PDA

View Full Version : the darkness is the coolest band right now, hands down...


jero
Dec 6, 2003, 10:15 PM
no one is even daring to do what they are doing. bringing rock back to its most flamboyant time. guitar solos, big hair and stadium rock anthems. its about time too, im getting sick of all this nu metal, rap/metal linkin park nonsense. lp got nothing on the darkness!:D

scem0
Dec 6, 2003, 11:03 PM
ugh i hate them.

I certainly have no problem with guys singing with their upper range, being a soprano myself, but when it sounds like your in pain please cease to annoy the rest of the world.

Bleh... annoying-ass music :p.

scem0

cr2sh
Dec 7, 2003, 05:29 AM
two words: postal service.

they rock my socks.

its funny that you'd even mention LP in a discussion of cool bands.

jero
Dec 7, 2003, 10:48 AM
there are so few comtemporary bands im feeling right now. i only really like:

the darkness
the yeah yeah yeahs
primus
the strokes
radiohead
the hives

jet is pretty cool but i havent heard the album. most rock is giving off this whole "mtv nu metal, pop/punk, good charlotte, rap/metal bs, linkin park, trl kiddie rock" vibe. and im not feelin it. give me a guitar solo and falsetto "freddie mercury" type vocals and im good for the night.

howard
Dec 7, 2003, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by cr2sh
two words: postal service.

they rock my socks.

its funny that you'd even mention LP in a discussion of cool bands.

the postal service does rock

that cd got me into all of death cab for cutie, who rocks a ton

manitoubalck
Dec 7, 2003, 04:10 PM
PowderFinger (and Australian band From Brisbane) has an excelent sound, but I can't go past Oasis, and the rock bands of old.

WinterMute
Dec 8, 2003, 06:07 AM
The Darkness were on TV last night in the UK, one of those "play your first venue" type things, but with plenty of interviews.

I like the band a lot, especially the christmas single, they can really play, and they don't take it seriously, in fact they play it for the Spinal Tap groove all the time, and let the listener decide if they are joking or not.

Can't see them ever being particularly credible though... not that it matters.

RAWK ON!!!

(headbangs into an early grave)

edesignuk
Dec 8, 2003, 06:26 AM
Yeah, I really like The Darkness - crank it up...and ROCK ON BABY!!!!!

Nothing serious, but sound great, IMO the whole album doesn't have a bad track on it, I can't count the numfer of times I've listened to it.

iGav
Dec 8, 2003, 02:02 PM
can't stand them myself.... I was watching MTV2 the other day, and the boy wonder was saying how we're beginning to see all these post-ironic-poodle-rock bands re-appearing.... :rolleyes:

I f-in hate Queen too. :eek: :eek: :eek:

WinterMute
Dec 8, 2003, 02:36 PM
He's taking the piss mate, everything they say is right on message, they know exactly what image they are peddling, and they might love the music, but they really love making folks guess about their irony, post or otherwise.:D ;)

Incidentally, I think Queen suck too.

jero
Dec 8, 2003, 07:57 PM
i respect bands and artists that go against the grain. and what theyre doing is going far beyond what ANYONE is doing. hate all you want, but take a step back and see all these cookie cutter nu metal, rap metal bands and you see a band like this thats on a totally different vibe, thats balls right there. forget playing it safe, folks have to respect the fact that they do what they want and forget what appeals to trl kids. heres a good review:

The Darkness - Permission To Land
Rock with balls.... no scrotum, just balls.

"Please God, I don't like Nu-metal or Garage rock. I like music with soul, with power, with showmanship and above all with humour. But I'm bored of all my Thin Lizzy and Motley Crue records. Please God, please send us a new band of the highest proportions. Amen"

Well here they are, a swaggering, solo-ing, spandex-clad, falsetto-vocaled, guitar-wanking, crowd-baiting, endlessly loveable foursome of music Gods sent from the heavens to answer our prayers. The Darkness are here to show the world that they are, as their website states, "Men what do rock, baby" and their debut album Permission To Land has, er, landed. If you're not familiar with the band live then upon first listen you will be in fits of laughter. This is the aural equivalent of a circus; a circus in space, with lots of monkeys, all wearing little hats and playing guitar. This is entertainment. And that's just what this album does: entertains from start to finish. The singles Growing On Me, Get Your Hands Off My Woman and I Believe In A Thing Called Love are all standouts, but there's a lot more to the album than that. Lots more anthemic, sing-along, air-guitar provoking RAWK numbers throughout with a fantastic November Rain style power-ballad, Love Is Only A Feeling stuck in the middle.

The songs are great, the style is great, the musicians are great, the production is great, the artwork is great, everything is just great!
Well, not everything. You see, some people are going to listen to this album and ask "This has got to be a joke, right? No-one makes music as, well, obvious as this anymore.

"So is it a joke? Well, no-one knows. It's certainly not original. Justin's falsetto vocals are hilarious in some parts. And the guitar solos are outrageous. Especially in I Believe In A Thing Called Love when Justin actually shouts "Guitar!" before the first guitar solo kicks off.

If you want music to entertain and top make you feel like a God amongst men, look no further.
If you want serious, heartfelt, sad music to remind you of all Man's troubles, then buy a Leonard Cohen album.

