Drowned in Sound - Community

Home / Community / Music forum /

The New Rock Revolution

The Von Bondies, The Vines, The Yeah Yeah Yeahs do i have to go on? These are just some of the bands coming through and changing the face of alternative music. If you look at some of the new bands around i think you can say we've never been so privilaged.
It's just a shame that there are still bands like Good Charlotte and Blink ruining it by releasing crap songs with lyrics a small child could have come up with. We don't want songs about skating and getting dumped we want more from bands like the Strokes who know how to make good music.

iamamoleman | 17 Apr '03, 21:50 | Send note | Report this | Reply

Re: The New Rock Revolution

I agree. Good Charlotte are atrocious. As are Blink 182. And Sum 41. And Avril Lavigne. And Linkin Park. I could go on. I have to disagree with the yeah yeah yeah's though. i find them very irritating.

luceluce | 18 Apr '03, 21:55 | Reply
Re: The New Rock Revolution

I like YYYs alot... Von Bondies are cool too... Vines are ok but Nicholls annoys me. The thing is, i think the whole 'New Rock Revolution' thing is a bit crass on the part of NME. Yeah, so there's lots of guitar bands, who've mostly emerged in the wake of the Strokes & the White Stripes. Good yeah but revolutionary is pushing it a bit IMO

WillClunas | 18 Apr '03, 23:00 | Reply
- Re: The New Rock Revolution
  
  It's true that NME have overdone it with the whole "Revolution" stigma attached to the music, and I'm sure that most of the bands would agree. It just gets in the way of the music, which is, on the whole, fucking great. It's just a shame that numerous DiS writers fail to appreciate or even acknowledge these bands, seemingly due to an anti-NME fixation and a penchant for liking shit indie no-hopers.
  
  whatawaster | 18 Apr '03, 23:20 | Reply
  - Re: The New Rock Revolution
    
    I agree that it shouldnt make any difference what movement the press associate a band with. I mean, i still really like Kinesis and MBA despite my instincts to dismiss them as Manics clones...
    
    As David Brent might say, "A good band is a good band forever"... anyway, I thought that NME was disowning the term "new Rock Revolution", not that it matters... No-one reads that paper anymore, do they?
    
    ImageChange | 18 Apr '03, 23:55 | Reply
    - Re: The New Rock Revolution
      
      It;s true that DiS writers hate any band that NME hypes. Because of this they unappreciate good music-probably the best we've had for a while.
      
      iamamoleman | 19 Apr '03, 10:30 | Reply
      - Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Sometimes it works well, since DiS pick up on bands who the NME have roundly ignored (Malowski for example have got some good coverage here) but I have noticed a sense of anti-NME feeling around... like people say I'm only a YYYs fan cos of that paper. Its true thats how I found out about them but they are a good band on their merit
        
        WillClunas | 19 Apr '03, 12:48 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        It annoys me that the writers just slag decent bands of because NME hype them. (It seems that Sean hates bands who even wear leather jackets) DiS have got to realise that bands like Kinesis and Miss Black America are useless and that they only listen to them so they can say we don't need critics. They seem to think that anything that goes remotely mainstream is crap.
        
        iamamoleman | 19 Apr '03, 13:03 | Reply
      - Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Geez.
        
        Dis is not ALL ABOUT fucken Kinesis, Miss Black America, etc. Yes those bands have featured on the site but about 0.0006% of the content is about them.
        
        Our top albums of last year included some of the most amazing records released of all time, things like Bright Eyes, Sigur Ros, The Reindeer Section, Boards of Canada, etc, etc..
        
        Just because the bands people - somewhat unfairly - see as our "pet bands" offered to help us promote our site in response to our support, by putting our name to their tours, doesn't mean we're exactly dedicating the site to them. Yes they may have a couple more reviews and news stories than other bands, but there are a good few thousand articles to tip the balance against them.
        
        As for being against bands in leather, i've already said that's a stoopid comment, the coopers are one of my favourite bands and they wear leather.
        
        this site isn't about me dictating an opinion, it's about a lot of different people who love a whole range of music and if you lot (one person, posting under different names) would step back a bit and stop focussing on a few bands who've had fuckall coverage to be fair, then you'd see things a touch clearer.
        
