Rock&Roll is dead, but Hip-Hop is alive and kicking. [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Rock&Roll is dead, but Hip-Hop is alive and kicking.



Smokey
12-02-2003, 03:46 PM
Been listening to Rock for last 25 years and 95% of my collection is Rock, but latest Rock music scenes is really disheartening. There is no soul to recent Rock music, everybodys hollering, jumping up and down and they pass it as music.

But looks like Hip-Hop music picked up where Rock left off and kicked it into high gear. In the 80s, groups likes Public Enemy, Run DMC and LLCoolJ blazed the trail for Hip-Hop, and that tradition continue today by Dr Dre, Chingy, R. Kelly, Snoop Dog and others.

Hopefully we will see the resurrection of Rock music.

JSE
12-02-2003, 04:01 PM
Rock is annoying as hell right now. I am a die hard rocker at heart but most of today's rock groups SUCK. You really have to look for decent bands now and then when you buy their CD, one or two songs are good and the rest SUCK! Just today, I learned that one of my favorite bands of all time, Living Color, just release a new cd. I thought, hell yes, the band is back in action after 10 years. Burnin Vernon is back. So, I went straight to Best Buy at lunch and bought it. Know what?

IT SUCKS!

Burnin Vernon's flame has gone out and the whole CD is horrible. I wish I never heard it because now one of my favorite bands in the recent past, now SUCKS! And when I say it SUCKS, it really really SUCKS! Did I say it SUCKS?

Anyway sorry to went but that's the way I feel about the present state of ROCK! I heard Van Hagar is getting back together. It will probably SUCK too. Guess Ed needs some money. When and if Pantera get's back together, they better not SUCK!

Man Smoke, you got me all stirred up now!


Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


JSE!

spacedeckman
12-02-2003, 07:20 PM
for a few years.

This is a hiding time.

The rap/hip-hop thing is scary. A bunch of illiterate, uneducated thugs, who rap songs worshipping themselves, getting a whole bunch of teenagers and pre-teens thinking its cool to be an uneducated illiterate thug. We won't get into the violence and disrespect/disregard for others.

Pulled my 14 year old niece out of a crack house a couple of weeks ago. Decent family, but got into the rap thing, started hanging around the wrong people. Stopped doing any of her schoolwork, and now talks like a "gang bangin' crack 'ho". All her friends have that "attitude". I remember the "metal head losers" from when I was a kid, but they were pretty tame.


Space.

grampi
12-02-2003, 08:49 PM
There is no such thing as new rock music. It may be called rock, but it ain't rock. Problem is, none of these artists today have 1/100th of the talent the artists of the 70's had. They can't write the music, they can't sing, and they can't play the instruments like the groups of the 70's. How many of today's groups can write a seemingly endless number of killer tunes like Styx did? How many of today's singers can belt out the vocals like Lou Gramm could? How many of today's guitar players can pick like Ace Frehley? How many of today's drummers can pound a set of drums like Neil Pert? The answer to all these questions is none. That's why I listen to either 70's rock, or today's country. Believe it or not, a lot of it sounds like 70's contemporary music. It's not too bad.

Smokey
12-02-2003, 10:23 PM
The rap/hip-hop thing is scary.


I think you may have to distinguish between Hip-Hop and Rap. At least to me in Hip-Hop, music comes first and then lyrics follow. But for Rap it is the other way around and music seem to be same for most Rappers. The only thing that change might be the lyrics.

R. Kelly might be a good example of Hip-Hop music that I am talking about. Or if we go back in time, music of Al Green and Marvin Gaye is also a good example of HH :)
.
<img src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000060NF.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif">

3db
12-03-2003, 06:56 AM
A colleague of mine introduced me to such bands as 9 inch Nails (especially the Fragile Album). I picked up Tools album, Laterus and there is some good stuff there. Jane's Addictions latest album is good too. If that stuff is a little to heavy, try "The White Stripes" , a Detroit garage band. Very simple basic rock. But very good.

I agree that rock has been replaced by Hip-Hop as mainstream music but its still very much alive and kickin.

JSE
12-03-2003, 08:20 AM
I know there have always been bad bands and music in every type of music, but Rock lately has taken a downward turn in terms of quality music and albums. The bands 3db mentioned are truly great bands and I listen to all of them alot. I was extremely pleased with Jane's latest album. But, the majority of the rock bands out there today are just crap. Linkin Park? My god, these guys can barely play their instruments. I think the guitarist knows 3 chords and plays them over and over and over. They are truly a joke of a band.

My point is this. It seems that most of the rock bands around today come out with one or two songs that have been produced to death and then ride on that one or two songs success for a year or so and then they are gone. Which in most cases is for the better. Hell, most radio staions now play the same songs from years past over and over again. They may introduce one or two new songs a week. Why is this? Because the product sucks.

Current Bands I really like:

Tool, Pantera, Jane's Addition, Big Head Todd and the Monsters, Kenny Wayne Sheppard, Seven Dust, I will admit it, MatchBox 20, Dave Mathews Band, Metallica, Nickleback, Perfect Circle, White Stipes, Fuel, Incubus, Dream Theater, Kings X, Norah Jones, to name a few.

