Where's My Elvis?
Part 1 - Burning out and fading away?
Part 1 - Burning out and fading away?
Since I was about 13 years old, I've been into metal. I'm not ashamed (although I probably should be) that it started with Bon Jovi and progressed from there. A chance playing of Nirvana's Nevermind on the bus and some kid in school lending me a copy of Megadeth's Youthanasia album set me off in a heavier direction and I never looked back but therein lies an important facet of my fascination with heavy music; the bands I started with were already big. Huge, even. Like and genre, rock music needs its big hitters, big sellers and headline acts (I write this days after seeing Slipknot play a packed Newcastle Arena) and I think it's fair to say that people are more likely to be attracted to a genre by hearing its biggest exponents than an obscure band that haven't sold many records. You're more likely to hear and be blown away by Black Sabbath than you are by Reverend Bizarre or Solace.
Metal is an odd creature; since the early 1970s the biggest bands have sold millions of records, from Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple through to Iron Maiden, Metallica and more recently Soundgarden and Pearl Jam. Yet despite this, rock remains firmly apart from the mainstream. Yes, the biggest bands get hits and occasional plays on Radio 1 in the afternon; hell, The Offspring even got a number 1 single with a naff novelty song. But how many of the people who got that song to number one went and bought the album? Or bought the next album, or their back catalogue? Iron Maiden had a number one single, but you'd be pushing it to call them a mainstream band.
So what I'm looking for here is the new rock giants. Who is going to inherit the throne? Well, first of all, who has the throne right now? To define my terms, I'm looking at a band who could headline a rock festival. And by 'Rock Festival', I don't mean one where Radiohead and Coldplay take turns year after year; I mean a real rock festival, with mosh pits and headbanging and where Chris Martin isn't invited.
It's telling that this year there will be no Sonisphere Festival in England. A lack of suitable headliners is the given reason and that to me, is a very sad state of affairs. Here's a brief list of who I would consider suitable rock festival headliners:
Iron Maiden
Metallica
Foo Fighters
Green Day
Red Hot Chilli Peppers
Kiss
Slipknot
Faith No More
Rage Against The Machine
System Of A Down
Black Sabbath
Pearl Jam
Guns & Roses
Aerosmith
Muse
Queen
AC/DC
The Offspring
Blink 182
Biffy Clyro
Rammstein
Linkin Park
Tool
Pretty formidable list, right? Well, I agree but let's break it down. In terms of sales, you can probably add Nickelback but you wouldn't take them very seriously, would you? They wouldn't get all the way onstage before being hit by a barrage of piss bottles. Seriously, though this list isn't as good as it seems when you consider things like age and recent output.
Of these, I count 8 of them in what you would call the twilight of their careers (Maiden, Metallica, Green Day, RHCP, Pearl Jam, Aerosmith, AC/DC, The Offspring), in terms of age or quality of output. I count a further 8 that have broken up and reformed, probably quite cynically in some cases, and are unlikely to reclaim their past glories (Kiss, FNM, RATM, SOAD, Sabbath, G&R, Queen, Blink 182). Arguably a couple of them are on the wrong list here anyway (sorry, Muse, Pearl Jam, Offspring, Blink, Biffy) and better suited to what you might call an alternative festival (Reading/Leeds or Glastonbury). That pretty much leaves you with Tool, Linkin Park, Rammstein, Slipknot and Foo Fighters, none of whom are exactly spring chickens. I suppose I'm being generous including Foos in this as they aren't exactly headbanger material but say what you like about them, they put on a great rock show. Slipknot are back from tragedy and personal problems and on the crest of a wave right now, but there do appear to be some interpersonal issues in the band, most of whom are now the wrong side of 40. How long they stick around is up for debate. Much of the same can be said for Rammstein, whose musical output has barely altered one bit since they formed, and let's face it, it wasn't too thrilling to begin with. Linkin Park, whose popularity baffles me, remain a big attraction despite the law of diminishing returns hitting them hard. Apparently they still have a rapper in the band... And has anyone heard from Tool lately?