        And if i dont read the nme how the fuck do i know what they're hyping? that's like hating aliens having never met any. If I wanted a history lesson I'd go back to school - let's push things forward and all that.
        
        sean
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 19 Apr '03, 14:49 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        'one person posting under different names'? Where the hell did you get that from. I know that it's hard to believe and discorouging for you but there is more than one Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Libertines, e.t.c fan on this site.I agree that some of your top albums of last year were actually good (Bright Eyes, Interpol e.t.c) But there is a definet bitterness towards hyped bands. Evidence of this is your narrow minded views towards The Libertines and the Mooney Suzuki on other threads.
        
        iamamoleman | 19 Apr '03, 15:01 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        This is not one person posting under different names... try the NME, its got some good stuff in it (sometimes)
        
        WillClunas | 19 Apr '03, 15:02 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Just seems odd to me that 2 people would think i have an anti-leather-jacket obsession, thats all.
        
        My narrow-minded views are just that MY VIEWS! Not everyone here on the site is forced to think and react the way I do. Infact, James Jam who writes for us, is one of the main NME contributors. And I've met many a person at the NME who hates garage rehashed watered down mushroom soup.
        
        I dunno how you judge "hype" and I've probably only written 4 negative reviews out of all the things I've done.
        
        And so what if we're bitter towards bands who're getting far too much media coverage anyway?
        
        Sean
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 19 Apr '03, 15:25 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        'garage watered down mushroom soup'?
        How can you say that these are bands who're getting far too much media coverage?
        They get this coverage because they deserve it, because they have worked hard for it and because they are excited about pleasing fans and not just about a pay cheque.
        Would you really want bands with no talent in the press? The bands who don't put themselves out for the fans?
        
        iamamoleman | 19 Apr '03, 15:39 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        The Darkness used to be a Britpop band. And before that a grunge band. All band members have been on the camden circuit in many shapes and forms, following whatever fad is going. Sad, innit?
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 19 Apr '03, 17:13 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        I think the main problem with the NME is that its not at grass roots level. It never risks publicising a band thats not that big already. Thankfully for them lots of these bands are fresh to our shores, but have a large following in the states or elsewhere. They do promote a lot of decent music, but they do sometimes get it drastically wrong which is a shame, cos they end up promoting rubbish bands to the end of the earth, and in reality this alone can make them unfairly successful.
        
        My main problem with it tho, is its complete degeneration in to tabloid rubbish. NME is now just a series of rubbish celebrity focused articles, in some way relating to music. Its now at the point when they can't just review something, they have to also say which celebrities like it. They've run out of content almost, and instead of reviewing more and avoiding the bullshit. Its just sunk into total triviaility.
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 22 Apr '03, 10:06 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        The Yeah Yeah Yeahs have had fuckloads of coverage on DiS, almost all glowing reviews.
        
        Likewise, plenty of news stories about the Von Bondies and a good review of one of their singles.
        
        And The Vines have had lots of coverage....
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 22 Apr '03, 12:24 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        yeah agree with most that has been only the Von Bondies are shite, the White Sripes are the kings their version of B.Benson's Good to me rules, also people check out THE IMMORTAL LEE COUNTY KILLERS blues-punk-rock at its best, bye also i'm Indian (well half)
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 22 Apr '03, 12:40 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Oh please!
        
        The Garage Rock band wagon rolls into town and we're supposed to believe everyone on it has been there all along! How naive! Do you really believe that all these chancers will still be at it in 6 months time, or will they not be trying their hardest to distance themselves from it?
        
        If you turn up after the bandwagon hit town, you're fucked from the start.
        
        What bands don't put themselves out for their fans? I don't really think that's grounds for press coverage? People in bands are like people in all walks of life, some are really nice and some are just arseholes, it doesn't matter what *type* of band they are.
        
        The press in general doesn't always cover bands because they're talented, infact the NME seems to base coverage more on what you wear than what you sound like now!
        
        And as a final point, the Garage Rock thing is paying off quite handsomely for some of these bands, the advances they are getting (yes, i do understand how an advance works btw).
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 25 Apr '03, 11:12 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        The Von Bondies: utter shit stripes hangers on. get a clue
        The Vines: lame but at least catchy nirvana/beatles wannabe. itd be ok if they combined the influence, but its really "right, here comes an in utero rip off, and heres a revolver clone"
        The Yeah Yeah Yeahs: make good music, but shes a stupid fascist bitch, and the current single has a completely shit melody
        Good Charlotte: are funny cos theyre twins, and one's skinny and one's fat Ha! how i chuckle. disgusting, degrading music tho
        Blink: catchy, sometimes good songs ruined by peurile humour. great drummer
        Strokes: were kind of cool fun at the time, but now just come off as a bunch of fashion whores. with songs not a mile from being about skating and getting dumped. not that theres anything wrong with that.
        
