Can we just admit that the 2010s haven't made any progress or contribution to the rock genre

Can we just admit that the 2010s haven't made any progress or contribution to the rock genre

Sure.

what about the emo revival

Rock died in the middle 90s.

music doesn't 'progress'

I think what he means is that there haven't been any new developments in the form

Explain progressive rock

...

i mean, it's a new development.

>revival

revival doesn't just mean "the same thing but now", it's a different take on the old style. more instrumentation, more electronics, etc.

neo-psych finally reached the mainstream
whatever it is king gizzard is doing is shaping up

you'll be hearing neo-prog soon on that note

Me fans are stupid pigs!

Wrong

why would anyone in their right mind contribute anything to rock music. we've moved on, there's no need to look back. this is the future, enjoy that shit.

That's like contributing polio

So you are claiming if you were to listen to rock music from the 2010 you wouldn't be able to tell which decade it is from?

I hope not....

t. fantano shill

pretty much yeah.
rock music is at it's middle age point where it's starting to slow down and look back at all the cool shit its done.
Sadly I don't see any good rock bands emerging anytime soon to save/re-shape the genre. Can still hope though

To be honest I can't think of any musical "progress" being made since 2010-12

EDM. it might not be as progressive as it was in the early 10's, but it's still more progressive than any other genre at the moment. as much as it kills me to say that.

agreed
it happened in 2000s, those albums in 2010s are just continuation

I think there have been a handful of high profile indie rock albums that I'd call "forward thinking" but they were mostly looked over and dismissed. Julian Casablancas' Tyranny, Volcano Choir's Repave, some parts of that Preoccupations album that weren't just straightforward post-punk. Problem is, most of these albums were just kinda boring.

Rock finished it's productive lifespan with 2nd wave post-rock and math rock.

Rock has kept pace at least.

Shit-Hop and Bleeps have massively devolved. The only people who think there's "innovation" in those areas are underages who spend too much time on social media following around their favorite flavor of the month trap rapper.

King Gizz
Parquet Courts
Ty Segall
Thee oh Sees
Foals
Tame Impala
Ariel Pink
Iceage
Kurt Vile

all solid-to-amazing contributors

what rock needs is a crossover band, that can top rock charts and and force the top 40 to go rock again. but it won't happen because of these dumb-asses that think rock music should be revered yet silent and hidden, but worship the days when rock was topping charts along with pop music.

>To be honest I can't think of any musical "progress" being made since 2010-12

I'd say since the 80's with the introduction of synths into mainstream music and then the growing use of sampling that followed.

I'm okay with this. It basically means the overall sound palette is pretty much set, meaning artists can't get away with "innovation" gimmicks any more (i.e. "[artist] has pushed the boundaries of rock music by integrating guitar feedback into their work! We've never heard that before. 10/10!"). The shifts the emphasis onto composition and aesthetic rather than a focus on a novel new sound or production technique.

>Bleeps have massively devolved
There's more to bleeps than "EDM" pardner

i like this
good post user

No, but new ideas and styles get added, and rock hasn't really changed since the early 2000's.

literally everybody has been agreeing that it's a stagnating genre since morons like you started making these threads

please stop

progressive house senpai

I can agree with no progress but not with no contribution

...

have you looked at the charts at all this year? rock never left

>revival
>progress
Hmmmmm....

Hello?

Arca?

Kid606 did glitch better.

Bjork still hasn't topped Vespertine.

0PN? Tim Hecker? Really not doing anything that Brian Eno, Biosphere, GaS, Aphex Twin haven't done before.

Now I'm not saying any of those artists are better than one another, that's up to your subjective opinion, but Electronic hasn't "innovated" any more or less than Rock, and because shitty Big Room House dominates the scene, yeah, I count that as a devolution of the genre as a whole.

