View Single Post
Old 19-08-2004, 03:37   #17 (permalink)
psydoll

 
psydoll's Avatar

psydoll is well respected with 54 reputation points.psydoll is well respected with 54 reputation points.psydoll is well respected with 54 reputation points.

Profile
Male
location: You're never there when I call
joined: Mar 2004
posts: 7,442
bands: AKA Crap Boyfriend, Gnome Meets Crowbar
talents: Annoyance

Send a message via MSN to psydoll
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis Louie
Rock won't "die out", but the cultural significance it once had has been greatly diminished . People will still make rock music in the same way others are creating classical, folk, blues and other such musical forms. The significance of the new music within the genre is only apparent to those who keep an interest in the subject.

There is more music being produced and released for public consumption now than at any time in the history of recording. As such, the consumer has an almost limitless choice of material to indulge themselves in. Rock music, in its primal form, was a catalyst for social change, regardless of whether that was the intention of the artists involved or not. Today, it's just another form of harmless entertainment.
Is it just me that thinks that an age barrier is evident here?

Who cares how much music is being produced, is catalysing a change or is being released these days? I know it does affect the more music-geeking public (myself included) but if I were 10 *doodnudundundndundundundun*

Think of only getting into rock now through say Good Charlotte. You look at the Leeds lineup and see The Bronx and The Icarus Line. You watch MTV2 and see no end of pleasing bands. I digress as Partridge distracts me but you know what I mean. There are gems in each genre.
psydoll is offline   Reply With Quote