Greta Van Fleet...Anyone?

Wasn't comparing the quality of the performances. I heard parts of the GVF song as it largely played in the background during a movie trailer - that' not really the setting for analysis of musicianship...

 

Can't speak for others, but I didn't post to "hate on" GVF. Just posted my experience with the movie trailer!

As I said, I like the song and I have nothing against GVF - well, other than their bizarre refusal to acknowledge how much they sound like Led Zep. That's just weird!

 

The article I found focused more on Robert Plant's bemused annoyance that they wouldn't admit to the influence but didn't quote the band directly, so I dug a little deeper.

Other articles find GVF in various levels of acknowledgement, so apparently I overstated the level of denial.

Seems like they try to shy away from the comparisons - they often cite all the other artists that influenced them while including Led Zep - but it's unclear if they've actively denied the similarities as they've been accused.

Based on what I read, my guess is that they more actively fought the accusations in their earliest days but have been more willing to acknowledge them.

Still, they don't seem to be in denial as much as I thought! I won't deny that I overstated the case!

 

Funnily enough, I think this is a poster for Mac Sabbath

 

They do have potential, and should be happy with the level of success they have already achieved, but I think that they need to seriously think about their next steps if they want to have lasting success instead of this being their 15 minutes of fame. Musically they are pretty decent - I like Lover, Leaver musically, even though the guitar parts are like a compilation of sections from old songs rather than being something fresh. However, the lyrics for most of the songs that I have heard are pretty awful. They are corny, cliched and I don't think that the singer can pull off those lyrics.

I'd interested to hear the singers natural voice, as I don't think that sounding like an old, posh English witch can be what he naturally sounds like. He has a powerful voice but needs to add in a bit more variation instead of belting it out all the time. Too often he screams in a song for no obvious purpose other than to show he can do it rather than because it adds something.

I think toning down the retro clothing would be a good step, too. They've gone overboard and made it too easy to ridicule them. They looked far better in the old videos on YouTube where they are wearing more normal clothes with subtle retro influences.

I think the next 12 months or so is make of break for them. They could either progress from where they are and have a decent career or stick with what they are doing and, I think, slide back to obscurity.

 

I have no idea what you wanted to say with that incoherent mess of a post you just wrote. I stated multiple times that I'm not particularly a fan of GVF in the first place and no one was discussing Blackmore. You seem to think your personal taste matters but it doesn't nor is it even the slightest bit interesting.

You also seem to think that rock can thrive without an industry to support it and I'm sorry to tell you that isn't the case either.

I didn't say GVF was the last band of course but it is the most successful young rock band right now and that success is good for rock's continued presence in the industry in general for what should be obvious reasons.

Rock promoters and the circuit will be far more keen to take chances on promoting other young rock bands if GVF is a raging success.

 

A thread with some very angry people. I’m glad I just peeked at the last couple of pages!

 

Live and on extended jams, he reminds me more of a young Clapton than Page, even though they sound more like Zep due to the singer.

 

The more I’ve listened to Rival Sons... the more I’ve realized what a joke Greta is. If you are going to be a rock band with classic roots... at least do it right.

 

When I first heard the latest Rival Sons album "Feral Roots" I said to my friend how this is basically what Greta could have been if they took Zeppelin II out of their CD player

 

I expect new music to move forwatd. If that means going for a Zep sound, then go further.

 

I guess we differ in that respect. I'm always analyzing musicianship. Especially in a case like that.

 

He's not as smooth as Clapton, though. He has a lot to learn. Time will tell if he chooses to do so.

 

If he was gonna be one of 'the greats', we'd already know.

 

Leaving all the childish ad hominem twaddle aside, I'll waste one more bit of precious time attempting to engage with you ( against my better judgement ).