Most of these bands produce good music and better yet, good albums from start to finish and are very good live. They are made up of good musicians as well. If you really want to hear some good blues rock, try out Big Head Todd and the Monsters. You Won't be sorry. They don't get much play but they produce some really good albums and are awesome in concert. They are probably the only band I make it a point to see everytime they are in town.

Anyway, sorry to vent again. Good rock is out there, you just have to spend some time looking.

JSE

topspeed
12-03-2003, 01:39 PM
Sorry to disagree Smokey, but R&R ain't goin' nowhere. As others mentioned, music trends are cyclical (sp?) and right now rock is down. One of the main problems is there is waaaay too much imitation and not enough innovation. If I hear one more band rip off Blink 182's sound I'll friggin puke! Good Charlotte?! Good Grief!

Rock has broken up into many niches and there are great bands in each. For a stripped down, minimalist sound The Vines, The Strokes, or White Stripes get your blood going. The latest Metallica album is their most hard core since Kill 'em All and Disturbed's latest went multiplatinum. Rap/Rock like Linkin Park and Korn satifies both h/h and rock camps. Tool is one of the most influental progressive rock bands out there, to the point the current rockers like Sammy Hagar say they love their stuff. And finally, Rush's latest album was their best since Moving Pictures IMO.

Another thing to consider is that as we get older, our sensibilities change. As Rock grows and branches out into newer art forms (see Rap/Rock) it may not be the good ol' rock and roll that we remember and therefore not appeal to us. That doesn't necessarily make it bad, just different from our expectations.

So no, Rock is not dead. As a matter of fact, I'll bet that it will be back with a vengence within the next 24 months. Watch...it's time.

Jim Clark
12-03-2003, 02:43 PM
Been listening to Rock for last 25 years and 95% of my collection is Rock, but latest Rock music scenes is really disheartening. There is no soul to recent Rock music, everybodys hollering, jumping up and down and they pass it as music.

.Sorry Smokey but that's spoken like someone who doesn't know jack about music or perhaps someone who's only connection is radio or even worse-MTV. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that there isn't any great Rock that you have discovered?

Too bad there isn't a forum here where you could find out about some really great music that's happening right now. And wouldn't it be great if many of those members offered up some of their own compilations so you could actually hear some of this music before you went online to order it up? Wouldn't that be a really great place?

Millions of bands out there selling millions of CDs. I'll bet if you scoped out Rave Recs for a while you might find more than a few bands of interest. *WARNING* you might just expand your horizons! Send me an email or a PM with your address and I'll forward a copy of my 2003 year end comp. Be forewarned that my tastes are heavily skewed toward various forms of electronic music but there will be some rock that makes the cut as well. I'm listening to my first edit right now as a matter of fact and it's awesome!

Regards,
jc

grampi
12-03-2003, 02:47 PM
None of today's groups compare in any way, shape, or form to the groups of the 70's, and none of them have the talent either.

JSE
12-03-2003, 03:01 PM
None of today's groups compare in any way, shape, or form to the groups of the 70's, and none of them have the talent either.


Huh? You not serious with that statement are you? None?

JSE

Over50revisited
12-03-2003, 03:10 PM
I went through the 50's oldies, the doo wap, motown, british invasion and the 70's and 80's rock and roll and I admit I was spoiled with all that great music. Jim's point about all the great bands today maybe so to his taste but maybe to mine not even close to what was available to me in my time.Even though my kids are grown up to this day they say dad you had the best music. Oh by the way don't put Marvin Gaye and Al Green in the HH or Rap category, these guys were so soulful that definitely is not a compliment. Just my thoughts.

Jim Clark
12-03-2003, 03:16 PM
None of today's groups compare in any way, shape, or form to the groups of the 70's, and none of them have the talent either.

Well, I guess I'd consider that a blessing, but then we'd both be wrong. There was plenty to enjoy in the 70's, just as there is now. You just gotta know about it first. To say it doesn't exist is a display of ignorance and nothing else. That's a statement of fact, not a slam, flame, or attack

Regards,
jc

JSE
12-03-2003, 04:02 PM
"To say it doesn't exist is a display of ignorance and nothing else. That's a statement of fact, not a slam, flame, or attack"

Well said, Jim

JSE

grampi
12-03-2003, 05:35 PM
The only thing I'm saying doesn't exsist is the level of talent in today's artists as compared to those of the 70's, and that's a fact.

JSE
12-03-2003, 06:01 PM
"The only thing I'm saying doesn't exsist is the level of talent in today's artists as compared to those of the 70's, and that's a fact."

You said more than that. How is it a "fact"? Just because something is different does not mean it is inferior.

Let's take some of today's bands. Just the more popular ones, nothing obscure. Pearl Jam, Stevie Ray Vaughn (RIP), Blues Traveler, Tool, Dave Mathews Band, Metallica, Jane's Addiction, just to name a vert limited few. These bands have some incredible musicians in them. Just as talented as the musicians in the 70's. I hate most 70's rock, but I acknowledge there are a ton of talented people in those bands. I would never say that the 70's was void of talent. That's not the "fact" and neither is your contention. If what you said is true, Stevie Ray Vaughn was less of a guitarist than Page, Perry, or Clapton. That's absurd! Stevie was one of the most talented guitarist to ever play. If you have not heard his stuff, do yourself a favor and listen to it. You will be amazed.

