Rock is Dead.

oldscoil

Read and discuss...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/rockandpopfeatures/8254476/Rocks-in-a-hard-place.html

Is rock dead? The claim has been made before, usually prematurely. But evidence is mounting that we are witnessing the last gasps of the guitar-based genre that has towered over the popular music world since the 1950s.
As I pointed out last week in a blog – “How rock died (and nobody noticed)”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/neilmccormick/100050411/how-rock-died-and-nobody-noticed/ – rock music, in any of its varied forms, has almost completely disappeared from the charts. This excited some controversy, with stories appearing elsewhere both issuing death certificates and defending rock’s survival skills.
Jim Morrison was probably the first to coin the phrase as far back as 1969, repeating, “Rock is dead” over and over in a widely bootlegged jam. In fact, the genre outlived the singer.

There were plenty who said rock was a spent force during the age of Seventies disco before punk brought distorted guitars back with a vengeance. Despite the rise of new wave, indie and stadium rock in the Eighties, the creative credibility of guitar music was seriously challenged by the pop, hip hop, electro and techno movements of that decade.

Yet power chords rang out again for grunge and Britpop in the Nineties, and rock seemed to be the music genre that would not die. Fifty years after its rebellious birth, rock somehow rattled on as the sound of the counterculture in the 21st century by going back to garage basics, with the Strokes and the rebirth of indie. As recently as 2009, unreconstructed hairy rockers the Kings of Leon had the eighth-bestselling album in the world with Only By Night and a UK number one hit single with Sex on Fire.

But a year is a long time in pop music. In 2010, there were only three songs even loosely identifiable as rock in the whole of the UK’s top 100 bestselling tracks. To add insult to injury, the highest placed of these (at number 25) was a 30-year-old re-release from American AOR band Journey, Don’t Stop Believin’, which has taken on the status of a camp karaoke showtune following its adoption by The X Factor and US teen TV drama Glee.

Rock’s pathetic three per cent of the charts was down from an already rather sickly 13 per cent in 2009, and 27 per cent in 2008. Turn that into a hospital graph and the prognosis would be terminal.

Rock fared a little better in the album charts, accounting for 27 per cent of the UK’s top 100. But, before you get too excited and start jiving around the room to Danny & the Juniors’ Rock and Roll is Here to Stay, the figures bear closer examination.
Album sales are themselves falling dramatically, declining seven per cent (that’s physical and digital), while single sales actually increased by 5.9 per cent. Young consumers, in particular, interact with music culture through single downloads (or at least that part of the younger generation willing to pay for music at all). The crucible in which tastes are being formed is club-based, hip-hop inflected urban electronic music and the karaoke MOR culture of TV talent shows (witnessed in Glee club hits and the retro-styled success of artists such as Michael Buble and X Factor contestants).
What the young listen to now will shape the music of the future. And this is where questions of rock’s continued relevance really strike home.

The biggest-selling guitar-based band in Britain last year (at number 10), and, indeed, in the whole world (number 16 in the United World Chart), was Mumford & Sons, a young folk ensemble featuring mandolins, accordions and string bass. I suspect even they don’t see themselves as the saviours of rock. Yet they connected to listeners of all ages, perhaps because their rustic approach offered something genuinely fresh, even novel.

Clearly there is still a lively rock culture flourishing in clubs and bars, popular with students and finding its focus at mass summer festival events.
But when was the last time a rock band rose to dominate that audience with something simultaneously accessible enough for the mainstream market and bold enough to restake rock’s claim to be music of innovation and adventure? Arguably it was Radiohead, before they retreated inward, leaving the more commercial aspects of the music to be exploited by anthemic bands such as Coldplay and Keane.

Last week’s NME featured two young rock bands on its cover, the Vaccines and Brother, both proclaiming themselves ready to take on the world. Yet everything about their retro styling suggests rock knows it is in retreat.

The Vaccines play garage rock that doesn’t employ a chord sequence or sound effect that post-dates 1965, while Brother have modelled themselves on Oasis and appear to be pinning their hopes on a Britpop revival. Sales of NME magazine itself are at an all-time low (below 35,000 copies per week). I’d say their chances of making a game-changing impact are about as good as NME’s last candidates for rock saviours, the Drums. And there was no sign of them at all among 2010’s biggest sellers.

There were, in fact, no rock bands in the top 15 bestselling albums in the world last year. Not one. The big successes (which, despite apocalyptic claims of collapsing trade in the music business, still each notched up more than five million sales) were pop diva Lady Gaga, rap superstar Eminem and teen dream Justin Bieber. The Kings of Leon’s latest album, Come Around Sundown, came in at number 17 (with 1.7 million sales).

