Is rock and roll dead?

[1neeto]

Originally Posted by KESTLY

Yes, I believe that it is "dead." Of course, it will always be around. But, as a relevant force for influencing culture, it is about as dead as Polka. It had a good run, a very long run. So, how much more can really be done, or should be done? Can you really elevate that genre of guitar playing, for example, beyond the Steve Vai level? It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to break into that Grammy's crowd and get their interest as a "rock" artist. They have a whole new image of "rebellion." Watching Sam Smith's performance on the Grammy's this year, I just wonder how much farther you can push these boundaries. It seems that even Madonna was kind of warning us that what we are about to watch is going to be a little bit too much for us.

Sam Smith didn’t do anything that hasn’t been done before. But yeah I agree with just about everything you said.

[bfm612]

Originally Posted by KESTLY

Yes, I believe that it is "dead." Of course, it will always be around. But, as a relevant force for influencing culture, it is about as dead as Polka. It had a good run, a very long run. So, how much more can really be done, or should be done? Can you really elevate that genre of guitar playing, for example, beyond the Steve Vai level? It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to break into that Grammy's crowd and get their interest as a "rock" artist. They have a whole new image of "rebellion." Watching Sam Smith's performance on the Grammy's this year, I just wonder how much farther you can push these boundaries. It seems that even Madonna was kind of warning us that what we are about to watch is going to be a little bit too much for us.

Cynically, I don't really expect rock and roll to be always innovating. Bands just (generously) lean on influences and slightly modernize sounds, but it's not always boundary pushing. Innovation's nice, but I don't think a revival requires it. That whole garage revival popularized by The Strokes was cool, but I didn't think it was all too different from the '60s version. Grunge bands generally fell within a punk/metal spectrum. I don't mean to disparage these, but all I'm saying is that music is like fashion where old things are inevitably revived. Bell bottoms and rock and roll will both come back at some point.

Regarding the rebellion part, I feel like there's always something to rebel against, and I don't think rebellion has really been ever constant, nor has it been one and the same as the "rock and roll" that most people think of. In her heyday, Madonna whether you liked her or not was a rebel, as was Prince, as was Nina Simone.

[RP]

"Rock and roll is here to stay, it will never die..."

[ozzman]

Originally Posted by KESTLY

Yes, I believe that it is "dead." Of course, it will always be around. But, as a relevant force for influencing culture, it is about as dead as Polka. It had a good run, a very long run. So, how much more can really be done, or should be done? Can you really elevate that genre of guitar playing, for example, beyond the Steve Vai level? It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to break into that Grammy's crowd and get their interest as a "rock" artist. They have a whole new image of "rebellion." Watching Sam Smith's performance on the Grammy's this year, I just wonder how much farther you can push these boundaries. It seems that even Madonna was kind of warning us that what we are about to watch is going to be a little bit too much for us.

This post wrapped it up folks. we are old, rock is dead. to sum it up from "All in the family" "Boy the way Glenn Miller played, gee our old La'Sal ran great,those were the days" it sucks but we have to move on. Let my headstone read" I lived in the time of Giants, I lived in the time of Clapton,Beck,Page and Vaughan"

[Tyeetime]

Rock and Roll is not dead. It is certainly not the same force as it once was - times and tastes change. But as long as someone is playing and someone is listening, it isn't dead. I go to see live music as much as I can, and yes many acts are old guys like me. But I've noticed there are a lot young musicians too, and plenty of young people (children even) in the audience, especially at outdoor venues.
Rock and Roll still spans the generations, albeit in a smaller way than before.
But it's alright.

Hey hey my my...

[815C]

Check out this band from Cuba. Go to 2:20 in the video which is just before they ROCK out. And if you like that, go to the second video and jump to 6:12.

IMO Essentially what happened to jazz is now happening to rock 'n' roll, as the music transitions from its status as the "popular" music of its heyday to a diminished presence, mostly outside of the "popular" music of now. And much like jazz, rock will continue to find makers and consumers, just in a lesser role. Rock isn't dead but it isn't the market leader like it has been in the past.

[1neeto]

I’m hoping for a resurgence of rock because of the uptick in guitar and gear sales due to Covid. I’m thinking things can get interesting by 2030 or so.

[Acousticado]

Originally Posted by J-Doug

IMO Essentially what happened to jazz is now happening to rock 'n' roll, as the music transitions from its status as the "popular" music of its heyday to a diminished presence, mostly outside of the "popular" music of now. And much like jazz, rock will continue to find makers and consumers, just in a lesser role. Rock isn't dead but it isn't the market leader like it has been in the past.

I tend to agree with this. “Rock” in its various forms had about a 50 year run at the top of the heap and is still very relevant across generations despite being bumped from the mainstream. Not too shabby. Many of us may not live to see it, but it’s interesting to ponder if current and future styles will have such staying power atop “popular” music. With the rapid advances in tech/AI and the shorter attention spans and patience of younger and future generations, I tend to doubt it. Likely, there’ll come a time when music will morph into something entirely unrecognizable to our sensibilities.

[Rickenbacker1]

It’s funny how big this EDM is ……

[bfm612]

Originally Posted by Rickenbacker1

It’s funny how big this EDM is ……

"To each his own" and all that, but I'm baffled that my coworker who's in her late 20s and 20 years my junior had EDM as her top category on her Spotify Wrapped this past year. I myself was neck deep in downtempo and all the Ninjatune releases back in the late '90s, but I'm really baffled by EDM.

Sorry, I know that was a tangent, but I had to get that out!

[frankmcr]

EDM is a producer's medium though, isn't it?

It just seems like some permutation of guitar/bass/drums is such a natural combination for a group of highschool kids who want to start a band. As long as they're doing that, R&R will be not just alive but important.

[lowrider]

This thread starts with the question ''is rock and roll dead?'' because the OP didn't see any rock on the Grammys. When was Rock ever on the Grammys?

Rock and Roll or Rock has alway been about rebellion. The Grammy's are about top 40.

Did The Rolling Stones get Grammys? Led Zeppelin? The Clash? Elvis as a rock and roller? Was The Who's ''Tommy'' ever album of the year?

Don't sweat it that rock&roll wasn't at the Grammys, it never belonged there!

[bfm612]

Originally Posted by lowrider

This thread starts with the question ''is rock and roll dead?'' because the OP didn't see any rock on the Grammys. When was Rock ever on the Grammys?...

...Don't sweat it that rock&roll wasn't at the Grammys, it never belonged there!

I don't know, but taking a look at Album of the Year winners, I see Arcade Fire (2011), U2 (2006), Steely Dan (2001), Santana (2000), Alanis Morissette (1996), just to name a few. Rock's not always rebellious and definitely not always too rebellious for the Grammys.

[rokdog49]

Originally Posted by 815C

Check out this band from Cuba. Go to 2:20 in the video which is just before they ROCK out. And if you like that, go to the second video and jump to 6:12.

These guys kick tail.