You seem all concerned that the Tinkerbell of guitar-based rock will fall to the ground dead if we all don't clap for GVF. That's patently ridiculous. If you want to see a resurgence in that kind of music, why don't you try championing some of the many, many better bands out there trying to get a leg up instead of berating people for not dropping to their knees and thanking "The Industry" for offering up this quartet of obvious poseurs ? Do you need to have your tastes validated by " The Industry" ? There are a sh!t-ton of new and still-at-it bands out there right this minute who could use your support; authentic, original, fresh bands making vibrant rock music rather than the utterly safe and pedestrian cotton-candy crapolla that GVF is dishing up for the nostalgic and the dilettantes who would actually buy into the notion that this band doesn't suck big-time because they don't know any better. If more people start buying their music and tickets, do you think that your precious industry wouldn't get a sniff of that and start angling for a way to cash in like they are with these boring goofballs ? Or maybe GVF is just to your taste which is fine but leaves us with little more to discuss.

So over to you now. Call me "stupid", "idiotic" and "incoherent" all day long - I couldn't care less. BUT ( and this appears to be a big "but" based on your penchant for name-calling ) if you've got an argument in favour of this rolling joke of a band that has some actual intellectual rigour behind it rather than more juvenilia and misguided support for an industry that you seem to feel needs to exist so they can pick the winners and losers for you while they suck the blood of all, time to put up or shut up.

D.D.

 

Daaaaamn son!

 

Maybe. Maybe not. Great players keep on learning, and weren't always great. This guy could go on to bigger and better things.

 

I like GVF. I don't care if they sound like someone else, try to sound like someone else, copy someone else, etc. I like 'em and that's all that matters to me. May not be good to your ears but they are good to mine. Same with these guys who clearly sound like another band. Doesn't matter to me, I like these guys too:

 

As directly stated more than once, it isn't about having my tastes validated; GVF are not even of particular interest to me in and of themselves. Validating your own taste seems to be a big concern for you however as you bloviate about what is 'vibrant, fresh, authentic, original rock music' as if that were an objective standard and as you press on in your personal crusade to slam GVF and anyone who likes their music.

I enjoyed the accusation of 'name calling' for calling your point incoherent while you on the other hand launched into calling the band "a rolling joke" "tinkerbell" "boring goofballs" "pedestrian cotton-candy crapolla" and spoke of "juvenilia" "dilettantes" and "obvious poseurs" as if these were facts and not merely your personal opinion.

And all that was with you 'leaving childish twaddle aside' as you said. I was far too generous with 'incoherent' indeed.

I think it's poor form to slam young kids making actual rock music, particularly in 2019. But far more than that, I am pointing out that if GVF were the commercial failures you manifestly would like them to be, it wouldn't create more space in the industry for other 'vibrant, fresh, authentic, original rock music' you think 'could use my support'

It would on the contrary make it even less likely than it already is that those and other bands would get the attention necessary from promoters and industry actors around the world to ensure a solid foothold in the years to come. Industry actors wouldn't conclude from GVF's hypothetical failure that 'vibrant, fresh, authentic, original rock music' would do better and be worth trying, but rather shelve the idea of taking a risk on other rock bands even more so, no matter how wonderful you might think those bands are.

In sum, the music industry isn't going to randomly get behind other rock bands. GVF's success is considerable and unusual and the best thing for other rock groups in terms of receiving industry support would not be for GVF to suddenly bomb but rather to continue to surpass commercial expectations even if you don't happen to like their music.

But then, anyone who has ever worked in the music industry already knows this is how things work and the rest is just uninformed bloviating and grandstanding of the sort that used to take place between isolated cranky customers in record shops and which now finds a home in forums such as this one.

 

Little late to hit the high road when it comes to name calling. Just saying. And bending what I posted or cherry-picking parts to take out of context in the hope of shoring up your argument is weak tea, but my posts are there for people to read for themselves and I stand by them. And my opinions are obviously just that, just as your posted views are your own, no more and no less. No plinth for either of us to stand on here, clutching a tablet with
" TRUTH" inscribed on it...