Still, a couple of million sales are not to be sniffed at. Any proclamations of the death of rock have to contend with the sight of tens of thousands of people regularly waving phones aloft in arenas to the hits of their youth.
Bon Jovi were the highest-earning live act last year, bringing in £130.07 million in ticket sales, ahead of AC/DC, U2 and Metallica, with Lady Gaga the sole representative of the new pop culture.

Yet the veteran nature of the big concert draws is indicative of a dividing line. Jon Bon Jovi is 48, and the majority of his audience is not much younger. Concert tickets for big entertainment events are expensive, which tends to favour the spending power of an older generation. According to a recent report on the live music industry by Deloitte, a full 40 per cent of the frontmen of the top 20 highest grossing live acts in the US will be 60 or over next year. As retirement beckons, who will replace the veterans on the front line? And what kind of music will they be playing?
We are, I suspect, witnessing a transition akin to the last days of jazz or swing, albeit scaled up to account for rock’s stadium-sized reach over 50 years of mass entertainment. If it is a death, it will be a long and slow one, with occasional remissions when a genuinely talented young artist harnesses the genre in an original or invigorating way.

There are great rock bands around now, and a lot of amazing music continues to be made. But the same could be said if you are a jazz fan, yet it is impossible to argue jazz has had any significant influence on pop culture since the Fifties.
At some fundamental level, the rock narrative is exhausted. Its musical palette has nothing new to offer, and, arguably, that has been the case for a decade or more. What is perhaps most remarkable is that rock has lasted so long, propelled by the visceral thrill of the electric guitar, the primal energy stirred up by three chords and the truth, and a parade of fantastic characters driven to wring every nuance from a multifarious genre.

Even as pop, urban and electronic music supplant rock in the tastes of the young, future stars have their work cut out matching the cultural, social, spiritual and creative impact rock has made on the world.

mike65

The Guardian ran the same stories this week.

Rock isn't dead its just not shifting much in the singles market and as the singles market is all but moribund it hardly matters. So no album is in the top 15 sellers for 2010. So what? Maybe it was a quietish year for major name releases (I'm not best placed to know these days). Live Rock still rules as no one is going to go to a stadium for dance/rap/X factor type gigs.

These things tend to go in waves, guitar based rock music in Britian was supposed to be nearly dead in the early-mid 90s then bang, there was a slew of acts that had been lurking that broke through and all was well again.

Heavy metal was at a low ebb in 77-79 with just a few spin off bands from Deep Purple and AC/DC keeping the flag flying in any meaningfull way (they had hit singles which disguised the slump) then 1980 saw a explosion of renewed interest as metal met post punk attitude with NWOBHM.

Rock music with guitars will be back even if it completely bypasses radio and tv and the singles chart.

Kess73

I see the live revenue figures were also published at the same time as this report.


It showed that rock and metal acts made up almost 70% of the top 50 acts in the world for bringing in revenue for 2010, and was an even 70% of the top ten revenue makers in terms of concerts and merchandise.


I can remember in the 80's and 90's of articles that were published that screamed of the imminent death of rock and metal.

The music will adapt and evolve, and no doubt at the start of the next decade we will yet again be treated to another article stating that rock is about to die........again..........soon........anytime now........just watch and see........it's almost dead......ah hell come back in another ten years and we will try again.

bullpost

A lot of that audience is going to see older acts who they remember from their youth - think Bon Jovi were highest-grossing act.

Traditional guitar/bass/drums acts are dwindling due to the limitations of the format. Even recent acts like Interpol and the Strokes who were successful have a sound based in the past (1979 in their case) so I think though these type of acts will be around for a while yet their audience share will also shrink.

Kess73 wrote: »

I see the live revenue figures were also published at the same time as this report.


It showed that rock and metal acts made up almost 70% of the top 50 acts in the world for bringing in revenue for 2010, and was an even 70% of the top ten revenue makers in terms of concerts and merchandise.

Blisterman

Every genre has a life cycle. I think rock music now is where Jazz was in the 70's.

Its time at the forefront of the mainstream may be ended, but it will never die. There'll still be bands releasing new stuff and still a sizable number of fans.

GrizzlyMan

Blisterman wrote: »

Every genre has a life cycle. I think rock music now is where Jazz was in the 70's.

Its time at the forefront of the mainstream may be ended, but it will never die. There'll still be bands releasing new stuff and still a sizable number of fans.