This choice is yours, but I know where I want to be...

"GUITAR!!"

iGav
Dec 10, 2003, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by WinterMute
He's taking the piss mate, everything they say is right on message, they know exactly what image they are peddling, and they might love the music, but they really love making folks guess about their irony, post or otherwise.:D ;)

Incidentally, I think Queen suck too.

wasn't the guy from the band, it's the aussie dude that presents MTV2....

I'm liking the Fiery Furnaces at the mo.... kind of like a more inventive White Stripes. :)

WinterMute
Dec 17, 2003, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by iGAV
wasn't the guy from the band, it's the aussie dude that presents MTV2....

I'm liking the Fiery Furnaces at the mo.... kind of like a more inventive White Stripes. :)

Yeah, they're pretty good, I've been backtracking Soundgarden's Superunknown all week, excellent..:D

How can you not love "Don't let the bells end"?;) :p

iGav
Dec 17, 2003, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by WinterMute
Yeah, they're pretty good, I've been backtracking Soundgarden's Superunknown all week, excellent..:D

How can you not love "Don't let the bells end"?;) :p

it grinds mate... it grinds.... :eek:

Superunknown... ;)

I'm currently listening to Roberta Flack... *sighs* such a good singer....

WinterMute
Dec 17, 2003, 03:33 PM
***** yes it grinds, but it grinds good....:D

Roberta flack, Galaxy chocolate in a voice.

TrenchMouth
Dec 19, 2003, 02:10 AM
i am not a big fan of the darkness...

i like that poeple are going against the grain and all, but i think it could be done a little better than this (not that i could lol). my roommate summed it up best; the beat in their hit right now is very pedestrian. its not my taste, but its a relief from the same old stuff.

kettle
Dec 19, 2003, 05:16 AM
Devin Townsend
Strapping Young Lad
:eek:

germ war
Dec 19, 2003, 10:49 AM
I hate to break it to you all, but NOTHING on MTV is pushing new boundaries, or is really all that interesting.

I didn't know about The Darkness until a couple days ago when my roommate was watching MTV and I saw the video. Revival rock? Please. Can we move forward instead of continually trying to revive what's already been done?

The bands that are truly doing something are the bands that AREN'T trying to appeal to pop radio. Pop music is struggling to find an identity; to find the next Beatles, the next Nirvana. Instead of trying to break the "next big thing" by marketing certain select bands to us, if MTV really wanted to make a difference they would air a wider variety and try to tap into the underground.

You know who's pushing boundaries? Kid606. Hella. Lightning Bolt. Drums & Tuba. Cheer-Accident.

Yeah, The Darkness isn't that BAD, but when there's nothing new under the sun, it's hard to appreciate a band who isn't trying to find it.

kettle
Dec 19, 2003, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by germ war
I hate to break it to you all.... etc. etc.

I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer.

You really have to look for the talent because if "they" don't want to sell their souls, you won't get to hear them in the "music industry"

iGav
Dec 20, 2003, 04:36 AM
Originally posted by germ war
I didn't know about The Darkness until a couple days ago when my roommate was watching MTV and I saw the video. Revival rock? Please. Can we move forward instead of continually trying to revive what's already been done?


I agree, it's the same with these so called 'Punk, Hardcore' bands... they need to get out there and do something different as well.... man, they bore the pants off me!

Rower_CPU
Dec 20, 2003, 11:30 AM
A band that's really made an impact on me lately is Dredg. Think of Tool, but with happier lyrics.

The lead singer is awesome and the guitar hooks are tight. The site is kinda artsy-fartsy, but you can download some clips (no iTMS yet).

http://www.dredg.com/

jero
Dec 26, 2003, 09:55 PM
some darkness clips:

http://n00b.org.uk/thedarkness/

edStar
Dec 30, 2003, 09:03 AM
The Darkness are playing at the Big Day Out.

I'll go check them out after I watch The Sleepy Jackson.

g30ffr3y
Jan 10, 2004, 02:17 PM
theres nothing original or inventive about "the darkness"... dont get me wrong i have a few guilty pleasures by them in my ipod, its fun to listen to, but its just rehashed rehashed rehashed... truth is most everything has been done... even radiohead who are creative genius are comparatively todays pink floyd... please dont flame me, but the darkness are nothing to get all excited about...

jero
Jan 11, 2004, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by g30ffr3y
theres nothing original or inventive about "the darkness"... dont get me wrong i have a few guilty pleasures by them in my ipod, its fun to listen to, but its just rehashed rehashed rehashed... truth is most everything has been done... even radiohead who are creative genius are comparatively todays pink floyd... please dont flame me, but the darkness are nothing to get all excited about...

