strobe lights and food fights, thats whats missing. also rollerskates.

It's the same with rock music. It's the same with most people who pay for any entertainement of any kind, Roberta.

music to put on and be swept away by, not music to have dinner with your uncle and aunt to.

You're all a bunch of balding rockists. We need more

not with jazz, nor blues, nor punk or underground rock, nor folk, nor classical music. not for the local funk bands or reggae bands

I agree with the dynamics statement. dynamics in music means the relationship between the loud and the quiet, the forceful and the delicate. much music these days is one note. that is why everyone used to love the pixies, before everyone ripped them off. they had a sense of dynamic range in their songs and they used it for full effect.

What do you mean, baby doll?

you do not see that this guy is ROCKING OUT! that is what is needed, not specifically a guitar sound. it is personal AGGRESSION

mainstream popular music does have talent behind the scenes, but most bands working in the genres I threw out there are doing it all themselves. there is not a hype machine in jazz or blues or classical music (not popera or those fucking tenors, but regular classical symphony and chamber music concerts)
the problem is that a hype machine was developed for underground rock a couple of decades ago and it has fucked up the underground.

I think that the people who make the most mopney from music want fans to treat the music as disposable, because if it si disposable you are always ready to buy a whole shitton of new stuff that they shove down yr throats. the old stuff holds no meaning. (of course I am speaking in generalities, but I see this especially in hip hop. and genero rock)

what is needed is more waitresses

clearly what is missing is rob instigator and sarramkrop.

And Jon Boy's talent, obviously.

i want nothing to do with you.

Good. I don't like you, anyway.

what is lacking in todays music is its ability to challenge the dominant ideology or provide any new form of transgression that doesn't lead to hedonistic self destruction thus destroying any revolutionary or emancipatory potential.

very little music is able to go beyond sucking off the dead guts of a past or imagined counter culture. people pretend there is still something somehow credible about outdated punk/noise/art moves.

the claim that the 90's bands killed off hair metal and flamboyance and indulgence is only partly true. people like thurston moore just ressurected it in the form of spewing out noise releases that are the postmodern equivalent of the indulgence of 80's fretwanking guitar solo metal or 70's prog flamboyance.

that entire argument or the word "internet".

we are locked into a nostalgia for a time when the cd/lp/cs artifact could still function as a portal to new undiscovered culture. now it really can't because it's been made obsolete by the computer which works as a musical object with infinitely editable cover art/liner notes/songs/videos.

i'm completely bored of rocking out, rock based music has by far the widest shit to good ratio. i think it's probably about 10000000 shit to 10 good

The first two paragraphs I'm totally with you,. The third I think is a little too harsh harsh. Sonic Youth haven't been avantgarde since the 80's, or at least not in a more linear way that would make the fans rely on them for 'never heard before' new thrills throughout. I don't think that's a bad thing, since they still made some great records since then.

WM and ATL sounded pretty avant garde to me.

Fair enough

Some songs on ATL, yes. On occasions they did. Overall they did not.

i edited the first post before i saw yr post by the way.

i don't think any of their 90's records were great. i think there are some superficially cool moves, but only in the form of a delve into their newly contextualised past influences.

Extravaganza stadium shows featuring a gigantic inflatable cock that rises from the stage floor.

neither of those records say anything new. all sy have is history, they will never say anything new again

I think that in their 90's etc incarnation they made a point that they are a rock band more than anything (some interviews would prove this etc). Ever since I've bought 'Goo' for the first time I've been reminded of other bands, as well as Sonic Youth themselves. Nothing wrong with that. I think it's a cool thing.

????

I will accept that rock music's aggression has gone for many years, though. Its cultural relevance has been relevant for as long as it was ok to feel of it as relevant. Since most music's importance is only relative, rather than imposed by itself, it's only natural that it suffers the down's more than the up's.

its relevance has been relevant for as long as it was ok to feel it was relevant?

maybe the truth is that it isn't relevant now. at least not for guys like you or me. but we desperately want it to be out of nostalgia and a near lifelong emotional investment that we still havent got the full payoff from (and never will).

i hate the fact i still read this fucking board so much and waste so much time sitting eating smoking listening to music and barely being able to notice it then chided myself for not paying enough attention. it just feels like bad junk that makes me stupid most of the time. i know there is so much more better stuff i should be doing and reading and that music seems to just keep me in my place most of the time.

OK, how can you critique the present state of music if you don't even know its past? A central part of the Rolling Stones' Tour of the Americas show in 1975 was the erection during certain numbers like Starfucker of a gigantic cock on the stage. Mick Jagger sometime rode it.

maybe you should try a different kind of "rock based music"

might I recommend

yeah that's definitely a necessary piece of knowledge for any critique of rock music.

I would think so. Fucking elitists.

its hardly elitist to think the rolling stones are shit.

haha

You poor kids, you're very smart. But you have no soul. Or sense of humor.

the rolling stones are the proof that there is no soul left in rock music.

Well, the Rolling Stones are no longer a band, and haven't been since 1975 or so, so what are you talking about?

no longer a band? do they not still tour and make albums?

No. Not the same band. As is pretty common with critics of the band, you're equating the current configuration with what they were in the past. Just because some old farts don't know when to give up the ghost doesn't mean that they were not great in their day.

My point about the cock on stage is that a lot of playfulness and creativity seems to have disappeared from what I hear in today's music. It's become Sooooo intellectual and precious that it's no longer rock and roll. I guess if you don't like rock and roll, that's a different story, then, but for God's sake, why does it all have to be so serious.