The Washington Post has a decent piece on an apparent resurgence of classic rock among teenagers, backing it up with some actual numbers and speculating on the meaning of it all: is it because MTV doesn’t play it, thus rendering it anti-commercial? Is it because it’s genuinely excellent?
In the middle of all that, though, they find time to take a shot at Death Cab for Cutie:
“‘In their prime, Led Zeppelin was not considered a serious band by rock critics. The rock critics generally put them down as a passing fancy. It took time to realize that the music was of lasting value.’ In other words: Maybe the Atlantic act Death Cab for Cutie really is a neo-master. (But maybe, and probably not.)”
Editorializing aside, isn’t that the wrong analogy? It’s not like Led Zeppelin toiled in relative obscurity as critical darlings until they were signed to a major label.
On the other hand, the writer’s name is “J. Freedom du Lac“.
Related: How sad is this memorial service for the first Sex Pistols show?
 |
 |
%s1 / %s2
Yeah, the Death Cab/Zeppelin analogy is strikingly stupid. In addition to the entirely different levels of obscurity involved, Death Cab generally DOES get good reviews. And it’s no surprise, since critics tend to latch on to bands with good lyrics, something that Death Cab is and Zeppelin was not.
As for this phenomenon, has anyone checked the makeup of rock stations in your average large city? Radio is pervasive in society, MTV is not (not that Radiohead or Wilco get any play on either). If you get bombarded with the message that Pink Floyd and the Doors were the greatest bands ever, you’re eventually going to buy it, especially when the other options are “Trapped in the Closet Part 86″ and Reliant K or whatever on MTV.
Wow. Interesting article. I’ve always been a huge fan of classic rock. Of course, thats partly because my father collects and has several hundred jukeboxes. You grow up with the greats like that (Zepplin, the Stones, Beatles, Who, etc., etc.) and they never get old. They’re like family.
That’s a pretty good read but I thought that this was nothing really NEW per se…I thought that for any musically inclined teen they’d naturally go through the classic rock phases as a rite of passage.
What’s next, WaPo tells me that teens are quoting Monty Python and the Holy Grail and know all the words to “Blister in the Sun”?
Shit’s been this way for decades.
I think the revealing bit’s where they mention a meeting which is about 98% boys. So, yeah, teenage boys get into Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, and AC/DC…no surprises.
But they also say that sales/traffic is up in that demographic above what it normall is.
I think the DCFC stab was misguided, since they are one of the better bands out there, but I think the point he was trying to make was that 95% of the bands in the mainstream have about 2 years of shelflife in them, if even that, and there are very few that we will be listening to in 10 years. For every Radiohead, Wilco, and Bright Eyes, there are five Hawthorne Heights-ish bands that are merely captializing on an MTV introduced fad, and will be as irrelivant as Winger in 2 years time. Admit it, in 10 years, the Strokes won’t have a body of work comparable to Zeppelin, and Death Cab won’t release albums that stand the test of time quite like the Who. I think the industry is mostly to blame though, since they really don’t nurture artists and allow development quite like they used to. We, the MTV generation, have become accustomed to Videos and trends come and go, and once a band doesn’t sell 3 million like they used to, at the peak of their trends interest, they get dropped.
Death Cab for Cutie is 2005′s Crazy Town. OVER in 06 bitches.
Hot Topic sells a Led Zeppelin t-shirt. At least, I assume that’s where it comes from, as I’ve seen the same fucking 1977 US tour shirt on hundreds of teenagers in the last year.
Uniqueness through ubiquity.
This article was pretty shoddily done. He doesn’t cite anything beyond a few radio ratings results (covering only a few years) and focuses on one particular student group.
The thing is, you could pick any middle or high school in America, on any day since 1969, walk into the cafeteria at 12:00 and see at least one table with no less than three pale long-hair sour-faced kids, who among them are sporting at least one black Zeppelin shirt and two black Doors shirts. The fact that some of them congealed together to demand student group status is somewhat interesting, but doesn’t necessarily prove any larger trend other than possibly the fact that Generation Y is a lot more organized than we were.
Zep Rules!