DAMN! who said anything about being inventive?! or original?! you would have to be a total moron to not see what they are doing. they are bringing back fun rock music from the 80's . thats...it. i love radiohead(and no they dont come close to pink floyd, no radiohead album touched dsotm) but whats with all this been done before talk. thats the beauty of it. not that theyre doing something thats been done before(cause tons of artists in all genres have done that) but that they are touching a form of music despised and such a 360 to the s___ rock of today that it has to be mentioned and recognized. cause everything post nirvana, bands it seems took a s___ load of downers and everyone was all depressed and serious and complex. like rock got all cynical. bull____! why does it have to be like that?! all inventive and original and depressing all the time? why cant rock have some fun?rock has been depressed for a looooong time, and its done so much for me and so many people it deserves to have a little fun. and no one is doing that better that the darkness. it takes more balls to go against the grain than simply follow it with crap nu metal. but i guess to really understand and appreciate the darkness you have to either a)lived through the 80's or b)really musically knowledgeable and c)have a sense of humor. cause obviously they do. they know what theyre doing, they know what they do pisses people off haha. thats the genius of it, people think they are 100% serious. if you do then the jokes on you jack.

yeah yeah, theyre rehashed. but i see everyday that theyre getting more and more radioplay and see theyre cds selling in the stores. so im not trippin.

im not trying to single you out btw, im just using you cause you were the last to respond.

www.thedarknessrock.com

jero
Jan 11, 2004, 10:11 AM
stop hating, i know whats up:

THE DARKNESS SET TO LIGHT UP LETTERMAN TOMORROW;
VIRGIN MEGASTORE PERFORMANCE TODAY;
DEBUT ROCKETS UP BILLBOARD ALBUM CHART

Atlantic sensation The Darkness is slated to perform on CBS-TV's The Late Show With David Letterman tomorrow night (January 9th), marking their live U.S. television debut. It's a triumphant return to New York City for the acclaimed British combo, whose last trips across the pond resulted in sold-out appearances at Irving Plaza and The Bowery Ballroom which have since become the stuff of legend. The band will also play live at the Times Square Virgin Megastore today (January 8th) at 6pm, and immediately following their performance cruise uptown to the Ed Sullivan Theatre for the Letterman taping.

This week, the band's debut album, "PERMISSION TO LAND," leapt an incredible 81 spots on the Billboard 200. Cracking the top 100 and landing at the 92 position in only its third week on the chart, the album has scanned over 120,000 copies. The jump was spurred in part by a groundswell of listener support at radio for the album's single, "I Believe In A Thing Called Love." The track is Top 5 in requests in twenty major markets across the country, including New York, Chicago, Boston, San Francisco, and Philadelphia, and is impacting heavily at both Rock and Alternative formats. It is slated to hit pop radio outlets the first week of February. In addition, the companion video is in "Buzzworthy" rotation at MTV, and a half-hour concert feature has been running regularly on MTV2. The band will make an appearance on MTV's Headbanger's Ball this Saturday, January 10, at 10pm.

Music critics have seen the light as well, with Rolling Stone, Blender, Spin, and Details all naming the band as one of the best of 2003 in year-end polls. In February, The Darkness will appear on the cover of Spin's "Next Big Things" issue, and will be the subject of a feature in Rolling Stone.

The Darkness have been widely hailed as 2003's most exciting new rock 'n' roll band, cranking out an irresistible - and unapologetic - blend of anthemic rock and sheer showmanship, complete with virtuoso guitar solos, killer hooks, and massive sing-along choruses.

Fuelled by a trio of remarkable singles - "I Believe In A Thing Called Love," "Get Your Hands Off Of My Woman," and "Growing On Me" - "PERMISSION TO LAND" made an extraordinary chart debut upon its July 2003 U.K. release, crashing in at #2. Its subsequent ascension to the #1spot made "PERMISSION TO LAND" the first debut album by a British artist to hit the top spot since Coldplay in 2000.

dont hate. lol.

WinterMute
Jan 11, 2004, 11:14 AM
First band I know of to release a single with the word c*nt in it and NOT get bleeped or banned....:D

Gotta love it.

edesignuk
Jan 11, 2004, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by WinterMute
First band I know of to release a single with the word c*nt in it and NOT get bleeped or banned....:D
It's actually, "you c***************nt!" :D :p

jero
Jan 17, 2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by WinterMute
First band I know of to release a single with the word c*nt in it and NOT get bleeped or banned....:D

Gotta love it.

yeah, gotta love that.

side note:

went to my local tower records with my friend(who wanted to buy their album) and all copies of their album had been sold out, except for one copy! haha. that made me smile. my friend got lucky and knabbed it.

dave1234
Jan 19, 2004, 10:21 PM
I have not heard all of their songs, but the stuff i have heard, is appealing to me, not my favorite. But it is something new...ermm. vintage....erm nintage?

jero
Feb 20, 2004, 06:48 PM
hey look at todays top songs in itunes. number 6 belongs to THE DARKNESS!!! yeah baby. no other band is even stepping to the darkness.

what do the haters have to say now?

ROCK BABY! ROCK!

krossfyter
Feb 22, 2004, 04:54 AM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
A band that's really made an impact on me lately is Dredg. Think of Tool, but with happier lyrics.

