I was just talking to my bass player about Oasis yesterday. He was telling me that the songwriter in one of his old bands used to come up with their songs by copping Oasis album cuts since nobody in the States would know they did it. Oasis has always been huge in the UK though. Same with Blur, or how when you talk to a British guy about music and bring up the Beatles. The ones I've talked to always seem to steer the conversation to the Dave Clark Five if you mention the Beatles.

I think in 2010 I finally listened to the Oasis records since they like everything are free now.  These are the records that the British press goes ape over and I listened to each of them about three times. They're just not that good.  They don't communicate anything to the American ear, and I can't figure out what English people like so much about it all.  I still think that the singer's voice sounds juvenile and ridiculous, like Blink 182 or something like that. 

 

 

That was during the brief disco revival of the late '90s when everything '70s was cool again. Columbus even had an all-disco station which I believe was all the way up in the attic at 107.9. It wasn't long until it flipped to another format.

 

And now it's the 2010s and people are looking at the 1990s with nostalgia. I always thought that nostalgia was on a 30 year cycle but these days it's more like 20.

 

It's always been 20.  Happy Days began in 1974 and the late sixties "hippie" music revival, such that it was, began in the very late 80s with Mother Love Bone, E'nuff Z'nuff et al.  Meanwhile a lot of the 80s revival happened in the early oughts.

People didn't notice that with Enuff Z Nuff though. They thought it was just more Hair.

And Mother Love Bone proved to be the defining band that bridged hair metal to grunge.  I wonder how the world would be different if Andrew Wood had lived?  Eddie Vedder would just be another Cubs fan trying to get a seat at Progressive Field.... (sigh).

And Mother Love Bone proved to be the defining band that bridged hair metal to grunge.  I wonder how the world would be different if Andrew Wood had lived?  Eddie Vedder would just be another Cubs fan trying to get a seat at Progressive Field.... (sigh).

 

I wouldn't say "bridged" so much as transformed.  MLB had an optimistic sound as did some early Soundgarden.  Andrew's death led Stone and Jeff towards a darker tone to their music that along with Eddie brought them to Pearl Jam's sound.  Meanwhile it was the already-suicidal Kurt Cobain's band that really broke Seattle loose and led to grunge, instead of Wood.  Compare "Stargazer" to "Jeremy".

 

I maintain to this day that the most important early demise in the history of rock and roll may have been Andrew Wood.

Those happy heroin guys like Wood, Brad Nowell and Shannon Hoon were only able to be that mellow due to the heroin though.

 

I tell people that if they want to hear how out there early Soundgarden can be that they should listen to "Kyle Petty, Son of Richard"

Those happy heroin guys like Wood, Brad Nowell and Shannon Hoon were only able to be that mellow due to the heroin though.

 

I tell people that if they want to hear how out there early Soundgarden can be that they should listen to "Kyle Petty, Son of Richard"

 

From what I've heard Andrew was a little less mellow but just as bright after he got out of rehab.  Apple was done while he was using, but the late '89 early '90 live shows were pretty epic.

 

He inspired IMO the second greatest album of that era, "Temple Of The Dog".  First was "Apple".

RIP Leonard Cohen. Too many great songs to list. I'll go with the one I figured Trump would of use as his campaign theme

 

Even the established hard rock acts in the early 90s were using sixties "seasoning" pre-grunge.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpfUi2hMFbI

Oh definitely Mr. Big. "To Be With You" was coffee-shop Hair.

 

 

And of course don't forget Tesla

Oh definitely Mr. Big. "To Be With You" was coffee-shop Hair.

 

 

And of course don't forget Tesla

Oops, must have missed a sign somewhere.

Even the established hard rock acts in the early 90s were using sixties "seasoning" pre-grunge.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpfUi2hMFbI

 

That production, it's hard for me to describe, like it's simultaneously loud and quiet at the same time.

One more, and while Disturbed has a hit lately I like this (30 year) old school version better:

 

I'd never heard of them. It sounds like there are 3 Geoff Tates in the band.