Interesting point David Brent, but I think the artist themselves should hold some of that responsibility as well as the industry. Death Cab and all these other bands that I just dont get or like, whore themselves out to shows like the fucking O.C. I know the industry heads dident hold guns to their heads and force them to do it. They saw a instant way to gain mainstream attention and jumped on it, instead of pounding the pavement in one shitty dive bar to the next, day in and day out, one city to another, playing their songs, getting the recognition the hard way, like Zeppelin had too. Maybe our generation is just a bunch of spoiled pussys, who cant be bothered with hard work.
toadies, to be fair, DCfC actually has been out there working it for years and years. i’m not a big fan or anything, but these guys do work it, unlike the other bands you rightly criticize.
ha, we ran a couple similar pieces in the Bruin last week.
I checked out Hot Topic out of curiosity once… the first thing I saw was a Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon 3/4-sleeve softball tee. Hey, better the Edgar Winter Group than My Chemical Romance.
…and speaking of Hot Topic, some friends were hosting a punk rock girl from Mexico this weekend who wanted to go to Hot Topic. they took her to St. Mark’s street, in Manhattan, but she still wanted to hit the rip-off. she’s only 16, tho.
This article seems to generalize entirely too much. “Classic Rock” including hey jude and my generation? I thought the title was reserved for subpar 70′s rock that tried so hard to build on the innovations of the 60′s but never really got past being rock for jocks. The Doors lowest common denominator rock makes more kids interested in rock? The killers are todays equivalent of the doors. Make interpol THEM and you have yourself an analogy and a reference.
If kids are getting into early the who and the beatles then that’s fantastic, nothing is better than 60′s music. But most of the music in the 70′s was drivel overall compared to the 60′s, especially “classic rock.” I just hate it when people lump 1962 until 1978 into one musical genre as if rock didn’t go through some fabulous then awful changes.
Toadies, I agree that some of the blame does fall on the artist, in the case of an OC band, the quick rise and subsequent fall when “emo” or whatever easily categorized genre they represent isn’t popular anymore. I also think the record labels don’t want their artists making challenging music anymore. look at Zeppelin, some of their songs were 10 minutes long, yet they got airplay and mainstream support. Hendrix’s music still sounds other worldly, as does Pink Floyds, because the labels stepped back and let them do their thing. Bands could make complex, artistic concept albums without fear of a label dropping them. Yet in 2005, we have freakin’ Green Day releasing a “political” “concept album” that is about as political and groundbreaking as an issue of Teen People. I think the combination of a bottom line concerned record industry combined with artists that release mediocrity are contributing to the death of good rock music. I mean, if Radiohead would have released Kid A as a debut album, don’t you think they would have been history by now?
“Admit it, in 10 years, the Strokes won’t have a body of work comparable to Zeppelin, and Death Cab won’t release albums that stand the test of time quite like the Who. I think the industry is mostly to blame though, since they really don’t nurture artists and allow development quite like they used to.”
No, the Strokes won’t have a body of work comparable to Zeppelin’s, and Death Cab might not release albums that stand the test of time like the Who (although I’d much rather listen to Transatlanticism than Face Dances, It’s Hard, Who’s Last, and Who Are You?, wouldn’t you?).
But that’s setting the bar incredibly high for the modern bands. While Picaresque or Twin Cinema may not be Quadrophenia (but what is?), they’re still tons better than Bad Company, Head Games, and Fly Like an Eagle.
“But most of the music in the 70′s was drivel overall compared to the 60′s, especially “classic rock.” I just hate it when people lump 1962 until 1978 into one musical genre as if rock didn’t go through some fabulous then awful changes.”
Classic rock radio doesn’t make this distinction, so I’m assuming most of the kids don’t, either. Again, kids turning to classic rock as an alternative to current pop music is largely a radio format-fueled phenomenon and has been for at least 15 years or so.
Dave you just made Devins point about 70′s rock. It sucked then, and still does now.
Woah, toadies, but Zeppelin did not come up “the hard way”. Their first album was put out by Atlantic, for god’s sake. Jimmy Page was already huge due to his time in the Yardbirds. They had all the force of a huge record label and old-school management from nearly day one.
Yes isint it amazing how you will never hear a classic rock station play Hendrix: Band of Gypsys song “Who Knows” but if you listened to that station for a full 5 hours you would hear “Foxy Lady” about 10 fucking times?