The lead singer is awesome and the guitar hooks are tight. The site is kinda artsy-fartsy, but you can download some clips (no iTMS yet).

http://www.dredg.com/


man... im a huge dredg fan.

the funny thing though is that this band is being marketed as a metal band when in fact they are anything but. sure it has elements of tool but not much. they have impeccably tight instrumentation... combining melodic guitars, intricate bass and drums, and sonic effects with bits and pieces of mandolin, trumpet, recorded samples, chants, and more - soars in a kind of almost gothic mood. They should be marketed as an IRM band... Intelligent Rock Music. They are more of a rock based world music band.

great stuff. As for progressive contemporary rock bands that I listent to these guys are in that library... along with The Mars Volta, Tool, A Perfect Circle, Rush, Radiohead, Manu Chao, Mogwai, Cave In, Cafe Tacuba, Sigur-Ros.... etc. etc.

krossfyter
Feb 22, 2004, 05:04 AM
to an outsider the rock music world may seem pretty stagnant and non progressive when a rehash band is touted as "most exciting new rock 'n' roll band".


im getting sick and tired of bands who are into recapitulating.


its like lets try this again rock music world... lets give it another go because we cant think of anything new... thats cool!


man come on.

Rower_CPU
Feb 22, 2004, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by krossfyter
man... im a huge dredg fan.

the funny thing though is that this band is being marketed as a metal band when in fact they are anything but. sure it has elements of tool but not much. they have impeccably tight instrumentation... combining melodic guitars, intricate bass and drums, and sonic effects with bits and pieces of mandolin, trumpet, recorded samples, chants, and more - soars in a kind of almost gothic mood. They should be marketed as an IRM band... Intelligent Rock Music. They are more of a rock based world music band.

great stuff. As for progressive contemporary rock bands that I listent to these guys are in that library... along with The Mars Volta, Tool, A Perfect Circle, Rush, Radiohead, Manu Chao, Mogwai, Cave In, Cafe Tacuba, Sigur-Ros.... etc. etc.

Nice to see another fan on here. ;)

I saw them live here in town in January in this very odd setting (converted movie theater). Awesome show. Obviously, it was scaled down from the studio work but still very well done.

For a trip you should check out Godspeed You Black Emperor...way out there...

krossfyter
Feb 22, 2004, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Nice to see another fan on here. ;)

I saw them live here in town in January in this very odd setting (converted movie theater). Awesome show. Obviously, it was scaled down from the studio work but still very well done.

For a trip you should check out Godspeed You Black Emperor...way out there...


yeah... ive heard of that band but havent heard thier music. now ill check them out for sure.

Awimoway
Feb 22, 2004, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by jero
there are so few comtemporary bands im feeling right now. i only really like:

the darkness
the yeah yeah yeahs
primus
the strokes
radiohead
the hives

jet is pretty cool but i havent heard the album. most rock is giving off this whole "mtv nu metal, pop/punk, good charlotte, rap/metal bs, linkin park, trl kiddie rock" vibe. and im not feelin it. give me a guitar solo and falsetto "freddie mercury" type vocals and im good for the night.

Hmm. Interesting that we have similar lists:
The Strokes
The Yeah Yeah Yeahs
The Hives
Jet
The Vines
The White Stripes
The Vondies Bondies
The Detroit Cobras

Yet note the omissions. I never liked Queen-esque spandex-falsetto-mascara girly metal. The Darkness does nothing for me. (And for that matter, I've grown tired of Radiohead's meandering, heroin-fueled mush.) It always seemed odd to me that (and I suppose Queen is somewhat of an exception to this rule) hair bands had the most misogynistic lyrics and fans of any rock genre yet they all dressed up and sang like women. Repressed feelings, maybe?

Originally posted by iGAV
I agree, it's the same with these so called 'Punk, Hardcore' bands... they need to get out there and do something different as well.... man, they bore the pants off me!

The new new thing for the sake of being the new new thing is not a concept I admire. It just strikes me as being nothing more than the consequences of a short attention span, or even being elitist because it's borne of the same philosophy that drove explorers to be the first to mark their territory on mountaintops and polar caps. This "I was there first" stuff has no place in music. Music should be about the sound, not about being different for the sake of being different, of being there first. I don't have a problem with taking a retrospective look at what made rock great, even if it's an ironic look.

krossfyter
Feb 22, 2004, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Awimoway


The new new thing for the sake of being the new new thing is not a concept I admire. It just strikes me as being nothing more than the consequences of a short attention span, or even being elitist because it's borne of the same philosophy that drove explorers to be the first to mark their territory on mountaintops and polar caps. This "I was there first" stuff has no place in music. Music should be about the sound, not about being different for the sake of being different, of being there first. I don't have a problem with taking a retrospective look at what made rock great, even if it's an ironic look.



Good points. You articulate for your side well. I applaud you really.


I seem to take my music preference (or the choice of music i listen too) in tandem with the technology field. its not really about being elitist... even though one can find a lot of that going on (abstract art is an elitist art form becuase only "certain select" people can understand it... nothing wrong with that)... its about progress. progress in music. whats wrong with progress? thats what i look for in my music and my tech. obviously i wont go out there and buy an atari and tell everyone out there i know "hey check out this atari... its nothing new i know... but its different now so thats why its better". to have an atari or to be excited about one today... is all about nostalgia... its novelty. people who love these rehash bands because of the nostalgia effect i have no problem with... but those guys who say they are better then the "progress bands" have another thing coming.

how would technology be today if "rehash" was the in thing? im curious.

obviously music and tech are two different fields... and the rules that apply to one dont nesecarily apply to another but in certain situations one can compare the two to put an issue in percpective.... such as this one. so its not about being first or being elitist... its about progress.

Awimoway
Feb 22, 2004, 03:11 PM
Originally posted by krossfyter
Good points. You articulate for your side well. I applaud you really.


