Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Modern_Mannequin, Aug 3, 2010.
Whatsa AAA station?
Usually the public radio stations, I've seen the format as labelled AAA. http://www.yes.com/#WFPK for instance is the AAA station in Louisville. Notice on the "top songs" list, you see Arcade Fire, Tom Petty, Los Lobos, Dr. Dog, LCD Soundsystem, Josh Ritter, Vampire Weekend, Spoon, Aqualung, Drive By Truckers and MGMT in their current top 100 playlist. All of which get great reviews and are well-loved by critics and hipsters, but you won't see any of these on the local "rock" stations (okay, you will hear OLD Tom Petty on classic rock, nothing past 1994 though) that are too busy playing Nickelback, Daughtry and Three Days Grace to give any of this stuff a chance.
Here in pizzaland we've got a national broadcaster, Rai, which runs 3 TV channels and 3 FM + MW radio channels along with the Berlusconi family-owned Mediaset conglomerate, which runs another three TV channels and controls more or less directly 4 radio channels.
While Rai is partially tax-funded, it has more or less the same quantity of TV ads and is no more independent than Mediaset, in fact it is way more prone to political pressure from the government and the Vatican.
In fact, the format is more or less the same, only it replaces certain soap operas with government-funded productions centering mostly around saints, popes and the occasional national hero.
Radio Rai 3 used to broadcast lots of classical music on its MW channels, but it has kinda cut it down.
"Adult Album Alternative" isn't "Alternative", it's an alternative to attract adult listening. I don't care for them because they tend to play too much rock, and seem stuck on themselves. But I do have one on the first button of my car radio, because it's the one station likely to play something I wouldn't expect to get over-the-air. They tend to play non-charting or low-charting cuts by artists they think should "matter" to a more eclectic audience.
You could say it's a logical evolution of the old AOR "format", wheras the real AOR degenerated into Classic Rock with a few modern tracks.
This is probably the most snobby comment I have seen on here in a while. You're saying that I'm not smart because I listen to modern pop music? Hrmmm I'd like to say my grades and GPA say otherwise, but that's just one standard of testing intelligence. I assume you're part of Mensa. Sigh.
I'm not saying that Nickelback is a great band, far from it, but some songs are certainly a hell of a lot of fun, "I Gotta Feeling" by the Black Eyed Peas is a great dance song. If you can't have fun listening to music then why bother listening at all? I know plenty of people who listen to Lady Gaga and then the next day they're listening to The Beatles. It's called Pop music for a reason dude.
I guess I'd also like to ask what "true rock" is? Isn't rock music built upon blues, pop, and country music? Nothing about rock music is original, nothing about rock music has ever been truly original, it's all based upon some other style.
This would not work in the United States.
Attitudes about what should be provided by the government and what should be provided by private enterprise are very different in the United States compared to Europe.
Most people here view art and entertainment as consumer goods. Furthermore, there is a large portion of the population that views any art or entertainment provided by the government with suspicion and, even, hostility.
There are very few publicly owned radio stations in the United States. Most people here listen to commercial radio stations if they listen to the radio at all.
The reasons for this are too numerous to mention and discussion of some of them are political in nature.
Most Americans simply are not accustomed to the idea of publicly funded entertainment.
This is the website for national public radio, as close as we've got to what you're talking about...pretty much every area of the country has at least one station. It's a variety of programming, though...not just pop/rock:
Here is one of our local listener supported public radio stations. They have a variety of local shows, NPR programming, and syndicated shows, like the World Cafe. My favorite terrestrial station here:
Digging the avatar, Dinsdale
...or, rather, publicly-funded entertainment media.
Of course our "national" public radio stations actually get most of their financing from fund drives to their listeners and corporate tax deductable donations.
A friend of mine got drunk last year during a fund drive and donated the max $600 to WNCW last year, so we got to go to the Warren Haynes pre-jam concert!
Well, James Oldham can rest assured that he is helping to put the nails in the coffin of the music industry. Rather than blaming everything on downloaders, why don't they take a long hard look at their sh**ty rosters, and then ask themselves why their sales are dropping like a ton of bricks. Are they really that stupid to think this is a coincidence? How do these idiots get their jobs...............????? Rolling Stone magazine always runs those articles about how much sales the industry is down from previous years, citing downloaders and people just going to concerts and not buying CDs. I think it's the crap music, personally.
