Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Will there ever be a time like Punk and Grunge.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 24-05-2013, 19:30
Adam_white.
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1

Will there ever be time when music was that cool again.
Adam_white. is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 24-05-2013, 19:32
Gigi4
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,776
Will there ever be time when music was that cool again.
I don't quite understand what you're saying. They are still many cool punk and grunge bands releasing music and touring if you like that style of music. Music is so diversified now that not one style will dominate the musical landscape. But if you want cool music, it's still out there.
Gigi4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-05-2013, 19:41
Adamsk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 481
No Grunge was Taylor made for the 90's and that was it.
But it still lives underground in many forms.

Punk is still alive but less formatic when it started.
Adamsk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-05-2013, 22:30
Eric_Blob
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,024
I think there's lots of "cool" music right now.

But to answer your question, no. In the Internet age, there will never be a time like when punk or grunge was mainstream ever again. It's impossible.
Eric_Blob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-05-2013, 23:47
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 3,815
I don't quite understand what you're saying. They are still many cool punk and grunge bands releasing music and touring if you like that style of music. Music is so diversified now that not one style will dominate the musical landscape. But if you want cool music, it's still out there.
I don't know how many times one needs to say this but Punk is NOT just a musical style, it is/was an attitude of mind and a lifestyle. It was a commentary on its times right through the 70s. Grunge was more of a musical style with some of the attitude. Punk and Grunge are about being alternative to the mainstream which is probably what makes people think the music is cool.

But then again I'm sure some people think Daft Punk is 'cool' but it's not particularly alternative. Punk was more uncool than cool...

No Grunge was Taylor made for the 90's and that was it.
But it still lives underground in many forms.

Punk is still alive but less formatic when it started.
I have absolutely no idea what formatic means, do you mean formulaic? In some ways there is less conformity and more and more alternative music and it is less formulaic. At the same time as the audience fragments there is less and less of a chance for a major new movement to happen which I think was the point of the original OP.
mgvsmith is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 24-05-2013, 23:51
performingmonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,527
It's impossible for there to be any kind of musical 'era' anymore. Save for a handful of niche artists, progression has hit a huge brick wall.
performingmonk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24-05-2013, 23:57
Hav_mor91
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The rolling Green of Wales.
Posts: 15,416
I don't know how many times one needs to say this but Punk is NOT just a musical style, it is/was an attitude of mind and a lifestyle. It was a commentary on its times right through the 70s. Grunge was more of a musical style with some of the attitude. Punk and Grunge are about being alternative to the mainstream which is probably what makes people think the music is cool.

But then again I'm sure some people think Daft Punk is 'cool' but it's not particularly alternative. Punk was more uncool than cool...



I have absolutely no idea what formatic means, do you mean formulaic? In some ways there is less conformity and more and more alternative music and it is less formulaic. At the same time as the audience fragments there is less and less of a chance for a major new movement to happen which I think was the point of the original OP.
Exactly Punk was as political as it was musical in the way a band like The Smiths int he 80's was a direct response and antidote to the worst of the 80's. So i suppos ein the right political climate and with the right leader like Kurt Corbain, Jonny Rotten etc it might happen who knows.
Hav_mor91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 00:12
Gigi4
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,776
I don't know how many times one needs to say this but Punk is NOT just a musical style, it is/was an attitude of mind and a lifestyle. It was a commentary on its times right through the 70s. Grunge was more of a musical style with some of the attitude. Punk and Grunge are about being alternative to the mainstream which is probably what makes people think the music is cool.

But then again I'm sure some people think Daft Punk is 'cool' but it's not particularly alternative. Punk was more uncool than cool...