I seem to take my music preference (or the choice of music i listen too) in tandem with the technology field. its not really about being elitist... even though one can find a lot of that going on (abstract art is an elitist art form becuase only "certain select" people can understand it... nothing wrong with that)... its about progress. progress in music. whats wrong with progress? thats what i look for in my music and my tech. obviously i wont go out there and buy an atari and tell everyone out there i know "hey check out this atari... its nothing new i know... but its different now so thats why its better". to have an atari or to be excited about one today... is all about nostalgia... its novelty. people who love these rehash bands because of the nostalgia effect i have no problem with... but those guys who say they are better then the "progress bands" have another thing coming.

how would technology be today if "rehash" was the in thing? im curious.

obviously music and tech are two different fields... and the rules that apply to one dont nesecarily apply to another but in certain situations one can compare the two to put an issue in percpective.... such as this one. so its not about being first or being elitist... its about progress.

Actually, the technology analogy isn't so bad. If art never changed, it would get stagnant, and we would all be justifiably bored. Technology progresses and times change. Art is always a reflection of its time, so art must change. But to insist on change in art for change's sake alone is putting the cart before the horse, in my opinion. What I really think is that this retrospective music is a new form (albeit in a subtler, nostalgic way), and that's probably the main reason I feel the need to defend it so much. Because I think a lot of people are not even giving it the time of day. They listen to a couple bars, conclude that they've "been there, done that" and cry out for something really different. And at that point, I can't help but think that the motive must be different for different's sake alone. And I don't really understand that.

krossfyter
Feb 22, 2004, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by Awimoway
Actually, the technology analogy isn't so bad. If art never changed, it would get stagnant, and we would all be justifiably bored. Technology progresses and times change. Art is always a reflection of its time, so art must change.

agreed.




Originally posted by Awimoway

But to insist on change in art for change's sake alone is putting the cart before the horse, in my opinion.


agreed.


Originally posted by Awimoway
What I really think is that this retrospective music is a new form (albeit in a subtler, nostalgic way),


a new form? if something is a new form its original in some ways... so in what way is this retro music original? please elaborate... im not trying to argue im actually just trying to have a civil conversation with someone who is equally as knowledgable about music and who accepts critical thought (just in case you get the wrong point).


Originally posted by Awimoway

and that's probably the main reason I feel the need to defend it so much. Because I think a lot of people are not even giving it the time of day. They listen to a couple bars, conclude that they've "been there, done that" and cry out for something really different. And at that point, I can't help but think that the motive must be different for different's sake alone. And I don't really understand that.



well a lot of people are now giving it the time of day. so its getting its deserved attention in my opinion... maybe too much for its own good... but thats just my opinion. the ones who i guess arent for this type of music (some) simply grew tired of that type of music long ago and see no reason to accept it again. just a preference thing.... if they do listen to it its just on a "head bobbing music" level. the radioheads and the pink floyds out there are not for everyone but the ones they are geared for more then likely include people who dont care for rehash music. its not for the sake of just something new... its simply about the feeling one gets when seeing one artist's inerpretation of things in life expressed in a different way that hasnt been conveyed before. its that feeling that drives these people i believe. its a new way of feeling the same old stuff.... not a old way of feeling or expierencing the same old stuff. thats the difference i believe. its not always or maybe never about being the first in a new land for the sake of being first. obviously if people want change over the quality of the music then thats another story of which im not really talking about here. its about new ways of seeing of hearing of sensing etc.. its about stimulating the senses... a basic human operation.
i see laziness in artistry as possibly contributing to the issue or factor of rehash or retrospective music also. i cant sit here and say that ALL these retro bands are being lazy thats why they cant think of anything new... but it is a legitimate question, wouldn't you think?... and is a potential effect on SOME of these rehash/retro bands.


its been a while since i had a good discussion on contemprorary music with someone. thanks for being that someone.


i respect your opinion and i look forward to your response to further contribute to progressive, enlightning dialouge.





:)

Awimoway
Feb 22, 2004, 06:51 PM
I don't think you're trying to argue, nor am I trying to argue. It's refreshing to have a civil debate/discussion without someone taking issues personally and getting offended if they don't agree with you completely.

The thing is, I like Radiohead. OK Computer is one of the best albums ever made. Ironically, part of the reason I've tired of them is because I don't think they have done anything particualrly new with their sound since then.


As for why retro rock is a new form... It doesn't take from one single era or genre of hard rock. It mixes and blends several of them. As I said in the other thread, it's a kind of collage. The sum product is a unique sound. Maybe I should start calling it Fusion Rock so that people will take it more seriously as its own genre. :)

Admittedly, the differences between it and its predecessors are subtle. It's not a revolutionary new sound. But it may prove to be a revolutionary new movement in the sense that it may lead to other retrospective movements in modern music that fuse together other kinds of rock or popular music from the past 30 years (much to your chagrin, I imagine ;)).

