Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: 1920s-1990s - Page 16







Post#376 at 04-01-2013 04:57 AM by princeofcats67 [at joined Jan 2010 #posts 1,995]
---
04-01-2013, 04:57 AM #376
Join Date
Jan 2010
Posts
1,995

Quote Originally Posted by Kepi View Post
Since Rani declined, lemme try.
She did?

Quote Originally Posted by Kepi
It's a self-preservation mechanism for the scenes. When something in the underground gets popular in the mainstream, it attracts the unninitiated in numbers too large for the folks who know what they're doing to control. The uninitiated then tend to wreck things until said thing is no longer popular, then move on. It's really bad for locally driven scenes.

One of the ways that you regulate that is by declaring artists "sellouts" who change their sounds to something more accessible to the mainstream (a regular departure album might offend your diehards for a bit, but it shouldn't get a "sellout" sentiment) or switch to major labels. This is a mixed bag, but it's an effective mixed bag.

On the one hand there were a lot of bands that had nowhere else to go and their currently label couldn't meet their needs. That's not selling out, that's "a fish too big to survive in this tank", but if you switch to a label that isn't an indy all the sudden, you're a sellout. Groups like The Mighty Mighty Bosstones got screwed by their indy, I totally understand not wanting to sign to another, especially in the point in time they went over to Mercury. Less Than Jake signed on to Capitol and produced their best two albums of all time, calling them "Sellouts" over that seems lame, because that frequently was a way to find their back catalog into stores, which opened the store to a wider array of that labels artists. Also, when ska got popular, that part of the scene was nearly destroyed. There was virtually no new ska for about 5 years. And the bands didn't sell out, the dominant taste just switched to ska for a hot minute.

Now on the other hand, if you hadn't had groups from the greater punk scene triage ska out for a while, it would have sent waves and waves of uninitiated kids into the overall scene and probably would have made it a toxic enviroment. Without independant production and/or labels, stable scenes are impossible. Greenday and Operation Ivy removing their back catalogs completely sunk Lookout! Records (now granted, Lookout! Records needed to go because they weren't treating their artists fairly), but consider the case of Jello Biafra vs. The Dead Kennedys, which removed most of their catalog from Alternative Tentacles due to a royalties mistake the label itself discovered and paid in full before the court case ever existed... That label paid it's artists, paid fairly, and would have been sunk if it hadn't had been for a couple albums Jello Recorded with the Melvins.

So that's selling out, and why it's a thing.
Thanks for your POV, Kepi.


Prince

PS:

Can you dig these?:
The Untouchables-Wild Child
The English Beat-Save It For Later
I Am A Child of God/Nature/The Universe
I Think Globally and Act Individually(and possibly, voluntarily join-together with Others)
I Pray for World Peace & I Choose Less-Just Say: "NO!, Thank You."







Post#377 at 04-01-2013 05:02 AM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
04-01-2013, 05:02 AM #377
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by princeofcats67 View Post
Je ne parle pas Francais!
(IOW, I don't speak Ericais!)
You should learn!
Did you like this tune from Pete Townshend: Slit Skirts?
I always like Pete. He's the best. I have this on an LP, which I can't play right now.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#378 at 04-01-2013 06:42 AM by Kepi [at Northern, VA joined Nov 2012 #posts 3,664]
---
04-01-2013, 06:42 AM #378
Join Date
Nov 2012
Location
Northern, VA
Posts
3,664

Quote Originally Posted by princeofcats67
Can you dig these?
Very much so. I've been listening to the English Beat longer, but I'm familiar with both bands.

I also have a thing for Madness, and even like some of the mid era, more chill stuff like:

Wings of a Dove:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MReD...e_gdata_player

Michael Caine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-5y...e_gdata_player

And of course The Specials and The Selecter were regular spins for me since I was a teenager.







Post#379 at 04-02-2013 10:36 PM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
04-02-2013, 10:36 PM #379
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Getting back to this a little late, but I see the usual knee-jerk hostility hasn't faded.