JSE

Worf101
12-03-2003, 08:22 PM
Rock/Popular music is cyclical but if you're longing for the days when Guitar Rock dominated the airwaves like a collosus, that day is done. Music has been fractured by single format stations and record company's carving up the public like a pie. What was the last "universal" album? I mean an album that damn near everyone bought or liked at least one tune on? Michael Jackson's "Thriller". Truth be told. As far as musicianship is concerned that goes in cycles as well. The average garage band in the 60's could barely play, as could the average denizen of CBGB;s in the '80's. Chops take work and some have always felt that attitude and looks could substitute for musicianship. It has ever been thus...

The king is dead, long live the King.

Da Worfster

Smokey
12-03-2003, 09:41 PM
Good discussion guys. But I have to agree with grampi that today's musicians no way can compare with 70's music. How can one put the bands like Pearl Jam, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Tool, Dave Mathews Band or Metallica in the same league as Steely Dan, The Who, Pink Floyd, David Bowie, Neil Young or Alan Parson?

For example, listen to latest music by Metallica or Dave Mathews Band. Metallica is screaming all the way thru the album, and DMB have lost all the initiations he had back when first started. But there are some respectable bands such as Jane'sAddiction or RedHotChilliPeppers. But nothing like what it was in the 70's and early 80's.

It is also worth mentioning that today's record music producers get some the blame also. 70/80's Record producers such as Steve Lillywhite or David Briggs are also responsible for some of great music from that era.

Worf also had a good coment about music has been fractured by single format stations and record company's carving up the public like a pie. It is sad, but true :(

Jim Clark
12-04-2003, 06:11 AM
Good discussion guys. But I have to agree with grampi that today's musicians no way can compare with 70's music. How can one put the bands like Pearl Jam, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Tool, Dave Mathews Band or Metallica in the same league as Steely Dan, The Who, Pink Floyd, David Bowie, Neil Young or Alan Parson?

(smacks his head...hard) In one eye, out the other. *exasperated sigh*

First off, Young and Bowie are still making music so I have no idea what you're talking about there. Secondly if all you're interested in or exposed to is radio fodder then you deserve what you get until you make it a priority to hear what else is going on in the music world and you obviously haven't and don't seem like you care enough to find out. Of course that's fine but I don't see the point of then complaining about something you know little or nothing about. I'll be the first to admit that finding it is a journey of both disappointment and joy. Like most rides it's the ups and downs that make it fun.

jc

Jim Clark
12-04-2003, 06:32 AM
Rock/Popular music is cyclical but if you're longing for the days when Guitar Rock dominated the airwaves like a collosus, that day is done. Music has been fractured by single format stations and record company's carving up the public like a pie. What was the last "universal" album? I mean an album that damn near everyone bought or liked at least one tune on? Michael Jackson's "Thriller". Truth be told. As far as musicianship is concerned that goes in cycles as well. The average garage band in the 60's could barely play, as could the average denizen of CBGB;s in the '80's. Chops take work and some have always felt that attitude and looks could substitute for musicianship. It has ever been thus...

The king is dead, long live the King.

Da Worfster
Guitar dominated rock-You're right, it's not on the airwaves but that doesn't mean it's not being made. Several bands comprised of extremely talented musicians still pump out prog rock for the faithful. Anyone interested could start with the Flower Kings, Porcupine Tree, and Dream Theater. The Prog boys at RR could name 100's of others, perhaps even better. I dare someone to get Demetrio started.

What was the last "universal" album? -This year it looks like Evanescence on the rock front. Hugely popular although not really a fave of mine. I don't think I could spend a lot of time defending the album as great but it's spot in the charts speaks to it's appeal to many. Moby's "Play" could be another of the so called 'universal' discs.

The average garage band in the 60's could barely play, as could the average denizen of CBGB;s in the '80's. Who did you have in mind there? Talking Heads? Ramones? Blondie? All pretty darn original and all created lasting music. No chops?? Ever tried to play the guitar like Johnny Ramone? Ever heard of anyone who could? didn't think so, you'd be the first.

Regards,
jc

drichardson
12-04-2003, 07:02 AM
for a few years.

This is a hiding time.

The rap/hip-hop thing is scary. A bunch of illiterate, uneducated thugs, who rap songs worshipping themselves, getting a whole bunch of teenagers and pre-teens thinking its cool to be an uneducated illiterate thug. We won't get into the violence and disrespect/disregard for others.

Pulled my 14 year old niece out of a crack house a couple of weeks ago. Decent family, but got into the rap thing, started hanging around the wrong people. Stopped doing any of her schoolwork, and now talks like a "gang bangin' crack 'ho". All her friends have that "attitude". I remember the "metal head losers" from when I was a kid, but they were pretty tame.


Space.


