Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

When is classic rock not classic rock?


odysseus

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Barking Spiders said:

It's the style of rock hat doesn't upset Radio 2 listeners, partly because everyone has heard tunes in the CR canon at least 3 million times

Reminds me of someone's quote about how punters don't know what they like, but like what they know!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/12/2019 at 19:03, odysseus said:
On 29/12/2019 at 18:38, hooky_lowdown said:

Who says Peppers, RATM and especially Stereophonics are classic rock?

I've seen a few bands who purport to be classic rock bands including songs by the above bands in their sets.  Presumably the bands have agreed that such songs, rightly or wrongly, fall under their definition of classic rock.

In my observation, bands who set out to play strictly Classic Rock covers find that they struggle to get many gigs and to maintain audience interest when they do play. Invariably they start adding the likes of Stereophonics, Chili Peppers and Green Day to their repertoire. Snobby people like me balk at this inauthenticity, but the punters seem to like it.

Edited by arthurhenry
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, arthurhenry said:

In my observation, bands who set out to play strictly Classic Rock covers find that they struggle to get many gigs and to maintain audience interest when they do play. Invariably they start adding the likes of Stereophonics, Chili Peppers and Green Day to their repertoire. Snobby people like me balk at this inauthenticity, but the punters seem to like it.

This seems to be the case 'ereabouts, too.  It was one of the deciding factors when my 'classic rock covers band' decided to morph into a Bon Jovi tribute.  At least Bon Jovi don't play Mr F^cking Brightside.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, arthurhenry said:

In my observation, bands who set out to play strictly Classic Rock covers find that they struggle to get many gigs and to maintain audience interest when they do play. Invariably they start adding the likes of Stereophonics, Chili Peppers and Green Day to their repertoire. Snobby people like me balk at this inauthenticity, but the punters seem to like it.

The final phrase - "the punters seem to like it" - is what it's about. It's all very well being "authentic" and "true to one's principles", but it doesn't pay the bills.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there are too many sub genres of Rock to be able to clearly say that’s “Blah Blah Rock” It’s like everything it is very subjective I might think something belongs in a certain category but other people might think it belongs in a different one 

IMHO I couldn’t give a flying F*** what it’s classed as if I like it and it fits into a set and the punters like it then that is more important than its label!!.........😀

 

Edited by Jimothey
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Classic rock" doesn't really exist as a genre because its just old rock, but if someone says classic rock I assume they are talking about the kimd of music that predominated rock before punk. More accurate would be 60s and 70s rock with too much focus on guitar widdling (ie The Beatles don't really count as they are a pop band)

I would have no problem putting a set together withh that kind of music and including Van Halen, Whitesnake, NWOBHM bands, and the likes of Guns and Roses whe were pretty much continuing the same kind of stuff, albeit doing so clad in spandex.

Its quite possible to put stuff by the Jam, the Police and Green Day in a classic rock set but IMO those bands are forging a slightly different path which actually, for me. sit more comfortably in an alternative/indie rock set.

My own band play mpstly 90s and 00s rock, but include a cover of Kids in America, some Billy Idol and Roxanne by the Police because we think those songs fit with the other stuff we're playing,  We also do songs which IMO don't fit at all, but as someone said above you have to pay what the punters expect to hear,

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jimothey said:

I think there are too many sub genres of Rock to be able to clearly say that’s “Blah Blah Rock” It’s like everything it is very subjective I might think something belongs in a certain category but other people might think it belongs in a different one 

IMHO I couldn’t give a flying F*** what it’s classed as if I like it then that is more important than its label!!.........😀

 

Damn straight. There are 2 types of music: music I like and music I don't like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, odysseus said:

Damn straight. There are 2 types of music: music I like and music I don't like.

I tend to agree to a certain extent but when someone asks you what kind of music you prefer how do you respond to that.

Altho you like or dislike music it doesn't describe your preferred styles assuming you have one or two ?

I think that's why most people tend to categorise music to allow them to describe it in more detail.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stub Mandrel said:

So 'classic rock' = "You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet" and, err, umm... not a lot else?

Well, can prob add Smoke On The Water and some ACDC

 

Not knocking any of the music, just Clarkson's narrow tastes/worldview 😁

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...