        pnut | 25 Apr '03, 15:13 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        'come off as a bunch of fashion whores' - only because of the way they're depicted in the music press. That doesn't affect their music. Fuck it, if a band wanna dress in ripped jeans and leather jackets, or if they prefer spandex, it shouldn't matter. It's the MUSIC that matters, and whether or not the Strokes have been over-hyped, they make fantastic music. So it doesn't bother me when Fab gets a haircut or Nick wears a dapper white blazer, I listen to their music.
        
        oh yeah, and why is Karen O a 'stupid fascist bitch'? Have I missed summat?
        
        whatawaster | 25 Apr '03, 15:31 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        some comments aloong the lines of "we hate the town we live in,cos all the guys think they can change things, but theyre just rilly rilly annoying"
        and the strokes' music sounded lovely and sunny in 2001, but the sheen's just worn off, with the boredom and formulaism.
        and id dispute for the rest of my life that its just music that matters about a band. if i think theyre ass holes, in tempers my enjoyment somewhat. not that i think the strokes are arseholes, but there is something dishonest about what they do
        
        pnut | 26 Apr '03, 11:19 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        I think that people forget that, contrary to popular belief, The Strokes didn't appear on magazine covers etc before they had built a reputation for themselves on the basis of their MUSIC. I don't really understand your vague point on their 'dishonesty', either. Is it because they've had a degree of success - and let's face it, they're hardly all-conquering in terms of record sales - that you see something dishonest about them? Sure, they've had a considerable amount of support from the music press, but ultimately it's a band's music that determines their popularity. Is it because of their middle-class background? The fact they went to a private school in Switzerland? Why should that prevent someone from making music, and why should that place question marks over their authenticity? The notion of dishonesty here is created by the music press, who portray them as fashionistas rather than musicians. It's up to the people who buy their records to see through this bullshit, which is unfortunately testament to a celebrity-dominated age which places style over content, and appreciate The Strokes for what they really are: a fucking good rock 'n' roll band.
        
        whatawaster | 26 Apr '03, 18:31 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        the dishonesty: aside from the songs they're famous for, they had a number of others that theyve glossed over that i got off kazaa that reveal the lyrical approach to be essentially very shallow and pointless. in the light of shit like "like a callgirl in her prime, arriving just in time", even the lines that grabbed me before, like "i missed the last bus..." seem less offhandedly inspired and more meaninglessly laboured. also i believe that to be a "fucking good rock 'n' roll band" i believe that you have to base at least part of your career on a great live show, which they completely fail to deliver.
        im still curious about how good the next album is going to be. from the newer stuff it may not be so biodegradably retro
        
        and i fucked up that karen o thing. it wasn't "annoying" but "nerdy" (mental connection between "rilly" and "annoying")
        
        pnut | 26 Apr '03, 18:47 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Hmmmm....I see your point, but those tracks on Kazaa are just a little suspicious in their authenticity, wouldn't you agree? But even if we take them to be actual Strokes songs, we only know that they were recorded prior to the release of their debut EP, and as such, they reveal little more than a youthful, more naive band starting out on the live circuit. What band can honestly say that they have never written a shit track, or played a dodgy live show? Every band writes more songs than they release or play at every gig, the point is that they recognise which ones are shite and subsequently discard them. This is what The Strokes have always maintained, they've never pretended that the songs on 'Is This It' are the only ones they've ever written. In any band's career, inevitably they have to progress from early, necessary mistakes to produce great music. It's not something that happens immediately, and I've learnt that personally from playing in bands in the past and realising how fuckin difficult it is to do summat special. You'd only be kidding yourself if you thought that everything penned by one of your favourite bands was gonna be pure gold, but you'd hope that the stuff which actually got released was their best material. As for their music being 'biodegradably retro', I think that's a pretty tiresome comment to make. How many bands can truly say that their music is completely fresh and unique? Does that really matter anyway? Pretty much everything within the rock music behemoth has been done before at some point in the past, and it's just boring to bang on about how much better it was back then etc, etc. It's completely a matter of opinion, obviously, but I honestly believe that The Strokes' music is equal to, if not better than a lot of the stuff their predecessors put out, and that it sounds fresh and vibrant, and makes you wanna jump around and get pissed and enjoy yourself, and in this light, I maintain that they are a fuckin great rock 'n' roll band.
        
