Netphoria Message Board


Go Back   Netphoria Message Board > Archives > Music Board Archive
Register Netphoria's Amazon.com Link Members List Photo Album Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-06-2002, 11:41 PM   #31
Folladori
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by x-man:
i agree with darkagency's points on the mergers forcing things in a certain way, and musicians dont have balls anymore. Nobody out there I see understands how to push the cultural edge, let alone are willing to.

I dont think the new war on terrorism, the internet, the general evolution of technology in these times can be overlooked when considering Rock (Alt. Rock) as 'dead or alive'.

Billy has said that the rules have changed, the way bands became successful in the past may not apply in the future...Napster was poised to have a real influence in these matters but the industry closed quickly once they got off their collective duff and moved into action.

I wonder if Billy still thinks the labels are trying to convince the artist that the industry and the mergers are forces to not even try to fight...that's sort of the context. errrr. close enough.

We have limited free speech if what you speak against controls the very distribution so that you can be heard. Can the internet, mp3's, SHN's, etc. really change that aspect of the music industry?

Is this the real Synthetic Army? I've wondered.

Who is Billy?

Tards.

------------------
http://allstarpowerup.com/incoming/joeshill-gimp.jpg

All Star Powerup Music. The one, true way to goodbye depression.
AIM- JetsPartTwo

 
Old 02-06-2002, 11:42 PM   #32
darkagency
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I agree with you x-man we have a very limited free speech.....Clear channel communicatios owns all most all Modern rock stations as well as counrty and top 40....they set the formats..and control what the nation listens to..with hardly any compitition...the radio stations are basicaly the same from town to town these daya with very little reginalism.....also i think payola and sexola are much bigger problems than most people think these days

 
Old 02-07-2002, 12:22 AM   #33
FearFactory
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by smashingjj:
why is it so popular to sing like Eddie Vedder and Scott Weiland did ages ago? because Vedder defined their kind of rock? damn. Aaron Lewis from Staind sings a bit in the same 'dialect', but at least his voice is...nice.
I've been accused of ripping off tons of vocalists... everyone from David Bowie to Aaron Lewis. I don't strive to sound like them, I just sing how I sing. I'm pretty certain that's the case with scott stapp and other vocalists who get accused of "ripping off" others. In fact, many people accused Scott Weiland of ripping off Eddie Vedder.

It's a lot harder to try and sing like someone else than sing like you, anyway.



------------------
http://raversaregay.homestead.com/files/USA.gif
Put on the mask and dance for daddy!

 
Old 02-07-2002, 12:53 AM   #34
Mathboy
 
Posts: n/a
Post

The 90's alt-rock movement is dead, but alternative music isn't, in the sense that reasonably good music is still being produced outside the mainstream. If anything, with the Majors focusing on the current new-rock sound, the Indie scene -- the alternative to that mainstream -- has only gotten more diverse and interesting. Geez, what's with the essays? It's pretty straightforward.

 
Old 02-07-2002, 08:41 AM   #35
Death rock boy
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I think it's true that the main reason for the descent of the quality of rock music is just that the bands these days are too scared and lazy to really try to attack peoples values. By that, I don't mean be as ridiculous as possible, just to be different.

 
Old 02-07-2002, 09:56 AM   #36
teioh
 
Posts: n/a
Arrow

music never dies, it just changes, and if you don't like it, then thats your fucking problem. i don't want to be the equivalent of a 50 year old rocker in leather jacket and blue jeans when i get older.
alternative rock isn't dead, but maybe rock is a little broke

 
Old 02-07-2002, 12:54 PM   #37
Buggle
 
Posts: n/a
Post

As long is there is a mainstream then there has to be an alternative which consists of music that does not sound like acceptible mainstream music. It slips around, alternative music isn't dead, it's just that what was alternative a few years ago is mainstream now. The two things co-exist and shape each other. The mainstream develops quicker than the alterniative so we are just in a stage right now where a shift is starting to take place.

 
Old 02-07-2002, 02:11 PM   #38
illiterate
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Stapp on VH1, talking about hearing Tremonti playing metal riffs for the first time...

"OK. That's not really what I'm into right now, but you're all I've got."

I find that really inspiring.

By the way, I'm not really into techno right now, but I'm going to start DJing because I want to famous and all I've got is this drum machine.

See what happens when Tremonti quits. Should be interesting.

 
Old 02-07-2002, 02:28 PM   #39
Death rock boy
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I guess the other question that goes hand in hand with the topic is does being alternative have more importance than being good.

I mean, Soundgarden, SP, although it was "alternative music" it was also really good. If a band made something that sounded like that, but it was really good, would you be less inclined to respect it because of it's link with the past

 
Old 02-07-2002, 05:28 PM   #40
smashingjj
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by FearFactory:
I've been accused of ripping off tons of vocalists... everyone from David Bowie to Aaron Lewis. I don't strive to sound like them, I just sing how I sing. I'm pretty certain that's the case with scott stapp and other vocalists who get accused of "ripping off" others. In fact, many people accused Scott Weiland of ripping off Eddie Vedder.

It's a lot harder to try and sing like someone else than sing like you, anyway.



well, being accused of singing like a whole bunch of other singers is better than being accused of sounding like just one singer. I guess.

but when a band sounds like another band that already existed, and isn't that good or at least somewhat original, I don't think it's interesting. I don't think that Scott Stapp would have sung like he does if he had never heard Vedder.

------------------
Mallow


http://www.director-file.com/cunningham/5226.jpg

 
Old 02-08-2002, 05:17 PM   #41
paranoid
 
Posts: n/a
Post

this thread is gayer than richard simmons.

nirvana not meant to be big? please. the "grunge" scene WAS exploding at the time BEFORE they began recording nevermind. (ever hear of subpop? it was getting bigger). the corporate labels catch a hold, sign nirvana (and many others), produce nevermind and lead the nation to believe that that was the record that broke grunge.

its rock and roll. there aint anything alternative about it.

------------------
I can suck my own ****.

[This message has been edited by paranoid (edited 02-08-2002).]

 
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is On
Google


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:58 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Smashing Pumpkins, Alternative Music
& General Discussion Message Board and Forums
www.netphoria.org - Copyright 1998-2014