At one time, artists like Underworld, Orbital, Bjork, the Chemical Brothers, etc, etc dominated the festival scene. Now it's faggots who press play on laptops, playing music that basically sounds like terrible 90's Eurodance.

t. Triggered rockist


look nugga, I love rock music, but acting like it's as relevant now as it was in the 70's-90's is being oblivious. You may not like it, but hip hop and electronic genres are the big thing today.

And just like rock in the 80's and 90's, the most popular acts aren't the ones that get in on celebrity gossip.

>As usual with Bowie, Blackstar (RCA, 2016), produced again by Tony Visconti,, is mostly image and very little about the music. The ten-minute Blackstar, that was supposed to be the centerpiece, is little more than a funereal litany a` la Doors with jazz horns that goes on five minutes too many. Bowie crooning melodramatic in Lazarus (from his Broadway musical about an alien who falls in love) or romantic in Dollar Days is either delirious and pathetic, certainly not entertaining. His tedious voice interferes with the driving jazz jam of 'Tis a Pity She Was a Whore and with the frenzied and tense Sue (a 2014 single). Even when the voice is not a distraction, the rest is hardly intriguing: I Can't Give Everything Away boasts an awful distorted guitar against syncopated beats and layers of electronic drones: not exactly genius. This is trivial "music" that any amateur could make, except that most amateurs would be ashamed to release it.

>Bowie died of cancer in january 2016.

>rock is dead and 00's indie killed it
fite me

For a counterpoint, I would like you to name me 1 rock artist today that has greatly innovated the genre that doesn't just sound like a slight variation of an older band.

As I said here "innovation" is dead.

This isn't a "bad" thing, just means music has matured as an artform (there's only so many colors/paint types/techniques, but that doesn't stop artists from painting original works).

People keep conflating innovation with "good" or "interesting."

I'm in favor of this because, like I said, artists can't get away with pimping novelty anymore and now have to focus on the composition, aesthetic, and meaning of their work.

And yes, something is always going to sound, look, read like something else to a degree. Originality is impossible. Even the first cave painters were inspired by nature.

The indie landfill killed it not indie the genre.

Who the fuck cares about rock? It's 2017. Grow the fuck up.

There are a huge amount of amazing rock albums since 2010 but i will just name one:
QOSA - Like Clockwork...

Rock music died in the 90's with Kurt Cobain. Grunge was the last area for the genre to explore after the fight hair metal era.

What rock is going to die over if it doesn't get it together is the aversion to technology

Grohl's "just some dudes in a garage band" ideology is exactly why rock isn't relevant.

I was in garage bands, they suck. The most benefit they had to me is exercise and some fun banging on drums with some mates who don't know how to write songs.

Hip-hop, "EDM", and by extension electronic music in general have a MASSIVE advantage over rock in the categories of timbre, novelty, and texture.

Rock being reduced to "hurr durr guitars drums bass" is a losing formula. We've had Zep. We've had Megadeth. We've had countless metal bands with 0 songwriting skill and no mainstream appeal turn metal into increasingly indistinguishable blobs of sound (and not the good MBV kind). Guitar bass drums (and maybe some cheesy keyboards) has been taken to the limit of where it's going to go technically and creatively. Synths are massively underutilized in rock, and when they are utilized they are some cheap preset on a wanky DT solo.

Reznor had the right idea. Textures is the realm rock needs to explore if it wishes to be relevant. Why there aren't a million people emulating what he did or drawing from it is beyond me. Instead we have whiny white people emo-core that for some reason is still a thing, eye-roll level prog that is more djents than anything, painfully saccharine radio pop rock that takes 0 risks whatsoever, and aforementioned blob "brutal" metal. Of course there are a myriad of subgenres I missed that are of diminishing returns in relevance such as easycore where the bands just cycles between different breakdowns, each one more bro than the last, and "pop punk" revival.