        As for their live shows, I've seen em 5 times now, and every time I've had a fuckin great time, and they've been blooming electric, man.
        
        whatawaster | 26 Apr '03, 19:32 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        The Strokes are the biggest ball of gas going. Nothing new. Nothing remotely invigorating. Nothing sexy. Nothing intelligent.
        
        They've just been made cool and people who want to be cool defend them.
        
        They're just a covers band, who've learnt how to shift a structure, change a lyric here and there. Expensive haircuts and authentic replica clothes doth not a great band make.
        
        I thought this when i saw 'em on the ..Trail o'Dead tour many moons ago and I still think it. They're bad for music because people will day learn everything they love has been done better by The Originals and it comes to a point when people realise they've missed the real party that was going on, the music that speaks to and for our generation. The genius' who're pushing things forward. The icons who have fresh ideas and PERSONALITIES not just TIES. SHOCKER!
        
        I'm sick of wasting my time spouting this rubbish. I've not even done it very eloquently.
        
        Sean
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 26 Apr '03, 20:01 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Sean, we meet again....
        
        At least you seem to admit that The Strokes have been MADE cool by the music press, rather than setting out to place their clothes above their music.
        
        So I want to be cool, eh? For defending a band who happen to mean summat to me, whose music I enjoy listening to, whose haircuts and vintage clothes I couldn't really give a fuck about? A band that I instantly took to after hearing 'The Modern Age' on the radio, and had never heard of, nor seen their 'cool' clothes and 'cool' hair before the guitar, bass and drums kicked in and made me wanna dance, have a fuckin great weekend, narrowly avoid driving into a tree and tell my girlfriend I loved her? You're the one who's desperately trying to be cool, my friend, ironically by launching an attack on anything that's deemed to be cool. In being 'anti-cool' and 'anti-fashion', you're merely trying to position yerself on a higher, undiscovered plain of 'coolness'. It's obvious that you're obsessed with da 'cool'; you just wanna be cooler than the 'cool' kids who dig the Strokes or any other 'in', 'hip' sound, daddio. It's not the majority of Strokes fans who fail to see beyond the 'cool' label applied to their music by over-zealous journalists, it's YOU. You can't begin to listen to music with an open mind if you've got such fundamental preconceptions. 'tis your good self who expresses the abhorrent 'indier-than-thou' mentality when dealing with people who *chuckle!* haven't even heard of The Koreans!
        
        A 'covers band'? That's just juvenile. So you think they're a copycat Television? Blondie? Please explain if this is the case...
        
        And I'd love to know who these 'geniuses' are, 'pushing things forward'. Kinesis, MBA, A, Feeder? Or maybe The Manics are gonna make a secretive comeback? I wait with baited breath....
        
        We could go on and on and on and on with this debate, but the fact is, it's never gonna make any difference whatsoever to what either of us feel regarding music. And that's the beauty of the beast. It's clear that you don't like (most of) the music that I like, and vice-versa. It's a circular argument that nobody can win. But it's actually quite enjoyable, y'know?
        
        whatawaster | 27 Apr '03, 01:37 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        music doesnt have to be about pushing things forward all the time, if that was the case, we'd all be tired listening to experimental shit that just makes you bored. it is true that someone has to do it, someone has to push the boundries, and these bands i greatly respect...but for the strokes, theres nuthin rong with em in my eyes. the only reason there is such a taboo on any form of pop in this indie culture is because it all got a bit crappy. by the same denomination, if we were living in the era of the beatles rising, the same debate would be going on, with 'sean' on the losing side. not until harrison broke out the sitar would 'sean' take any liking to the band, as the sitar had never been used before in a popular mainstream band, and would be seen by many as 'experimental' and 'pushing things forward'.(and yes, i have a problem with inverted commas)
        
        ok i have to go get a cuppa t now, and i'll have forgotten the point i was trying to make by the time i get back up, so i'll just post this now.
        
        waves | 27 Apr '03, 11:12 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        I read a copy of the NME at the DiS Easter alldayer last week, it was rubbish, had about 3 articles in it, a few half arsed reviews and a bunch of week old 'news'
        
        and it cost £1.60... i was actually looking to grab a copy of Kerrang! but they'd sold out by friday... piles of NMEs left tho
        
        most of the NME seemed to be full of ads as well, i don't expect that for that much money, yes, i'm old enough to remember it when it was under £1, you'd be hard pressed to find someone here who actually hates 1005 of th writers and articles in the NME, it's easy to find peopel who hate the mag itself
        
        but hey, i've got a "i'm a hero of the new rock revolution" badge that i found, sometimes i wear it next to my DiS badge
        
        ollie.
        