Devin, I believe you’re getting Classic Rock mixed up with its subgenre, Freedom Rock.
“Dave you just made Devins point about 70′s rock. It sucked then, and still does now.”
Not if you consider that some of the best work by the Who, Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, the Stones, etc. was made in the 70s. My point is that classic rock radio doesn’t distinguish between good and bad or 60s and 70s, so the kids don’t, either. Their radio-listening habits define them as “classic rock” radio listeners, so they draw freely from this ill-defined pool of music, be it Hendrix and Zeppelin or the Steve Miller Band and Foghat (greatest hits collections, when available).
That is true Topher, but you have to admit that in todays world, bands have alot more tools at their disposal for getting their music to the masses than the classics did, not that it is the fault of todays bands by no means. I guess its just the way things evolve. But from my point of view, technology causes a whole lot more of shit music to get shoved in peoples ears. But then again, shit music was always a dominate force in music history, it just wasent always so in your face. The joys of information at your fingertips comes with a price.
Great discussion here as usual.
But more importantly, anyone got a link for the new Cat Power leak?
“They saw a instant way to gain mainstream attention and jumped on it, instead of pounding the pavement in one shitty dive bar to the next, day in and day out, one city to another, playing their songs, getting the recognition the hard way, like Zeppelin had too. Maybe our generation is just a bunch of spoiled pussys, who cant be bothered with hard work.”
I work hard for my Led Zeppline Cadillac!!!!!!!
Is been long time for rock and roll car but now I have!
(P.S. American Idiot has many songs over 6 minutes and they played a 9 minute one on carson daly’s show)
Also radio in the 70s was controlled by about 80 million people but now it is controlled by about 8. And they all like Foxy Lady and Sweet Home Alabama and Seasons In The Sun, not Blue Cheer and 13th Floor Elevators etc etc Roxy Music.
P.S. Why is playing in shitty bars a plus?
P.P.S.S. The 70s were fucking boring and listening to long Pink Floyd songs was a good way to pass the time (and for dj’s to get bjs in the control booth). Later lifeslices I have wifi to do.
Hover Board GO!
Please dear God don’t let this lead to the classic rock radio format surviving even after the last Baby Boomer dies …
Adam has a point.
Okay, this article annoyed me. I went to high school from ’89-’92, and everyone I knew (among white kids, at least) listened to classic rock and nothing else. We spent tons of money on CDs – Dylan, the Dead, the Stones, Clapton, Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Jefferson Airplane, Janis Joplin, the Doors, Simon & Garfunkel, and Aretha. Everybody also listened to classic rock on the radio; it was just a question of which classic-rock station you liked best. So I agree with those who have said that this is nothing new. Most people don’t really get to go to a lot of live shows and meet a lot of people with different taste in music until college. I think this is a fake trend article – lazy journalism.
Yeah, I was in high school around the same time, and those of us that really liked the “new” stuff (Nirvana, Pearl Jam, etc) were our own minority against the classic rock kids. (Oh, and the subset that really liked Garth Brooks.)
It’s never really gone away. And neither has the continuing “rejuvenation” of classic rock. I remember an article – I can’t remember which magazine it was, but I believe it was SPIN – from sometime near the end of 1995. It talked about how college kids were picking up on this “new trend” of classic rock radio, and how “alternative music” was in decline after it’s early-90s peak. It turned out to be garbage, naturally, as alternative radio was bigger in the late-90s than in the early-90s (mainly because mainstream alternative radio didn’t really exist outside of major-market America until 1996).
Kids have heard those songs all their lives, and are now reaching back for something that appeals to them, given that the modern music scene isn’t working for them. Honestly, I did something similar back then, granted that the popular music of 1989 largely blew. I started collecting 45′s of popular singles from the new wave era. Popular music was just so unbelieveably fragmented – there was something new every two months – you couldn’t grab hold of anything.
Hmm. Sounds familiar.
And, frankly, I see bands like Death Cab as the modern Guadalcanal Diary. There were kids in ’89 that just loved those small time bands on major labels, but few (if any of them) had any long-term potential within the masses.
