| | | |
Father Time
|
2/12/2016 11:07:27 AM
Did choreographed dance moves kill rock?
Maybe.
|
|
Two Silo Complex
|
2/12/2016 11:46:26 AM
choreographed dance not normally used in rock. Mainly pop. What is considered rock that uses choreographed dance? Beyoncé is not Rock, Britney spears is not Rock, they are both pop in my book. Right now I can't think of one mainstream rock group that uses choreographed dance.
Now that in mind they say any publicity is good publicity and it does draw a certain audience that would not be drawn with out it. Look how huge Micheal Jackson was and still is.
TSC,
Ken
|
|
Larree
|
2/12/2016 12:14:42 PM
Nope. Music and dance have always been intertwined. MTV, drum machines, sampling, and American Idol killed music. The four-headed beast!
|
|
Father Time
|
2/12/2016 12:49:13 PM
Ken, the point is that rock bands used to stand there and play great songs. Now the buzz is always about pop acts doing dance routines.
|
|
|
2/12/2016 12:54:14 PM
Okay, here's what I think.
Nothing has killed rock. Rock yet lives as long as any of us still create it.
That said, obviously it's been deliberately pushed out of the mainstream
by many methods. The reason for this I think, is you move what is superior
out of the visible area, and then you sell shit for the new chocolate.
Simple enough in concept, devastating in it's actualization.
The fact of it, to my view, is,
that choreographed dance moves is the anti-thesis,
the exact opposite, of free individual expression,
as exhibited in the unbridled abandon we use to dance
with our favorite rock n roll records when we were younger.
Well, I still do that. I'll never change in that respect.
But no matter what anyone says to the contrary,
the choreographed dance thing, is meant to discourage
freely expressed individuality, and instead encourages
conformity to a group mentality,
basically 'be like us, exactly like us, or be outcast'.
That's the ugly side of it,
I expect some will now disagree with me, and I care not one iota about that.
I expect you do to that those who will. I still got my message out.
Want more of an idea? See the animated movie called "Ants",
it illuminates the concept of which I speak, profoundly well.
I'm American Lesley Jane and I approved this message.
Be Free. Be Yourself. Be Who You Are.
No matter who doesn't like it.
~L
|
|
Larree
|
2/12/2016 1:16:19 PM
---- Updated 2/12/2016 1:48:21 PM
Come on. Music and dance are one thing. What came first? The drummer or the dancer? I am sure music and dancing were born within days of each other. A great choreographed routine is just as hot as nailing the ending. Even Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention used choreography very effectively. And don't forget all those Motown groups. And Pete's windmills.
|
|
Two Silo Complex
|
2/12/2016 1:44:23 PM
I think that choreographed routines get "buzz" because like them or not they are flashy and aimed to be visually appealing. We are visual creatures by our nature. Just look at how rock soars and youtube while cd/mp3 sales slump.
Nothing has killed rock. There are a lot of old school rockers still out there and some reforming and new rockers out there making the scene.
For me this pop/dance whatever you call it has never been in competition with rock it is its own animal.
What I am trying to say is that Rock is alive and well and though some here don't appreciate modern rockers and think all new music made today sucks I don't. I enjoy rock from early eras and today.
Father time are there no concerts in your town ? I guess being in Chicago we are spoiled just about any major label artist comes here.
TSC,
Ken
|
|
Larree
|
2/12/2016 1:50:39 PM
Yeah, Chicago is a great live music city. Everybody passes through Chitown.
|
|
The Jay Dyall Project
|
2/12/2016 2:10:27 PM
---- Updated 2/12/2016 2:12:31 PM
1: Rock is not dead, still breathing fire in many styles, and
2: Dancing has always been a part of rock n roll since its inception in the 50's.
Not all added dance onstage with them, but many did.
Motown is a perfect example, so were many girl groups.
Chubby Checker, James Brown, even Elvis on occasions.
Chuck Berry's Duckwalk was a dance.
Mick Jagger's peacock strut is a dance.
Jimi Hendrix setting his guitar on fire onstage was a ritual dance.
The above mention Townsend's Windmill & Jump is a dance.
Many 60s acts had Go-Go dancers onstage with them.
Many early rock videos of the 70s,80s and 90s had dancers in them,
even hard rock, metal hair bands, new wave, punk rock, etc., used dancers.
David Lee Roth, Stevie Nicks, The B-52s, the list goes on and on.