        ollie | 27 Apr '03, 13:03 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        To be honest, I don't care if it's a revolution or not. For instance, I admit I had only heard about the White Stripes when they released White Blood Cells, HOWEVER this is not because I read that they were the "next big thing in real rock" I was watching Later, with Jools Holland and I was confronted by this mesmerizing couple, I instantly fell in love with them (so to speak) and went out to buy the album the next day becuase........I liked them. That's it.
        
        The same with the YYY's. The ep kept catching my eye and I read various comments about it, all good. I bought it and I've just got the album. The only thing bad about it is the sticker on the front with the usual tawdry comments about it being "the best debut since -you guessed it!- the Vines, Strokes" etc, etc.
        please be quiet. Things like that remind me of abother episode of Later... when there were a bunch of style wankers dancing around to the Libertines (or whoeeverthehell)
        
        "It's just so post 9/11, darling" Or something. Goddamit! There are some bands of this "genre" that I like, most that I don't, regardless of what the press and the in-crowd say.
        
        snufkin | 30 Apr '03, 16:17 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        NME's opinion of bands doesn't affect mine, and the same is true for most people here I should hope.
        
        I don't mind the YYYs, just object to the hype, particularly claiming Karen O is anything more than an average-looking girl with a great voice.
        
        Read 'Please Kill Me: An Oral History Of Punk Rock' and you'll soon feel slightly cheated by this "New Rock Revolution" which is little more than a bunch of bands being lumped together because they look and sound like big bands from late 70s New York. Some good, some awesome, some shite.
        
        Oh, and I'm not sure that your Good Charlotte / Blink vs The Strokes lyric argument works. On paper, neither band's lyrics are that great. As much as I hate Good Charlotte.
        
        "Ya see, people they don't understand
        No, girlfriends, they can't understand
        Your grandsons, they won't understand
        On top of this, I ain't ever gonna understand..."
        
        vs
        
        "Lifestyles of the rich and the famous
        they're always complainin'
        always complainin'
        if money is such a problem
        well they got mansions
        think we should rob them"
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 30 Apr '03, 17:46 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        There is a famous story, bob dylan's driving about as the world's hippest folky protest singer. he hears "I want to hold your hand", and gets out and starts dancing and banging on the bonnet of his car. "it's amazing" he shouts.
        
        in feb 2001 i'm watching mtv2 and the strokes come on, playing live. i've sat through countless hours of punk/metal and a band come on looking so different, playing outrageous pop music. the chords, the melodies, oh man. I was jumping round my front room. It's amazing. the hype can never kill that moment. I don't read nme anymore (though I did then).
        
        i applaud dis for writing about WHATEVER THE FUCK IT LIKES, and it still surprises me quite often. New Rock revolution? pish, but the strokes were/are fantastic.
        but if you don't like them, fine. who cares? they're massive anyway, now.
        yeah yeah yeah's: had the ep, played it a few times, moved on.
        libertines: can't get over the goddawful reading "performance"
        the darkness: oh dear
        the vines: brilliant, the soundtrack to my first term at uni
        white stripes: good, but overrated.
        
        oh, and by the way - for comparison
        
        ramones: catchy but forgettable, mean nothing to someone who wasn't there and isn't anywhere like it
        sex pistols: grates
        velvet underground: good, but not my favourites really
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 10 May '03, 14:01 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Sure the skater rock bands are shite, but then so are a lot of these supposedly revolutionary NME-pushed acts. Dunno about you but to me but originality seems an important prerequisite for revolutionary status, and, well, garage rock's been around for ages. Changing the face of alternative music I think not. I also wish people would stop using the world 'alternative rock' to describe these bands - pretty much all the biggest rock bands at the moment come vaguely under the 'alternative' genre - it's not like theres a big predominance of 'mainstream' rock these guys are an alternative too
        
        matt | 10 May '03, 14:36 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Matt, you are so right, i saw the Vines at Brixton the other night and they were bollocks. changing the face of modern music my arse.
        
        billr2k | 12 May '03, 19:55 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        The vines are brilliant. When they play live they bring excitement and thrill that you couldnt find any where else. If the garage rock bands aren't changing the face of modern music then who is?
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 12 May '03, 19:59 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Kelly O? Surely not...
        Avril? Maybe...
        Harry? Possible..
        Milla Jovovich? Of Course..
        Winona Ryder? For sure..
        
