Print Page | Close Window

The cultural evolution of "classic rock"

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=103772
Printed Date: April 27 2024 at 22:38
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: The cultural evolution of "classic rock"
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Subject: The cultural evolution of "classic rock"
Date Posted: August 20 2015 at 13:42
Something I did not notice until very recently is that how in the US and Canada, "classic rock" is defined by radio stations that keep playing the same big hits by the same sacred cows of the genre over and other, but in UK and Europe it's defined more by specialist magazines like Mojo and Uncut that are aimed at record collectors. As a matter of fact, one of those magazines bears the title Record Collector. These mags often focus on less well known artists and records, or on entire albums and careers in a more serious scholarly manner than the "big hit singles from back in the day"-oriented radio play structure of classic rock in North America. There's also much more attempts to promote newer musicians carrying the torch, and comparison to how the same traditions evolve.

Isn't it pretty weird how the culture surrounding so-called "classic rock" seems to operate in more or less polar opposite ways on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean? I also get the impression that those kinds of rock music hold somewhat higher cultural status in Continental Europe than in the Anglosphere, notice how much of the current prog rock revivalism is centered around Sweden. (the only country where Henry Cow, of all bands, have some degree of mainstream crossover popularity!) Even then, I get the impression that it's there where punk and the derived indie rock scenes, as well as modern electronic music even more so, carry higher status than classic rock.

Also, the US/Canadian people here who listen to classic rock radio might find http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?action=showall&boardid=41&threadid=97322" rel="nofollow - this list of AOR station clichés very amusing. The ones I found funniest were "all of punk rock represented by Train in Vain by The Clash" and "psychedelic meaning it was recorded sometime between 1965-1974".

The real head scratcher, in my book at least, is when music from after the mid-1970s outside of groups specifically imitating that sound and aesthetic are inducted into the "classic rock" canon. When I saw Siouxsie and the Banshees on the cover of one issue of Mojo, my first thought was "if you told Siouxsie back in 1978 that her music would one day be called 'classic rock', she'd probably be absolutely horrified..."


-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook



Replies:
Posted By: twalsh
Date Posted: August 20 2015 at 14:57
So true of Vancouver.   The local station plays mostly the same tired stuff it played 20 years ago, only with more Pearl Jam and Red Hot Chili Peppers, maybe some Metallica from, of course,  the Black album, Enter Sandman, of course.

-------------
More heavy prog, please!


Posted By: LearsFool
Date Posted: August 20 2015 at 15:11
Living on Long Island, I receive no less than three American/Canadian style classic rock stations (the local 102.3, call sign WBAB, New York City's 104.3, call sign WAXQ, and New Haven's 99.1, call sign WPLR), so I have quite the view of the American classic rock radio format.

The gist of the classic rock format around here is that it covers all the hits from the rise of The Beatles in 1963 to the end of the hair era with Use Your Illusion and Pornograffitti limping out around '90 - '91. That's right - it would seem that Americans think of the hair bands as the last hurrah for the rock styles minted and popular in the '60's and '70's, or more properly of course just the '70's. I find myself agreeing with them to an extent, to be honest.

WBAB is the only one of the three to go into that more uncommon cliche of playing a few Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Foo Fighters, and Nirvana tracks occasionally.

What's unique about WAXQ is that they like to occasionally pull out a lesser known track of the era to play. Last one I remember from WAXQ is them playing a Traffic cut. And they'll rarely find an excuse to play "Shine On You Crazy Diamond"'s first half some morning. But those are just exceptions to the rule.

But that cliche list hits a lot of things they all do. Both WBAB and WAXQ do Twofer blocks, but only one of them does it on Tuesdays, the other does it on Thursdays. Imagine that! WAXQ does a Zep block with none other than the name "Get The Led Out". And they do various slightly unique interpretations of Beatles breakfasts, like brunches or lunches, alongside a local classic pop station - 103.1, call sign WBZO. And they do that thing where they'll play the occasional Ramones or Clash track to prove how punk they are, plus they'll squeeze in Talking Heads and U2 for good measure. And their extent of girl rock is Joan Jett and Heart - there's even a surprising Janis drought.


-------------


Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 20 2015 at 18:05

My only knowledge of  how 'classic rock' is portrayed in the UK is through the magazine titled Classic Rock, which should be retitled Classic Hard Rock magazine, as it's emphasis seems to be on 70s and 80's hard rock and metal bands like Zeppelin and Sabbath, while eschewing any 70's or 80's new wave bands, except perhaps for Roxy Music.