Yes, those big production choreographed dances are mainly in Pop Music,
and, in my opinion, in many cases it serves as a camouflage to hide the fact that some of those singers don't necessarily have such a great voice but fans eat up the theatrics.
Dancing doesn't diminish a rock band's sounds, in some cases it gives
the song(s) a pleasant visual.
Dance or no dance, it did not kill rock. Never will! Rock Music is Immortal!
|
|
Two Silo Complex
|
2/12/2016 2:36:52 PM
As stoneman said in another thread singing and dancing is incredibly hard to do and not many really pulled it off. Those that can do it have talent.
Elvis was kind of an example but he did not always dance but he danced more than many.
Mowtown is not rock sorry
About the only artists I can think of who really pulled off singing and dancing are Beyoncé and Micheal Jackson. Britney Spears tried but she is not even close to them in talent if you call what she did talent. I call it "shake my money maker" because I'm an attractive young female and my dancing sells. That is directed at Britney just so we are clear.
The go go girls and all the back ground dancers are not artists they are there again to "shake my money maker" because sexy girls dancing sells tickets.
Again none of this is Rock and yes it gets attention my answer to that is where are the rock promoters? Why don't the rock promoters put as much effort into hyping the show as these dancers do. If they did maybe rock would get more attention.
|
|
Father Time
|
2/12/2016 2:50:15 PM
That stuff is another medium, outside of music, really.
Those routines since Thriller never did anything for me.
|
|
|
2/12/2016 3:13:36 PM
I for one make a distinction,
between that choreography of, say, The Jackson Five,
or The Temptations, or the Pips doing their synchronized thing
behind Gladys as she sings with that inimitable voice of hers.
I really don't have any issue or problem with that, it does look spiffy, as such.
And as for rock and what keeps it alive, that's another question altogether,
which I'll get to in a moment.
My bone of contention with the choreography issue...
and how it's adversely effected the music business as far
as rock or rock n roll are concerned....
Well here's an example that I see readily enough to talk about it.
The band, No Doubt, was actually Rock and/or Rock N Roll.
"I'm Just A Girl" is absolutely brilliant musically, and it's total Rock N Roll.
"Don't Speak" was a Rock Ballad as good as any ever. Great Stuff.
Then a few years later, perhaps quite a few,
she comes out with this awful thing, and it's not the band,
it's just Gwen Stafani, by herself,
only she's got about a hundred people dancing a tightly choreographed
routine all around her, I believe she's doing it too, as she lip-synched
her record, and the record was called "Hollaback Girl"...
I saw that, and said to myself, "Oh Gwen, you so totally sold out."
So she went for a market, chose fame over actual quality of music,
not the first time such a thing has happened.
Yeah we can call that my opinion.
But it's not only mine,
on Family Guy, Seth MacFarlane worked in a reference
to it, where Brian the talking dog
said, and I quote,
"I don't know what a Hollaback Girl is,
but I think I wanna kill Gwen Stefani"... that's verbatim of what's in that cartoon.
A bit much obviously, I just think she sold out,
and I wonder if she even will do more great rock n roll,
even if No Doubt were to make another album.
As for Rock, and/or Rock N Roll, today....
I've not heard one performer or group,
who's 'got it' in terms of what's in the Mainstream out there,
like the stuff I grew up with.
The stuff I grew up with, was just, plain, better.
Now, you come here, to Indie Music People,
and It's Like An Oasis Of Great Music. It's not like the crap they fly
on the flagpole of 'today's sound'....
Some say they like some of the stuff 'out there' in mainstream,
and I have to suspect they're just saying that.
Really. Post here, a song of today,
oh, there was one, some Country chick, I forget her name,
she's singing 'they want me, oh oh oh, they want me',
that one knocked me on my ass like records used to do.
There was that, and that was mainstream, I first heard it in my supermarket.
What needs to happen for Rock, and Rock N Roll to come back
to a Forefront Position as we knew it once upon a time,
Is More People Need To Make More Great Rock N Roll Records.
And Us, we're Prime Candidates to Do That.
All Of Us. Here.
Make, The Next Rock N Roll Classic. Keep trying till you nail it.
Then do it some more.
I've heard some stuff here, that ranks with anything goin, ever.
Including some of my stuff and my band's stuff,
but I'm here to instill the idea in everyone's head here,
to go for it, to make better songs, better records,
find that buried treasure.... and I seek to do the same,
and I will continue to.