What's happened to the metal head losers, they're just as violent as the thugs. When you look at the "death heads" (all black, morbid types) and who they look up to - Marilyn Manson??!!! These people are also killing people but usually wind up killing themselves afterwards. I think the state of music period is on a down swing. I limit my listening to classical, jazz, and Christian genures (the Christian rap group Cross Movement has literally changed lives where I come from). Maybe if your niece learns the real story - and give her an alternative (i.e. Cross Movement) she'll straighten up. Hey, its just a thought. I hate to see children go the wrong way, friends are strong influence.

3db
12-04-2003, 07:13 AM
[QUOTE=Smokey]Good discussion guys. But I have to agree with grampi that today's musicians no way can compare with 70's music. How can one put the bands like Pearl Jam, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Tool, Dave Mathews Band or Metallica in the same league as Steely Dan, The Who, Pink Floyd, David Bowie, Neil Young or Alan Parson?



Surely your not serious. I would have easily pitted Stevie ray Vaughan against any of them including my fav band Led Zepellin as far as having guitar prowness and he would have mopped the floor with Steey Dan and Peter Townshend if he were still alive

The thing is your trying to compare apples and oranges and it can't be done in a meaningfuly way. Music, especially rock is about change. Its changing and evolving.


For example, listen to latest music by Metallica or Dave Mathews Band. Metallica is screaming all the way thru the album, and DMB have lost all the initiations he had back when first started. But there are some respectable bands such as Jane'sAddiction or RedHotChilliPeppers. But nothing like what it was in the 70's and early 80's.

I agree with you here to some degree. I never was a Metalic fan. I have 2 DMB albums and won't get anymore because they sound too much alike. But the ones I do have, I like. There is alot of complexity in his music and its a good test CD to test sound resolution of an audio system. Nine Inch nails is very innovative in their approach. The Red Hot Chilly Peppers to me is too formula driven, never liked their stuff.

JSE
12-04-2003, 07:23 AM
"How can one put the bands like Pearl Jam, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Tool, Dave Mathews Band or Metallica in the same league as Steely Dan, The Who, Pink Floyd, David Bowie, Neil Young or Alan Parson? "

You can't, because generally speaking The Who, Bowie, Pink Floyd, Etc are great bands of the past. Yes, some are still making music, I said generally. The bands I mentioned are great bands of the present and most likely near future. And these are just Popular bands. As Jim stated, there are a ton of lesser known bands out there that are great musicians and have telents that rival bands of the 70's.


Grampi said the level of talent is not there anymore. Just beacuse a band is not mainstream does not mean they are not talented. I bet there were a ton of bands in the 70's that were not really mainstream that were extremely talented musicians. I am sure some of you guys could rattle off dozens without even thinking. I can do the same with current bands.

I bet in 30 years this discussion will come up again in soem form. I can hear it now: Man, the bands today (2033) have no talent compared to the great bands back in the last century and earlier this century. Man, remember the Joe Schmoes, that was a great band.

Taste has nothing to do with talent.

JSE

tugmcmartin
12-04-2003, 07:27 AM
Good discussion guys. But I have to agree with grampi that today's musicians no way can compare with 70's music. How can one put the bands like Pearl Jam, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Tool, Dave Mathews Band or Metallica in the same league as Steely Dan, The Who, Pink Floyd, David Bowie, Neil Young or Alan Parson?

For example, listen to latest music by Metallica or Dave Mathews Band. Metallica is screaming all the way thru the album, and DMB have lost all the initiations he had back when first started. But there are some respectable bands such as Jane'sAddiction or RedHotChilliPeppers. But nothing like what it was in the 70's and early 80's.

First, this is really a pretty stupid discussion IMHO. Mainly because any discussion of this sort is about 99.9% subjective. Smokey says flat out that today's musicians in no way compare with 70s music. To him that may be true because he's looking at things from a jaded perspective. I'd bet money that Smokey "came of age" in the 70s and most of the music and bands from that era have some underlying connections with good, happy times in his life and thus he holds a special place in his heart for the artists from that time. And he'd be perfectly fine believing that. I, however, came of age in the 80's and 90's and happen to believe that there are a tremendous amount of talented artists out there who kick the crap out of Steely Dan, the Who, Floyd, Bowie, Neil Young and Alan Parson. I like the Who and Floyd and Neil and Bowie too (Steely Dan and Alan Parsons i could do without), but Young is not a talented musician, IMO. Great songwriter but average musician at best. I'd argue the same about Bowie (tho his compositional skills seem a bit better). The Who and Floyd were both immensely talented bands, but i could name at least 2 dozen bands from the last decade or so that are more talented (and Jane's Addiction and Red Hot Chili Peppers wouldn't be among that list). The point is, i think we tend to put stuff we are more familiar with on an often times illusionary pedestal to the point where we think that nothing will ever compare. But if we actually listen subjectively, i'd imagine we'd all find a lot more to like about music (the present state of rock and roll in general).