I think punk can have two different meanings. It can mean an in your face attitude and not caring what people think. It can also be a style of music, a kind of garage rock with stripped down instrumentation and short songs. In the 1970's, the two tended to go together as a reaction to the mainstream overproduced 70's rock which relied on being a musical virtuoso. Today, there's not one mainstream to rebel against. But you can have a punk attitude without making "punk rock" music. Madonna is a perfect example of that. Or you can make punk like music without having the attitude like Green Day or Blink-82 or something. But I'm thinking the OP meant mostly the punk style of rock music, not merely the attitude.
In the punk scene of the 70's there were people who just loved the music and didn't necessarily agree with all the leftist political stances so I don't think the two needed to necessarily go together.
Gigi4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 00:19
acker
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,545
deleted.
acker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 00:52
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 3,815
I think punk can have two different meanings. It can mean an in your face attitude and not caring what people think. It can also be a style of music, a kind of garage rock with stripped down instrumentation and short songs. In the 1970's, the two tended to go together as a reaction to the mainstream overproduced 70's rock which relied on being a musical virtuoso. Today, there's not one mainstream to rebel against. But you can have a punk attitude without making "punk rock" music. Madonna is a perfect example of that. Or you can make punk like music without having the attitude like Green Day or Blink-82 or something. But I'm thinking the OP meant mostly the punk style of rock music, not merely the attitude.
In the punk scene of the 70's there were people who just loved the music and didn't necessarily agree with all the leftist political stances so I don't think the two needed to necessarily go together.
Some of what you say is ok, just ok. The attitude (which is as much nihilistic as it is left wing) goes with the music. It was part of the zeitgeist. You just don't 'love the music' you connect with the sentiment. That's the point of 'Pretty Vacant', 'White Riot', 'Teenage Kicks'. And it was part of an era which restated the value of youth rebellion.

There is/was a reason why it was stripped down besides being a reaction to the complexity of prog rock etc. You get three chords, three minutes and the truth. The truth isn't just a left wing revolution, it was a restatement of the youth revolution that happened in the 50s around rock n'roll. And punk was a restatement of the original rock n roll form. Which is why I agree that punk is partly about musical form or style. But if you take out the era out of the music you end up with Green Day and Blink-182. Not the worst but watered down, punk just as a musical style.

It is amazing that an economic meltdown on the scale of 2008 has impacted so little in popular music. And even the threat of global climate change makes little impact. The Occupy movement and Anonymous are with us but they don't have a soundtrack! Surprising.
mgvsmith is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 01:00
Gigi4
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,776
Some of what you say is ok, just ok. The attitude (which is as much nihilistic as it is left wing) goes with the music. It was part of the zeitgeist. You just don't 'love the music' you connect with the sentiment. That's the point of 'Pretty Vacant', 'White Riot', 'Teenage Kicks'. And it was part of an era which restated the value of youth rebellion.

There is/was a reason why it was stripped down besides being a reaction to the complexity of prog rock etc. You get three chords, three minutes and the truth. The truth isn't just a left wing revolution, it was a restatement of the youth revolution that happened in the 50s around rock n'roll. And punk was a restatement of the original rock n roll form. Which is why I agree that punk is partly about musical form or style. But if you take out the era out of the music you end up with Green Day and Blink-182. Not the worst but watered down, punk just as a musical style.

It is amazing that an economic meltdown on the scale of 2008 has impacted so little in popular music. And even the threat of global climate change makes little impact. The Occupy movement and Anonymous are with us but they don't have a soundtrack! Surprising.
I admit that maybe I'm not the biggest expert on punk because it was a little bit before my time. But I'm just going by what I've read and what a good friend of mine who was in some punk bands at the time told me. My friend loved it because of the music and also because it was easier to get into as a young musician than the prog rock of the time where you had to be a musical genius to even get into a band. He liked some of the rebellion, but he got tired of the nihilistic attitude you mention because he felt it was becoming too negative and self destructive. He also didn't totally agree with some of the leftist socialist themes. He felt like a lot of the bands talked about giving to the poor but deep down they wanted to be hugely successful and be stars and so he found the socialist thing a little hypocritical.
Gigi4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 01:20
TommyCinderford
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 164
I don't know.
TommyCinderford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 01:28
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 3,815
I admit that maybe I'm not the biggest expert on punk because it was a little bit before my time. But I'm just going by what I've read and what a good friend of mine who was in some punk bands at the time told me. My friend loved it because of the music and also because it was easier to get into as a young musician than the prog rock of the time where you had to be a musical genius to even get into a band. He liked some of the rebellion, but he got tired of the nihilistic attitude you mention because he felt it was becoming too negative and self destructive. He also didn't totally agree with some of the leftist socialist themes. He felt like a lot of the bands talked about giving to the poor but deep down they wanted to be hugely successful and be stars and so he found the socialist thing a little hypocritical.
The 70s was a much better time generally for pop music. The grunge period (late 80s to 90s?) was good for rock and rap but not for pop music generally. And nowadays it's all so retro and fragmented which suggests that musicians just want to look back to a better past than look forward to a grim future.
mgvsmith is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 01:32
Gigi4
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,776
The 70s was a much better time generally for pop music. The grunge period (late 80s to 90s?) was good for rock and rap but not for pop music generally. And nowadays it's all so retro and fragmented which suggests that musicians just want to look back to a better past than look forward to a grim future.
Yes, I agree with all of that. I also feel that electronics even though I like some dance stuff has come to dominate a little too much. Today, dj's are bigger than pop or rock stars.
Gigi4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 02:00
Eric_Blob
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,024
Yes, I agree with all of that. I also feel that electronics even though I like some dance stuff has come to dominate a little too much. Today, dj's are bigger than pop or rock stars.
I'm not bothered by the electronic domination really, as you can make pretty much any genre (apart from rock) with computers. Hip hop, drum & bass, house, dubstep, R&B, dance, trap, etc. all can be made with computers. Using computers you can still make extremely varied styles of music.