The focus of this magazine, like many others, is what the publishers and editors define as the current rock music scene, or the case of Classic Rock, their perception of the past rock music scene.
 
Before comparing cultural differences, perhaps it's better to question how accurate these magazines portray the past rock music world. It's disturbing to me that mega selling artists like Fleetwood Mac or Bruce Springsteen are not prevalent in the past perceived 'world' of Classic Rock magazine.


Posted By: Intruder
Date Posted: August 20 2015 at 19:28
LearsFool, I grew up in Freeport, NY......great radio choices at the time.....don't forget the Whale - 99.1 - out of Binghampton.  They used to do album spotlights every night at midnight on some of the most far out stuff and the latest releases of the heavies.....Meddle, Tarkus, ITCOTCK, even Three Sides Live on the day of its release.  I used to prop a mic against the speaker and tape a new album every night! 
Yeah, classic rock radio is lame, outdated....a dinosaur, but there was a time when the dinosaur ruled the world.


-------------
I like to feel the suspense when you're certain you know I am there.....


Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 14:48
The playlists I see for North American classic rock radio also include a lot of stuff I wouldn't say meets any popular definition of "classic", i. e. stadium rock like Journey and Styx that I can't see having much in the way of appeal to generations younger than their initial audiences. Isn't lasting appeal and influence on future generations of artists pretty much the most objective definition of "the classics"?

Speaking of your observations on the UK magazine titled Classic Rock, I also find it weird to see that many NWoBHM-and-beyond metal groups lumped in with the pseudogenre. I mean, wasn't that when heavy metal started separating itself from "regular" rock music? It's funny that Classic Rock now cover more traditional heavy metal than Metal Hammer do, though!


-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook


Posted By: LearsFool
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 15:35
The radio format is less "old school rock that stands the test of time" and more "old school rock us old timers really loved back in the day", just with the caveat that either way they focus on the superhits.

Somewhat tangentially, I've been wondering how not just classic rock but also classic pop stations whittle down their playlists to exclude certain hits over time. On the classic pop side, for instance, I know from cassette recordings my dad has saved from the '90's that back then the local stations of that format would play "Desperate But Not Serious" in one version or another, but not anymore.


-------------


Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 13:51
On a related note, has anyone else gotten the impression that music from the "classic rock" canon has been taken a nosedive in cultural status recently?

First there was the backlash against the classic rock sacred cows from the punk and indie rock scenes, no doubt powered in part by a generation gap between Generation X and the Baby Boomers. The exceptions going to rock music from that era that only first became really popular with people way younger than their initial audiences: 13th Floor Elevators, The Stooges, Velvet Underground etc.

Then there's how with Generation Y, it looks like how electronically based music genres have taken over the position of cultural dominance from guitar based rock music... where it seems like hardcore punk and heavy metal holds more of the same role of countercultural outsider genres that "regular" rock had in its heyday. 1960s/1970s-style rock music seems to be seen more of a "nostalgia" thing.

That brings us to a development I find rather curious: How being into "real" rock music is now regarded as a conservative fogey thing, when it used to be considered more radical and transgressive than the top 40 pop. Today it's like the complete opposite, where high status music reviewers and record collectors have to show their serious minded appreciation for the latest bubblegum pop as valid art to prove they're not a bunch of stuck-in-the-past rock snobs.

Of course, there's also the recent explosion in retro-1960s/1970s psychedelic hard rock as exemplified around my quarters by groups like Graveyard, Kadavar, Sea, Witchcraft and so on which throws another wrench in the works. Those bands' membership might overlap with the "wrong generation kids" everyone likes to make fun of, though...


-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 14:10
^ It's either good or it ain't, and people know that.   I think the Stones, AC/DC, Zeppelin, Floyd, Sabbath, even Tull, all those guys will always be in favor, quietly perhaps but always.   It's the quality of the music and recordings that people respond to.   I know teens who like AC/DC and the Stones.   Go figure.   It's the era I think of as the "Rock Peak" when there was so much good stuff out there it still hasn't worn off.  




-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: zappaholic
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 16:43
"When did Motley Crue become 'classic rock'?"  ~  Bowling For Soup




-------------
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." -- H.L. Mencken


Posted By: sublime220
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 17:21
My question is when will bands like Nirvana (the Cobian one) be put with bands like the Stones? I feel like we've just taken everything from 1965-1983 and classified that as 'classic rock' instead of what the term was used to describe before.