Now that nobody really controls the airwaves, the chances seem pretty slim that we’ll ever see the collective dominance of any one band, like you did with Zeppelin in the 70s or even Nirvana/Pearl Jam in the 90s. The modern music scene is like digital cable – you’re no longer forced to watch the networks for programming, and there are way more fucking channels than you have time to deal with.
Somebody call me next year when Arcade Fire releases their next record and tell me how many people remark: “God, didn’t we already do that last year?”
Oh, sorry, except for the uber-hipsters who’ll say: “God, didn’t we already do that two years ago?”
/jaded
As an aside, I personally know Josh (Freedom?) DuLac, and he’s a chode. Thank you and goodnight.
Don’t you think the comparison is because they are both on Atlantic? Not for any other reason, really.
i think DEATH CAB is more like REM…..
critical darlings for their early indie label albums……
then decide to cash in….
and begin sucking….
LED ZEPPELIN was cool only because they broke up when bonham died….
REM should have done the same when billy berry left….
(no matter what genre of music you are talking about….there are some bands that “rock” and some that “suck”)
simple & plain….
word to your mommy.
–maya
i hate this “Freedom” guy, he writes for the post all the time and i always disagree with him, also how the hell can i take anyone name Freedom seriously?
OF COURSE classic rock is on the rise again. just look around a high school (i get the chance five days a week!) and you can tell by the t-shirts.
and i don’t now why people are so in love with the sex pistols. they sucked ass!
“instead of pounding the pavement in one shitty dive bar to the next, day in and day out, one city to another, playing their songs, getting the recognition the hard way, like Zeppelin had too.”
Woah. I suggest you read up on Led Zeppelin – Jimmy Page specifically. Your generation may indeed be a bunch of spoiled pussies. I suggest you put the power of Google to use before spouting nonsense and declaring your complete ignorance on a comment thread.
This J Freedom Du Lac guy…or as I used to call him “Du-Cock”, used to write for the Sacramento Bee in my town. He was the worst “music writer” on the planet, by far.
I work at a classic rock station in Sac. Our listeners would always be pissed after a Classic Rock act came into town. He would always write the most insulting reviews. He’d have insightful nuggets like, “Fleetwood Mac, for the classic rock geriatric crowd.” The funny thing is, those were the people who were buying the Bee in the first place! Not to mention, it’s a proven fact that the Beatles for example, sell more in the 18-24 demo, than any other.
Anyway, I could go on and on. Good luck to the Washington Post. Maybe when Aerosmith rolls in to town, he can say, “For all of you dicks over 24.”
has anyone realised that the majority of times you listen to classic rock is while incredibly drunk or stoned?
I hate the way people are so concerned about what everyone else is listening to. I’m not going to claim that I’m completely innocent of it myself, but something on a scale like this is ridiculous.
“Classic rock” isn’t our generation’s “parent’s music.” It simply happened to be released while they were growing up. Big fucking deal. As if music just falls into little categories that only certain people are allowed to listen to. Just because you discover Led Zeppelin through your dad’s old tapes doesn’t mean it doesn’t belong to you. To pretend otherwise is ignorant and condescending in a way that makes you look like an asshole.
Radio has done some terrible things to music. It makes music you hate popular and then it makes music you love popular. It bothers you when both of these things happen, so why even bother with the radio? Listening to music because it is or isn’t being played on MTV is a bad reason. And there are people out there who do it, but what can you do? Can you stop them? No. All you can do is make yourself look like a pretentious dick. People are always commenting on how people don’t deserve to listen to this band or that band, and just because I feel the same way doesn’t mean I feel the need to express my unjustified opinion. When you do, you make yourself just as guilty as they are.
The truth is that no one has rights to the music we listen to – either by age or who discovered what first. Listen to good music, make good music, and stop worrying so much that the 13-year-old girl next door has Led Zeppelin and Death Cab on her iPod. After all, she listens to Hilary Duff and Kelly Clarkson – what does SHE know about music?
you know what I think?
It’s not that complicated. “Those durned kids these days” are finding out who they are, and finding their music is just another part of it.