As for Motown not being Rock N Roll,
well, you know, it's a next door neighbor certainly.
For one thing, a lot of people think of Rock N Roll as a white thing,
but it's black music, originally.
There's an old BEATLESEX record called "Rock And Roll Was Black",
maybe I should find that one and put it out again.
The BEATLES, covered Motown, a lot.
"Twist And Shout" big number one hit for The BEATLES;
that's originally The Isley Brothers
(who many years later had a smash hit with "Who's That Lady?")
The BEATLES also did a great cover of Smokey Robinson And The Miracles:
"You've Really Got A Hold On Me"....
Look, one can only complain but so much about what is out there,
when one is one self an artist capable of inventing the thing
that shows everybody what is lacking, now.
So, go to it, and I will do so as well.
It is never too late as long as I'm breathing a breath,
even a last breath, I still may come up with the next big smash.
And so might you.
But, if you see the movie "Ants" you get the idea,
because that movie called it out....
the thing of a hundred people, all doing the same dance step,
'and now, here's the goosestep',
"Beware the mob mentality, it is not individuality's friend."
~Lesley Jane
There, there's a nice me quote for you.
|
|
|
2/12/2016 3:16:38 PM
PS...
basically, in case I talk too much that anybody gets that....
I'm by and large agreeing with Father Time....
all that b.s. got away from the quality of the music for me.
It became about flash not substance.
And this is actually not a new issue.
Here's a quote from John Lennon.
"We didn't move. That was a conscious decision.
We stood there and played music. Then Mick (Jagger) came and
resurrected bullshit movement".
~John Lennon
|
|
LyinDan
|
2/12/2016 4:39:42 PM
"You've Really Got A Hold On Me"....
Man...I musta played that (live) (in a band) 500 times back in the late 60's. early 70's. That song still gets me, makes me move. Music has always made me move. I got laughed at back in school for tapping hands and feet to...classical music. Hahaha. That never made me a dancer. I'm shaped wrong for that, I guess.
Still, body motion and music of any kind are not antithetical.
Playing musicians are largely not dancers. Why? Prolly because their rhythm concentration is used up on actually producing music. That's where it's channeled. Singers are notably dancers and movers. Why? Because moving your vocal chords is just not enough. You have to get with it. Notable exceptions, guys like Van Morrison. They are excused because EVERYTHING goes into the vocal. Nothing left.
So, it's no suprise that music induces movement. Now, choreographed movement? Well, if it's rock and roll we're talking about, well, rebellion is the name of the game. Was, and still is. Is a dance routine rebellious?Certainly could be. After all, it IS possible to be coordinately rebellious. In fact, successful rebellions in general involve coordination and movement toward a common purpose. Rebellion, after all, can be one coordinated group against another coordinated group. So, one coordinated Thriller gang against another. THAT worked well, eh?
Maybe it's political. Like many things. Maybe you just don't like the political implications of siding with the choreographed facade of one musical group as opposed to those of another coordinated group. Stick a bunch of Ted Cruz dancers in the picture opposed to a group of Bernie dancers. Whichever side yer on, it's rebellion. I think that would pass as rock. Without killing it.
|
|
Two Silo Complex
|
2/12/2016 6:12:41 PM
LyinDan
You have a way with words. Good points man.
American Lesley Jane
(The BEATLES, covered Motown, a lot. "Twist And Shout) yes they did but when The BEATLES did it was cool! It was done is a rock way that was not mowtown even if that was the source of the song.
If we want to talk about old stuff "do you love me" was some cool early rock. You made some good points in your last post your comments were interesting.
Rock maybe could use a good solid kick in the ass or maybe it just needs someone to believe in it again, The problem with rock today for the most part is as ALJ said most artists have sold out because they are more interested in the money train than making good music and that if anything is what is slowly killing rock. But rock is a tough old beast and its not done with the fight yet.
|
|
Richard Scotti
|
2/12/2016 7:04:58 PM
Each generation is genetically predisposed to feel that the music they grew up with is the best music there is and that all music from prior generations is not as valid or as authentic as theirs. People tend to identify with the music of their youth and have a loyalty to it.
|
|
Raandy
|
2/12/2016 10:38:07 PM
A lot of people out there who grew up years afterwards adore the Beatles.
|
|
Richard Scotti
|
2/13/2016 4:52:26 AM
The Beatle phenonenom was a once in a lifetime thing that will never be repeated.