-------------
There is no dark side in the moon, really... Matter of fact, it's all dark...


Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 18:56
Originally posted by zappaholic zappaholic wrote:

"When did Motley Crue become 'classic rock'?"  ~  Bowling For Soup


About 15 years ago.

-------------
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.


Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 27 2015 at 02:44
Nirvana are definitely a classic band in that they were, along with the other major grunge bands, probably the last really influential "normal" rock groups, but I always thought the "classic rock" era ended with the 1977 punk explosion. Pearl Jam and Soundgarden to a lesser extent I can see, since they show a clear lineage from classic 1960s/early-1970s rock music updated to the 1990s, but Mudhoney or Nirvana not really.

It's the same reason I'm perplexed at seeing 1980s metal groups in the classic rock canon, because heavy metal started moving away from "normal rock music" - again not a very helpful term but you know what I mean - in the mid/late 1970s.


-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 27 2015 at 11:23
Essentially it's why I stopped listening to the FM close to 20yrs ago, all you hear is the same old stuff over and over on a daily basis.
FM Classic Rock stations are meant for the drive to work and the drive home crowd, it gives those people recognizable music for that 1-2 hour in the car, it keeps them from channel surfing while driving.

25-30 yrs ago I had a territory to cover and in the morning I would listen to the FM for traffic issues, between 9am and 3pm I had a case of cassettes I would listen to, then at 3pm I would listen again for traffic issues going home. But you always here the same stuff over and over.

Calling certain stuff Classic Rock is the same argument we have here on what to call a particular band, bottom line is FM will play what people will listen to and that will always be AC/DC to Zeppelin, this is why some teens like AC/DC.

You will never hear anything else but Classic Rock on the FM, never will you hear anything progressive rock deeper than say Tull, Yes, Pink Floyd because the music would be insanely boring!! Can you imagine hearing The Flower Kings, Camel, Magma, early Genesis, PFM, Can.......in the morning or on the drive home!!?? Talk about falling asleep at the wheel LOL


-------------


Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 27 2015 at 13:29
Something more weird is that before I knew more about the format, I assumed "classic rock" would also include 1950s rhythm'n'blues and rockabilly: Chuck Berry, Bo Diddley, Jerry Lee Lewis, Elvis Presley etc.

That entire kettle of music is now categorized as "oldies" instead, though?!


-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 27 2015 at 13:43
^ Yeah, or rock 'n roll



-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: August 28 2015 at 13:10
It's all Rock n Roll man!!

During the Hand.Cannot.Erase show in Seattle in June, Steven Wilson said himself..." we are just a rock n roll band...."


-------------


Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 19:26
In Detroit, the wretched drek played on 94.7 WCSX focuses on Bob Seger, Styx, Foreigner, Aerosmith, Boston, Bruce Springsteen, Rush and specific songs by Floyd, Zeppelin, the Stones, the Who, etc.
 
You can actually pick the 3 or 4 songs they'll play from Zeppelin or Floyd in your head. Go ahead, pick the 3 or 4 you can't stand to listen to anymore and there they are! Same with Tull. You get "Aqualung" and that's it, unless they get really adventurous and play "Living in the Past" (now that's dangerous!). It's basically that way for most bands -- one or two of the same overplayed songs (to them Black Sabbath's "Paranoid" or "Iron Man" is the absolute limit of that Satanic stuff LOL).
 
I haven't listened in years. When I mistakenly land on the station, it's Bob Seger's "Down on Main Street" or the Eagles' "Life in the Fast Lane". I'd rather listen to sports talk radio.


-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...


Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 02:23
I'm still perplexed at people thinking of Boston, Foreigner and Styx or for that matter Bob Seger as "classics". No way they've got as much lasting influence and popularity as Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Rolling Stones or The Who.

Maybe Seger is more popular in his native Michigan, though? Wouldn't be surprised he's seen the same way there as Bruce Springsteen is in NJ.


-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook


Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 03:41
my idea of classic rock is roughly between 65 and the end of the 70's and that can include some 70's pop stuff, plus the rock music of the 80's & 90's (but I insist on the ROCK music part, not the pop stuff from those later decades)

In Benelux, I only know of one classic rock station and that's Classic 21 in French-speaking Belgium (Arrow Rock kind of fluttered in the Netherlands into AOR/MOR crap some 8 or 9 years ago). It started mostly as a fairly typical Classic Rock station, though it included a fair bit of French-speaking rock and singers as well (Classic 21 is state-owned). It did really well and even attracted many Flemish listeners, because nothing similar exists north of the linguistic barrier. It also attracted many listeners from Northern France.