"But user" you say, "Muh textures is explored in bands such as Tame Impala, King Gizzard, and other thing"

And those bands are exploring texture in ways that have already been explored. "Muh retro" is another blight on rock, eating away further at any real cultural relevancy it's capable of.

hey

To continue, I don't want to hear a band that sounds like the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s. I want a band that sounds like now, and very few are doing it, and surprise surprise, they aren't really relevant (because the consumers aren't flocking to them). One of the so-called "exciting bands" of this decade is Tame Impala, a band with no balls, no risk, no anger, all pleasant jams to hear as background noise at your local Panera Bread.

And as fore the old guard, I'm becoming more and more bored as time rolls on. No, I don't want to hear the new Melvins album. It's not going to be Bullhead. Their best work is behind them.

No, I don't want to hear that new QOTSA. Give me someone who hasn't been around for 2 decades pumping out material and give me someone taking risks, please.

This is where Hip-hop and electronic succeed. While rockists (and I don't even particularly like this term) criticize the hip producer sampling and chopping and fucking with a song, adding effects, adding his own instrumentation, it becomes something new and unheard of. Clams Casino is a good example of what hip-hop is capable of doing.

Electronic music isn't afraid of "hurr durr they're just pushing buttons and the song is made" accusations, they're exploring new timbres and textures day in, day out. Even awful dubstep artists are at least doing something novel, and someday it will evolve into something more artistic. Disclosure has shown us that tasteful pop songwriting is indeed possible in the dance music realm. Anderson Paak makes danceable hip hop music with a mix of live and electronic instrumentation that sounds fresh. Skrillex, hated as he maybe, helped the masses fall in love with obnoxious noise, the product of hours working on synthesis.

Rock sits ideally by and lets electronic and hip-hop producers actually BE creative, while they noodle around the same old pentatonic riffs that have been done before, and much, much better.

Ahem

>Muh retro
no thanks

Kill yourself. Literally all of these artists are rehashing ideas from the past. It's fine if you're a fan, but don't push them as having presented anything new or progressive in recent years.

hey look someone gets it

Watch this I bet he says
>everyone rehashes idea from the past!!!
>its called influence!!!

yet he knows exactly what you're trying to say

pretty much this. as much as i love rock and metal. i have to agree

Find me a song from before that album that sounds like Dinosaur Carebears.

Same thing could be said about Shit-Hop and Bloops.

If you guys think any modern shitty trap artist, laptop button pusher (whether they be Autechre or Afrojack [they all "push buttons" now], or hackneyed bedroom DJs are introducing "novel" timbres and textures into music, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Synths are also massively under-utilized in classical and Jazz, it doesn't mean I want them employed in those genres full stop. Also on this point, you can't beat the "timbre and texture" of real instruments played in real acoustic spaces. Drum machines sound like shit. 808 basslines sound like shit compared to an upright double bass or an electric bass through a good amp. Instrument plugins through your favorite DAW sound like shit.

Exploring "textures" over composition is the province of hack noise "sound sculptors" like Merzbow and others in that scene. Once the novelty wears off, there's nothing there to really explore. They won't be discussing Merzbow (or Reznor) in the future like we discuss Bach.

I get your point, but you're fetishizing novelty and "innovation" over everything else.

wrong

This maybe?

>Dinosaur Carebears.
Sounds like Mr Bungle through an instagram filter

Sorry user, le wacky genre crossing isn't exactly a new concept in rock

this

I'm just saying why rock is dying, and no it couldn't. We have new hip hop producers every day and they're all trying different shit. The soundcloud flood of amateurs may blur your vision, but look at Kaytranada. He made a new sound all his own. Sampled baile funk and added trap drums. Boom. In fact, a lot of those soulection dudes do decent stuff. Jazz influenced hip hop that uses synths instead of samples, and sometimes samples too.

I like how you discount novel timbres and textures even though that's exactly what said bedroom DJs are doing. No, not EVERY SINGLE one of them but there are some leading the pack out there.

>you can't beat x
Subjective opinion. I agree with you, but you should be able to admit it's way less exciting, especially seeing as how rock has a metric fuckton of hacks and pretty much no innovators.

>Exploring textures over composition

you dolt I'm saying do both.