I'd never heard of them. It sounds like there are 3 Geoff Tates in the band.

 

I wish Queensryche had covered TSOS  :o

the best vocals on Jingle Bell Rock (not that anyone was rating them :|)

Metal definitely has never really been my thing, but I'm still thinking of going to see Amaranthe when they come to Pittsburgh in April.  One of their songs played randomly on an Amazon Prime Music station I was listening to (effective marketing, I guess) and I liked their sound.

hey what song are you listening to?

 

My latest find, 18 Ohio original bands circa 1988, including the Max Crucial and the Krushers song I had on .45 and have had stuck in my head for awhile:

 

https://www.discogs.com/Various-Join-Rivers-Can-We-Listen-The-CMJ-Music-Marathon-8-Ohio-Exhibit-Compilation-CD/release/8133584

a jaw dropping 1978 promo for styx rock band tour  :-o

 

 

^Seen recently playing the Taste of Blue Ash. 

No one rocks the 3 piece suit on stage like Dennis DeYoung!

One of my favorite records turns 20 this year...Willis by The Pietasters.  This was a bit of a concept record -- the concept being let's get a liquored-up dude to start dishing on his woman. 

 

The album's first song..."I don't give a * about my life, cos I'm all *'ed up again...and I'll stay two steps ahead of you with a steady diet of tonic and gin":

 

 

I'm not sure this album can really translate today in a streaming format.  The CD was hilarious...it was a physical object with a beginning and an end.  You couldn't believe that grown men got together and recorded something this ridiculous and that about 100,000 people paid $15 for the thing.   

One of my favorite records turns 20 this year...Willis by The Pietasters.  This was a bit of a concept record -- the concept being let's get a liquored-up dude to start dishing on his woman. 

 

The album's first song..."I don't give a * about my life, cos I'm all *'ed up again...and I'll stay two steps ahead of you with a steady diet of tonic and gin":

 

 

I'm not sure this album can really translate today in a streaming format.  The CD was hilarious...it was a physical object with a beginning and an end.  You couldn't believe that grown men got together and recorded something this ridiculous and that about 100,000 people paid $15 for the thing.   

 

I bought that.  "Out All Night" is a staple on any personal late 90s soundtrack of mine, along with the Bosstones and supplementing all the Britpop.

The Pietasters were sort of like The Ramones.  None of their music was serious but it was delivered with a straight face, which made it absolutely hilarious.  There is some alternate reality where they wrote 2-3 hit songs that were backbones of the era's pop culture but it didn't happen on this planet.  They didn't really have a target audience so the crowds were pretty eclectic.  You'd look around and ask yourself how all these people found out about the band. 

 

I saw them at least 10 times and they came pretty damn close to selling out Bogart's in 1999, which is about 1,000 people.  I remember the opening act was The Dropkick Murphy's, who went on to become much more famous.  Somehow both the official band of St. Patrick's Day and the Boston Red Sox.  Again, if things had gone a bit differently (a song in a key movie or something like that), The Pietasters could have achieved that level of notoriety. 

 

The Mighty Mighty Bosstones were, meanwhile, perhaps the biggest sellouts of the decade.  I got that 1997 record when it came out because the record store near my house was giving away a free promo CD with it.  Anyway, the album was a 180 turn in every direction from everything they had done previously and I might have listened to it twice all the way through.  I'm sure it's still here at my house somewhere with no sings of usage.  Then in 2000 I got a free promo copy of whatever record they put out that year or the year previous and it was and it was total junk.  It's a shame because they put out a handful of the more unusual songs to grace college radio in the early 90s.  I saw them live twice in 1996.  They sold out Bogart's and they sold out the other place I saw them at in Kansas.  That was before they had anything on MTV or mainstream radio. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Pietasters were sort of like The Ramones.  None of their music was serious but it was delivered with a straight face, which made it absolutely hilarious.  There is some alternate reality where they wrote 2-3 hit songs that were backbones of the era's pop culture but it didn't happen on this planet.  They didn't really have a target audience so the crowds were pretty eclectic.  You'd look around and ask yourself how all these people found out about the band. 