We like what we like. Nobodys going to change that. We can talk all day about how great the ’78 cover of blahblahblah was compared to the 92 blahblahblah but come on. We’ve all got some Madonna or at least some Prince tucked away that we absolutley love, even if we won’t admit it. It doesnt matter whats popular if you like it.
this, of course, doesn’t apply to anybody who listens to anything to ‘be different’ or unique or fit in or cuz its cool.
Ever cross your mind that we LIKE Zep, how it sounds, how it makes us feel? That’s what music is supposed to do. All this complication with critiques and opinions and main-stream and posers is so elementary.
it sounds good or it doesnt, at least thats how it is for me.
i LIKE it, or DONT.
you know what I think?
It’s not that complicated. “Those durned kids these days” are finding out who they are, and finding their music is just another part of it.
We like what we like. Nobodys going to change that. We can talk all day about how great the ’78 cover of blahblahblah was compared to the 92 blahblahblah but come on. We’ve all got some Madonna or at least some Prince tucked away that we absolutley love, even if we won’t admit it. It doesnt matter whats popular if you like it.
this, of course, doesn’t apply to anybody who listens to anything to ‘be different’ or unique or fit in or cuz its cool.
Ever cross your mind that we LIKE Zep, how it sounds, how it makes us feel? That’s what music is supposed to do. All this complication with critiques and opinions and main-stream and posers is so elementary.
it sounds good or it doesnt, at least thats how it is for me.
i LIKE it, or DONT.
and if your going to talk about MTV,
isnt this site just another MTV for snobbier, more musically-educated sub-genre classified pretentious people?
(dont get me wrong, i love the site.)
This writer was pretty condescending.
It makes sense that classic rock is on the rise for high school kids again. When faced with the choices offered by standard radio, Hendrix and Zep are going to be more appealing. Also, from my observation a lot of kids will share a like for classic rock with their parents, which I think is pretty cool.
And it tranfers to college. Classic rock is probably the one constant in all the users on my iTunes network.
And it happens too much in current movies and TV. Soundtracks oftentimes use older stuff (in the earlier mentioned 1962-1978 group that’s all been forced together) instead of using current releases. And when they don’t, it can be a big deal, i.e. Garden State and the OC.
Nothing new. People have always liked classic rock. People will probably still like classic rock fifty years from now. It’s fucking CLASSIC. You don’t just label something ‘classic’ that is going to fall off of the face of the planet in a few years. I never heard anyone labeling O-Town or 2gether classic.
2gether isn’t even a real group. It was from a tv movie of the week.
Kids with pale skin, partially-red, long gross hair and chubby chins will always be into the Zeppline. Annoying girls will always be into the Doors. That’s how it works. This guy is probably the uncle of one of the kids in the group and wrote this dumb fluff piece about it. It’s not a big deal.
Albums that have sold well since the 70s continue to sell well! should be the headline…
1962 is WAY to early for classic rock mon ami.
This is the billboard top 1962 hits:
Green Onions – Booker T. & The MG?s
Duke Of Earl – Gene Chandler
Soldier Boy – The Shirelles
Sheila – Tommy Roe
Peppermint Twist-Part 1 – Joey Dee & The Starliters
The Loco-Motion – Little Eva
The Wanderer – Dion
Breaking Up Is Hard To Do – Neil Sedaka
Johnny Angel – Shelley Fabares
Palisades Park – Freddy Cannon
Remember people everything you think about the 50s is really most of the 60s and everything you think the 60s were like happened in the early 70s…
It’s true!
Personally, I enjoy “classic rock” (I term I also deplore) for two main reasons:
1. It’s so much easier to get a handle on 60s and 70s. Everything has already been made (released or not, officially), and you don’t have to play the stupid indie jerk-off battle towards obscurity (which will never really end unless every music fan sits alone in his/her room and makes music for nobody)
2. It’s just better; it really is.
Whatever Motown is like 80 million times better than Classic Rock.
To paraphrase my friend Caroline:
If you boil down two decades to 10 bands it’s going to seem like solid gold.
That’s just physicas my man.
2gether was just as real of a group as any of the other teenie bopper artists.
Which are as “real” as Nora Jones. All she does is sing other people’s songs. What do you mean by real?
I think the fact that he picked the magnet high school in the county (dork city) to interview kids from may have skewed his generalization. these children would rather trust reliable precedent rather than attempt to identify contemporary innovation.