Also
>Bach
what the fuck does Bach have to do with this

Novelty and innovation is what drives the market in those genres, baby. The modern trap sound, as well as edm, is both novel and innovative, with new sounds and combinations explored every day.

Rock's problem is it doesn't fetishize novelty and innovation, that's why it's so boring now.

You haven't heard that much electronic music. It likely began with you at Drukqs.

Trap: Looped beats with some ambient piano synths anchored by yet another 808 bassline while a braided rapper once again raps about drugs, money, fucking. Bonus points if the phrase "suck my dick" is used.

Very novel and original.

Bleeps. 0PN and Tim Hecker are rehashed ambient. Dubstep, either the good UK kind or the bad US kind, is rehashed and incompetent Drum 'n Bass and Jungle. And EDM is a fuckin' embarrassment. Nothing this decade or last in electronic music has reached the peaks of Endtroducing, Since I Left You, Vespertine (Bjork used to like releasing mixes in 5.1 surround, but since all you "forward thinking" children only listen to music through earbuds and the latest pair of Senn cans made in China, this no longer makes sense to do), Selected Ambient Works, Substrata, Dubnobasswithmyheadman, In Sides, Leftism, Mezzanine.

And yes, my cutoff is around 00. That's when "dancey" electronic groups like Basement Jaxx, Dirty Vegas, and even Daft Punk started to dominate the scene, moving electronic music as a whole into a more catchy and club friendly direction, eventually giving rise to the boil on the ass of modern music that is EDM.

"But the underground bedroom DJs! J-James Ferraro! Vaporwave!"

Don't make me laugh.

>criticize the hip producer sampling and chopping and fucking with a song, adding effects, adding his own instrumentation, it becomes something new and unheard of

I could chop up a bunch of famous paintings into a collage, add my own painting, and "create something never before seen," but it will still look like shit compared to even a hand painted landscape scene.

Novel=/=good. I'd still rather listen to Son House sing John the Revelator acapella than hear anything by some soundcloud producer chopping up yet another Amen break.

>2007

>he thinks fantano is the only music critic who gave it a glowing review

>I like how you discount novel timbres and textures

Here's where we enter the subjective, obviously.

I don't care what "novel" timbres they're producing, because electronically produced and manipulated music has a much less interesting and visceral timbre than the timbre of real instruments reverberating in real acoustic spaces.

Ginger Baker's drums on the s/t Blind Faith record makes ANY drum-machine sound like complete ass by comparison.

Yes, you can sample this, but once you pitch shift, time shift it, or otherwise manipulate it, the timbre is lost.

Electronic music will always be hamstrung by the fact its sounds have to be conveyed through a transducer of some sort (i.e. PA speaker [which sound like shit] or your speakers at home). Indeed, so does acoustic music in a home listening environment, but in that case, you're at least listening to a recording of instruments played in a real space rather than a recording of a speaker.

I half way agree with you, but argument is you don't need "technology" to do what you want. There's still an infinite amount of timbres and textures to explore with instruments through extended techniques and the like, or you can make your instruments (Blue Man Group is really underrated in this regard. As "mainstream" as they are with their Vegas show, the sounds they get are pretty unique) or use unconventional devices as instruments. Tony Malaby (Jazz musician) has used blenders and hair clippers on a record.

What's it even gonna be like in the year 2050 when literally every conceivable thing in music has been done before?

>What's it even gonna be like in the year 2050 when literally every conceivable thing in music has been done before?

Impossible. There's a mathematically infinite amount of ways you can combine notes, sounds, textures, lyrics, etc.

Truth, yeah. But I mean categorically. Most genres have already been discovered and fleshed out I'd presume, yes?

I think we need to start thinking beyond genre.

Like your example of being "fleshed out." Say a rock group employs something from another discipline, it's "no longer rock!" and thus you get these rock is dead proclamations and such.

We've been here before. Traditionalists once didn't think the Beatles were "rock." "Rock" was Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, Elvis, etc.