 

I saw them at least 10 times and they came pretty damn close to selling out Bogart's in 1999, which is about 1,000 people.  I remember the opening act was The Dropkick Murphy's, who went on to become much more famous.  Somehow both the official band of St. Patrick's Day and the Boston Red Sox.  Again, if things had gone a bit differently (a song in a key movie or something like that), The Pietasters could have achieved that level of notoriety. 

 

The Mighty Mighty Bosstones were, meanwhile, perhaps the biggest sellouts of the decade.  I got that 1997 record when it came out because the record store near my house was giving away a free promo CD with it.  Anyway, the album was a 180 turn in every direction from everything they had done previously and I might have listened to it twice all the way through.  I'm sure it's still here at my house somewhere with no sings of usage.  Then in 2000 I got a free promo copy of whatever record they put out that year or the year previous and it was and it was total junk.  It's a shame because they put out a handful of the more unusual songs to grace college radio in the early 90s.  I saw them live twice in 1996.  They sold out Bogart's and they sold out the other place I saw them at in Kansas.  That was before they had anything on MTV or mainstream radio. 

 

I've been reading this bookhttps://www.amazon.com/dp/B00F21WW6W/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 and one point it makes is that punk started in the US, but there was always a tongue in cheek aspect that the Ramones largely personified.  The Brits took it seriously and made it more intense.

 

I'm semi-suprised that the Bosstones are considered sellouts, but my tastes have always been eclectic so I have never really even recognized the concept.  I've always particularly liked style mashups so one of my favorite ska-type songs is Reel Big Fish's cover of "Take On Me".

The initial punk bands weren't huge in the U.S. like they were in England.  So in England there was basically a total collapse by 1980 and it's thought of as more of a fad there than here.  There the genre sort of stopped whereas here in split into several factions but kept evolving.  There were also hugely different scenes in each American city whereas England is obviously a smaller place and so it's easier for those bands to tour every city.  Hardcore started in LA but almost immediately spread to the east coast and became more associated with the east coast cities.  In the east there were both hardcore and straight-edge hardcore bands and those two groups never got along.  In the west the ska-punk and pop-punk innovations that came out of the East Bay and LA in the late 1980s became the mainstream radio and MTV "punk" of the 90s, specifically Green Day and Rancid. 

 

The same thing happened with ska...the record companies and MTV ignored all of the east coast and midwest bands that had been touring in vans for ten years and instead threw all these bands out there who nobody had heard of.  No Doubt, Save Ferris, etc., became the pop face of ska.  When that happened everyone got pissed and the whole thing started collapsing.  It was accelerated by the embezzling scandal at Moon Records in NYC. 

 

The thing I took away from it all is that whenever a bunch of people get together and build something pretty cool together and nobody's really making much money and people are mostly into it for the right reasons, all it takes to destroy it is for some big money to appear out of nowhere and for it to end up in the pockets of come-lately's.  The people who built it all and who were the most talented get stepped on and forgotten. 

 

I saw it happen in Cincinnati when Over-the-Rhine started taking off after 2010.  The people who had been there when the neighborhood was in free-fall back in the 80s and 90s and post-riot years were brushed aside by people with a lot of money who showed up around 2014.  They re-wrote the neighborhood's comeback to cast themselves as the stars, even though nobody had heard of them even a year prior. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The initial punk bands weren't huge in the U.S. like they were in England.  So in England there was basically a total collapse by 1980 and it's thought of as more of a fad there than here.  There the genre sort of stopped whereas here in split into several factions but kept evolving.  There were also hugely different scenes in each American city whereas England is obviously a smaller place and so it's easier for those bands to tour every city.  Hardcore started in LA but almost immediately spread to the east coast and became more associated with the east coast cities.  In the east there were both hardcore and straight-edge hardcore bands and those two groups never got along.  In the west the ska-punk and pop-punk innovations that came out of the East Bay and LA in the late 1980s became the mainstream radio and MTV "punk" of the 90s, specifically Green Day and Rancid. 