Part of my attitude is informed by my background in studying postmodern literature. One of its basic tenets is the idea that we can't get outside of our own culture and just invent new things ex nihilo. There's always a context. What I like about retro rock is that it recognizes and even embraces that context. It's very open about the fact that it's retracing rock's roots. The album art, the dress and hairstyles of retro rockers is often as retro as the music. But of course for art to be fresh and relevant, it must also do new things. And as I've said, the sum total of a given retro rock group's music is a new sound, combining 60s-70s hard rock, punk rock, and more. I guess that's open to debate--to you it might not sound like a new creation at all. And I can't really argue with other peoples' perceptions because they're so subjective.

It would be disingenous of me, however, not to concede that some of these bands are just being lazy and ripping off past acts.

Yet some of those groups aren't rehashing at all. The Strokes' sound resembles the retro rock of other groups, but I think it is completely its own, and it's a contemporary sound at that. It just doesn't sound a lot like other contemporary sounds, so it tends to get lumped in with the likes of the Stripes and the Hives. But I like it too. Because I like music with some energy, some life. I like to rock. Dating all the way back to its inception in the 50s, rock and roll has always been about abandon. It's sensual and reckless. It should be.

Experimental and improvisational/jam bands like Floyd, the Dead, Radiohead (in its own way), Dave Mathews, are less reckless and more cerebral. It's the language of jazz spoken with a rock sound. In my opinon, it doesn't entirely fit in with the rest of rock music. There's nothing wrong with that, of course. It's just that it's another ethic.

AngryLawnGnome
Feb 22, 2004, 06:59 PM
YES The Darkness rocks! They're weird, but weird is good. I love rediculous hats....

krossfyter
Feb 22, 2004, 07:15 PM
i completly understand your point Awimoway. Good response. Thanks for that.

You said some interesting things. One thing you said deals with ex nihilo. I agree. No one is completley original... being that all artists take from someone else. However this happens to different degrees... im sure you can agree.

While output of the sum total of the sounds these retro bands are using maybe something different ... that originality of sound is of a lesser degree then the output of radioheads or floyds. like you said this issue can be argued and its entirely subjective... i agree... i just wanted to counter with my opinion.


radiohead may not be doing anything new anymore... but the point is they did something new already... with that degree of originality higher then most bands today. so they continue on with the alphabet they carved.... it would be silly to think they could do it again... it would cease to be the radiohead sound.

so the rock music world/culture holds its breathe and waits for the next big thing... the next sound that has a higher originality output then most bands... the next radiohead or nirvana.

and right now my votes in the mars volta ballet box.

the darkness, hives, strokes, white stripes etc. etc. are just the trend sound at the end of a music landscape that is stagnating.... the last hoorah for a dying era... in my opinion.


im sure you can agree that music is cyclical.... literature is isnt it? art is getting that way. so from that idea... what can you conclude would be next?

whats going to be the sound that is derived from a backlash against the return of raw rock? can we look back in history to help us answer this?


interesting.

Awimoway
Feb 22, 2004, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by krossfyter
the darkness, hives, strokes, white stripes etc. etc. are just the trend sound at the end of a music landscape that is stagnating.... the last hoorah for a dying era... in my opinion.

im sure you can agree that music is cyclical.... literature is isnt it? art is getting that way. so from that idea... what can you conclude would be next?

whats going to be the sound that is derived from a backlash against the return of raw rock? can we look back in history to help us answer this?


interesting.

Actually, I think hard rock is on the upswing. I think it's a response to the mushy, Coldplay, emo-pop of the last several years. And I think it's too early for a reaction because raw rock is the reaction of the moment. I'm not sure why you would think we would need a reaction to it. Perhaps because of nu-metal's presence? I hate nu-metal so much that I don't listen to any of it and it's completely off my radar screen. But my sense is that retro rock is a response to it as well. It's a return to our roots. To honest, simple, clean, unadorned rock. But it doesn't sound honest to you because it just sounds like a ripoff. I don't agree, but I see where you're coming from. I see why you would call for a new thing. And there probably will be other movements simultaneous to retro rock. Most movements occur simultaneous to other movements. Motown and psychadelic. Britpunk and disco. New Age and hair bands. Rap and grunge/alternative. And of course there are lots of mini-genres within those. So who knows what we'll see. I really can't predict.

krossfyter
Feb 22, 2004, 11:18 PM
Originally posted by Awimoway
Actually, I think hard rock is on the upswing. I think it's a response to the mushy, Coldplay, emo-pop of the last several years. And I think it's too early for a reaction because raw rock is the reaction of the moment.

really... so what makes you assume this? what bands in particular?

Originally posted by Awimoway

I'm not sure why you would think we would need a reaction to it. Perhaps because of nu-metal's presence?



well simply because thats how history plays itself in music and art. one movement is a reaction agains the previous.. albeit not all the time. Im not saying its going to happen but if it does what will be it.


Originally posted by Awimoway

I hate nu-metal so much that I don't listen to any of it and it's completely off my radar screen. But my sense is that retro rock is a response to it as well. It's a return to our roots. To honest, simple, clean, unadorned rock.

I agree it is a reaction against nu-metal.

Originally posted by Awimoway

But it doesn't sound honest to you because it just sounds like a ripoff. I don't agree, but I see where you're coming from. I see why you would call for a new thing. And there probably will be other movements simultaneous to retro rock. Most movements occur simultaneous to other movements. Motown and psychadelic. Britpunk and disco. New Age and hair bands. Rap and grunge/alternative. And of course there are lots of mini-genres within those. So who knows what we'll see. I really can't predict.

very true. the question is what new sound is next. if there is any band close to that in contemprorary rock music i think its the mars volta. i know i could be wrong but i havent heard any other band that brings something newer to the table yet.

