Definition of classic rock?
 

I honestly don't know where to put this, but I just read this and I had to ask....

Last week, MVM saw some brilliant new classic rock.

"New" classic rock? Is that not a contradiction in terms? How can something be classic if it's new?

They likely mean in the style of 60s and 70s rock bands. As per your original question, classic rock is what they play on classic rock radio stations.

Yeah, I got that. But it just seems wrong. New classic rock? I suppose a lot of bands want to be tagged as classic rock, but I feel you have to earn your stripes to be considered classic rock - Cream, Clapton, Zep, Free etc. Guess anything can be classed as anything if you want it to be. Threshold, one of my favourite bands (you'd hate them of course) say on their website "We're a good old classic rock band" (though I think they mean more in the idea of we're a rock band in the classic mould, rather than we're classic rock per se) but I definitely class them as progressive metal, a tag they seem to dislike. Shrug, I guess.

They might share my philosophy that you shouldn't call yourself progressive if you're just playing in the style of early progressive groups.

Yeah I agree, calling something "classic" when it's brand new is pretty ridiculous. Whoever wrote or said that should be fired!

How about "in the style of classic rock"?

Do you think these wee young lads have listened to a little bit of Led Zeppelin? Check out the drummer at 3:45.

Just rock from the 60s and 70s, that is pretty much the definition. The world "classic" though expectedly changes over time as things get older.

The Wikipedia definition actually pretty much nails it: "Classic rock is a radio format which developed from the album-oriented rock (AOR) format in the early 1980s. In the United States, the classic rock format features music ranging generally from the late 1960s to the late 1980s, primarily focusing on commercially successful hard rock popularized in the 1970s."

When a genre tag originates as a radio format, it's always going to be a bit vague.

Which kind of makes it ridiculous that a band operating in 2017 can be dubbed "classic rock". As others have said, classic rock style, maybe, but not classic rock. I'd also argue against Frown's definition of prog rock (well, I'd argue with Frown over the colour of the sky, but you know...) as that has clearly defined tenets and characteristics, so that it's easy enough to pin down a band who should be called prog rock (long, interminable keyboard instrumentals, non-standard lyrics, different time signatures, long, epic, multi-part songs, use of things like harp, mandolin, flute etc - you know all the usual ones) and while they may not be seen as truly "progressive" in the literal meaning of the word, the genre itself no longer really means that, it is again in a style popularised and created by 70s bands like Yes, Genesis and ELP, and newer bands like Spock's Beard, IQ, Arena et al continue that legacy.

oh god make it stop please

With a much better singer they could be a sorry imitation of the White Stripes.

Definition of classic rock.

So what you're saying is symphonic prog has tenets. I just don't think they should abuse that word and should be referred to more specifically than progressive rock. And I would argue that the genre should still be ablut progression because it's in the damn name. Same with conscious hip hop. Are you really that woke if you were saying the same basic **** that Nas was throwing down in the 90s?

Wow. Any royalties should go straight to swan song or Peter Grant or wherever that **** goes.

Well, I would argue those tenets apply to any progressive rock, even prog metal at times. However I do agree with you; it's definitely not progressive, not in the way your experimental/drone/noise/whatever stuff is. But until we come up with a new word (please, no wank rock!) we're stuck with it, and I prefer it because I know when I see the tag that there's a good chance I'll like it. Something that does annoy me is Progressive Trance, I think it is? I see it around a lot. What the hell is that?

As for the genre being about progression, well that was easy in the seventies, when all this stuff was new. Now there's not so much different that can be attempted, and if you go too far off the path you wander into experimental territory, which I guess wasn't really a thing in the seventies, at least not as it is now. So again, we're stuck. I would certainly agree that bands I listen to have done nothing to advance the cause of music, ie progress it forward, but that doesn't stop me liking them. The only one I'd give a pass to in that regard would be Marillion, who, along with Radiohead, were one of the first to go for the "pay what you like" business model, and also one of the first to get fans to pre-pay for (essentially I guess finance) their next albums. So that's pretty progressive. Musically, without a question, not in the least, not even close.
Excellent. :laughing: Also
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...c-cartoons.jpg

Symphonic jazz rock?

Of course there are different ways to progress, it always just seems like everything has been done because innovation wouldn't be innovative if it was already in the picture. Plus, a lot of prog bands in the 70s like King Crimson were pretty experimental. There are a lot of experimental rock bands that I would call progressive rock, like Perhaps or Massacre. Most self proclaimed progressive rock bands don't really reflect what I'd like the genre to be, so I think they should be xalled something else.

I got xalled once. Couldn't sit down for a week.

I often feel something like Drama Rock or the like might suit. Keyboard Drama? Buck Drama? Banana Drama? Dramarama?

I'd call it rock produced roughly between the years of 65-76. After the initial rock and roll period (Elvis, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Fats Domino, early Beatles/Beach Boys et al) and before punk and new wave emerged and influenced everything starting in the late 70's. Recent acts who take on a 60's/70's revival sound, like Britpop bands like Oasis and Blur for instance, could also be called classic rock, IMO. You might exclude particularly experimental or avant garde stuff from the classic rock label too. For instance I've always thought people referring to The Velvet Underground or early Freak Out! era Frank Zappa as classic rock was weird since they sound so much different from what is generally considered classic rock.

When this came out in 1973 it blew everyone away. Rock Candy was the first song I ever played in public. Was a 1975-76 graduation party at some dudes house. Guy's dad was rich and they had this HUGE rec room downstairs. Had to have been 50-60 totally stoned, and working their way towards drunk, teens there.

That was also the day I realized that having long hair and playing rock guitar was a gateway to easy female "attention". :)

Another awesome track from Montrose's debut.



The guy who engineered this was Ted Templeton, who 5 years later would engineer Van Halen's debut album.