Why do record executives always want to announce the death of rock music. In my opinion its because they are just looking for excuses for the complete mess they have made of the entire industry. Sales are down? Why? Because record companies are unwilling to let bands grow, feed their creativity or just let them do their own thing. Instead they are interested in the bottom line and can't understand why people don't want to buy their over priced, poor quality, generic sounding mass marketed garbage.
There is still hope and a lot of talent out there, its just difficult to for them to reach their audience. I read an encouraging article at the weekend regarding one of Britain's 'next big things', a band called Kassidy, 4 guys playing acoustic guitars and focusing on vocal harmonies! About as far from your Lady Gaga's as you can possibly get! I'm always suspicious of bands being heralded as the next big thing, but i have to say that A&R guys pushing an acoustic four piece is an encouraging sign.
Rockbands cost a lot of money (producing, touring, instruments,...)
A dj only needs a laptop and ableton these days.
Britain's 'next big things', a band called Kassidy, 4 guys playing acoustic guitars and focusing on vocal harmonies!
> they broadcasted their debut at BBC (T In The Park)
Sounds ok, but those harmony-bands revival is nothing new. Grizzly Bear, Fleet Foxes, Avi Buffalo, Broken Glass Heroes,... are quite popular over here these days. Bands influenced by Neil Young, The Byrds, Crosby Stills and Nash, Beach Boys,...
I think they're even more popular than e.g. Crosby Stills and Nash 40 years ago. They didn't have much radio airplay or commercial success over here (according to my dad). While those new bands are played frequently on the radio.
If it sounds retro, it's "hip" these days ... (the press over here calls it "dance laziness" ... we had our portion of electronic beats now for more than 20 years) and "young people" are into "vintage sound" again like Amy Winehouse, Duffy, Fleet Foxes, Broken Glass Heroes, Caro Emerald, Jamie Lidell, Gotye,...
"Deservedly so"? Why, just because you don't like it? There is new rock music being created even now that is fresh, exciting and enjoyable - check out Gaslight Anthem, The Rifles, Glasvegas, British Sea Power. Probably none of these bands get much mainstream airplay but great new rock music is still being created and just because the major labels disdain it these days doesn't mean it's going to die. Genesis, Pink Floyd, ELP and Yes more or less created progressive rock back in the 70's and progressive rock is still as vibrant and innovative to this day. There may be only a handful of newer bands that are 'famous' - Spock's Beard, Porcupine Tree, Dream Theater for example but there are hundreds of lesser known bands writing and producing some very good progressive rock - Pendragon, The Watch, IQ, Grey Lady Down, Opeth, Arena, The Flower Kings, to name but some. The point is that there is a love for this music that transcends fashion - people want to play it and people want to hear it so there is a worldwide network of prog rock bands that have loyal followings and yet are nearly all well below the radar. If rock music becomes no longer mainstream, it will not die out. Like prog rock it will just go underground but live on; probably in a far healthier state without record company battles and promoter battles and sponsor battles; where bands really can experiment without some record company pleb telling them that they can't do this or they can't do that. Rock's not going to die, no way, it's just going to move away from the corporate BS and back where it should be, the streets.
Not saying this against you, but I've met a lot of people who went through college with nice GPAs who still weren't that smart. They had work ethic and were intelligent enough to regurgitate information on exams, but they had not one shred of intellectual prowess nor could they ever actually truly understand the lessons in college that they forgot the moment the tests were finished.
There is a difference between doing well in school and intellectual capacity to understand different forms of art and expression.
There's plenty of rock albums I love, but I think the attitude of the rock crowd shows an even stronger tendency to suicide and to intentional and deliberate extinction than most major label executives.
I don't think there's a mainstream market for newer rock outfits, simply because there's lots of new genres and acts around that are just as good and new, thus more interesting to young folks.
Mind you, I'm talking strictly classic rock, not electro-prog-samba-new wave-gothic-cello-rock and I'm not talking about those who where in their 20s in the 70s.
That's exactly my point.
I don't think that Genesis, ELP or Yes transcend fashion.
In fact, they are hardly appealing to today's kids.
I don't think they aged as well as, say, the Beatles.
Don't want to start a flame, but if I should choose to file them as either "classic stuff" and "novelty stuff which is now unenjoyable to anyone but nerds" I would have a hard time deciding.
I understand there's even younger people who like those acts because they resonate with them, but I see them as a minority.
I don't think Genesis will ever be listened by kids born after 1999 when they grow up, except for the occasional nerd. AC/DC and Elvis probably will. And Pink Floyd, too.
You see, it's the very fact that fans believe in the timelessness of 70s rock like it were some kind of godsend instead of 5 guys jamming and writing nice songs that makes me think that it's better off forgotten.
And maybe, then, rediscovered with the right attitude.
(While in fact I must admit that I absolutely loathe Genesis, ELP and Yes )
It seems to me that most Americans don't need to be spoonfed like that, either
There's a lot of political discussion in Belgium either.
But radio is in the first place entertainment, and not politics.
Radio presenters don't influence me in my "view" at politics.
I experience a lot more free speach at public radio than at commercial stations. The commercial stations are more "restricted" because of the advertisers.
National radio stations have "specialised programs" for exploring new artists (demo's), there's a program about metal, friday and saturday there's electronic, blues, jazz, world, duyster (= sounds like Boards Of Canada, Monsters Of Folk,...),... There's still place for creative people.
While commercial radiostations never play records from independent labels ... (just because their advertisers want them to play mainstream easy listening and contemporary popmusic). Presenters are mostly (ex) tv stars, ex miss belgium,... People who don't have nothing to do with music.
It depends. The people who are watching American Idol religiously are being spoonfed, as far as I'm concerned.
Those people who actually have taste are turning to internet "stations" rather than turn on the radio or television.
From what I understand, there was a time when the Brits were very annoyed by the lack of rock music on the BBC, which made them turn to pirate radio stations, and that they were floored that there were so many commercial rock radio stations in the United States.
Now, the media companies have become so consolidated that we now have fewer choices because radio stations have decided to go for the lowest common denominator rather than provide us with variety or quality.
Radio 1 Livestream
Those are still good sounding to me (compared to commercial stations). And they still have more listeners than the "most succesful" commercial stations. Sometimes they play commercial garbage as well, but not like "commercial stations".
These are good points, but this is not what I was referring to. I was not speaking about the political content on American radio stations (although there is a lot). What I was saying was that there were political reasons that there is not more publicly-funded media in the United States.
This all sounds great, however, there are many Americans that do not think of Belgium when they are presented with the concept of publicly-funded media. They think of the Soviet Union, China, or North Korea. They simply distrust in government in general.
I would like to not violate the rules of the forum, so I am trying to be as factual as possible without injecting my own opinions on this situation. I am only trying to explain why it exists.
I would like to reiterate that you have made some very good points about the situation in other countries, which I thank you for.
Thanks...I've seen the NMA twice this year (so far). Rock ain't dead.
I listen to Sirius XM satellite rather than terrestrial (the aforementioned public station the exception). The sound quality isn't there, but the programming, on Spectrum for instance, or the Underground Garage, is much better than the standard commercial station. And, of course, we can all listen to streaming internet stations from around the world.
Terrestrial radio has its place, but its got more competition than in days past. I miss the stations pre-1996 telecommunications act that enabled clear channel, infinity and entercom to take over commercial radio, but that was pre-internet, pre-satellite. Many ways these days to access music, besides the live shows.
I've just done a partial quote of your post, but it was a good post and you raised good points. The reason I picke dthis particular quote is that I think you may not appreciate just why those early 70's bands were (are?) revered so much. Towards the end of the 60's there were a whole bunch of fine bands producing highly regarded albums - the best of the British bands plus all those West Coats bands like Airplane, The Dead, Santana etc. By the time of the early 70's a lot of those bands were passing their peak and with teh rise of the glitter bands, music was looking pretty desperate. When bands like Genesis, Yes, ELP, Pink Floyd, Zeppelin, King Crimson etc. were hitting their peak, it was like a breath of fresh air. Here were bands creating music that transcended their time (although you may argue that). Music that stimulated both the body and the soul and that took some time to get into, it was not disposable music. Music that was not predictable and 'catchy' but that resonated.
I do think that thes ebands do deserve their acclaim and I also believe that most of them continue to attract new generations of fans hungry for something that is more than just 'this year's thing'
Separate names with a comma.