Fads come and go but i think true fans of whatever Genre will always remain faithful to what they love:)

stateofflux

everything is to do with 'having the tunes'....eras are defined by tunes...scenes are also defined by tune quality....the amount of classic timeless tunes recently has not been as big ....hence the slump in rock.....its simple really...

also i think the reason for so many reunions all over the place is a lack of competition from modern bands....meaning people lean towards being retrospective as the current crop can't deliver the goods....

Motley Crue

No, Rock is not dead, in 2010 it owned the live arena and the live stage...even if it didn't make an impact on the charts.

Fact is, Pop music is like bubblegum, you use it and chew it for as long as you can until it's tasteless and then you bin it. That kind of music is not sustainable and therefore no good for the environment either....

Somnus

So do those articles just mean rock is dead in the charts?

If so who cares?

Most of the bands I listen to would never ever make it into the charts! They're still getting on grand. There'll always be a fan base. Plenty of bands make a living without being in the charts.

Nolanger

There were only four rock bands in the British top 40 a decade back in January 2001.

scudzilla

The main stream press and such have been coming out with this crap every couple of years for as long as i remember.

Can't be arsed even reading this tripe, ROCK WILL NEVER DIE

Riddle101

Sometimes I think that Rock and Metal are a dying breed. When you see people like Justin Beiber and Cheryl Cole at the top of the charts, and being famous for making absolute sh!te, and you don't even hear of a singly rock or metal band unless it's Kings Of Leon or one of the more popular rock bands that somehow managed to find sucess among the general public, then you tend to wonder. I have so much distain for the music of the 00's and don't care for it, and it's not just that either. I haven't really seen many bands worth getting into. When you have bands like My Chemical Romance, Fallout Boy or 30 Seconds To Mars, then why is it a surprise really.

But then I think maybe it's just that the really good bands are still making a name for themselves. I'm sure there are bands just waiting to step up to the plate but you just have to look for them. In the late early 80's Metallica, Anthrax, Slayer etc where all making their names in San Fransico. Motley Crue and Ratt in LA, and later Nirvana, Pearl Jam and Alice in Chains in Seattle, all before they become famous. But who knows really.

So no I don't really believe Rock or Metal will die. Just that it might take awhile for the next wave.

deman

Nolanger wrote: »

There were only four rock bands in the British top 40 a decade back in January 2001.

As crap as the UK top 40 is, I doubt this very much. Facts and links please.

deman

I just think that rock music, esp the harder variety gets treated unfairly by the British media (which, I'm afraid to say, has a strong influence on the Irish listenership). Maybe I'm spoilt for choice here in Finland with a huge exposure to rock from 2 dedicated rock radio stations. Never listen to anything else.

Nolanger

deman wrote: »

As crap as the UK top 40 is, I doubt this very much. Facts and links please.

everyhit.com

PeterIanStaker

1. The charts don't matter a f*ck.
2. Rock and Metal will never die.
3. See #2 above.

Dan_Solo

Sorry to wander off, but apart from kicking ass, why does everybody like Queens Of The Stone Age but if you tell them it's metal they look at you funny?
Oh, and Kings Of Leon me h0le. Oh, you like metal? You must love the Chili Peppers then?:rolleyes:

nyarlothothep

Hmmm, until a genre is created which appeals to all the outsiders, freaks and geeks I don't see rock and metal dying. It provides a function for people who want something a little more than candy floss vacuousness. However, I think creatively speaking rock and metal are really moribund. I mean the whole indie revival thing of the 00s was really self indulgent drivel, I disliked the fact that these bands pretty much imitated punk bands from the late 70s/early 80s and added nothing new. Or even a band like Trivium for turning into Metallica fanboys was a bit lame. Phil Anselmo made a good point that before bands would have 9 or 10 influences and would rip them off to develop something new from them. Now they normally have one and with bands like Interpol trying to sound exactly like Joy Division I tend to agree to some extent.

And I agree that the mainstream british press really don't appreciate hard rock or metal which is a shame because I find the bands they tend to champion to be boll0cks. But I digress, rock is kinda limited, its become over saturated as so many ideas have been tried, however the unknown is where creativity thrives so who knows what the next trend is, hopefully it will be something more original than the crap the indie revivalist movement produced.

Shay Vader

Foo Fighters & QOTSA. That is all.

