Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 242 posts

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#31

Post by ehnto »

jorvi wrote: post #27
failwhaleshark wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Just no. You can redefine terms but this doesn't make it so. Edit: "Despite the industry's attempt to create a specific EDM brand, the initialism remains in use as an umbrella term for multiple genres, including dance-pop, house, techno and electro, as well as their respective subgenres." - Wikipedia. Wikipedia being right for a change, this is industry BS. Don't buy it like a willing consumer.

What, no? At least in Europe, EDM is a specific set of big club / festival House that's all about big bombastic bass drops. If one of my Techno buddies says with disdain 'all they were playing at that place was EDM' I know exactly what he means, and it isn't techno

I have always used it as an umbrella term too. Maybe it's a distinction you and your friends have because of the scene you're in?

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#32

Post by criddell »

sjg007 wrote: post #25
bumbada wrote: post #20

What killed rock n roll is the same thing that "killed" every other music genre before: Demographics. People get older and young people want to differentiate themselves from older people, so they just do different things, including listening to different music. This even happened with what we consider classical music, from Beethoven Eroica to Stravinski Rite of Spring and specially Operas. Old people will consider a…

Classical music is 300+ years old. I also love Opera as do my parents and grandparents. I think it is more about what gets played on the radio. The music is good and new. That tricks our brain into pursuing it. Eventually each genre finds its own classics that basically capture most of the attention.

Do you think radio still matters?

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#33

Post by xphilter »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #23

The article makes a very strenuous effort to make a point about something something racism in rock that sounds a bit boring and trite to my ears. After all, Bon Scott said it best years ago: In the beginning Back in nineteen fifty five Man didn't know 'bout a rock 'n' roll show And all that jive The white man had the schmaltz The black man had the blues No one knew what they was gonna do But Tchaikovsky had the news…

I mean, if you exclude racism and structural racism as an answer, you’ll be wondering for a long time “why black people don’t rock anymore.” But it’s not my job to educate you, I’d suggest you look into yourself.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#34

Post by derwiki »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #23

The article makes a very strenuous effort to make a point about something something racism in rock that sounds a bit boring and trite to my ears. After all, Bon Scott said it best years ago: In the beginning Back in nineteen fifty five Man didn't know 'bout a rock 'n' roll show And all that jive The white man had the schmaltz The black man had the blues No one knew what they was gonna do But Tchaikovsky had the news…

“Roll over Beethoven” by Chuck Berry has the line “And tell Tchaikovsky the news”—-I presume that is the reference?

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#35

Post by ehnto »

crucialfelix wrote: post #5
llamataboot wrote: post #3

I often reflect on the similiarities to that and how techno and house became EDM. When I started going to Midwestern raves in the 1990s they were literally some of the first fully integrated places I hung out in. Definitely some of the Detroit techno parties we went too, some of the first places where it was a majority Black space. EDM now is thought of as this totally white music, all electronic music really, by eve…

I was in the 90s Midwest rave scene as well. This pattern repeats itself in music over and over. Jungle to DNB. Dubstep was like two tone, then it got destroyed by the US market takeover. Garage, grime, dancehall, hip hop all stay mainly black (with some white artists accepted) to defend their scene. Precisely to stop the take over from happening again.

I thought the Jungle/DnB split was just the result of cocaine getting popular and the Jungle scene wanting none of that, but I wasn't there so I only have third party accounts to go off.

Remembering as well that these musical styles live on and elevated above their once-upon a time rave/club scenes. So this is commentary specifically about the club scenes in the UK at their time of provenance.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#36

Post by jrm4 »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #23

The article makes a very strenuous effort to make a point about something something racism in rock that sounds a bit boring and trite to my ears. After all, Bon Scott said it best years ago: In the beginning Back in nineteen fifty five Man didn't know 'bout a rock 'n' roll show And all that jive The white man had the schmaltz The black man had the blues No one knew what they was gonna do But Tchaikovsky had the news…

I mean, it's important to remember that the racist segmenting of the industry (again, mostly the fault of the sellers not the artists) never really went away, it just changed in a lot of ways. So there's the difference between "Rock n Roll" the sound, and "Rock n Roll," the product.

As a sound, it pretty consistently stays there, though perhaps not as crisply defined. Prince, Michael Jackson, and later Run DMC et al. But for a very long time, those artists are explicitly not given space on Rock n Roll stations. Later on, these same stations would go on to explicitly and openly denounce hip-hop, but the play Beastie Boys, and even EMINEM.

What's really interesting is early Hip-Hop on this; how it very consistently both sampled Rock-n-Roll, but also frequently explicitly "hated" it. Not too hard to see why this division happens, given the disparate treatment (i.e. hip-hop comes out a little after most of the Satanic Panic has died down. Rappers get treated as "scary" for basically just being black, RIGHT AFTER and in the face of rumored blood rituals etc etc.)

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#37

Post by ehnto »

yoz-y wrote: post #14
crucialfelix wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in the 90s Midwest rave scene as well. This pattern repeats itself in music over and over. Jungle to DNB. Dubstep was like two tone, then it got destroyed by the US market takeover. Garage, grime, dancehall, hip hop all stay mainly black (with some white artists accepted) to defend their scene. Precisely to stop the take over from happening again.

With streaming, what does make a genre more or less appreciated by a group of people? TBH for most of the artists I listen to, I have no idea who they are, how they look like or even how many of them are in the band.

I think the musical styles and their in the flesh club/rave scenes are getting conflated a bit. Music is often born in a specific location and scene and then grows into it's own monster. Especially now with the internet, music is for everyone. But locally speaking there are different groups listening and producing styles of music you may not even know about yet, that will enter the global lexicon of music and get much the same treatment of commercialization as house and others got.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#39

Post by mellosouls »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #23

The article makes a very strenuous effort to make a point about something something racism in rock that sounds a bit boring and trite to my ears. After all, Bon Scott said it best years ago: In the beginning Back in nineteen fifty five Man didn't know 'bout a rock 'n' roll show And all that jive The white man had the schmaltz The black man had the blues No one knew what they was gonna do But Tchaikovsky had the news…

So why didn't the black grasroots ever sprout an analogous new rock scene, instead of turning towards the mainstream, big stage, light show, for-profit music that comes from black artists for the last few decades?

I think this claim speaks more to your perception of music that isn't "rock" (there is no greater association with stadium-filling and dull commercialism than that label for some of us) than it does about what young creative people (of whichever colour) should be making.

Post reply on HN