Quote Originally Posted by Semo '75 View Post
Maybe you simply didn't have a very large social circle then? You wouldn't be the only person on this forum who doesn't get out much, after all. From what I remember (and this is backed up statistically in terms of things like album sales), plenty of people approximately my age were listening to it.
I was in college at the time. So I had a pretty wide social circle. I'm not saying nobody listened to it or bought the albums. But they didn't love it and think it was the greatest thing ever the way say - Boomers - embraced "their music". A lot of mostly-forgotten neo-hippe and/or "jam" bands were as popular, or more popular among the college and older Xer crowd: Hootie and the Blowfish, Dave Matthews Band, Phish, Blues Traveler, Counting Crows, etc. Most of that was also garbage.


Rock music had been going to a place that wasn't "sustainable" for a mass audience for years. That was basically my point. Pop music, no matter what style it's in, fills an emotional need. Some rock of the mid- to late 1980s was capable of filling the emotional needs of an adolescent audience (the primary audience for pop music), but a lot of it wasn't. Consider the embarassment of Billy Idol's "Cradle of Love"--a dude in his mid-30s singing about banging teenagers. Or consider the singles from Steel Wheels getting heavy rotation on rock radio. Or consider hair metal, with it's endless warmed over variations on "Rock and Roll All Nite" and "Patience". That's what the rock world actually looked like before "Smells Like Teen Spirit" broke. It wasn't particularly interesting.


You make it sound as though it's some kind of either/or thing. It is, of course, entirely possible for people to listen to Led Zeppelin and Soundgarden, or the Rolling Stones and Nirvana, or whatever. There seems to be a not insignificant overlap between people who enjoy Bruce Springsteen and Pearl Jam. While Mr. Cats has indicated he had a problem imagining rock radio playing the Eagles alongside Pearl Jam, that's ultimately exactly what happened. After all, it's not a huge leap from, say, this to this. The idea that there wasn't an obvious continuity with earlier forms of rock is, to put it simply, wrong. Just wrong.

Ultimately, you're making the same mistake that a lot of people here make (less so in the real world) by assuming that people should enshrine your musical tastes as they listen privately to their favorite music on their headphones or on their stereos at home. The idea that people actually go out to concerts, or otherwise integrate music into their social lives is lost on you. (This gets back to what I was saying above about not getting out much.) It's cool that The Police put together a reunion tour in 2007, and it's cool that the band's relatively affluent audience was willing to pay an average ticket price of $112.00, but I bet you wouldn't have seen a lot of people under the age of about 35-40 in the audience. And, of course, in the early 1990s, they weren't touring at all. Neither was Led Zeppelin. The Stones were, and I actually got paid $20 an hour to camp out for Stones tickets by my boss, and even then I wouldn't have dreamed of spending the kind of money she was willing to pay for tickets to see a miniature Mick Jagger and Co. flog the latest (ahem) "hits" off of Voodoo Lounge.

When rock (or any other style of music) ceases to appeal to young people, it becomes a museum piece. Which is basically what was happening in the early to mid-1990s.



Go back to the links I offered in one of my earlier posts. You had people predicting, accurately, that mainstream rock was destroying itself by reaching up the age ladder (to Boomers) as opposed to down the age ladder (to 13ers) as early as 1982. That decision meant that rock was well on its way to being extinct.

And that happens to be where you miss my point. "Grunge" didn't have to happen, at least not in the way that it did. If rock radio had done a better job of breaking new acts, as it had done up until about the mid-1980s, then it wouldn't have happened. But putting aside grunge, Metallica wasn't getting much airplay on mainstream rock radio circa 1990. When it was current, you'd have actually had a better shot of hearing "One" (and only "One") on a mixed Top 40 station as opposed to a mainstream rock station. (Metallica was largely forbidden on mainstream rock stations until the release of the Black Album.) At the time, it was more important to hype up the latest release by the Rolling Stones, the Doobie Brothers, or Billy Idol (all of whom had #1 mainstream rock hits in about the year or so before Nirvana broke).