I agreed about dance-pop dominating too much, but that was in 2009-2011. It doesn't dominate that much anymore. I also don't think DJs are THAT big. They're probably huge with upper class white males, but with the general population, they're big, but the same level as pop stars, etc. imo.
Eric_Blob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 02:02
TommyCinderford
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 164
I also don't think DJs are THAT big. They're probably huge with upper class white males, but with the general population, they're big, but the same level as pop stars, etc. imo.
Agreed, the era of the star-DJ came and went about 10 years ago. The era of the YouTube dubstep remixer, however...
TommyCinderford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 02:43
Eric_Blob
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,024
Agreed, the era of the star-DJ came and went about 10 years ago. The era of the YouTube dubstep remixer, however...
I agree. I do like dubstep personally. And I think it's amazing how a genre created by young guys in London over a decade ago trying to re-brand UK garage after it got a bad reputation has taken over the world in the past few years.

However, it annoys me in a way, because a lot of people don't seem to know what dubstep is. Some Americans that don't know about the style of music seem to just think it's "weird electronic music". And record labels are cashing in on this, they put about 20 seconds of "weird electronic music" as the bridge/middle 8 in the songs of their pop stars, and people think it's dubstep, and because dubstep is "cool", those songs become more marketable.

And, I agree with what you say about the Youtube remixers as well. I've seen people that just get every song and listen to "dubstep remixes" of them. I question why they do that. Do they actually like dubstep, or are they just doing that because it's "cool" apparently? Because if those people were really into dubstep, why aren't they listening to some proper dubstep songs too, and why don't they listen to UK garage and grime, which are very similar to dubstep?
Eric_Blob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 10:53
gashead
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bristol
Posts: 7,018
Will there ever be time when music was that cool again.
That implies that punk and grunge were cool at the time. Not sure about punk, but I wouldn't say that grunge was ever 'cool' as such, even in its heyday. Far for it, in fact. It wasn't called 'grunge' for nothing.

Depending on your musical tastes, at any given point in time, music is either the best it's ever been, or the worst. There is no subjective measure of when it was ever either of these extremes.
gashead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 11:33
CitizenofPhobos
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,586
..I grew up on Heavy Metal.. Black Sabbath, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Skid Row etc to me Grunge was seen as an irritant and a fad, just like Emo is today ..I never really considered it cool, Alice in Chains were decent though.

I've always held the belief also that Hard Rock/Heavy Metal/Punk was never really supposed to be topping charts worldwide, it was created for the few by the few and I think that is what makes it special, the fact that some bands did manage to top charts was just by good luck but it was not intentional.
CitizenofPhobos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 11:35
ashtray88
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,311
No Grunge was Taylor made for the 90's and that was it.
As in Taylor Swift made?
ashtray88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 14:36
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 3,815
I'm not bothered by the electronic domination really, as you can make pretty much any genre (apart from rock) with computers. Hip hop, drum & bass, house, dubstep, R&B, dance, trap, etc. all can be made with computers. Using computers you can still make extremely varied styles of music.

