Fun Stuff > BAND
Cool Mainstream
PunkisDead:
Just spent 3 hours reading amd watching avril interviews... VJs are idiots and rolling stone should just burn
first and formost, just because a person calls them self a punk, dosen't mean they make punk music.... this just came to my attention reading an interview with Corb Lund.... chances are if our not canadian or european you won't be sure who he is... basiclly he was the frontman for a band called "The Smalls" with some absoultly amzing lyrics even if the music was lacking... But anyway Corb is now making country music under his own name with the band "The Hurtin Albertans" While it is country and I can admit that not ALL country is bad (most of it is crap though) he does write some really good music, but i have a soft spot for his music being from teh same area and growing up with alot of folk/counrty. Anyway moral is. Corb said himself he is still a punk at heart I like Avril cause she a) writes her own shit b) can play an instrument and c) is proud of her heritage which is very uncommon for Canadian musicans and actors who make it big.... actually by rights I like Nelly Furtado for the same reasons... Shania Twain is a skank and needs to be beaten and Celine Dion.... I just ca';t stand her.
I was never a fan of the Sex Pistols, i just have a strange dislike for them, not a big fan of teh clash either....
And it's easy to say punk is dead.. No more Dead Kennedys, DoA is all but gone and Black Flag has left us. They don;t classify punk as punk anymore anyway....people use terms like hardcore, ska, emo, scremo etc... when i first got into the music we didn't differentate things like that. It was Just Music!!. It makes me sad. If it wasen't for Bad Religion ( new album aside, it just sounded too good :/) those of us stuck in the 80's and early 90's era of punk would have nothing left.
Although if you are into spoken word Jello Biafra (DK)and Henry Rollins (Black Flag, Rollins Band) have some great stuff!
** Note brackets inserted because for some reason people do not know who these people are**
TheSmirkster:
I really like the thought behind this thread here goes the list
Jack Johnson, Rancid, Dropkick Murphys, Led Zeppelin, Nirvana, White Stripes, Weezer, Transplants (a little bit), The Clash, Weird Al, The Vines, The Hives, Jet, U2, Suicide Machines, Sublime, The Sex Pistols, Rolling Stones, Beatles, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Outkast, Ludacris, NIN, Neptunes, Metallica, Libertines (in the UK anyways), Jurassic 5, Iced Earth, Mos Def, Gorillaz, Foo Fighters, Moby, Fatboy Slim, Cake, Bush, Beck, Ben Harper and the Innocent Victims, 311
I tried to keep it slim, since I normally have a very broad idea of mainstream. For example, I would have put Catch22, but they're only mainstream in the ska scene.
soak:
Can an Artist escape the mainstream?
For example Blur's last few albums have recieved less and less mainstream attention, i never heard Crazy Beat on commercial radio, but are they doomed to be considered eternally mainstream because of the success of Park Life etc?
Luke:
If I ever became part of a music group that got off the ground, I'd do my best to get into the mainstream, just so I could make some money - I mean, seriously, how awesome would it be to make a crapload of money making music that you love to make? I don't see what the big deal is.
Garcin:
"Mainstream" means different things to different people at different times.
If you use "mainstream" to mean not under an indie label, that is to say under Universal, EMI, Sony/Bertelsmann, or Warner, then obviously groups not run by superstars will have given up a substantial amount of creative control, have significant marketing budgets, and create primarily profit driven music (ie. music meant to appeal to as many people as possible). Music for music's sake, experiments, attempts to challenge & educate the audience -- these don't exist for pop under the big four labels, hence the need (& value) for indie.
If you use "mainstream" to refer to groups that are well-known by their particular niche audience, then it should have no impact on the quality of their music. I've heard some people make the argument that the only way an artist can do something really novel & interesting is when they don't feel the need to please their audience, hence the justification for the unknown group being best -- but I think that's complete bullshit. Indie obsession with unknown bands is either (on the good side) a pleasure taken in introducing other people to new & exciting things or (on the bad side) a need to feel special & privileged, and a pathetic rationalization for the monumental amount of time spent to listening crap bands it takes before discovering a new one before anyone else.
Finally if you use "mainstream" to refer to groups that appeal to almost everyone, regardless of niche tastes, then your using it as an epithet. Because a band that appeals to almost everyone is appealing on the lowest common denominator.
Conclusion? "Mainstream" can be good, bad, or neutral depending on the context.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version