Of course, other styles of music ended up filling the emotional needs that rock used to fill, at least for young people, and generally did it better. That left rock with a fairly narrow band, which is how grunge actually ended up happening. (None of this is intended as a defense of grunge. With the exception of the rush of euphoria that accompanied "Smells Like Teen Spirit", I had little use for the "style" myself, although I hesitate to use that word when what actually ended up being labeled as "grunge" represented a pretty wide variety of sounds.)
You didn't get my point, at all. Rock as it stood before grunge was in sad shape. Poison to me was the point where that whole period jumped the shark beyond repair. Something new certainly needed to happen. But Grunge still sucked. Again, don't get me wrong - I, like a lot of people, tried to get into it. I owned all the usual CDs - Nevermind, Superunknown, Siamese Dream, blah, blah, blah. But it wore out fast. If anybody is nostalgic or attached to that music, it's probably early Millenials who were in elementary school and thought this stuff was the height of coolness. Most Xers (beyond high school) saw it as I said - either too whiny and annoying for their taste, or if they were "underground" music fans, a bunch of commercial sellouts.

Personally, I'll take Van Halen and Def Leppard over Pearl Jam and Nirvana if I have to choose between "before" and "after". Once you start talking about stuff like Winger and Skid Row, it's interchangeably bad. Guns N' Roses deserves some mention, as they were a bridge between "hair metal" and "grunge". Aside from the fact that Axl Rose has one of the most annoying voices in history, I'll take them over the grunge bands too.
Last edited by JustPassingThrough; 04-02-2013 at 10:44 PM.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987







Post#380 at 04-02-2013 10:40 PM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
04-02-2013, 10:40 PM #380
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Quote Originally Posted by Semo '75 View Post
They didn't fit into a category then, but now we know that Weezer was a pioneering emo act...



Which make this part funny!
If Weezer is now viewed as "proto-emo" (news to me), that is some serious retroactive classification. They were more like "nerd rock". Thematically, it's not even in the same ballpark. And they had a sense of humor. I would throw Cake and Beck in there as other oddball non-grunge from the period. Weezer fits more into that category.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987







Post#381 at 04-02-2013 10:58 PM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
04-02-2013, 10:58 PM #381
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Quote Originally Posted by princeofcats67 View Post
Hey JPT. Nice to see you posting again. I do hope you'll forgive me for temporarily diverting your
thread(sort of).



I believe you and I are in the same camp, in that it was too "negative" for us. But as Semo
(and Copper to a degree) have pointed-out, it wasn't "interpreted" as such by alot of people.
IOW, eventhough the intentions may have been "negative" to a degree, the interpretation was
not. And, looking-back, although at the time I interpreted the muisc/message as "negative",
I believe their intentions were not really that "negative", but instead, only indentifying what they
were interpreting as going-on in the world. And I'd add that breaking stuff down(eliminating falseness)
may leave one with a form of "spirituality" in a sense. It's different for different types of people.
I didn't see it at the time, but I definitely see it now.

That concept is nothing new. I was first exposed to it via Bob Dylan from Like A Rolling Stone
"When you've got Nothing left, you've got Nothing left to lose", and Kris Kristofferson from
Me and Bobby McGee "Freedom's just another word for, Nothing left to lose".

So for some people(and probably, a whole lot of people), what I perceived as "negative" was
really sort of "positive" for them, and maybe even, "life-affirming".

Anyway, something to consider, IMO.

FWIW, one of my main problems with "Grunge"(et al),
was that there weren't any songs about "chicks"!
Sure there were. Nirvana had a cheerful little ditty called "Rape Me". Standard-issue male-feminist militancy of the period.

I have to agree that it wasn't as successful(generally speaking) as some stuff before it, but that doesn't mean
that it wasn't viable. It did have it's time(as we kinda showed with stuff like all those big concert-events like
Lollapalooza, The HFStival, Monsters of Rock, OzzFest, Etc.).

And, that separation was only temporary because , eventually, alot of that stuff did make it's way
to being incorporated into "rock music" as we kinda know it. But, considering the way music is
available Today, stations aren't really required to "do it all", so to speak.



Oh, come-on now. I don't believe it's very fair putting stuff up against The Stones, Led Zep, and Floyd.
I certainly agree with you that they are "immortal", but saying that Pearl Jam(although I'm not into them)
is nothing more than a footnote, well...whatever.
Why not? If Grunge is to be placed on some kind of pedestal, it has to be measured against everything.

I believe some of that "poor musicianship" was on purpose.
Definitely.

