Rock Is Alive — But You Might Not Know It When You Hear It

Well said, Pete!

 

Or you could just go listen to Queens of the Stone Age, Royal Blood, Greta Van Fleet, Deftones, Muse, Kaleo, Foo Fighters, etc...

Or you can listen to FOB follow the trends of pop music in a lame attempt to appeal to tweens...

 

It's all about that cash, though. Wentz gotta eat!!

 

I agree with that he says to an extent, but a genre exists precisely because of the sound of the music, so certain elements might make songs not be classified as rock anymore, and thats fine. I don't see why it even matters what "genre" a song falls into, if you like it, you like it. I enjoy the old rock sound of FOB but also enjoy the new sound as well but I wouldn't say most of the new stuff is rock.

 

the people tied to the conventions of rock are the reason it's tanked in popularity. Innovate or die

 

don't get me wrong, I love a good throwback sound every now and then, but mix it up at least.

 

You mean FOB never appealed to tweens before when they played trendy pop punk?

 

A band like Greta Van Fleet is exactly why people say rock is dead. They are carbon copies of Led Zeppelin, because rock elitists are too stuck in the past. I’d rather listen to FOB than anything you listed.

 

Rock is alive and well but it has nothing to do with Pete Wentz.

 

*whispers*
you can listen to both

 

Whilst I agree that rock fans are too regimented, I wouldn't describe Fall Out Boy as innovative really.

 

I've always held the idea that rock music was based upon and is grounded in a certain ideology and attitude as opposed to a sound. I can go and listen to The Orwells or Sleepy Sun and think in my mind "this is true rock n roll" but ultimately there is no reason someone else can't listen to Imagine Dragons and have it appeal to their "rock" sensibilities exemplifying in their mind what rock music is. Music has always been evolving and to me its silly to hold genres to such rigid standards with that in mind. Artists in this day and age have more at their disposal than ever to follow their creative ambitions piecing sounds together and it is often condemned instead of being seen as an opportunity. I don't particularly enjoy FOB's new sound, but I wont denounce them for following their artistic whims on the grounds of it being a sellout to whatever the perceived essence of rock is. Genres are trivial things. That being said the idea that rock has an obligation to innovate in order to survive in the modern age is somewhat ridiculous to me. There will always be an audience for every facet of rock and I wouldn't be surprised to see a resurgence in popularity for a more retro sound. I think what must innovate is the fans' perception of what the genre can be. Rock fans get so hung up on holding modern releases to a certain "standard" that they fail to see that the groundwork for the genre was in intentionally defying that very standard.

 

Lol at this band trying very hard to call their music rock music. At the end of the day, they could call it whatever they want, it still sucks and isn’t even remotely innovative.

 

Rock is alive, but I wouldn't say its necessarily doing well in a popular and traditional sense. Look at the Billboard rock charts and you'll see alternative/pop artists like Beck, Imagine Dragons, and 30 Seconds to Mars at the top, with a standard Foo Fighters and Weezer track on the side. Rock will have its mainstream revival eventually like any other sound, but that time isn't now.

 

Or y'all can just listen to whatever you like and not give a shit about genre conventions beyond describing a band's sound.

 

Innovation is very important to a genre's longevity. However when it comes to Fall out Boy it's more of a move to a new genre rather than an innovation on the one that came before. There's nothing wrong with what Fall out Boy is writing these day's but it takes some mental gymnastics to call it rock music. There's plenty of indie bands that are actually progressing the rock genre.

 

It doesn't really matter to me if FOB is playing rock music or not but you can only add so much pop or rap elements to a rock song before it's just a combination of genres rather than a pure simple description.

 

I get what he said, I just don't think I agree with what he is trying to say when he compares some of hip hop's upstarts to DIY punk, acting as if underground rap hasn't been around for ages. I think this just goes to show that, more than anything, society is so focused on mainstream trolling & that's what really bums me out.

 

Most of those bands just play pop songs with loud guitars. If you think Foo Fighters is the pinnacle of what rock has to offer, reevaluate.

 

Is there any kind of conversation about music that is less interesting than arguing about whether something does or does not fit into a certain genre?

 

Good way to deter multiple people from openly discussing their opinion on the article.

 

“Where are the guitars?!”

 

Who cares? Isn't everything just "alternative" now anyway?

 

Lol. “You mean the audible guitars on the song you were just listening to?”

This kind of thing is just so dumb. In country, it’s “where are the steel guitars?!” Or “where are the banjos?” Or “this isn’t country because there’s a drum machine.”

If your genre is so poorly defined that it can be made or broken by instrumentation or production choices, then you at least have to acknowledge that genres are fluid and that there is a lot more overlap than most people recognize.

Alternatively, you can try to understand that genres go a lot deeper and involve things like lineage of influences and lyrical themes and melodic structure and vocal style and overall songwriting style. Just because you are changing the ingredients a little doesn’t mean you can’t create some version of a genre’s tradition.