Jump to content

Recommended Posts

With The Stone Roses reforming and Noel Gallagher's Flying Birds released last week I can't help but think we've been stuck in a period of stale musical rehash that comes along every decade or so.


I can't recall it being this bad since the days of Jazzy Jeff, Alannah Myles and Madonna in.... 1990.


Are we not due for a massive band to break that would form the soundtracks to our lives? A modern day Stones, a recessionary slap in the face from a Pistols equivalent, a new New Order....hell...even a new Blur would be great.


All the ingredients are here...economic gloom, world strife, and a mass market neutered by X Factor. Can a BIG, IMPORTANT FOR ITS TIME rock band ever emerge again?


Or is it just how we all feel getting older? (I hope not)

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/20204-were-due-a-big-band/
Share on other sites

I don't know. I wouldn't look up to them, and think they were so cool now, probably because I'm older than most of them. The Arctic Monkeys for example, my main problem with them was the fact that I thought they were annoying little scrotes, rather than any problem with their music.


Hot Fuss by The Killers was huge for me, but I guess that was a while ago now, so I was only mid 20s.


Anyway, I'm still 2 years off 35, so I'm like, way cooler than you B)

Almost everyone is way cooler than me Otta, and you certainly are.


My main issue with the Artic Monkeys was that they sounded shite live. The BIG bands that I'm talking about (and craving) all nailed it live. The Stones still do, even if watching them at the O2, in a padded armchair and eating free hot dogs is a world away from a rough arsed south london club circa 1964.

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'd expect a technology-based innovation to

> unexpectedly bring about something genuinely new

> and different.

>

> As it happens, if you've got a spare $6000, you

> can buy it already.


But that's 24 years old *Bob*

Not everyone is as swift to embrace the future as they ought to be, Jah. But give it another fifty years or so and mark my words - magical musical instruments which instantly open a dimensional portal to anywhere in the galaxy - will be two a penny.


And all this business about these polar monkeys and their silly guitars will be soon forgotten.


Keith Richards will have one, of course - because The Stones will still be playing (the O3)

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> doubt it will happen anyway - it's not a

> generational thing to look at the music business

> in 2011 and see that it's highly unlikely an

> artist can have the same impact again.


Not sure I would agree... I don't think the state of the industry would be a barrier to a band breaking through and capturing the imagination of the public. I don't remember Nirvana getting a huge marketing push.

Well Nirvana signed to Geffen for that record, so you may or may not remember a push but it was there. And it was (as we can't escape) 20 years ago anyway


But comparing Glenn Miller to, say, the 1990s is false. Advances like cassettes and cds changed little of the landscape. Since mid 90s and even mid 2000s, after decades of pretty much a few tv channels and radio and music albums, the landscape is significantly more fractured and varied



I don't thing that makes me gloomy or cynical btw - whatver the next "big thing" is it just won't involve keyboards or guitars. "young people's music" as a vehicle for "something big" lasted a few decades. Not bad but the world changed before it and it'll change after it

Sure, Nirvana went major, and there was a budget for promotion, music videos, etc... but it wasn't huge. Geffen never expected Nirvana to become household names. There was a $30K-$50K budget for the Teen Spirit video - a tiny fraction of the money spent on Lady Gaga and Rihanna videos these days. But the thing proved popular on MTV, and it just took off... it was the 90s equivalent of "going viral".

all true Jeremy - but back then MTV played music videos and people were looking for stuff


10 years later a video goes ballistic - say Hey Ya by Outkast - but does it lead to them becoming huge? Not really.


to take the Pistols argument from the OP - that was surely only possible because of the rules in place at the time. these days pretty much anything goes - if not on TV then on a billion internet sites.


Something in the shape of the pistols would be laughed out of town now


(or at the very least they would have lots of forumites solemnly asking them "what their point was" or "im sorry but if you can't articulate your message better than that then I'm afraid I don't have to listen")

True.. once you've been to a gig where mass brawling breaks-out, the police are called, the venue gets smashed-up and the artist has to scarper through the rear door for his own protection, well.. where do you go from there?



Of course that was opening of The Rite of Spring - back in 1913.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...