I kinda liken this whole discussion to a conversation i had with a childhood friend of mine a couple days ago. I'm getting ready to have my first child and i'm all kinds of excited. Its gonna be a boy. So to me, this will give me an excuse to go out and buy some cool toys and be able to say its for the kid. So we got to talking about toys and how we missed all of the small, metal, sharp-edged toys that we grew up with 20-30 years ago that served a double hazard for choking/cutting potential. But after actually looking at some of the new toys for the first time in a long time, we both actually found some stuff we thought we be cool to have as a kid now. So while the edges have largely been smoothed out and it seems like almost everything nowadays is plastic, there are still toys out there that i could find that were superior to the quality of the "old-school" toys. Just had to look at it subjectively, thats all.

Anyway, i'm done rambling. I'll close with just this: any statement by anyone that one decade of music is far superior to another in terms of quality of musicians and bands isn't taking the time truly necessary to find the new gems and is living life with blinders on. Take 'em off. Its nice to be able to look in new directions sometimes.

T-

thepogue
12-04-2003, 11:57 AM
go here (hear) to find the living...

http://www.wheelies.com/

Harleyx
12-05-2003, 08:11 AM
I have EVER heard on this or any board is "Man, I totally dissagree with what you're saying about rock (insert favorite genre here)".
If we all agreed, this would be the most BORING forum ever. Lately I've been hoping for a duet between Diana Krall and Eddie Van Halen (he could use some work). My tastes vary. As for hip hop...NO! NO! NO!
It's all wrong.Rock always had a certain honesty to it, no matter how ugly it got. Hip hop is just ignorant and greedy...and mostly old rock samples anyway. There just seems to be SO MANY bands coming out now I guess the rule of averages applies, but some of it is pretty good.
LONG LIVE ROCK!

grampi
12-05-2003, 11:10 AM
"How can one put the bands like Pearl Jam, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Tool, Dave Mathews Band or Metallica in the same league as Steely Dan, The Who, Pink Floyd, David Bowie, Neil Young or Alan Parson? "

You can't, because generally speaking The Who, Bowie, Pink Floyd, Etc are great bands of the past. Yes, some are still making music, I said generally. The bands I mentioned are great bands of the present and most likely near future. And these are just Popular bands. As Jim stated, there are a ton of lesser known bands out there that are great musicians and have telents that rival bands of the 70's.


Grampi said the level of talent is not there anymore. Just beacuse a band is not mainstream does not mean they are not talented. I bet there were a ton of bands in the 70's that were not really mainstream that were extremely talented musicians. I am sure some of you guys could rattle off dozens without even thinking. I can do the same with current bands.

I bet in 30 years this discussion will come up again in soem form. I can hear it now: Man, the bands today (2033) have no talent compared to the great bands back in the last century and earlier this century. Man, remember the Joe Schmoes, that was a great band.

Taste has nothing to do with talent.

JSE

I'm not talking about tastes, I'm talking about talent. You may have the two mixed up. When's the last time you heard a guitar player in one of today's bands (and Stevie Ray Vaughn doesn't count because not one of today's musicians) pick like Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Ace Frehley, or Eddie Van Halen? Or how about hearing one the lead vocalists belt out lyrics like Lou Gramm, Steve Perry, Dennis De Young, or Brad Delp? Could any of today's drummers even hold Neil Pert's drum sticks? None of today's musicians have even a fraction of the talent these people had. I also don't believe any of them have the music writing talent either, but that's more of a taste issue, so I won't go there.

mpm32
12-05-2003, 11:44 AM
A little background, I started my listening career with my parents music, simon and garfunkel, beatles. from there I gravitated toward metal; ac/dc, iron maiden, motorhead. from there 'new wave' the police, talking heads, u2,(started with boy when it first came out), the the, then to punk, then to industrial. Now all of this time I was a musician so I was also listening classical, allman brothers, chick corea, pattituci, monk, parlament, james brown, motown etc. Anyway, I digress. My point is that all music borrows from others; there are influences evident in all styles of music that cross over to other forms.

Now on to Hip Hop. I myself had/have no appreciation for Hip Hop, when I heard the word Hip Hop, I assumed the thumping bass, the rap lyrics etc. Now just the other day I was flipping channels and came upon the Documentary Scratch. It was about Hip Hop. If the Documentary is accurate, Hip Hop is all about the turntable - hence Scratch. The MC, or rappers came after. Those that consider themselves purveyors of Hip Hop, have no need for rap. Now after learning about the difference between Hip Hop and Rap and watching these 'turntablists' working their set-ups, I have a new appreciation for Hip Hop. Not that I would go out and buy any, I just understand where they are coming from. Always something to learn.

I guess my point is, to be a complete musician/music aficionado, you need to appreciate all types of music even if you don't necessarily like or listen to everything. Understand that all music has its place. So you have to dig a little to find what you are looking for. I would rather listen to something underground than what clearchannel is shoving down our throats over the airwaves. Even though I appreciate what they are trying to do. $$$ :-)

JSE
12-05-2003, 12:15 PM
I'm not talking about tastes, I'm talking about talent. You may have the two mixed up. When's the last time you heard a guitar player in one of today's bands (and Stevie Ray Vaughn doesn't count because not one of today's musicians) pick like Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Ace Frehley, or Eddie Van Halen? Or how about hearing one the lead vocalists belt out lyrics like Lou Gramm, Steve Perry, Dennis De Young, or Brad Delp? Could any of today's drummers even hold Neil Pert's drum sticks? None of today's musicians have even a fraction of the talent these people had. I also don't believe any of them have the music writing talent either, but that's more of a taste issue, so I won't go there.