Too a degree, some of the Seattle-sound
was a little "loose"(ie: rough around the edges). I mean, that's kinda how the name "Grunge" was
adopted. I pretty much stick with Pearl Jam and the influence of Neil Young's Live Rust-era sound as
the "Grunge"-sound. As far as musicianship goes, I can tell you straight-up that alot of those guys can
really play their asses-off. IMO, one of the best drummers in all of music is Jimmy Chamberlain who played
with Smashing Pumpkins. I'd put him right below the likes of Buddy Rich and Neil Peart; Seriously. And like
I said before, I believe some of the "loose-ness" was intentional.
Agreed, great drummer.

But, it also brought-in a whole new group of musicians via a move towards DIY. It was like, hey,
if you can play a few chords and sorta play lead guitar, you can do this. Think for a second how
cool that is: "You can do this!" That was somewhat refreshing after feeling completely humiliated
attempting to hang with the likes of some of those Hard Rock guitarists. Yngwie Malmsteen,
John Norum, John Sykes, Eddie Van Halen, Steve Vai, and Nuno Bettencourt
(much less Jimmy Page or Jimi Hendrix, for that matter).
But yeah, some of the musicianship did indeed take a hit...a big hit.

Rock Music being "extinct". That's a very interesting statement, IMO.

Here's where I went: Well, first-off, I'm basically a '70s "classic-rock" guy, with a great appreciation
for early-80's melodic rock/hard-rock(eg: Journey-Escape, Def Leppard-Pyromania). Plus, I like a lot
of melody and hooks and stuff. So, the first thing I did was completely go back-over almost everything
from 1965-1970 that I missed-out on when I was growing-up.

Then, I basically went to Goo Goo Dolls and Shania Twain(when Mutt Lange started producing her records).
I think U2 is pretty cool, but I'm not into all the offshoots that occured(eg: Coldplay). FWIW, I'd say that
"rock music"(as I knew it) went "Country". Shania Twain-"Rock This Country!".
And FWIW, most of the kids(15-25ish) in my area are big "country music" fans
(eg: Jason Aldean and some dude named Luke, or Clay, or something!).
Basically, Brad Paisley, Keith Urban, Little Big Town, Etc.
Well, that and all sorts of current "micro-groupings" of "Metal"
(I don't listen to the stuff, personally).

Anyway, that's that.

Here's what's missing IMO.

Journey-Escape
"I've got dreams I'm livin' for..."
But, that said, there's a whole new group of kids, that, while they don't "get"-it
(in the way that I get it), they're still connecting with it (eg:. Don't Stop Believin'), IMO.

Prince


PS: So, JPT. I've never asked before. What's your birth year? And, what did you do after "grunge" occured.
I mean, where did you go other than back to the 1970's- rock stuff?
My birth year is 1975. Around the time grunge was big I was more into these artists, in no particular order:

John Coltrane
Miles Davis
Frank Zappa
B.B. King
Eric Clapton
A Tribe Called Quest
De La Soul
Bob Dylan
Allman Brothers

Could list more, but that's enough.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987







Post#382 at 04-03-2013 08:22 PM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
04-03-2013, 08:22 PM #382
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Quote Originally Posted by Kepi View Post
There is a difference between good and likeability. Likeability is experiential, but good is not. Good is a matter of proficiency. That proficiency is multispectral (and at times it can be situational and mutually exclusive), but it's definitely objective.

This is where existentialism fails, there are many things which a person doesn't like experientally that they do because it yields a greater good. While both the subjective and the objective exist, they're not the same thing. So a song like "Tonight, Tonight" by The Smashing Pumpkins, you can objectively say that every element of that song as good with the exception of Billy Corgan's vocals, you can also make some persnickity criticism about the production. Otherwise, well written song. Doesn't keep me from wanting to beat my skull in with a claw hammer every time I hear it because of Billy Corgan's voice. It's bad. Some people like it, that doesn't make it a good voice, it just means they like an awful voice.

The problem with stating music is purely experience driven is that experience draws on a sum total that lies outside the realm of music. So if Ben Folds killed your parents, you probably don't care much for the guy. It doesn't change the fact that he is a great pianist. Similarly, if you lost your virginity to the music of Tiny Tim, that doesn't make it good music.
An excellent point. There is a lot of music I don't like, but I can recognize and appreciate the skill and craftsmanship of it.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987







Post#383 at 04-05-2013 04:55 PM by princeofcats67 [at joined Jan 2010 #posts 1,995]
---
04-05-2013, 04:55 PM #383
Join Date
Jan 2010
Posts
1,995

I really love this song; So Romantic!