Maiden and Metallica are arguably the mainstays of the UK rock festival and therein lies the problem. I fucking love Iron Maiden, although in a semi-ironic way. Maiden have churned out largely the same material since Bruce Dickinson joined in 1982. Granted they started doing it a bit better when Bruce rejoined them in the early 2000s, but essentially it hasn't changed much. The cool thing about Maiden is that they do it with such conviction that it's hard not to enjoy. The bad thing about Maiden is that given the quality of their recent output, they break no new ground and are trading on past glories, probably until they retire, which likely won't be long.
Metallica are one of my favourites; this is a band that matters to me and unlike Maiden, their last album was fresh and thrilling to my ears. However that was 6 and a half years ago and there is no sign of a new one. They tour, but people who have seen them recently don't speak highly of their live prowess. By their own admission, decades of playing fast and aggressive music has taken a toll on them and it seems like they can't quite cut it any longer. It's sad to say but if there's even the slightest error with a song like 'Battery' or 'Dyer's Eve' then it's going to stick out like a snare drum on St. Anger.
Considering the most viable of the others, would your average metal head rush to buy tickets to see Pearl Jam? Certainly I would but one wouldn't place them beside Iron Maiden on a bill (although Pearl Jam themselves would likely love it). Download have booked Muse to headline this year's show (which is the only reason they made the above list). Much as I like them, I wouldn't get excited about seeing hem headline a rock festival.
Several of these bands should probably have been put to pasture long ago. It's sad to think of Axl Rose and a group of session musicians stumbling through 'Sweet Child O' Mine' or Gene Simmons trying to get his grease paint in between the wrinkles. How much longer can Steve Perry and Joe Perry flog the dying Aerosmith horse? Can anybody really say that the Chillis are the band they were even 5 years ago?
Sadly, illness is likely to get the better of AC/DC and Sabbath sooner rather than later but let's face it, are they even pale shadows of the bands they once were? For the bulk of the above bands, the main reason you'd go to enjoy them would be for nostalgia; to get to see 'Run To The Hills', 'Paranoid', 'Detroit Rock City' or even 'Killing In The Name' played live. The most recent of those songs was written 24 years ago.
Now I'm not writing this to be mean to the bands that I love; I'm writing this as a reminder of the state of affairs we find ourselves presented with: out massive bands are becoming less massive, our headliners are dying off, our rock legends are becoming less and less legendary by the year. The thought of Ozzy commanding a crowd to 'Go crazy' from a wheelchair is a sad one but one that is not too far from reality.
So I leave you with one question. A question inspired by true rock legends, a revolutionary and inspirational band, and one that unfortunately should have retired many years ago: who's next?
So what I'm looking for here is the new rock giants. Who is going to inherit the throne? Well, first of all, who has the throne right now? To define my terms, I'm looking at a band who could headline a rock festival. And by 'Rock Festival', I don't mean one where Radiohead and Coldplay take turns year after year; I mean a real rock festival, with mosh pits and headbanging and where Chris Martin isn't invited.
It's telling that this year there will be no Sonisphere Festival in England. A lack of suitable headliners is the given reason and that to me, is a very sad state of affairs. Here's a brief list of who I would consider suitable rock festival headliners:
Iron Maiden
Metallica
Foo Fighters
Green Day
Red Hot Chilli Peppers
Kiss
Slipknot
Faith No More
Rage Against The Machine
System Of A Down
Black Sabbath
Pearl Jam
Guns & Roses
Aerosmith
Muse
Queen
AC/DC
The Offspring
Blink 182
Biffy Clyro
Rammstein
Linkin Park
Tool
Pretty formidable list, right? Well, I agree but let's break it down. In terms of sales, you can probably add Nickelback but you wouldn't take them very seriously, would you? They wouldn't get all the way onstage before being hit by a barrage of piss bottles. Seriously, though this list isn't as good as it seems when you consider things like age and recent output.