A lot of the attraction was not really during daytime (this was wishy-washy Zep/Eagles stuff, though you can still hear Floyd's Dogs at noontime), but dedicated/specialist programmes during the evenings (blues/boogie, metal, etc...) and during week-ends.

Because of its (big) success, pressures went increasingly upwards, because some wanted to be part of the machne and put their grain of salt (footprint), and through the years, the formula got watered down , instead of remaining "pure". 

However, as some marketing idiots decided that the 60/70's music catered only to a certain age slice (to which I belong), they started wanting to attract the following age-slice by opening up the playlist to the 80's - thus breaking the 60/70's domination of playlists. So now, you hear OMD or Cure stuff, at the expense of classic-era  Yes and Genesis tracks. The thing is that the success has actually remained (and even increased to the eyes of specialists, because they take into account web radios' market shares of listeners),  these yukky changes are seen successful, because the audience shares are stable, thus avoiding the so-called "erosion factor".

It's still my choice of radio when in the car, but the excitement is long gone. I'd say that my appreciation slided down fro a 7/10 to a 5/10 through the years, but let's face  it, other radios (99% of what's on the airwaves, not counting the talk-mostly channels or classical radios) are hovering anywhere between 0.1/10 and 2/10. 





Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 04:10
I actually don't know if classic rock radio exists here in Denmark. For the most part, I know it from magazines like not just Classic Rock but also Q, Mojo, Record Collector and Uncut. Which again seem to be aimed at obsessive record collectors rather than big hits.

When did that CR radio station start, Sean Trane? I have been under the impression that the format has for the most part been a North American phenomenon, and similar radio stations did not appear in Europe until much later even then most of them were in the UK.


-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook


Posted By: rocknrollcola
Date Posted: August 31 2015 at 03:37
Alternative Rock has been the new addition to Classic Rock Stations. It will get weird when you start adding about anything that is rock from the 1990s and 2000s.


Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 31 2015 at 04:00
Adding to the confusion: I also swear that "alternative rock" started out as a radio format in the 1990s rooted in a growing demand for that kind of music beyond the college radio crowd but classic rock stations wouldn't play it either.

For the record, wasn't that how progressive rock got its name either? Referring to 1970s radio stations that played more ambitious and experimental rock music than usual...


-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook


Posted By: rocknrollcola
Date Posted: August 31 2015 at 04:09
I believe so.


Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: August 31 2015 at 04:38
Originally posted by Toaster Mantis Toaster Mantis wrote:

I actually don't know if classic rock radio exists here in Denmark. For the most part, I know it from magazines like not just Classic Rock but also Q, Mojo, Record Collector and Uncut. Which again seem to be aimed at obsessive record collectors rather than big hits.

When did that CR radio station start, Sean Trane? I have been under the impression that the format has for the most part been a North American phenomenon, and similar radio stations did not appear in Europe until much later even then most of them were in the UK.
 
They started in 2004 , on the base of the previous rock station called Radio 21, which was born on the late-80's, itself started on the Radio-Cité - created in parts by Marc Moulin during his Telex days in the very early 80's. The mythology is that Radio-cité was Belgium's only (or first anyway) pirate radio, but that's a bit of myrth, methinks (I was in Canada at the time, anyway).
 
 The formula changed slightly (not in the good direction, IMHO) twice: in 2009 and 2012
 
It's the third-most listened-to FM-radio in the French part of the country, and still holds whatever critics and DJ legends of Belgium left alive, including its director Marc Ysaye (drummer of Machiavel) and the recently retired (but he will go on on Radio Campus) rock purist Jacques de Pierpont.   
 
Of course purist like me and the buddies love to loathe it or slam the way the radio is going, but compared to what happens in neighbouring countries (not really aware of what happens in GB ou Germany, though), we're all aware that Poor Little ol' Brussels/Wallonie is doing quite an exploit with this.
 
 
 
 


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 31 2015 at 04:43
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Essentially it's why I stopped listening to the FM close to 20yrs ago, all you hear is the same old stuff over and over on a daily basis.

Same old crap different day and tons of ads.  Not for people who are really in to music.  I enjoy listening to old stuff but I have heard the classic rock stuff that gets played on commercial radio enough times that I never really need to ever hear it again.  I like revisiting the old stuff but I prefer to explore new stuff.  Radio is dead to me.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk