Panic! at the disco

Went with Arcade Fire in the end, Urgh at Muse though.

I just want to add that; Nickelback are probably one of, if not, the worst band to have ever roamed this earth.


(imo)

How can the Strokes only have 2 votes?!

Recently Muse but mostly liked Arctic Monkeys first two albums immensely so voted for them!

Arcade Fire is not a rock band.

Agreed. They're indie/alternative, wouldn't know what rock was if it smacked them in the face.

Do Kings of Leon not count as rock?

Some of those have barely had a hit between them.

You missed out probably the biggest rock act of the decade, the Foo Fighters.

I wouldn't call Coldplay rock.

Rock has all different kinds of genre... Indie/Alternative are just two of these...

I put them on the list cos I wanted to represent the nu-metal acts that were extremely popular at the turn of the Millennium. Honestly, whether Slipknot are 'metal' or not is a pretty contentious issue, a lot of my metalhead friends (wrongly, imo) wouldn't even class Cradle of Filth as metal let alone the acts you mentioned. I probably shouldn't have put them on though, only because most of their commercial success was around 1999 and petered out afterwards.

I'm too much of an anally retentive snob to class a lot of these acts as rock myself, but I'm going off what the public/media says is rock.


Exquisite taste. A thrilling and titillating auditory experience awaits for those who discover these continental pearls of beauty.


I can understand why they are classed as such. Folky, but they hardly fit into true folk. Win Butler looks like an axe wielding psychopath but the similarity to punk pretty much ends there. Their entire 'corporation' is managed exactly like an old fashioned (pre-Nirvana) rock band so I would hesitate to call them indie either. IMO they're a modern art rock band. People just don't see it cos that genre is meant to be a form of 'pompous' rock that died out when punk, metal and indie came along.


Well... that sex in a pick up truck song did make me laugh so they are better than some of the humourless shite on this list but yes, in principle, I have to agree.


The Foo Fighters became popular in the nineties. If I included them, I would have to include Oasis, Placebo, Radiohead etc. This is a poll to determine what bands came around in the last decade and remain popular.

I wouldn't either, but a lot of people do.

Rock Subgenres!

If you play it that way...then most of that list isn't rock either
(don't just single out AF from that list)

Muse - alt/rock, progressive/space rock
Elbow - alt/indie
Kasabian - alt/rock
Arctic Monkeys alt/indie
Linkin Park - nu-metal
Coldplay - alternative
Arcade Fire alt/indie
Nickelback - shit rock
My Chemical Romance - pop punk, alt/rock
The Strokes - indie, alt/rock
Slipknot - nu-metal
Evanescence - alt/rock, nu-metal
Franz Ferdinand - alt/indie
Panic! At the Disco - pop rock

is how i would label them.

PATD and Coldplay are pop

That would be incredibly pointless. What's wrong being simple and calling it all rock. I've never understood why anything slightly different has to have it own subgenre made up for it.

Volbeat are good. So are Alestorm

How is it "incredibly pointless"? Rock is a broad term, it covers many genres.

It's like saying; "whats the point in having Death Metal, Black Metal or Metalcore - lets just group them as metal"
Well that would be "incredibly pointless" seeing as they're different genres and stand for different types of music.

Just because you don't understand what different genres of music there are doesn't mean that everyone else should be as ignorant about them as yourself.

Obviously there are different kinds of rock, but I think the word rock is being used here to distinguish these acts from R&B, rap or dance type of acts.
As far as mainstream, I took that to mean bands that have achieved a certain level of fame and commercial success even if their style would be classified as indie/alternative.

Linkin park

Its quite sensible, all the bands in the list are rock bands, but the Strokes sound nothing like Slipknot.

So you need sub genres to explain the differences but the big umbrella genre of "rock" as well.



I personally couldn't pick a favourite from that list, the Strokes and Slipknot are so different, how do you compare them.

For me, The Strokes and The Libs sum up the decade for me in some ways.

Then again, I would say the Deftones were the best of the decade in their particular field.

Similarly the influence of emo/post hardcore bands in the 2000's was massive, so perhaps Biffy Clyro from the UK, at the drive in were massively influential on music in the decade, even My chemical Romance deserve a mention.

Queens of the Stone age were very popular and influential (josh holmes seems to have worked on or colaborated with artists on half the albums made in the last 10 years )

All this labelling of bands is soooo

see i thought there was indie rock and alternative rock, they are not folk as say Jeff Buckley

All the above are metal so describing them as such is perfectly valid. I'm not even talking about subgenres really, I'm talking about all the pedants that come out and say "this isn't rock this is post-indie-artrock (or some such crap)" Well, uh yeah it IS rock. Do you understand what sub-genre means yourself? A subcategory within a genre - the genre being ROCK.

haha ok... So everyone has to dumb down how they look at different artists because it makes it hard for some people to understand the difference one genre to another?

Also I didn't say it was wrong, I did say it was how I would label them. Feel free to call Slipknot rock, I just couldn't.