They had a universal appeal that is almost supernatural in nature and their music was and is appreciated by people of all ages. They are transcendental. If the world is still here in 100 years, people of every generation will still be singing Beatle songs. How many other bands can you say they about? I think none. When they appeared on Ed Sullivan the world became hooked. It was a year after Kennedy was killed and people were deeply depressed. The Beatles were saviors. They changed the world.
They gave people hope and brought light into a dark landscape. My point is that they are totally singular. They transcend my theory of generational loyalty to a certain kind of music. It is true however that older people probably have a more passionate and nostalgic view of the Beatles than younger people do. That's only natural but it doesn't erase the fact that the Beatles have an appeal to all generations though the degree of appeal based on age still varies.
|
|
Hop On Pop
|
2/13/2016 7:24:21 AM
Ken?
You're in Chicago? Did I know that? We have to jam!
|
|
Two Silo Complex
|
2/13/2016 3:44:55 PM
hop on pop not Chicago down town but close enough to see the shows that come here. About an hour north of the city.
Ken
|
|
Stoneman
|
2/13/2016 4:20:49 PM
The term "Rocking Out" has always been associated with free form partying. It has always meant to do your own thing. Dance, jump around, scream or just chill with a blunt while your head bobs from the ceiling to the floor. Rock gives the musicians more freedom to wail away on the guitar, jump into the crowd or just rock back and forth while playing. The energy and cohesiveness of the band accented by strategic dynamics is a force unmatched. It looks better when the whole band is moving in the same direction and timing. But it is not necessary to do so. I have only been in 4 Rock bands and it was so much fun. I also played in Reggae bands that had similar stage antics only with a different style and beat. I played the chitlin circuit in the 70's with a funk band. Everything was precision and we were all expected to know all the steps for every song. Anyone caught out of step was fined. We were patterned after the God Father of Soul/Funk (James Brown) who demanded that every member of his band be uniformly presented on the stage. Even the horn section had steps. My own band spent hours practicing in front of huge mirrors while watching ourselves perform with the choreographer who always pushed us to our limits. It was grueling murder. Pure torture physically. We ran 4 miles a day while singing in order to keep our stage stamina up. Probably one of the hardest gigs I ever had because of the precision and physical demands. I was also in an accapella group in the 80's and we had some serious choreography. The rock musicians that I knew were in awe of us because of our six part harmony just as we were in awe of them with all the lights, pyrotechnics and energy they displayed on stage.
The advent of all the great artists who used expert choreography was a natural progression. From Jackie Wilson to James Brown to Michael Jackson to Madonna, Janet Jackson, Britney Spears, Chris Brown, Usher, Neyo, Beyoncé etc. etc.. The torch has been passed and will continue to be passed as there is a segment of society that wants precision on stage. They want to be wowed by the artists ability to capture the moment through dance, music and vocals. Only a few are capable of pulling it off without having to lip sing while piping the vocal through. Janet Jackson was often accused of that. But people forgave her because her dance choreography was so impressive.
Does it have anything to do with the demise of Rock? Well, personally, I don't believe that Rock has died. It may not be out in the forefront anymore but neither is R&B. Soul is so far in the background that only Black people know the talented young up and coming soul artists. Jazz is so dead that new releases are hard to find and airplay is relegated to obscure stations. Reggae is only popular in the Caribbean and South America. The list of genres that use to be hot and are not right now is long. But that doesn't mean those genres are dead. It means they may be going through a natural transition from the old artists to the new artists. As the greats of yesterday die off many new artists will make their own marks on music history. Out with the old and in with the new. Most will respect those that came before them. Others will claim to have created something new when they are simply playing the same chords and transitions of Rock groups from the past. It is natural to want to asses blame for something so important to musicians like Rock. But maybe there is nothing and no one to blame. If young Rockers don't come out, Rock will die. If the public no longer feels compelled to go to Rock concerts it will certainly die. But the performance enhancements of dance for Pop artists has no effect on that. Pop is Pop and Rock is Rock. There is no proof that people would turn to Rock if the Pop artists who dance went away.
