Is it safe to say that Jack White is the rock and roll icon of this decade?

[Paz]

Originally Posted by TrueVCU

And this would be why I've largely fled to the refuge of indie rock

There is no such thing as "indie rock" anymore. Independent music used to be experimental, small-time, independently-owned labels releasing music by artists who more often than not were doing something no one had ever done before them, or reviving something long since abandoned (e.g., M83 creating 80's style synth and drum machine rock, or Modest Mouse completely raising the bar for lyrics with depth and poignancy).

Nowadays, indie has turned into a fashion trend and string of cliches, which unfortunately, are perpetuated by the artists inhabiting the supposed genre, even though "indie" was never meant to be a genre, but a description of artists on independently-owned record labels. Just like everything else, the labels started making money, decided making money was priority, cut bands with real ingenuity and creativity, and have turned the entire process of "indie" music success into a streamlined, one-way street, in which bands usually devolve into something that is only a shadow of their true selves, but sound nothing like what made the band original and gained it a following in the first place (e.g., Kings of Leon, Modest Mouse, Wolf Parade, etc). Just compare these bands newer albums with their originals, and it is like listening to two different bands... the label heard the sound, however, knew it could squeeze out more money with something more accessible, and released it.

It is also this very fact that has caused the original fans of these bands to rebel against the trendy hipster fuckheads, and thus alienate themselves as "elitist". Also, the overexposure of music has made finding a hidden, obscure artist way to easy, and has, in my opinion, killed some of the fun of finding a future favorite album in the dustbin of your local record store, as opposed to "listeners also bought" from iTunes.

[Media]

Revive independent record stores!

(FYE and iTunes both helped kill the tangibility of music.)

[Jonny Royal]

Originally Posted by goku2057

^He's too old.

THAT IS A DAMNABLE LIE!


caps

[GTAce]

Originally Posted by Paz

There is no such thing as "indie rock" anymore. Independent music used to be experimental, small-time, independently-owned labels releasing music by artists who more often than not were doing something no one had ever done before them, or reviving something long since abandoned (e.g., M83 creating 80's style synth and drum machine rock, or Modest Mouse completely raising the bar for lyrics with depth and poignancy).

Nowadays, indie has turned into a fashion trend and string of cliches, which unfortunately, are perpetuated by the artists inhabiting the supposed genre, even though "indie" was never meant to be a genre, but a description of artists on independently-owned record labels. Just like everything else, the labels started making money, decided making money was priority, cut bands with real ingenuity and creativity, and have turned the entire process of "indie" music success into a streamlined, one-way street, in which bands usually devolve into something that is only a shadow of their true selves, but sound nothing like what made the band original and gained it a following in the first place (e.g., Kings of Leon, Modest Mouse, Wolf Parade, etc). Just compare these bands newer albums with their originals, and it is like listening to two different bands... the label heard the sound, however, knew it could squeeze out more money with something more accessible, and released it.

It is also this very fact that has caused the original fans of these bands to rebel against the trendy hipster fuckheads, and thus alienate themselves as "elitist". Also, the overexposure of music has made finding a hidden, obscure artist way to easy, and has, in my opinion, killed some of the fun of finding a future favorite album in the dustbin of your local record store, as opposed to "listeners also bought" from iTunes.

[Negativity]

Originally Posted by Paz

Nowadays, indie has turned into a fashion trend and string of cliches, which unfortunately, are perpetuated by the artists inhabiting the supposed genre, even though "indie" was never meant to be a genre, but a description of artists on independently-owned record labels. Just like everything else, the labels started making money, decided making money was priority, cut bands with real ingenuity and creativity, and have turned the entire process of "indie" music success into a streamlined, one-way street, in which bands usually devolve into something that is only a shadow of their true selves, but sound nothing like what made the band original and gained it a following in the first place (e.g., Kings of Leon, Modest Mouse, Wolf Parade, etc). Just compare these bands newer albums with their originals, and it is like listening to two different bands... the label heard the sound, however, knew it could squeeze out more money with something more accessible, and released it.

Brother, I highly doubt their music changed for any of the above reasons you've mentioned. You know, even if you think music is shit, the people playing it are doing so because they enjoy it.

