Bob Ezrin says it all

You can like whatever you want. I like Ezrin's work with Alice Cooper but The Elder, IMO, is crap.

 

Nothing's going to get me to say "new music is all crap", nothing's going to get me to say "top 40's great these days". But that's just me. My understanding of music is that's it's something people Do. Knowing musicians that Do , playing with a few of them, recording a few others, gives me the perspective that music always happens, the stuff I like as well as the stuff I don't like. Someone responsible for music I don't care for is someone whose opinion is of no value to me. When Captain Beefheart or T.S. Monk say something like "I don't care for the punks, they ripped me off" or "I don't care for Ornette Coleman, I was doing what he was doing long before he claimed to do it first" I'm playing attention, but it won't stop from listening to Punks and 'Outsiders'. But when someone whose music I detest complains about new trends in music, derision is all I have to offer.

 

as I see it other than 3 people on a music forum no one even knows who this guy is or cares about his opinion.

 

I enjoyed this rant more when it was coming from Shel Talmy.

At least that guy incompetently produced albums by a better assortment of artists.

 

I think the guy who produced Berlin, which is arguably one of the most extreme statements in Rock (love it or hate it), might have a valid opinion on the issue.
Do people realizing that divorcing music from the entire history of Rock music doesn't help their case?

 

"Rock era" is the invention of one person here: Rockledge. As far as I can tell, no one else here uses that phrase - other than to mock Rockledge, that is...

 

Bah. Berlin was obviously incompetently produced and Lou Reed is a lousy artist, apparently.

 

Still, I would like to see Win Butler, or Jack White, or Jeff Tweedy come within a mile of its subject matter.

 

Try Deerhunter or Perfume Genius, or Carrie and Lowell by Sufjan Stevens. Now you're in the ballpark.

 

I walked right into that one. I should have been a bit more specific. I do think a comparison between Lou Reed and Sufjan Stevens might be instructive though.

 

Just need to add some cool sound effects to all of those and it will be like Bob did 'em all.

 

The "rock era" makes about as much sense as the "country era", the "jazz era", the "soul era", or the "funk era".

 

Anyone who actually and non-ironically uses the term "newers" as a pejorative deserves to be mercilessly ridiculed without quarter.

 

Or, apropos for some at this forum, the "Cretaceous" era...

 

"Rock era" was originally used to describe music made since 1955 or so. I'm not sure what's it's supposed to mean in a new context.

 

Off topic, but who are these coked out prog bands you're referring to? Bands like Genesis, King Crimson, Gentle Giant and Jethro Tull generally avoided illicit substances, while others like Yes tended to favor the psychedelics, AFAIK. I know that some members of Pink Floyd got into coke later on, but that was well past their progressive peak.

 

I didn't really understand that either.

 

Which is to say, it makes no sense at all.

 

Get off my lawn be damned. He is absolutely spot on 100% correct. Absolutely.

 

Yeah. The Wall is a sonic mess init? Jeez. No idea.

 

Prog rock was a cocaine-free zone in the '70s as I understand it too. Probably for the best, really.

 

Did you just take a shot at T. Rex?

 

Now, if it's Coke you wanna talk about, you might want to talk to this guy:

 

I don't believe that. Regardless, Prog Rock really helped to suck the life out of rock in the 70's. Of course, there was great music being made as well. Some of it not heard or completely understood until years later.

 

Which proves how few people there are who are actually knowledgable about music.