Of these, I count 8 of them in what you would call the twilight of their careers (Maiden, Metallica, Green Day, RHCP, Pearl Jam, Aerosmith, AC/DC, The Offspring), in terms of age or quality of output. I count a further 8 that have broken up and reformed, probably quite cynically in some cases, and are unlikely to reclaim their past glories (Kiss, FNM, RATM, SOAD, Sabbath, G&R, Queen, Blink 182). Arguably a couple of them are on the wrong list here anyway (sorry, Muse, Pearl Jam, Offspring, Blink, Biffy) and better suited to what you might call an alternative festival (Reading/Leeds or Glastonbury). That pretty much leaves you with Tool, Linkin Park, Rammstein, Slipknot and Foo Fighters, none of whom are exactly spring chickens. I suppose I'm being generous including Foos in this as they aren't exactly headbanger material but say what you like about them, they put on a great rock show. Slipknot are back from tragedy and personal problems and on the crest of a wave right now, but there do appear to be some interpersonal issues in the band, most of whom are now the wrong side of 40. How long they stick around is up for debate. Much of the same can be said for Rammstein, whose musical output has barely altered one bit since they formed, and let's face it, it wasn't too thrilling to begin with. Linkin Park, whose popularity baffles me, remain a big attraction despite the law of diminishing returns hitting them hard. Apparently they still have a rapper in the band... And has anyone heard from Tool lately?
Maiden and Metallica are arguably the mainstays of the UK rock festival and therein lies the problem. I fucking love Iron Maiden, although in a semi-ironic way. Maiden have churned out largely the same material since Bruce Dickinson joined in 1982. Granted they started doing it a bit better when Bruce rejoined them in the early 2000s, but essentially it hasn't changed much. The cool thing about Maiden is that they do it with such conviction that it's hard not to enjoy. The bad thing about Maiden is that given the quality of their recent output, they break no new ground and are trading on past glories, probably until they retire, which likely won't be long.
Metallica are one of my favourites; this is a band that matters to me and unlike Maiden, their last album was fresh and thrilling to my ears. However that was 6 and a half years ago and there is no sign of a new one. They tour, but people who have seen them recently don't speak highly of their live prowess. By their own admission, decades of playing fast and aggressive music has taken a toll on them and it seems like they can't quite cut it any longer. It's sad to say but if there's even the slightest error with a song like 'Battery' or 'Dyer's Eve' then it's going to stick out like a snare drum on St. Anger.
Considering the most viable of the others, would your average metal head rush to buy tickets to see Pearl Jam? Certainly I would but one wouldn't place them beside Iron Maiden on a bill (although Pearl Jam themselves would likely love it). Download have booked Muse to headline this year's show (which is the only reason they made the above list). Much as I like them, I wouldn't get excited about seeing hem headline a rock festival.
Several of these bands should probably have been put to pasture long ago. It's sad to think of Axl Rose and a group of session musicians stumbling through 'Sweet Child O' Mine' or Gene Simmons trying to get his grease paint in between the wrinkles. How much longer can Steve Perry and Joe Perry flog the dying Aerosmith horse? Can anybody really say that the Chillis are the band they were even 5 years ago?
Sadly, illness is likely to get the better of AC/DC and Sabbath sooner rather than later but let's face it, are they even pale shadows of the bands they once were? For the bulk of the above bands, the main reason you'd go to enjoy them would be for nostalgia; to get to see 'Run To The Hills', 'Paranoid', 'Detroit Rock City' or even 'Killing In The Name' played live. The most recent of those songs was written 24 years ago.
Now I'm not writing this to be mean to the bands that I love; I'm writing this as a reminder of the state of affairs we find ourselves presented with: out massive bands are becoming less massive, our headliners are dying off, our rock legends are becoming less and less legendary by the year. The thought of Ozzy commanding a crowd to 'Go crazy' from a wheelchair is a sad one but one that is not too far from reality.
So I leave you with one question. A question inspired by true rock legends, a revolutionary and inspirational band, and one that unfortunately should have retired many years ago: who's next?
No comments:
Post a Comment