Do you expect them to release their first album over and over again?

[Paz]

Originally Posted by Negativity

Brother, I highly doubt their music changed for any of the above reasons you've mentioned. You know, even if you think music is shit, the people playing it are doing so because they enjoy it.

Do you expect them to release their first album over and over again?

It is possible for a band to evolve without alienating a large portion of their fanbase, just for the pretense of acquiring a larger one... of course, some Luddites will never be satisfied, but in the case of Kings of Leon, for example, they completely lost their raw edge that made them something original in the rock scene, and have become a simplified, streamlined, predictable "radio band".

And I disagree, I believe "success" is the reason many bands change their sound, but whether or not that change is made consciously I did not and do not presume to know at all.

[=NukeBlaze=]

Revive independent record stores!

(FYE and iTunes both helped kill the tangibility of music.)

Discontinue being so neutral on the internet.

[Coded-Dude]

regardless of what you guys think many bands are forced to sacrifice musical integrity in order to stay signed or sell albums.

[Otacon305]

Well I'm no supporter either way (I don't give a shit about musical integrity or artists making money) but isn't it supposed to be "all about the music"?

[Coded-Dude]

what i mean by music integrity is: the artists ability to write, play, and record the music they love and want to share with fans. Labels don't care about that crap, they only want whats going to sell.

[Otacon305]

Originally Posted by Coded-Dude

what i mean by music integrity is: the artists ability to write, play, and record the music they love and want to share with fans.

I know. I was just saying I don't give a shit about that.

[Jonny Royal]

Is it ever "safe" to say that any rock artist is the rock and roll icon of this decade? It's difficult to come to a consensus for something like that given the vast difference of opinions.

[Media]

Well the thing is, Jonny, it's not really about opinions. No matter what anyone currently thinks, in five years someone will be remembered as the rock and roll icon of this decade by default. Magazines like Rolling Stone will have to have somebody fill the space in their comparative lists, and this thread isn't about who we think deserves that the most, but rather who is most likely to be chosen.

[Jonny Royal]

Then I fear I the point of the thread went over my head sadly. At least at the time of my post it did, I understand now.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by Media

Well the thing is, Jonny, it's not really about opinions. No matter what anyone currently thinks, in five years someone will be remembered as the rock and roll icon of this decade by default. Magazines like Rolling Stone will have to have somebody fill the space in their comparative lists, and this thread isn't about who we think deserves that the most, but rather who is most likely to be chosen.

And all those magazines, like Rolling Stone, are likely to have different opinions, there is no correct answer here. Besides that, what makes them right? Just because they are publications and not individuals? Behind that magazine is just some people voicing their opinions, they just have a bigger forum on which to do it. You cannot say that this thread is not about opinions, because that is ALL it is about.

[goku2057]

I still say Pete Wentz. FOB is everywhere, and they made it big after 2000.

[Paz]

I don't think exposure and influence is the key to rock icon. I think ingenuity behind the wheel and collaboration are two main substantive ideas behind it.

[Jonny Royal]

Originally Posted by goku2057

I still say Pete Wentz. FOB is everywhere, and they made it big after 2000.

Lol pete wentz

[Media]

Chris, you're not getting me. I'm not saying that the various major publications stating their choice is fact. I'm saying that they usually all agree upon something eventually, and in the future they refer to that -- in retrospect -- as fact. You've got the documentary "It Might Get Loud" that features Jimmy Page and Jack White jamming (with the Edge, who I believe was chosen only because the 80's was such a barren decade for rock and roll; this reinforces that someone can be chosen by default), because the director picked Jack to represent this generation's guitar icon. Rolling Stone constantly drops his name in such a light (they call him the "King Crawling Snake.") The most popular opinion is the one that eventually gets "agreed upon." It doesn't mean you have to agree though! For instance, I believe that Jerry Garcia is a much better guitarist than David Gilmour, but he never tops him on "best guitarist" lists. Why? Because history favors Pink Floyd.

I'm not talking about opinions or facts, man. I'm talking about what happens.

[ZigZag]

sounds like some 20/20 hind sight here, We really won't know. But back to the original post no... quantity does not mean quality... But who knows... we may have someone new come out that takes the proverbial cake