 

The same thing happened with ska...the record companies and MTV ignored all of the east coast and midwest bands that had been touring in vans for ten years and instead threw all these bands out there who nobody had heard of.  No Doubt, Save Ferris, etc., became the pop face of ska.  When that happened everyone got pissed and the whole thing started collapsing.  It was accelerated by the embezzling scandal at Moon Records in NYC. 

 

The thing I took away from it all is that whenever a bunch of people get together and build something pretty cool together and nobody's really making much money and people are mostly into it for the right reasons, all it takes to destroy it is for some big money to appear out of nowhere and for it to end up in the pockets of come-lately's.  The people who built it all and who were the most talented get stepped on and forgotten. 

.

 

The other problem that happens is that once people reach 32-34 years old, all of a sudden they need to make real money. So as those more obscure but highly influential bands reach that age they break up or lose key members. Meanwhile the well-funded bands got to keep going even with kids and a house.

The initial punk bands weren't huge in the U.S. like they were in England.  So in England there was basically a total collapse by 1980 and it's thought of as more of a fad there than here.  There the genre sort of stopped whereas here in split into several factions but kept evolving.  There were also hugely different scenes in each American city whereas England is obviously a smaller place and so it's easier for those bands to tour every city.  Hardcore started in LA but almost immediately spread to the east coast and became more associated with the east coast cities.  In the east there were both hardcore and straight-edge hardcore bands and those two groups never got along.  In the west the ska-punk and pop-punk innovations that came out of the East Bay and LA in the late 1980s became the mainstream radio and MTV "punk" of the 90s, specifically Green Day and Rancid. 

 

The same thing happened with ska...the record companies and MTV ignored all of the east coast and midwest bands that had been touring in vans for ten years and instead threw all these bands out there who nobody had heard of.  No Doubt, Save Ferris, etc., became the pop face of ska.  When that happened everyone got pissed and the whole thing started collapsing.  It was accelerated by the embezzling scandal at Moon Records in NYC. 

 

The thing I took away from it all is that whenever a bunch of people get together and build something pretty cool together and nobody's really making much money and people are mostly into it for the right reasons, all it takes to destroy it is for some big money to appear out of nowhere and for it to end up in the pockets of come-lately's.  The people who built it all and who were the most talented get stepped on and forgotten. 

 

I saw it happen in Cincinnati when Over-the-Rhine started taking off after 2010.  The people who had been there when the neighborhood was in free-fall back in the 80s and 90s and post-riot years were brushed aside by people with a lot of money who showed up around 2014.  They re-wrote the neighborhood's comeback to cast themselves as the stars, even though nobody had heard of them even a year prior. 

 

Well it’s pretty obvious why No Doubt was hyped, which is ironic because the “sexism” inherent in this counteracted the traditional sexism of the rock music world in general.  I’m partial to female singers in general so I’ve picked up on this.  It’s a good example of a form of “affirmative action” working without any government involvement or coercion needed.

 

As far as the money in general goes, Steve Albini’s addressed how that’s changed:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/nov/17/steve-albini-at-face-the-music-how-the-internet-solved-problem-with-music

 

More music is being heard, and more bands are moderately successful while fewer are huge.  Between this and what I called the Brony Effect (networks reaching self sustaining critical mass that never would have before the ‘net) musical niches don’t need to be “discovered” by concentrated money and influence and have no need to seek to be.

 

The Pietasters were sort of like The Ramones.  None of their music was serious but it was delivered with a straight face, which made it absolutely hilarious.  There is some alternate reality where they wrote 2-3 hit songs that were backbones of the era's pop culture but it didn't happen on this planet.  They didn't really have a target audience so the crowds were pretty eclectic.  You'd look around and ask yourself how all these people found out about the band. 

 

I saw them at least 10 times and they came pretty damn close to selling out Bogart's in 1999, which is about 1,000 people.  I remember the opening act was The Dropkick Murphy's, who went on to become much more famous.  Somehow both the official band of St. Patrick's Day and the Boston Red Sox.  Again, if things had gone a bit differently (a song in a key movie or something like that), The Pietasters could have achieved that level of notoriety. 