        Sorry, did u say get spunk in their face? Think I mighta read that wrong. My delete button dont work, better send this to u.
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 12 May '03, 20:03 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        What rock revolution. Nobodies done anything new or different or... revolutional since say... black sabbath, nirvana etc etc How can you say weve never been so priveleged. Its all crap. Get used to it.
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 24 May '03, 17:14 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        yeah. rock is getting much the same as pop, people keep bringing out the same old shit, and what's worse it seems to get worse. the term rock has really gone downhill with bands such has busted, good charlotte, avril lavigne, sum 41 etc claiming to be rock, when really they are just glorified pop groups. the only group i would say were changing and improving would be silverchair, as they try different styles and are so diverse in what they do. there is no reveloution, infact there's a merging of music going on.
        
        pop-is-crap | 25 May '03, 22:06 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        "the only group i would say were changing and improving would be silverchair, as they try different styles and are so diverse in what they do."
        
        the only group changing and improving?!?!? mistake me not, i quite like silverchair..but..er..that's bollocks. the one thing silverchair are not very good at is diversity and progression. they're not exactly radiohead... besides, there are hundreds of rock bands out there doing good stuff, and a handful of those are doing potentially great stuff. just needs a nudge and a wink and some support.
        
        x
        gen
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 27 May '03, 12:16 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        yeah other groups are getting better and there are loads that should be making it for themselveses but can't as music industries seem more interested in busted and avril lavigne and such crap. silverchair r undoubtly diverse, listen to diorama (if you have and you still think that then......). admittely lots of other bands who are doing well deserve it and i agree with ur little nudge- wink idea. but kindly dont criticize the ones who are up there with the potential
        
        pop-is-crap | 27 May '03, 22:08 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        The most original band around are...
        
        BEARSUIT.
        
        Yep.
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 27 May '03, 23:07 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        I'll second that; go BEARSUIT!
        'Now the atlas boy is King, lalala'
        love matt xx
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 4 Jun '03, 17:57 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        the new rock revolution was nme's pathic attemp to try and get rock back in the charts and for the most part it worked... i don't mind the bands that come from it but i pay no head to them whatsoever
        
        it's harmless but a little irritating
        
        i do like the whipe stripes tho
        
        my vote for the most orignal act about today goes to
        
        the jimmy cake!!
        
        Tame | 4 Jun '03, 19:02 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        fuck me, someone knocks the nail on the head. thank you Tame. NME tried to create (for want of a better word) "a scene". You read the papers, you watch the tv, and girly pop stars who used to wear GUCCI are now in ripped jeans and con all stars. NME knows this, so sell it. Are you blind ?!!? The vines are not part of a revoloution. If you're gonna break your guitar, then fuckin break it, dont just half heartedly throw it at your amp like some pansy on heat. Fuck me, you lot bore me to fuckin tears. The strokes are good, but I play it once every 6 months, the white stripes are good, but same again here. i dont give two shits how you found out about it, or where you saw them. End of the day, it's cyclical, and in less than a years time we'll be listening to something else that has hangers on like shit has flies, and is named after a different room in the house.
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 5 Jun '03, 13:44 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        I agree totally - NME have ruined the whole 'scene' by making one - and it getting people's attention and thus commercialised. Oh for a return to the days just before the strokes and white stripes were hyped - we used to be able to see all the great 'big' bands at tiny clubs before NME stepped in with 'the scene' - now sold out brixton academy etc etc...
        And it's produced a load of shit copycat acts.
        
        "We hate the fucking NME" - Thee Headcoats
        
        alari | 24 Jun '03, 23:09 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Well said!!!!!!!
        
        Old_Anonymous_Comments | 3 Jul '03, 20:44 | Reply
        
        Re: The New Rock Revolution
        
        Music doesn't need labels. Neither does it need the thoughts of narcisistic music papers with dwindling readership to tell us what to like.
        There's room for all genres, whether it be Velvet Underground wannabies like the strokes, or Operation Ivy/Sublime derivatives like Blink and Good Charlotte.
        There's even room for wannabe Pixies.
        Let's not mix Revolution with Evolution.
        
        dustysurfer | 4 Jul '03, 01:54 | Reply

Search

Home / Community / Music forum /

The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Re: The New Rock Revolution

Recent