Red Rockers-China
A little bit better recording.
(I wish I could find one where the bass really "growls"!).


Prince

PS: Great backstory i/r/t some of the topics of this thread, IMO.
I Am A Child of God/Nature/The Universe
I Think Globally and Act Individually(and possibly, voluntarily join-together with Others)
I Pray for World Peace & I Choose Less-Just Say: "NO!, Thank You."







Post#384 at 02-02-2014 05:00 AM by hkq999 [at joined Dec 2013 #posts 214]
---
02-02-2014, 05:00 AM #384
Join Date
Dec 2013
Posts
214

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
No, the war on terror was declared soon after the attack; which was immediately pronounced an act of war; ergo we were at war. Oct 7 was the start of the actual US invasion of Afghanistan. But I consider the attack itself as the start of the war.
I also knew that it would start as an attack on the USA, but not sure I published that anywhere.

In 2005 the economy was on an apparent upswing and the speculation was at its height. The electoral shifts of 2004 and 2006 were nothing unusual at all. Presidents often score well in a re-election bid, and poorly in off-year elections. A second off-year election is well-known for being bad for the president's party. 1998 was perhaps the only exception, since the 1994 off year had been so bad. That pattern may repeat in 2014.

Yes, and people were still buying sub-prime loans in 2005, and WAMU executives were celebrating their success with them even later. It was "addressed" by virtually no-one. The focus is everything.

Here's a good chart. Make of it what you will.
http://www.statisticbrain.com/home-f...re-statistics/


No, the mood shifted; that's the point. Noone thought we were in a crisis at all until Sept.2008, and the economy was not in danger until then, despite some foreclosure and bank problems. 1929 = 2008. Great Depression=Great Recession. The great war, if it comes, will come in 2025, at the end of the 4T, just as WWII came at the end of the previous 4T.

Do you predict that this 4T will involve a war? How bad do you think it's going to get over the next decade?







Post#385 at 02-02-2014 06:27 AM by hkq999 [at joined Dec 2013 #posts 214]
---
02-02-2014, 06:27 AM #385
Join Date
Dec 2013
Posts
214

Quote Originally Posted by Kinser79 View Post
This saeculum is no awakening. No new ideas came from the Boomers, in fact all current ideas are hold overs from the Missionaries. It is as Mega-Unraveling as it gets, and we will be plunged into our Mega-Crisis soon. These are facts Eric. But I know your relationship with facts and reality is tenuous at best.



I said not being tone deaf. If one cannot appreciate the smoothness of Kurt Cobain's singing one must be tone deaf. It takes a practiced ear to hear beautiful shades of gray.

Think on this for a second, The Castrato is supposed to be 18 or 19 something like that right, yet his voice has yet to break. Seriously I've met six year olds with deeper voices. Enough said.

ETA: Of course there is always the possiblity that his name isn't really "Justin" but rather "Justine". It wouldn't shock me if that were the case either--I've met manlier lesbians.

Technically the missionaries didn't really have any new ideas either, they were pretty much recycled from the eighteenth century. Just saying. But if your mega-secaulum theory is true, would that make millenials civic civics? As in civics plus?







Post#386 at 02-02-2014 06:55 AM by hkq999 [at joined Dec 2013 #posts 214]
---
02-02-2014, 06:55 AM #386
Join Date
Dec 2013
Posts
214

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Not much difference there...


Hardly. It was all a waste. Lots of sound and fury, with nothing there. 3T music is just ignored by most people today, except maybe Xers on this site! 2T songs are the ones people sing and remember, and are used in commercials and that everyone knows on quiz shows. 3T songs never will be, because there is nothing there in 3T songs. This saeculum's 3T music cannot compare with jazz, sorry. And jazz originated in the previous 2T, like all the arts of the 20th century.