RC88

rock is never gonna die
even now bands are still being formed, gigs are still being sold out and wheather or not they go platinum albums are still being cut

if some of the youth of today want to listen to overproduced pop(if u can call it that), brain cell killing dance/trance or want to sing along to disney or x factor their choice, but just remember there is still a great number of rock acts alive today still selling out festivals, look at download,rock am ring and glastonbury just to name a few festivals that still get great old and new act from the globe over.

rock is slow now because there has'nt been a new genre craze in years(eg prog,metal,punk,alt rock,grunge,britpop), new bands is afraid of trying somthing new and experimental in case it blows up in their faces

Malice

oldscoil please don't post the same thread multiple times. It's considered spamming and is very much frowned upon.

dagaz11

Rock and metal have never be meant to be mainstream. If one band makes a splash once in a while, it's often either because they sold out with syrupy ballads-Metallica- or accidental. I'll grant there are exceptions like AC/DC but it's because they got started in a era that was a lot more sympathetic to the genre.

It's totally irrelevant comparing different genre sales figures when rock and metal are in a state of apartheid compared to pop, rap, etc... How many mainstream folks have ever heard of say Seamount, Running Wild, Necrophobic, WASP, Agalloch,.... Then again not all of these bands are for everyone's ears but there's a % of the population who would enjoy their music if they were exposed to it.

Mainstream charts are but a testimony to the New World order where Major labels and their financial power decide what has a right to exist culturally on a large scale.

Gunslinger92

Rock wont die as long as there are fans, and there are plenty of fans

In fact, it doesn't really bother me that rock music isn't so popular these days. At least there are no longer people claiming they are a band's biggest fan when they only know a handful of songs :rolleyes:

What does bother me however, are some of today's best selling "rock" bands. Take My Chemical Romance and Paramore for example. It's no wonder I'm losing faith in humanity when there are people out there who think these bands are rock gods.

TangyZizzle

Sickening allegations. As long as I have speakers and the passion that will never die, Rock and Metal will continue to breathe. While my tastes have become somewhat diluted in the last few months with additions like Pendulum and Braintheft to my iTunes library.. I will never forget the heavy as whale shít metal that started my musical passion.

Fúck pop.

AhSureTisGrand

You're looking at the wrong charts. Rock fans tend to be devoted towards particular bands and don't care so much about the "latest hits". Therefore they buy albums. ALBUMS. Not singles. Look at the album charts and you'll doubtless find better stuff. Anyway the charts don't matter.

Also 2011's gonna be a big year for rock and indie. The Strokes, Arctic Monkeys, Radiohead, White Lies (their new album's just out), Foo Fighters, Rise Against, Kasabian, Mona, Blur, Jack White and many more I've forgotten about

mike65

Big year for indy if thats the list.

Metallergy

not dead at all, just done to death. only so many routes you can take on a fretboard n they all got shredded up - but it'll be a staple of youth culture forever, n when you think about it so much stuff got covered concocted n fused in those first 50 years alone so prepare for an eternity lot of stuff you've heard somewhere before. would have to put a balkan flavour on it or something, worked for SOAD anyhow. maybe the answer lies to the east which defies the concept of rock as a western thing, but if needs be, so be it

Metallergy

,do you mean is originality dead? as opposed to popularity.. that you see shortlived attempts at old genres being relabeled as new by unsuspecting kids whom its all new to yet whose parents already did it considerably harder n faster from here on in for the rest of eternity should lend a clue to that.. or maybe theyre reinterpreting an old style but they should represent a time and a place, when stuff starts trying to reinterpret itself years later as some sort of neo-core that just sounds like grindcore from 25yr ago, i mean wtf, its time to bail

- that kids are not pioneering new styles or subgenres all across the board on an almost monthly basis anymore, let alone yearly tells you its not confined to 'rock' n that there's not much left to concoct. people were too eager to shoot their load too soon; can't hinder a sense of adventure. but there is somewhere left to go.. who can find it? don't evy ya.

AhSureTisGrand

Aaand another thing... Rock has developed in so many different ways that it's hard to label some things as rock. Rock started to blend into "Alternative" when Nirvana hit the mainstream. Take for example Arcade Fire. Are they rock because they're set up like a rock band? They're not really rock, not really pop and definitely not something in between. Radiohead's new stuff is similarly confusing.

Does it matter though? Great as rock is, we need to accept that it's not the be-all and end-all. Rock was (and is) great because it followed no rules. If we make up too many rules about what is rock and isn't, we kill it.

Malice

Metallergy wrote: »

would have to put a balkan flavour on it or something, worked for SOAD anyhow.

The Balkans refers to the Southern European geographical area consisting of those countries that made up Yugoslavia amongst others. System of a Down are American so what's the Balkan connection?

Metallergy

Malice_ wrote: »

The Balkans refers to the Southern European geographical area consisting of those countries that made up Yugoslavia amongst others. System of a Down are American so what's the Balkan connection?

cheers for the geography lesson. but it still sounded like balkan ska-metal by a bunch of armenians who settled in the states to me..

anything else?