Savage Henry
Feb 23, 2004, 03:22 AM
The Darkness will die out soon enough, though they will peddle out their careers for a couple of decreasingly popular albums before deciding to settle on a "Best of..." compilation with a title that smacks of illconceived optimism.

Sure they are ironic and pulse out a lot of energy in their performances, I don't really have a problem with that. But their music, to me, just sounds like they are happy settling for an average of Queen, Bay City Rollers, Wizard and Showaddywaddy.:D

Music has been in a wilderness since Zappa died. Mind you, so have I, so perhaps I'm not such a great judge on these things.

krossfyter
Feb 23, 2004, 03:59 AM
hah... a Frank Zappa fan! Gotta respect that for sure.

krossfyter
Feb 23, 2004, 11:18 PM
"Charlie's Angels" Syndrome:

Sufferers frequently invoke the phrase "But it's fun!" in an attempt to rationalize their enjoyment of garbage. No known

Rower_CPU
Feb 23, 2004, 11:25 PM
kross-

Got another "interesting" band for you to check out:

http://www.sleepytimegorillamuseum.com/

They opened for dredg when they played here. Way....out....there....but good, musically.

krossfyter
Feb 23, 2004, 11:29 PM
checking them out right now. thanks man.

krossfyter
Feb 23, 2004, 11:57 PM
interesting.


very dark, very prog, very avant garde.

sounds like a mix between gwar, devil doll, king crimson and fantomas.


the traveling performance art/musical act is a very cool concept.

thanks for exposing me to this band. im going to try and find more music from them.

Rower_CPU
Feb 24, 2004, 12:01 AM
De nada, amigo. :)

iGav
Feb 24, 2004, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by Awimoway
The new new thing for the sake of being the new new thing is not a concept I admire. It just strikes me as being nothing more than the consequences of a short attention span, or even being elitist because it's borne of the same philosophy that drove explorers to be the first to mark their territory on mountaintops and polar caps. This "I was there first" stuff has no place in music. Music should be about the sound, not about being different for the sake of being different, of being there first. I don't have a problem with taking a retrospective look at what made rock great, even if it's an ironic look.

I was actually being sarcastic in my reply to another post... ;) :p

I don't really have an issue with being retrospective with regards to music, as long as it's for the right reasons, merely ripping off a sound is not only unoriginal, it's also uncreative, it's the same as copying a design, you may gain the aesthetic and the style, but you'll miss out on the indepth conceptual process behind the form, the period in time in which it was created and the relevance of what was going on at that time and the influence that, that had on the work.

It's natural to be informed by exisiting work, that's a healthy part of the creative process, but the influence has to be more than just the superficial, it needs to be deeper for a more thorough understanding. Hence the dig at todays so called 'Punk' bands... you have to understand the issues around the time of Punk to understand not only why it was created, but it's relevance to the social landscape of the time, and this is where it's difficult to see any 'Punk'ness' in alot of today's so called 'Punk' bands.... who really seem to merely have sliced off the superficial frothy top and poured the stuff that matters down the drain.

socorazy
Mar 8, 2004, 03:51 PM
The darkness is rad.. i love how they are a modern day queen. i just wonder if they would be as good if they didn't have that gimick.

WinterMute
Mar 8, 2004, 05:52 PM
I discovered something cool today, one of my old assistant engineers from a studio in North London called Straylight, one Pedro Ferreira, is the dude responsible for the Darkness album and singles, he's touring with them currently.

It's good to see old buddies doing really well. :D

Sasha3
Mar 9, 2004, 09:58 AM
...on the strength of the opinions on this thread, but sorry charlie, I've heard it all before. They are competent but no great revelation unless you down a keg of Guiness and start seeing god.

Savage Henry
Mar 9, 2004, 10:12 AM
The darkness is rad.. i love how they are a modern day queen. i just wonder if they would be as good if they didn't have that gimick.

No, they would not. Why do you think they needed their gimick in the first place?

Their gimick will shortly go the way of Hammer's parachute pants.

womencantsail
Mar 10, 2004, 01:10 AM
MC Hammer is a terrible person. He should be executed for wearing those obscene pants.

pepita
Mar 13, 2004, 10:42 AM
Their gimick will shortly go the way of Hammer's parachute pants.

Heh. But see, that's a contradiction - those pants and MC Hammer are still very much alive in your memory. And in the memory of millions of people around the world :p

Sasha3
Mar 13, 2004, 10:51 AM
Heh. But see, that's a contradiction - those pants and MC Hammer are still very much alive in your memory. And in the memory of millions of people around the world :p

The pants yes, but not the music.

pepita
Mar 13, 2004, 02:26 PM
The pants yes, but not the music.

Why, was there any difference? :p

Maybe SavageHenry is right, and The Darkness will soon fade off into forgotten land, and their songs leave no trace. But, Justin Hawkins's haircuts and outfits won't. They're not original, but they hadn't been seen in a long time...

Not to mention his fascinating teeth and his really expressive arse. He can wiggle that butt in ways that Beyonce, Britney or J.Lo can only dream of.