First, these aren't kids. The point has been made by myself and others that they are roughly the same age as a lot of musicians who had made huge strides in moving rock forward by that stage of their lives. Robert Plant was 22 in 1970 with Led Zep, Led Zep II and Led Zep III under his belt already and with Led Zep IV months away. How do you honestly think that Anthem of The Peaceful Army holds up in comparison to any of those albums ? And Plant was just a kid, too by your standard. Do you honestly think that Anthem of The Peaceful Army has moved rock forward in any meaningful or substantive way comparatively speaking ?
At 24, it's arguable that Grandmaster Flash pretty much launched an entire genre of music while being "just a kid". We could go on. Your "kids" seem to seriously underachieve by comparison. Saviors of rock ? Where's your Messiah now ?

Second, "actual rock music" seems to mean " rock music that I like" to you and nothing else. You are not the arbiter of what is "actual rock music" and shameless aping of Led Zeppelin does not automatically certify GVF as "actual rock music". It just certifies them as a band that shamelessly apes Led Zeppelin. What the hell would "actual rock music" even be in 2019 after decades of evolution and hybridizing ? Little Richard ? Nine Inch Nails ?
The Eagles ? Babymetal ? Ed Sheeran ? Muse ? Motorhead ? Car Seat Headrest ? Pretty sure that whatever it is, it isn't this singularly redundant, safely-neutered version of what was an actual example of a high water mark for the genre, and I'm not even that much of a Zep fan.

So if GVF and their ongoing success are key to ensuring the continuing existence and flourishing of "actual rock music", is it your position that the future of rock music is like the present /future of Hollywood movie-making - endless sequels and reboots where our risk-averse friends in "the industry" keep rehashing the past because it sold then so why not now ? If so, perhaps GVF should have called themselves Charlie's Angels. What a dystopic future beyond even Margaret Atwood's pessimistic predictive capabilities. God help us all. Excepting those of us who apparently go in for that sort of thing....

Third, I can't help but notice that you keep bringing up "the music industry", even alluding to some mysterious role that you yourself play in it (but seem reluctant to divulge ) which allows you to deliver sweeping statements about how the thing works. I do not share your view that all good things come to us via the benevolence of "the industry". I get that there are people who feel cut adrift in a sea of music now that "the industry" plays a diminished role in curating it for them. Water, water everywhere yet not a drop to drink. I also get that there are people who are in a deep and cozy rut in terms of what they like and are quite happy to just heap more of same into their musical diet. This is just what you seem to champion as the healthy role of "the industry" and bands like GVF and it's this kind of cynicism and laziness that put the industry back on it's heels. The fact that they choose acts like GFV to get behind is indicative that they still have lessons to learn from the past.

Where you see GVF as a potential cure, I see them as proof that "the industry" is simply relapsing back into the disease which had them on their apparent deathbed not so long ago. They're lazy, greedy and prone to milking the same worn-out cash-cow until it drops drained dry and dead at their feet. And on to the next cow. You put forward the opinion that if the vampiric creatures of "the industry" get a little taste of success should we all get behind GVF, good things will follow. But. as you said yourself, history shows that "the music industry isn't going to randomly get behind other rock bands". They are corporate and as such, they are largely risk-averse. As such, even if we were to all scrap our misgivings and criticisms and rally behind GVF as The Next Big Thing ( Although Extremely Reminiscent Of A Previous Big Thing But What The Hell At Least They're Not Hip Hop ), chances are all we'd have dumped on us as a result would be a hoard of even sadder rehashes of what once was. Why ? Because the fundamental nature of "the industry" will be to go for the quick. easy buck for as long as the tree bears fruit and then move on to the next low-hanging bellyful. As it always has. You say that only people who work/have worked in "the industry" know how it really works but based on what has transpired to date, I'm pretty sure that, your elitism aside, this is indeed how things work in that world. The leopard has not changed it's spots. And it's one fat, lazy leopard although not as fat as it once was....

But why not someone decent for a change ? Why the rush to celebrate and champion mediocrity ? Why the default to diminished versions of what once was ? This is " actual rock music" ? Maybe to you. But if it's come to this, if we find ourselves at a place where we have to applaud nostalgia-fueled mediocrity and clap for the passionless, depleted likes of this in order to keep "Actual Rock" Tinkerbell airborne, she can faceplant into the dirt anytime she's good to go because I'm out.