 

The Mighty Mighty Bosstones were, meanwhile, perhaps the biggest sellouts of the decade.  I got that 1997 record when it came out because the record store near my house was giving away a free promo CD with it.  Anyway, the album was a 180 turn in every direction from everything they had done previously and I might have listened to it twice all the way through.  I'm sure it's still here at my house somewhere with no sings of usage.  Then in 2000 I got a free promo copy of whatever record they put out that year or the year previous and it was and it was total junk.  It's a shame because they put out a handful of the more unusual songs to grace college radio in the early 90s.  I saw them live twice in 1996.  They sold out Bogart's and they sold out the other place I saw them at in Kansas.  That was before they had anything on MTV or mainstream radio. 

 

I've been reading this bookhttps://www.amazon.com/dp/B00F21WW6W/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 and one point it makes is that punk started in the US, but there was always a tongue in cheek aspect that the Ramones largely personified.  The Brits took it seriously and made it more intense.

 

I'm semi-suprised that the Bosstones are considered sellouts, but my tastes have always been eclectic so I have never really even recognized the concept.  I've always particularly liked style mashups so one of my favorite ska-type songs is Reel Big Fish's cover of "Take On Me".

 

I've been wanting to read that.  I heard the authors interviewed by Marc Maron last year and have been meaning to pick up a copy.

I just watched one of these "the beatles are the greatest thing that ever happened" documentaries, something I do every few years, and I'm still unconvinced:

 

This host is obviously biased toward the Beatles songs written on piano and the ones that are technically more complex.  And most importantly from my perspective, the ones that are devoid of direct American influence.  No hard blues, no vamps.  No American slang.  No tease, wink, or nod. No Primitivism. No balls. 

 

In other words the complete opposite of The Rolling Stones. 

I just watched one of these "the beatles are the greatest thing that ever happened" documentaries, something I do every few years, and I'm still unconvinced:

 

 

This host is obviously biased toward the Beatles songs written on piano and the ones that are technically more complex.  And most importantly from my perspective, the ones that are devoid of direct American influence.  No hard blues, no vamps.  No American slang.  No tease, wink, or nod. No Primitivism. No balls. 

 

In other words the complete opposite of The Rolling Stones. 

 

And, for that matter, the early Beatles.  Who fit the Stones' "image" better than they did.

 

To me, Sgt. Pepper is the time the Beatles realized anything they recorded would sell.  I call it "S*** Don't Stink" syndrome.  REM and Prince have also suffered from this.

One of my favorite records turns 20 this year...   

 

As does one of mine, where attitude based "Pop Punk" became the shark, it could not evolve further. 

 

A band that only lasted a couple years and that was likely for the best.

 

The singer is now a BBC personality, the guitarist sings with a traditionalist folk choir.

 

To me, Sgt. Pepper is the time the Beatles realized anything they recorded would sell.  I call it "S*** Don't Stink" syndrome.  REM and Prince have also suffered from this.[/color]

 

I don't think Sgt. Pepper is a very good album.  I do really like songs 2-3-4 but the intro is a bit too much and the B-side is a mess that has nothing to do with side 1, even with the reprise.  A great album has to be pretty damn good start to finish, and I think a few of the other Beatles records are better overall records.  But no Beatles record is as good as any of the four Velvet Underground records or the 4-5 really good Rolling Stones records.  And if we're going to talk about sophisticated songwriting, I don't think any Beatles song matched the ambition and complexity of shine on your crazy diamond. 

I just watched one of these "the beatles are the greatest thing that ever happened" documentaries, something I do every few years, and I'm still unconvinced:

 

This host is obviously biased toward the Beatles songs written on piano and the ones that are technically more complex.  And most importantly from my perspective, the ones that are devoid of direct American influence.  No hard blues, no vamps.  No American slang.  No tease, wink, or nod. No Primitivism. No balls. 

 

In other words the complete opposite of The Rolling Stones. 

 

The Beatles were musically adventurous, always moving "forward" with new influences. I credit them for that. The opposite of the spectrum is a band like AC/DC that's had seemingly no evolution, and I suppose in a way that's also cool.