There's no reason why music can't be good during a 3T. The only trouble is, during the recent 3T, it wasn't. That's about all there is to it. The politics was one reason, no doubt. The corporate power was able to take over and shut it all down.
The 3T wasn't all gloomy, it had some classic pop music that people still listen to today like Michael Jackson, Madonna, Prince, Whitney Houston, Mariah Carey...







Post#387 at 02-13-2014 07:24 PM by Tussilago [at Gothenburg, Sweden joined Jan 2010 #posts 1,500]
---
02-13-2014, 07:24 PM #387
Join Date
Jan 2010
Location
Gothenburg, Sweden
Posts
1,500

Quote Originally Posted by Chas'88 View Post
Quite agreed. For me, the 1990s was witnessing a small town simply survive, while being a gritty ghost town that hadn't had a face lift since 1970 something. When I finally saw this film recently, the idea that the nineties were the "totally like exhausted decade where there's nothing to look forward to" struck home with me and my personal experience.
Yeah, the first few frames before it turns all cheesy with Leonard Cohen playing "Everybody knows" (1988) in the background captures the mood exactly. S&H also did a good description of the 90's late Unraveling in The Fourth Turning, but all these Millies who weren't there still run around believing this period was some big fun confetti party anyway (you're an exception, of course, as well as a first waver).

It's not such a bad song really. At least part of the lyrics have the 90's written all over them:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lin-a2lTelg&feature=kp
Last edited by Tussilago; 02-13-2014 at 08:13 PM.
INTP 1970 Core X







Post#388 at 02-13-2014 07:36 PM by Tussilago [at Gothenburg, Sweden joined Jan 2010 #posts 1,500]
---
02-13-2014, 07:36 PM #388
Join Date
Jan 2010
Location
Gothenburg, Sweden
Posts
1,500

Quote Originally Posted by hkq999 View Post
The 3T wasn't all gloomy, it had some classic pop music that people still listen to today like Michael Jackson, Madonna, Prince, Whitney Houston, Mariah Carey...
To put it bluntly, the Unraveling can be roughly broken down into a happy period and a gloomy period. The 80's were happy; the 90's were gloomy, or at least romantic and energetic versus spent and dull.
Last edited by Tussilago; 02-13-2014 at 07:52 PM.
INTP 1970 Core X







Post#389 at 02-13-2014 07:46 PM by Tussilago [at Gothenburg, Sweden joined Jan 2010 #posts 1,500]
---
02-13-2014, 07:46 PM #389
Join Date
Jan 2010
Location
Gothenburg, Sweden
Posts
1,500

Quote Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough View Post
You didn't get my point, at all. Rock as it stood before grunge was in sad shape. Poison to me was the point where that whole period jumped the shark beyond repair. Something new certainly needed to happen. But Grunge still sucked. Again, don't get me wrong - I, like a lot of people, tried to get into it. I owned all the usual CDs - Nevermind, Superunknown, Siamese Dream, blah, blah, blah. But it wore out fast. If anybody is nostalgic or attached to that music, it's probably early Millenials who were in elementary school and thought this stuff was the height of coolness. Most Xers (beyond high school) saw it as I said - either too whiny and annoying for their taste, or if they were "underground" music fans, a bunch of commercial sellouts.

Personally, I'll take Van Halen and Def Leppard over Pearl Jam and Nirvana if I have to choose between "before" and "after". Once you start talking about stuff like Winger and Skid Row, it's interchangeably bad. Guns N' Roses deserves some mention, as they were a bridge between "hair metal" and "grunge". Aside from the fact that Axl Rose has one of the most annoying voices in history, I'll take them over the grunge bands too.
Yup. Signed.
Last edited by Tussilago; 02-13-2014 at 07:49 PM.
INTP 1970 Core X







Post#390 at 02-17-2014 07:03 PM by hkq999 [at joined Dec 2013 #posts 214]
---
02-17-2014, 07:03 PM #390
Join Date
Dec 2013
Posts
214

Quote Originally Posted by Tussilago View Post
To put it bluntly, the Unraveling can be roughly broken down into a happy period and a gloomy period. The 80's were happy; the 90's were gloomy, or at least romantic and energetic versus spent and dull.
Haha yeah the 80s look like the happiest decade I've ever seen from the music and fashion. Most of the 90s look dull to me but 1999 to 2007 didn't really seem that dull.
-----------------------------------------