Why was being a rock musician over 30 years old considered a bad thing back in the day?

All The Young Dudes - 33 year old frontman (arguably their single mainstream popular album)
Slanted and Enchanted, debut album from Pavement - 41 year old drummer
Guided By Voices - frontman/main songwriter was 30 when they debuted to no reception, and was 37 during the beginning of their critical success and period of their most popular albums
Blank Generation, debut album from Richard Hell and the Voidoids - 35 year old lead guitar player
Suicide (s/t) - 39 year old singer/frontperson (absolutely their only popular album)
Kim Gordon, singer and bass player of Sonic Youth - 38-40 for their major label debut and follow-up, their two biggest selling and most popular albums
Wayne Coyne - 33 for "She Don't Use Jelly," their first success, 38-40 when their sustained mainstream success started

 

It is true though that most of the great bands did their best work under 30.

 

Of course they do. I sure as hell thought that when I was a kid.

I remember really giving it some thought and trying to decide what age was really old. Like, when were you really past it, no more question. Just done.

What I decided on was 35. Of course now I wish I could be 35 but there you go. Same thing will happen to them though. Happens to everybody.

 

Generalizations. 'Don't trust anyone over 30'. A slogan in the 60s. I don't trust people who generalize. I remember in school, how different kids were, you had the nosiy and the quiet, the book worm and the sporty. You had those who were kind and those were a-holes, those who thought it was cool to steal and those who tought it daft. It was all there. in kindergarten. And it does not change, you are who you are.

 

I used to think 'youth' ended when you were 37. Don't ask me why.

Rock was youth music that has grown old with its first audiences. BUT - unlike the stuff 40 year olds' listened to in the 60s/70s, rock still has a youth audience. Kids are curious about their parents' record collections today in a way they weren't in 1970.

 

no, it was about the music, not the looks....like today.....big tits = big star.....ridiculous.

 

Big or semi big name rock or pop artists I have seen live when at least some band members were under 30:

Phish
Billy Idol
Blues Traveler
REM
Big Country
Human League
Flock of Seagulls
Spin Doctors
Husker Du
Replacements
Ramones
Derek Trucks
Joan Osborne
Joss Stone
Britney Spears
John Mayer
Grateful Dead (Brent Mydland)
Nickel Creek
Allison Krauss

I think that may be it

 

It's still a bad thing

 

In the "swinging London" documentary A Technicolour Dream, someone remarks that "before the mid-'60s the youth all aspired to be older, after that the middle-aged aspired to be young."

 

You had to be there. In the 60s when this whole thing really got going with the Beatles, there was a significant generation gap (unlike today). Kids listened to their "rock & roll"; parents listened to their "easy listening," and with very few exceptions neither one listened to the other's music (or at least didn't admit it; I confess to liking Herb Alpert's Tijuana Brass).

So in a nutshell, those over 30 likely fell into the unhip category: had an actual job, wore conservative clothing, and didn't use the popular vernacular of the younger generation, "ya dig?"

 

Wheelchairs with Steel Wheels...

 

I really miss a lot of "Those old Folks".......A lot. I miss their common sense and life experiences, and work ethic. There are many of the so called "younger generation".....who didn't make it past 35...In either case, Ha-Ha doesn't seem appropriate.

 

That's 6. Also, a few of these are just old drummers or bassists. Old frontman rarely make great debuts, especially.

 

Is your avatar your highschool yearbook picture?

 

Founding member Ian Stewart was kicked out of The Rolling Stones in 1963 at the age of 24 because he was too old to fit the image. He was still allowed to play the piano and be road manager though.

 

This had a lot to do with the politics around the Vietnam War, and the age of the draftees.

 

Of course. I wasn't being serious.

 

Not problem.....Nothing pointed towards you,,,,just a comment from me...No offense intended.

 

I agree with this. In a way, it encouraged a (thankfully short-lived) closed-mindedness that kept those cool people in the mid-60's from appreciating older musicians. If you look at rock festivals today, you might see younger headliners like Rihanna or Muse alongside middle-aged veterans like Green Day or the Chili Pepper or even grandparents like the Stones. But, if you look at the lineups at Woodstock or Monterey Pop, virtually everyone (aside from the Beatles-blessed outlier Ravi Shankar) is very young. Unreal that great folk, jazz (Miles? Rollins?), and blues artists around in 1967 weren't considered.

But the situation righted itself soon enough. The one great thing about the "back to basics" movement was the attention it brought (through the music of Dylan and the Band, Creedence, Cream/Clapton, the Stones and so many others) to the music of rock's forefathers.

 

DOH!!!!

 

When we saw the Rolling Stones in concert in 1972 we thought they were near the end and we might not ever get a chance to see them again.

 

Well you guaranteed there were none, but go ahead and alter the parameters of your simple and ignorant statement....

 

You missed out Loverboy!

 

I saw pretty much everyone when they were under 28...it was a grand time for music. Balls to the wall...

 

Because in the late 60s there was almost no such thing as a 30 year old "rock" star. Even the "rock and roll" stars of the 50s & early 60s (which was perceived as a quite different musical animal by the late 60s) were - for the most part - only in their early or mid-30s.

Once 30+ year old rock stars became commonplace, it was replaced by the notion that 40 year old rock stars was an incongruance. Of course until the early rock stars turned 40 - and the fans weren't too far behind.

I can remember being amazed that the Stones were still playing live with such energy in their late 30's in 1981 - because at the time, it had no precedence. Or Springsteen in his early 50s in the early 2000s. Now that I'm in my mid 50s and in fairly good physical condition, it doesn't seem so amazing.