 

The Stones and the Who got experimental too, of course. But their musicianship, while amazing in their own right, just wasn't as sophisticated and creative as Lennon/McCartney/Harrison. By the late 60's that out-of-left-field adventurism echoed the cultural changes of the time.

 

So the Beatles were torchbearers in that way. They couldn't out rock the Stones, out sing the Beach Boys,  or really get the true soul feeling of their original R&B heroes. But they managed to maintain just enough creative longevity to incorporate all of these influences really well, while somehow maintaining their popularity and core audience.

 

I'm not sure I can think of any other artist that kept their following through such drastic changes.

To me, Sgt. Pepper is the time the Beatles realized anything they recorded would sell.  I call it "S*** Don't Stink" syndrome.  REM and Prince have also suffered from this.[/color]

 

I don't think Sgt. Pepper is a very good album.  I do really like songs 2-3-4 but the intro is a bit too much and the B-side is a mess that has nothing to do with side 1, even with the reprise.  A great album has to be pretty damn good start to finish, and I think a few of the other Beatles records are better overall records.  But no Beatles record is as good as any of the four Velvet Underground records or the 4-5 really good Rolling Stones records.  And if we're going to talk about sophisticated songwriting, I don't think any Beatles song matched the ambition and complexity of shine on your crazy diamond. 

 

Thank you. Beatles = overrated.

2017 is the 10-year anniversary of the last White Stripes album, Icky Thump.  Perhaps the last real rock & roll band with any mystique and in 20 years Jack White might be the last rock guy still drawing a decent crowd. That album was all over the place but had fresh moments that were 100x better than pretty much that has happened since:

 

In 2007 the White Stripes were pretty damn big so it's impressive that they put out a record this sloppy and obnoxious. 

 

 

 

The Beatles started out as the Backstreet Boys and ended as Black Sabbath. I don't think that's happened again.

I don't see how anyone can claim The Beatles are overrated whether you like them or not. Not only did they go through a complete transformation of their sound in a very short amount of time, they are also responsible for so many innovations in recorded music. They were the first band that actually utilized the recording studio as a tool, rather than just performing their songs live in the studio. They pioneered so many new effects like flanger and chorus that you now hear in every recorded album. They were the first to print song lyrics in their albums. The list goes on and on. If anything, I think the Beatles are underrated because I don't think most people know how much they changed about how music was recorded and distributed.

^I agree, but I also think it's possible to not like their music. Some people build them up as infallible, but they had some real duds, too. They definitely contributed more to modern music than almost any other individual/group.

^no, the Beatles are not overrated!! okay?

 

legendary New York jazz pianist and singer Barbara Carroll--who was performing as late as last December (with a new album release!) dies at 92

2017 is the 10-year anniversary of the last White Stripes album, Icky Thump.  Perhaps the last real rock & roll band with any mystique and in 20 years Jack White might be the last rock guy still drawing a decent crowd. That album was all over the place but had fresh moments that were 100x better than pretty much that has happened since:

 

In 2007 the White Stripes were pretty damn big so it's impressive that they put out a record this sloppy and obnoxious. 

 

 

 

 

 

except they disintigrated, but thats ok because the west coast jack white, ty segall, is carrying on just fine. in fact better than ever. every time i see him that bar is raised. every time i saw stripes/jack white the bar disappointingly lowered.

^I agree, but I also think it's possible to not like their music. Some people build them up as infallible, but they had some real duds, too. They definitely contributed more to modern music than almost any other individual/group.

 

Right. Given the chance I'd almost always choose Stones, Chuck Berry, Hollies, Who, Beach Boys Byrds and others from the era instead of the Beatles. Beatles harmonies in particular can be grating on my ears. I personally feel the same way that Robert Plant should just shut up instead of screaming "Oooohhhhhh" at every chance he gets. I'm still not gonna say Robert Plant, Led Zeppelin or the Beatles weren't tremendous contributors to music. They're both amazing.