I love Rock music. I love to play it and I love to listen to it. I also love Pop, R&B, Jazz, Hip-Hop, Reggae, Gospel and so on and so forth. Of course my own catalog speaks to that. It is all just music to me. I'm too old and physically handicapped to do choreography now. But I love to see Jenny from the block thrusting on time with ten other dancers while singing a hot EDM song. Each genre has its own unique nuances. The tastes of the public are notoriously fickle. What is in today is gone tomorrow and back again next year. Everything keeps coming right on back around. Who ever thought that funk music would come back? But there it was, Uptown Funk, #1 in the nation for many weeks. After that many of the great funk bands started releasing new CD's after decades of touring for the old crowd. Who's to say that the same thing won't happen for Rock music? Resurgence is possible and likely.
One more thing, there was only one Beatles. Let their legacy be honored with respect and dignity. But never say that no other band will ever come along and be bigger than them. Humanity has a way of out doing themselves over and over. Whether it is Olympic records, space flight or movie ticket sales. The sky is not a limit for humanity. Musical artistry is in constant evolutionary cycles. The next greatest Rock band may be practicing in someone's garage right now. The greatest artist of all time may yet to have been born. Never say never.
|
|
Father Time
|
2/14/2016 12:17:02 AM
I don't know, Stoneman. I tend to believe that the Beatles are the best band that ever was, and the best that ever will be.
|
|
Larree
|
2/14/2016 4:36:06 AM
Music is too subjective an artform so I am going to change it up. The Beatles may not have been the "best" band ever. But The Beatles perhaps reflected the times they lived in better than any other band and that was the real key to their greatness.
|
|
|
2/14/2016 5:55:52 AM
Well.
You know, I am the guy who channels two of these boys.
And again. I have to retell the true Beatle History.
Ten years ago,
Pete Shotton, John Lennon's boyhood best mate since age 5,
came to our home, and saw that it really is Lennon I channel.
Pete said to John, after watching us make the record
(Now Released Here At IMP by the way)
"Between Here And There" by BEATLESEX
which we'd all written together that very morning in Pete's hotel room...
"You bastard.
You knew.
You knew didn't you.
You knew that if I saw you work, I'd know it's you"
John replied,
"I've only been trying to tell you that for two fuckin' Years, Shotton"
So.
As they've been hearing their name bandied about a bit,
both men, John, and George want at least a 'fair soundbite edgewise'.
Who wants to go first?
George then, fine.
~Lesley
----------------------------------
Okay...
Some of you still won't believe this,
but I won't focus on that.
Nor will I focus at this moment
at trying to be Beatle-witty because we do a bit of that being Beatles.
Instead, I'll have a sip of coffee and see if it comes to me.
Of course what we were was a product of the times,
was a product of a lot of things. One of them being youthful exuberance.
We were kids then you know. And in a lot of ways, so was the world.
So it all sort of coincided. Then there was the very real aspect
of the complete depression America certainly was in after they murdered
Kennedy, so, when we came here, we really couldn't by then ask
for a more receptive audience, and fortunately for us, by then,
we were honed and seasoned enough as a band, to fulfill the need;
'entertain the hell out of us in a hurry please' 'okay here ya go'. 'thank you!'
You know, the magic of what we were, I think,
was more than a bit of synergy.
As BEATLESEX, we have a good bit of it,
Lesley's gotten very adept at playing bass like Paul, and drums like Ringo,
and sometimes we do some amazing work.
But the synergy, is still, now the three of us,
With Lesley wearing a couple hats to keep up with John and I.
This is why we've always wanted Paul and Ringo to join BEATLESEX,
because then, we'd really have a tangible possibility again before us,
to have that synergy, and Be, anything like What We Once Were.
Okay, I'm gonna shut up now 'cause John's telling me
leave something for him to say. Okay bye. ~George
-----------------------------------------------------
Look, this post, this thread, was, about dance killing rock,
choreographed dance moves, killing rock.
And that's somewhat of an over-reaction.
People forgot how to rock, perhaps,
and then started with all this nonsense.
And to each their own.
Some think all this 'new stuff' and it's a kind way of saying it,
trying not to just categorically call it what I think of it,
is the bee's knees you know.
And yeah, I may not share that opinion.
By all means, bloody well dance all you want.
George was happy just to dance with you, and I wrote the damned thing.
Mostly me, Paul came up with the 'Oh OHs' I think.
George sort of didn't leave me a lot to say, because he nailed
all the good stuff, I'll get you for that, George.
Synergy was at the heart of the thing we were when we were the thing.
We're still at it, George and I are anyway, we're Still Trying, To Do It.