I agreed about dance-pop dominating too much, but that was in 2009-2011. It doesn't dominate that much anymore. I also don't think DJs are THAT big. They're probably huge with upper class white males, but with the general population, they're big, but the same level as pop stars, etc. imo.
I've liked electronic and computer-based music since the 70s.
I remember Eno, around the time he and David Bryne put out 'My Life in the Bush of Ghosts', predicting two aspects of future music. One was that electronic music instruments and recording equipment would become cheaper and easier to use. And the second was that increasingly music would be made up of cut up music from the past. I don't know how he knew this would all come to pass but he did. And it's not necessarily a bad thing. It's just that the ability to write solid source material, particularly by major popular artists, has diminished along the way.

That implies that punk and grunge were cool at the time. Not sure about punk, but I wouldn't say that grunge was ever 'cool' as such, even in its heyday. Far for it, in fact. It wasn't called 'grunge' for nothing.
.
Cool is not a word I would associate with Punk or Grunge. I would say 'uncool' if anything.
mgvsmith is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 14:49
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 3,815
..I grew up on Heavy Metal.. Black Sabbath, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Skid Row etc to me Grunge was seen as an irritant and a fad, just like Emo is today ..I never really considered it cool, Alice in Chains were decent though.

I've always held the belief also that Hard Rock/Heavy Metal/Punk was never really supposed to be topping charts worldwide, it was created for the few by the few and I think that is what makes it special, the fact that some bands did manage to top charts was just by good luck but it was not intentional.
Strange belief if you think about it. Metal is part of pop music culture, the chart success of the bands you mention was naturally a part of their general appeal. Metal has been a focus for alternate youth culture from its inception, it's look, the sound, the styles and it still appeals to a large number of young people and, of course, those who have grown up with it. The only reason there isn't much chart success these days is that Metal is more valued as live music and the number of sub-genres means a fragmented yet large audience.
mgvsmith is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 17:49
scrilla
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 956
Cool is not a word I would associate with Punk or Grunge. I would say 'uncool' if anything.
Cool is very hard thing to determine. One person's cool will be the very antithesis of another's.

Anything that is 'in your face' and that polarises opinion; especially the opinions of the default 'uncool' older generation is seen as cool by a section of youngsters who want to rebel. I believe this includes Punk, Grunge, Heavy Metal, Gangsta Rap, overtly sexualised, explicit pop with attitude from the likes of Nicky Minaj, Rihanna, Ke$ha and also some Rave / Dance genres or even Dubstep. An artist like Bob Marley is seen as cool by these sort of people because of the marijuana connotations, rather than for his uplifting lyrical message.

Kids who don't just listen to whatever is in the charts but dig further often head in those sort of musical directions, I believe and partly in the quest to be cool. Not so many will have a penchant for Duke Ellington, Willie Nelson or a touch of Opera. Subtlety, or acceptance by the old fogies is a no-no.

When I used to browse Hip Hop in the stores (I buy mostly online now), the schoolboys would always be looking at artists like 2Pac, 50 Cent or The Game, those with a tough, controversial gangsta image and not Dilated Peoples or Jurassic 5 or Blackalicious, who don't present that way.
scrilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 17:51
scrilla
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 956
It is amazing that an economic meltdown on the scale of 2008 has impacted so little in popular music. And even the threat of global climate change makes little impact. The Occupy movement and Anonymous are with us but they don't have a soundtrack! Surprising.
That's an interesting point. Well, it is to me, never having really thought about it (since I probably buy far more reissues of older music than current sounds now) and quite bizarre where you juxtapose it with the social conditions of the Punk era.

I sometimes assume we are all 'switched-off' now and too busy worrying about social-networking and playing games consoles but things like Occupy do suggest otherwise. Perhaps it's just that the mainstream music scene is particularly impotent?

I don't know what's in the charts from year to year and don't watch music channels on television but it seems to me from the limited exposure I do experience, that anything positive, political or with a message is not promoted. So-called Hip Hop that receives general play seems to be little more than nihilistic and lyrically explicit party music and Soul singers are underground, having been replaced with over-hyped booty-shakers.
scrilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 19:29
Glenn A
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 14,845
Agreed, the era of the star-DJ came and went about 10 years ago. The era of the YouTube dubstep remixer, however...
Also a lot of the superstar DJs I remember like Pearce, Tong and Jules are well into middle age now and the really big era for these guys was the period 1990-2002.
Glenn A is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:12.