^I agree, but I also think it's possible to not like their music. Some people build them up as infallible, but they had some real duds, too. They definitely contributed more to modern music than almost any other individual/group.

 

Right. Given the chance I'd almost always choose Stones, Chuck Berry, Hollies, Who, Beach Boys Byrds and others from the era instead of the Beatles. Beatles harmonies in particular can be grating on my ears. I personally feel the same way that Robert Plant should just shut up instead of screaming "Oooohhhhhh" at every chance he gets. I'm still not gonna say Robert Plant, Led Zeppelin or the Beatles weren't tremendous contributors to music. They're both amazing.

 

absolutely ditto to all that. god the beatles voices are like nails on a chalkboard. sort of the same, although to a lesser extent, for the more over the top of the led zep robert plant vocals.

There's so many albums coming out this year from some of my favorite artists. Ed Sheeran, Eminem, John Mayer, The Shins, Lupe Fiasco, etc. etc. A lot of big artists are coming out with albums soon. Pretty exciting time. Thank God. The Trump era has been bringing me down.

 

John Mayer is releasing his album (42 songs) in 4 song waves every month (no doubt so that he can sustain a spot on billboard since he has to know by now that his popularity is waning) but from what I've heard so far, it's actually pretty good. I didn't like the new direction he took with country / folk music after he moved to Montana and turned into a wanna-be Neil Young. His Blues cd "TRY!" with Pino Paladino and Steve Jordan is what really made me a fan and it seems as though he's going back to Blues,Jazz, R&B and working with them more.

 

I think I actually speak for a lot of UO members when I say that I wish Trump would respond to Eminem on Twitter in hopes that a whole mixtape would be released from him, dedicated to Trump. When I heard Eminem say, "Trumps a b!tch, I'll make his whole brand go under." I really wish he would have elaborated. Unfortunately, I think even Trump is aware that Eminem slays anyone in his path and that it would be in his best interest to pretend like he never knew about this or Eminem's "Campaign Speech."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxVVRNL2mgg

Don't judge me, but I've been stuck in an early 2000's alt rock phase for some time. I've listened to bands like the Wonder Years, Taking Back Sunday, The Used, Joyce Manor, Rise Against, A Day To Remember, etc. Does anyone have more modern rock bands they've enjoyed recently?

Don't judge me, but I've been stuck in an early 2000's alt rock phase for some time. I've listened to bands like the Wonder Years, Taking Back Sunday, The Used, Joyce Manor, Rise Against, A Day To Remember, etc. Does anyone have more modern rock bands they've enjoyed recently?

 

I recently grabbed a last minute Promise Ring cd for a dollar before a cross country road trip. Enjoyed it!

 

My cooler friends listened to them and others like LeTigre, Mountain Goats and Get Up Kids. But I must have been elsewhere, musically speaking.

 

There's a lot of alt-rock music I missed in early 00's, made apparent by the fact I don't know any of the bands you've listed haha. 

Don't judge me, but I've been stuck in an early 2000's alt rock phase for some time. I've listened to bands like the Wonder Years, Taking Back Sunday, The Used, Joyce Manor, Rise Against, A Day To Remember, etc. Does anyone have more modern rock bands they've enjoyed recently?

 

I recently grabbed a last minute Promise Ring cd for a dollar before a cross country road trip. Enjoyed it!

 

My cooler friends listened to them and others like LeTigre, Mountain Goats and Get Up Kids. But I must have been elsewhere, musically speaking.

 

There's a lot of alt-rock music I missed in early 00's, made apparent by the fact I don't know any of the bands you've listed haha. 

 

 

I saw the Get-Up Kids before they were famous.  I went to the same school as their bass player Jim Suptic and saw them play in a coffee shop in the fall of 1996. Here is what he (and the rest of the band, who all dressed like grandpas) looked like then: http://kcomposite.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/20110729-013831.jpg 

 

I thought they were god-awful.  I didn't realize then that I was witnessing the birth of emo/screamo.  I now work with a guy in a screamo band and have had to go see them 2-3 times.  20 years have gone by and it's still crap.