Grampi, no offense but, WAKE UP! You are trapped in the past. Get out there and listen to some new music. Quit re-living the glory days. I am not going to get into a person for person comparison because that is a waste of time, but I can tell you that your use of the term "NONE" is not accurate and really somewhat ignorant. There are tons of incredible musicians out there today that are just as talented as Page or Steve Perry. Eddie and Neil I will give you. They are probably two of the best techinical musicians on guitar and drums ever. Notice, I said technical. Technical skills are not everything. You obviously know 70's music and love it. That's great, but don't be so blinded by it that you fail to see what else is out there. You are missing out on some really great music and talent and that's a shame.

Not my type of music, but what about that guy named Josh Grolin, or Grogin, Grobin, something like that. I heard him the other day and I could not believe his voice. He's not rock, but man can he sing. And what about Norah Jones. One of the sexiest, most suductive voices in a long time. Oh, and her band has some great musicians as well. Her CD and DVD are permanently clued into my DVD player. I know, these are not "Rock" but you are missing out if you have not heard them and many others.


And bye the way, Ace Frehley?

JSE

grampi
12-06-2003, 07:30 AM
Don't let the fact that Ace played for Kiss throw you. He was one of the best, if not THE best gutarist of all time. If you don't believe me, ask Eddie Van Halen. Ace taught him to play.

JSE
12-06-2003, 08:18 AM
Don't let the fact that Ace played for Kiss throw you. He was one of the best, if not THE best gutarist of all time. If you don't believe me, ask Eddie Van Halen. Ace taught him to play.


I know Ace was a great guitarist but I would not have known that if I only knew/viewed him as a KISS guitarist. I'm not sure I would call him best guitarist of all time, but he is good. Eddie clearly took it to another level.

Again, get out there and listen to some of the new stuff. You might be suprised. You even might find some Ace's! Don't just go by what you see on MTV (not that they actually play videos anymore), MTV2 or the radio. There is much more out there.

JSE

thepogue
12-06-2003, 01:26 PM
it's that simple.....Rap and Hip-Hop is todays "Anti" music just as Elvis was in the 50's (wiff that "crazy" leg shaknin' thang), Steppinwolf of the 60's ...the Clash in the 70's...Devo in th 80's....Nivana in the early 90's.....now take a look at each of the above and at first they seem to have NOTHING in common....but the truth be known....they all call to the anti-establishment....kids....who spend money....by records/cd's.....and the market knows this....and sells this...very very well....so when you see the "A-moe-d and the funky-kadina featuring King Kong and Donky Kong"....don't expect much more that raw-ness, a good flow, the "look" and a multi-million dollar marketing machine. BTW please dont think that any one type of music gender has all or none of the talent....I'm not at all a hipster but its hard not to see the genius of M&M (plain or Peanuts!)
Get out and go to local show and you'll see more local/young talent than you'd ever beleived! Two quick notes on guitar "greats"....and folks...this is ALL my humble opinion...so take it for what its worth...as a HUGH Kiss fan (more so "back in the day") and guitar player...i can tell you Ace is no where near "one of the greats"...sorry to say...the band was/is great for a few reasons (one of them NOT being great musicians) timing when the back first started (rock needed the bands "freshness"), great hooks, great live shows and surprise surprise...MARKETING!! (see above "Anti" ie spitting blood/blowing fire....thank you very much Gene!) Now for Eddie...being the first in anything is always big news...before Eddie...HIS style was unheard of...because of it, still today you can pick out bits and peices of songs that bands still today use his licks (so to speak) so IMHO he is one of the greats... once again much can be said for timing for the band coming on scene......

well...nuff said...oh one more thing..

LONG LIVE ROCK!!!

grampi
12-06-2003, 02:41 PM
I totally disagree with your assessment of Ace. There were no limits to this guy's playing abilities, and he could play almost any instrument with strings. On his solo album, he played everything except the drums. To say Ace wasn't at least one the greatest guitar players is just wrong! Also, I wouldn't say Eddie was any better than Ace, he just had a different playing style.

Smokey
12-06-2003, 07:24 PM
If you all want to listen to some greatest guitar work ever, then listen to Neil Young's 1991 album Ragged Glory. He blow away guitarist half his age :)
.
<img src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000002LMK.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg">

Harleyx
12-06-2003, 10:36 PM
Don't let the fact that Ace played for Kiss throw you. He was one of the best, if not THE best gutarist of all time. If you don't believe me, ask Eddie Van Halen. Ace taught him to play.
Ace taught Eddie how to play?? Now that is a quote you'll live to regret.
Eddie and Ace's playing styles had N O T H I N G similar about them whatsoever....except 4/4 time....
Eddie has always worshiped Eric Clapton (a guy could emulate worse) but Eddie sounds nothing like him.
As for Ace, he was PERFECTLY suited to Kiss, and I loved him there.
Todays guitarist want Ace's $$ and Eddies talent.

thepogue
12-07-2003, 04:52 AM
as I've been wrong before. One way to "judge" the greats is to see if their peers (other guitar players) try to emulate them. I've subscribed (years ago) to guitar player mag. and can tell you I've never seen any writings that would lead me to beleive that Ace is anything but a good solid player (as judged by his peers). Once again, as a guitar player myself, I've seen his style and think its nothing "above and beyond". Now Eddie...thats a whole different ball of wax. Many a time I watch him play and be left thinking "How did he do that?"