In the interests of gender equality, I can only applaud that worthy contribution to the pop industry. :cool:

But, seriously, The Darkness are possibly a little bit more endowed in the talent department than MC Hammer, no? They're no musical gods by far, but surely they're not so terrible they deserve that kind of comparison, eh. They're definitely entertaining. MC Hammer was about as entertaining as a punch in the eye...

pepita
Mar 19, 2004, 09:22 AM
What, no more arguing over the Darkness? tsk... :p Just stumbled on this review and thought it might add more fuel to the discussion, in case anyone's interested - from Pitchfork (http://pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/d/darkness/permission-to-land.shtml) , home of indie snobs ;) who suprisingly gives it an 8.4.


I wrote a one-act, one-man play about this idea titled Proper Rock Fan: Pot Kettle Black. Take a look:

SCENE: Virgin Megastore, Chicago. A Proper Rock Fan scans the Top 40 albums wall.

Proper Rock Fan: People are stupid for falling for music like The Darkness. It looks phony, manufactured, and seems to take its image more seriously than its songs. All music like that is ****.

[curtain]

briankonar
Mar 21, 2004, 02:39 AM
the darkness sucks imo, it's kind of like Weird Al (entertainment?) to me.

at least i got something good out of this thread...Dredg is pretty wicked! :)

timmyOtool
Mar 31, 2004, 11:08 PM
The Darkness puts a smile on my face when I hear them, but that wont last long because they are a joke that I will tire of quickly. I am still waiting for a waste land of modern music to churn up a worthly offering of rock.

sethypoo
Apr 2, 2004, 03:34 PM
The Darkness is waaaaay cool, my girlfriend loves them, she's always asking me to sing that high for her.....lol.

Try out Incubus, too. Their new album, "A Crow Left Of The Murder" is particularily good, although their Morning View album is my personal favorite.

sethypoo
Apr 2, 2004, 03:36 PM
Heh. But see, that's a contradiction - those pants and MC Hammer are still very much alive in your memory. And in the memory of millions of people around the world :p

Can't touch this! ((da, da da da))..... :)

tomo2512
Apr 26, 2004, 04:49 PM
any darkness fans listen 2 the lyrics in growing on me every line is about nits lol is it ment to be? post asap plzz i am dying 2 no

Awimoway
Apr 26, 2004, 05:08 PM
any darkness fans listen 2 the lyrics in growing on me every line is about nits lol is it ment to be? post asap plzz i am dying 2 no

Congratulations. You made utterly no sense at all. :rolleyes:

tomo2512
Apr 28, 2004, 02:25 PM
:confused: how do i not make any sence just read. The lyrics in growing on me are in my opinion all about nits. listen 2 it its mad. does n e 1 no if it is really about nits.

Awimoway
Apr 28, 2004, 03:34 PM
:confused: how do i not make any sence just read. The lyrics in growing on me are in my opinion all about nits. listen 2 it its mad. does n e 1 no if it is really about nits.

It's called punctuation, my friend. Use it. Live it. Love it. Learn it. It won't steer you wrong, I promise. ;)

tomo2512
May 5, 2004, 05:28 AM
:) u still havent answered my question, <---(comma lol) is the darness's song "growing on me" about nits. If u listen 2 the lyrics they will all relate to nits.lmao. ;)

amnesiac1984
May 24, 2004, 08:26 AM
i completly understand your point Awimoway. Good response. Thanks for that.

You said some interesting things. One thing you said deals with ex nihilo. I agree. No one is completley original... being that all artists take from someone else. However this happens to different degrees... im sure you can agree.

While output of the sum total of the sounds these retro bands are using maybe something different ... that originality of sound is of a lesser degree then the output of radioheads or floyds. like you said this issue can be argued and its entirely subjective... i agree... i just wanted to counter with my opinion.


radiohead may not be doing anything new anymore... but the point is they did something new already... with that degree of originality higher then most bands today. so they continue on with the alphabet they carved.... it would be silly to think they could do it again... it would cease to be the radiohead sound.

so the rock music world/culture holds its breathe and waits for the next big thing... the next sound that has a higher originality output then most bands... the next radiohead or nirvana.

and right now my votes in the mars volta ballet box.

the darkness, hives, strokes, white stripes etc. etc. are just the trend sound at the end of a music landscape that is stagnating.... the last hoorah for a dying era... in my opinion.


im sure you can agree that music is cyclical.... literature is isnt it? art is getting that way. so from that idea... what can you conclude would be next?

whats going to be the sound that is derived from a backlash against the return of raw rock? can we look back in history to help us answer this?


interesting.

I thought I would chime here with your discussion on what might be next.

I see good rock taking more influences from other genres. Electronics and production styles will play an ever greater roll as more musicians become versed in music technology as well as their instruments. Certain kinds of Hip/Hop are bordering on rock sensibilities. While quite lo-fi in style i Think Fog/Why?/Dosh are interesting new sounds. Especially Why & Doshs "21st century pop song".

I'm not sure hwo to express it really, but definately more modern electronic sounds, not jsut synths like emerson lake & palmer but proper decent 'new' electronic sounds.

ANway thats the direction I'm trying to take my music so hoepfully it won't be too far off.