most 50's and 60's music and know most of the words for a sing-a-long. 70's through to mid eighties is my true era and I can normally remember the names of the most obscure bands along with the chart stuff. But, 90's through to the present is mostly a blur. Recent trends such as (C) rap just about finished it for me.
I find it interesting that bands like The Bee Gees and Abba, who were considered so un-cool at the time are now good to listen to.
By the way does anyone else remember seeing this classic tv moment with Clive Anderson and the bee Gees?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdvfmGPDVkk
I find it interesting that bands like The Bee Gees and Abba, who were considered so un-cool at the time are now good to listen to.
By the way does anyone else remember seeing this classic tv moment with Clive Anderson and the bee Gees?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdvfmGPDVkk
Sponsored Links
In the past we had pop groups that were in it for the fame/glory, just as today. Look at TOTPs back in the 70/80s, and you'll see mostly awful acts. Occasionally a decent act will slip through the net and make it onto prime time, but it is always the case that the mainstream provides the worst. But then that's the only way they can sell such rubbish.
The decent music must need less plugging.
I always hear the question of whether music of the moment will be remembered. The answer for even some awful rubbish is yes. I walk into some shops and hear Heart FM playing what has to be the worst pop of the 80s. Look back at the charts of the any era, and there will be plenty we don't remember.
When I was a teen, I wouldn't care whether a song was old or new, just whether I liked it. Many of today's gen are the same, which is why they buy the old stuff as well as new. This makes them open minded. It is us that must try to find new music of today. Its a changing market in terms of where we find it, which can make it difficult.
Micky wrote:
Many bands reform of course, and its almost a done deal with many of them. As for them doing dodgy new material, I saw the Wonder Stuff last year at a festival, and they stated: "You won't hear us saying "and here's one from our new album"". They don't do new material because people don't want to hear it. When you reform it is very difficult to have any new material accepted by your audience. I think James managed the odd new track at Beautiful Days last year, but they knew what the audience wanted.
And this is one of the key issues: the audience is one of the main obsticles to a band creating new material, as they want to hear those few famous tunes that made the band famous. This can get in the way of creativity more often than not.
Blondie managed with one good comeback song (Maria).
Bands I like who don't fit into this rule and have continued to create great music over the years:
New Model Army - Still going strong creatively
Half Man Half Biscuit (new album just out)
Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds (incredible output in quality and quantity)
The Fall (over 28 albums, and just when you think they're done for, they come back with a belter).
-All started in the 80s and just kept going.
REM's spilt was not a big suprise, as their output was starting to drop in quality. The Chili Peppers are in a similar boat IMHO, as they are past their best. Iggy Pop has been going through the motions for years.
The Pogues had their first three albums, and they were all classics, but since have not managed to match it.
David Bowie does the occasional heap of crap, but keeps coming back with something special and up to date. This makes him one of the few that can manage it.
But what of todays bands? Well I'm a bit out of touch like many here. But a quick look at who played Glastonbury and Leeds in recent years gives us a good indications. So acts such as:
Elbow
Muse
Franz Ferdinand
Gorillaz
Artic Monkeys
Arcade Fire - one of the most original sounds in recent years.
- all good stuff in my book. But many other acts are long established, which is a bit depressing, which tells us that the record companies can't be bothered to develop new talent.
Acts I hate: Cold Play, Razorlight, Radiohead, Keane, Travis, U2, later Kings of Leon.
You mean like Chesney Hawkes or the Worzels?
The female music scene has never seen such total domination since Tiffany hung up her baggy sweater and bat-wing denim jacket.