D.D.

 

OMG! Some of the folks here will have an aneurysm.

 

A mountain of text bubbling with venom and frustration that your taste doesn't govern the world. I don't necessarily agree with your assessment of what is 'good' nor do I and thousands of others necessarily agree with your assessment of GVF.

The point is a simple one: GVF are quite obviously one of the most successful very young rock bands out there right now. Their record is charting highly around the world and they are doing great live business and have already moved into doing 2 back to back nights at places like Red Rocks (capacity 9500).

Their continued success will signal to other promoters that younger rock is quite viable commercially and encourage signing of other bands and subsequent promotion. That's how the music industry works and if someone wants rock in general to be promoted and to enjoy commercial health moving forward, then the success of GVF is a great thing whether you or I happen to like their music personally. It increases the chance that many other rock bands, some of which you might actually like, could get signed and promoted.

It has absolutely nothing to do with someone's corporate 'benevolence' nor is it any different from how it has worked in the past. As for GVF not even being rock music, I am afraid you made even less sense there than you did in much of the rest of that screed. And regarding their ages, they are indeed basically kids; they are between 20 and 23 years old - the same age as "college kids"

 

There you go again. You just can't seem to help yourself. Right out of the gate you just have to try and make this about me instead of the matter at hand - all ad hominem attacks and deflection, skirting the valid points made which lay the flaws in your logic bare as you continue restating the same opinions over and over as though that will lend them more credence. So predictable at this stage. Soooooo tedious.

I never denied that GVF was a rock band. I just think they're not a particularly good one. They certainly aren't a very original one. They are to classic rock what Bruno Mars is to R&B and that's why they elicit the same
response from people who know karaoke ( albeit slick karaoke in Mars' case) when they hear it. I do think that they are a pretty damned lucky rock band. But there's always been bands like GVF. They're the goldfish of the music business - shiny, short-lived and readily replaceable with minimal investment, financial or otherwise.

Nor do I think that GVF being successful will lead to some sort of renaissance where a divine light will beam down onto the talent guys at the major labels and they will rush out to beat the bushes for actual talent instead of signing up any Humperdoo that knows ( or can be quickly taught ) which end of a guitar the cord plugs into and bears a tangible similarity to what's selling this year. Like they did when the Beatles broke. And like they did when grunge broke. And so on. Because that's what they do. That's what they've always done. If you want to believe otherwise, that's your lookout, industry guy. Good luck with that. I don't equate the health of rock with the health of the music industry. "Successful" doesn't necessarily mean desirable. The herpes virus is "successful". Want some ?

Unless someone yearns to be intubated and sustained by being fed a steady diet of industry-approved musical goo, making the health of art conditional on the health of the parasitic industry that feeds off of it is misguided at best, ultimately destructive at worst. That's what got us here in the first place, with people treating the Golden Calf named Greta like some sort of savior for one of rock's weariest, most threadbare, most thoroughly plundered tropes. Yes, more of this will be what saves guitar rock ? More likely that it will finish it off. They're like an unwitting satire of that which you claim to champion. How can this really be good for rock ? Yeah, yeah, yeah... if they fatten up their label, the industry will lumber out into the sunlight and start promoting more of same and everybody gets a balloon and some candy...... Like hell. But you go ahead and believe that if you must.
And it appears that you must. Again, good luck with that.

We live in a time where the mediocre is celebrated and those traits once considered undesirable are now considered aspirational. Substance is secondary to celebrity, familiarity is preferred to originality. If there was ever a time that a band like GVF could make bank ( and likely have it all sucked up by the utterly reptilian industry that spawned them in the grand tradition of this most scaley and slimy of commercial endeavors ), it's probably now.
Get your tickets.

D.D.

 

Jeez ... I guess they must be doing something right, if they have old fogeys getting so hot under the collar about how they are so lightweight.
It's just amazing how many just can't resist venting on a thread about a band they claim aren't worth their time.
Nice one kids !!!

 

The horror, the horror........