Paul and Ringo play the oldies circuit, but George and I,
thanks to that we can, because of Lesley's abilities as a channeler....
we're still trying to get at even some of the magic we used to
seemingly just be able to piss without even looking or thinking much about it.
Being young helped. Momentum helped. The times helped.
I think a lot of people stopped believing in miracles,
and what we were then, kind of was one.
But I don't accept that it's over. If it really were over,
we wouldn't have the chance to do it some more.
So, everybody go on with whatever you're doing,
and whatever you're listening to, whether I think it's even music or not,
and we'll just keep trying to make more miracles and more magic,
because in the end, it's not saying 'this is crap' that's going to make
any bloody difference whatsoever.
It's making the other thing. That, is what will make the difference,
if difference is yet to be made to a clear distinction.
Love, ~John
O~O
|
|
Richard Scotti
|
2/14/2016 7:01:56 AM
---- Updated 2/14/2016 7:02:17 AM
Rock will never die as long as there are artists of all ages willing to carry the torch into the future. I do believe that MTV wounded rock but not mortally. When the visual became more important than the aural - a whole new brand of superficiality was introduced. I recall somebody on MTV commenting on how much weight Stevie Nicks gained and it totally blew my mind. Suddenly, an artist's appearance was more important than their talent. It was harder and harder for a band to get a record deal if they didn't have a drop dead gorgeous lead singer or a bunch of handsome guys who looked like they came straight from central casting of a soap opera. The videos and the visual content literally overshadowed the music and the performers. MTV also heralded the start of celebrity gossip which also contributed to the trivialization of music.
|
|
Larree
|
2/14/2016 9:05:25 AM
MTV did not trivialize music as much as that shithole of a TV game show, American Idol, did when it hit the dumbshit box.
|
|
Larree
|
2/14/2016 9:15:31 AM
---- Updated 2/14/2016 9:24:16 AM
I disagree, Richard. Rock is dead. I am willing to bet that there is not one "rock star" out there who would get pissed off and threaten to smash a car onstage every night if his or her band signed a deal to sell Buicks while they were off doing drugs in the desert. Or wherever. Today's "rock stars" are mostly a bunch of corporate chumps. Today's rock stars will drive that Buick until it breaks down for a buck.
Rock today is nothing but a Halloween costume for corporate chumps. It might sound like rock, but it is all a bunch of fluffy bullshit. It may sound right, but it always smells funny.
The closest thing we ever had to real rock since Rock was born was the early Hip Hop movement. But that whole scene is worse than rock now.
|
|
Father Time
|
2/14/2016 9:24:58 AM
This is one rockin' thread. Everybody's postin' their best stuff!
|
|
Bryon Tosoff
|
2/14/2016 2:05:06 PM
Ok, opinion, all music is alive and well, people are enjoying it in various places around here. not as many as in the past, sure pay people musicians what they should get, but only the good ones, in bars and eateries. they only deserve beer and a pizza as pay and a little gas money
Now the hard working dudes, not the weekend warriors who have full time jobs already and are stealing food and money from the real good ones. they undercut and work for cheap, and yes some are good, too many bands , too many flooding the market, vying for work, it is a tsunami an ocean a veritable flood of people trying to get their names out there. where am I going with this. not sure
Beer and Pizza bands plunking away , yes the beer and pizza band, working for a little notoriety and gas money
rock is not dead, but some people who rather stay at home and watch videos and TV are , Dead,
What did Beethoven and Mozart do, played for a piece of dry bread and water, diied paupers, as most of us will, fame fortune. nah , not interested, never gonna happen, food and food stamps, that is more like it, like the old days.
Jazz, good jazz will never die, people do it for the love of it, not for the fame , the passion is the thing, and the enjoyment of it all, now in some aspects that has been lost, you have fun, they will come.
|
|
|
2/14/2016 3:37:35 PM
I don't think Rock is dead.
I'm still here. So is my band. We Rock.
Father Time Rocks. A Lot Of Us Here Rock Like Blazes.
Larree, YOU friggin' Rock, so, I have to disagree with you there.
Rock in the mainstream, well that's another story....
moguls of other music styles have pretty much bogarted the scene....
and what is in the mainstream rock genre probably does suck dogs...
so it may SEEM commercially dead at the moment...
But no, I refuse to believe that,
if I decided to believe that, I'd have to kill myself, that's no joke.
So I refuse to believe that, thank you.
~L
|
|
| |
�2015-16 IndieMusicPeople.com All Rights
Reserved
| |