But if you feel that Ace is one of the "greats"....to each is own. I still very much enjoy him no matter what title he's given (by his fans).

grampi
12-07-2003, 07:34 AM
Ace taught Eddie how to play?? Now that is a quote you'll live to regret.
Eddie and Ace's playing styles had N O T H I N G similar about them whatsoever....except 4/4 time....
Eddie has always worshiped Eric Clapton (a guy could emulate worse) but Eddie sounds nothing like him.
As for Ace, he was PERFECTLY suited to Kiss, and I loved him there.
Todays guitarist want Ace's $$ and Eddies talent.

Why would I regret my earlier quote? I heard Eddie say that in an interview. Now if you want to call him a liar, be my guest.

zapr
12-07-2003, 09:23 PM
I think what's really changed is the music industry.They take a band that's some what talented and they hype them or pump them.Look at Shania Twain.Her frist album.It was good.The songs,the lyrics,the music,she could sing,she was talented,she was country,not that I'm into country,but that was who she was.Then she sells herself out.why?The industry.Money!She's now told what songs to do,what to wear,how to perform,they hype her in a different way.Her songs are not country any more,they're anything they can play on every radio station in the country.They hype Shania Twain because it's bussiness. Big money.And that's what has hurt music and the artists today.Personally I perfer the blues.It's real,it's honest and the musicians are topnotch.The guitarists are the best I have ever heard.And buy the way.Stevie Ray Vaughan is the best guitarist to ever pick up a guitar!

JSE
12-07-2003, 09:35 PM
"And buy the way.Stevie Ray Vaughan is the best guitarist to ever pick up a guitar!"

Amen!

Heart, Soul, Emotion, and skill was in every song he played. He was Clapton, Eddie, Hendrix, (Albert) King and Hooker all rolled into one.

"One of the greatest blues musicians who ever picked up a guitar." óJohn Lee Hooker

RIP SRV

Harleyx
12-08-2003, 03:51 AM
Why would I regret my earlier quote? I heard Eddie say that in an interview. Now if you want to call him a liar, be my guest.
I won't call him a liar, but if I had actually HEARD he said that, I'd argue it even with him. Anyone with ears could tell the difference.

Harleyx
12-08-2003, 04:04 AM
Look at Shania Twain.Her frist album.It was good.The songs,the lyrics,the music,she could sing,she was talented,she was country,not that I'm into country,but that was who she was.Then she sells herself out.why?The industry.Money!She's now told what songs to do,what to wear,how to perform,they hype her in a different way.Her songs are not country any more,they're anything they can play on every radio station in the country.They hype Shania Twain because it's bussiness. Big money.
Actually, If anyone sold (or still sells) Shania out, it's Shania herself.
She hooked up with Mutt Lange (Mr. Formula) and the marketing began.
Mutt is (99% of the time) guaranteed success with his signiture large bass lines and multi layer harmonies. Def Leppard STILL speak about how tough it was to do 100 takes of the same song...but they got damn rich doing it.
Shania went from a house in Timmins Ontario, to a Chateau in Switzerland...She lip syncs regularly now, but I bet she never worries about the bills.

What's your music worth to you?

JSE
12-08-2003, 11:19 AM
"Mutt is (99% of the time) guaranteed success with his signiture large bass lines and multi layer harmonies"

Harleyx,

It's funny you mentioned that. A week or so ago my wife and I were talking about Shania and Mutt and how her music now sounds a whole lot like Def Leppard. You're right about the bass lines and harmonies. I found myself watching a Shania video with my eyes closed and hearing Def Leppard? Yes, I know. Why would anyone watch a Shania video with their eyes closed? Believe me, I peeked.

JSE

Harleyx
12-08-2003, 11:33 AM
Yea...even if you hate the music, She's worth a peek with 'mute' on..)

grampi
12-08-2003, 08:16 PM
I won't call him a liar, but if I had actually HEARD he said that, I'd argue it even with him. Anyone with ears could tell the difference.

So you're saying Ace couldn't have possibly taught Eddie because Eddie developed his own style? I'm not following your train of thought.

thepogue
12-09-2003, 04:00 AM
a moot point as far as "greatness" goes...if he did in fact teach Eddie (which I'll keep my opinion to meself) but that might make him a great teacher....was BB Kings teacher a great guitar player?...clapton?...how bout Sugar Ray's trainier...is he a great boxer?...well...you get my point...great players...well...play great! As I said before...i love'em...but as far as being "one of the Greats"...well.....

Harleyx
12-09-2003, 09:52 AM
So you're saying Ace couldn't have possibly taught Eddie because Eddie developed his own style? I'm not following your train of thought.
My train of thought is simple...and easy to follow.
Eddie has ALWAYS said he learned to play guitar (after giving up the drums to his brother) by staying home and "noodling" every night while everyone he knew was out partying. All the while listening (and loving) Eric Claptons style.
I have never heard him mention Ace. He has mentioned others, Jimmy Page comes to mind, but not Ace. That's not a bad thing, I think Ace is great too..even hung out with him and his band for 3 days once just before the 'Kiss and make-up' tour.

There....did you follow?

grampi
12-09-2003, 09:53 AM
And I'll keep my opinion to myself about Ace teaching Eddie (even though it sounds like you're calling me a liar). No, being a great teacher doesn't make a great guitar player, being a great guitar player does. I've listened to both Ace's and Eddie's guitar work extensively. If you consider Eddie one of the greats, then you've got to consider Ace one as well because he's every bit as good as Eddie, if not better. If you say he's not, then you haven't listened to enough of his guitar playing.

Harleyx
12-09-2003, 10:05 AM
No, I'm not calling you a liar. I'm just saying that as a fan of both bands since the '70s, I've never heard that.
I DID know that Gene SImmons is responsible for discovering Van Halen and getting the record company to ink them.
There's the 'Kiss Connection'.
As for who's better...we might as well argue politics or religion, it's pointless.
Like I stated earlier, The world is a beautiful place because we DON'T all agree on music. Even if you're wrong.
HAHAHA

grampi
12-09-2003, 11:26 AM
Yes, I knew about Gene helping VH get their start. His name is even listed on their first album. That's not their only KISS connection though.

thepogue
12-11-2003, 05:27 AM
it would be more like..."hey grampi...your a liar..." so now you'll know for the furture..

BTW how many hours do I need to listen to have my opinion be just like yours?...100, 500, 10,000?....how 'bout this...you pick up a guitar...play it for oh...20 years or so...then we can chat about Eddies and Aces playing styles....and I'll listen to Kiss and VH for that 20 years...and we'll meet up and dissuss this issue again... until then...I'm not changing me opinion...and hopefully you'll keep yours....for better or worse.

grampi
12-12-2003, 09:55 PM
Up yours! And BTW, my opinion hasn't changed. Ace = teacher, Eddie = student.

Harleyx
12-12-2003, 10:06 PM
Your opinion=nothing.
There are a lot of Van Halen-Kiss ties, but the only similarity between the 2 guitarists is that Gene originally tried to recruit Eddie.
But don't let that stop you from posting your opinion.

thepogue
12-13-2003, 06:57 AM
Up yours! And BTW, my opinion hasn't changed. Ace = teacher, Eddie = student.


Eddie's a chump..there....whew...I should have though of that 8 days ago!

Harleyx
12-13-2003, 09:02 AM
Eddie's a chump..there....whew...I should have though of that 8 days ago!
Ok folks...THIS is what happens when you stop taking your meds..

thepogue
12-13-2003, 11:04 AM
but the doc will be back in ta'morrow....;)

grampi
12-13-2003, 04:38 PM
Eddie is an awesome guitarist, it's just that Ace a bit better.

Harleyx
12-13-2003, 05:11 PM
Eddie is an awesome guitarist, it's just that Ace a bit better.
Ace may be better...at taking coke, ludes, what have you....
But (and I think both are great) if your hearing works and you care about the music you play, Eddie is FAR AND BEYOND a better player.
I'ver heard both men play SCREAMING hard rock, and both play classical guitar...Ace has talent, but Eddie has talent and foresight beyond most.

grampi
12-13-2003, 07:50 PM
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

recoveryone
12-18-2003, 08:17 AM
for a few years.

This is a hiding time.

The rap/hip-hop thing is scary. A bunch of illiterate, uneducated thugs, who rap songs worshipping themselves, getting a whole bunch of teenagers and pre-teens thinking its cool to be an uneducated illiterate thug. We won't get into the violence and disrespect/disregard for others.

Pulled my 14 year old niece out of a crack house a couple of weeks ago. Decent family, but got into the rap thing, started hanging around the wrong people. Stopped doing any of her schoolwork, and now talks like a "gang bangin' crack 'ho". All her friends have that "attitude". I remember the "metal head losers" from when I was a kid, but they were pretty tame.


Space.

Its all the same, Metal head (dopers) & Hiphop (crackheads) back in my day 70's you had dopers dropping out of school rooms full of Rocker poster (Kiss, Arosmith,Ledzepplen and others) sniffing glue taking acid and ludes. Now we have HipHop music with crackheads uplifting gangbanging (been around for decades) now its a world wide craze. all things come and go. Rock may go the way of Jazz, so you better remaine faithful. My good old R&B has been blended with Rap and its hard to tell who whos anymore. Thank God for Neo Soul.

thepogue
12-20-2003, 06:11 AM
I think I've still got me ole Ted Nugent beltbuckle somewhere!! lol