# Are Rock Fans thinking the Same As Classical Fans?



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

I have a hard time seeing the Rock and Roll world, no matter how "normal" the celebrity seems to be, to be much different than what Hollywood suffers. I guess in a secular society, these are supposed to be our "gods," but they seem to be people with more problems than the rest.

Just dealing with more things related to rock and rollers who have died in the last year.

Several times in my adult life since around age 22 I had seen the need to "abandon" rock and roll, and I feel like I am several "degrees away from" rock music "fandom." When I look at even a lot of the Progressive Rock website stuff I cringe. I'm not being a snob, I'm aware that Art rockers of various stripes can look at themselves as more sophisticated than Prog rockers, it's just that the latter artists held my interest for a longer time.

There is a page of "rock and roll" deaths:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deaths_in_rock_and_roll

It's not pretty. Hollywood is pretty much the same. The classical world doesn't seem anywhere near this and it seems people who go down the classical path also don't have the kinds of crazy behavior that rock fans are known for.

So, this thread is to talk about "rock and roll" as a genre, your relationship to it, any of your thoughts about it that you want to share.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Ok, so just talking off the top of my head and generalizing, but the whole genera of rock music tends to have a sense of rebellion and often abuse of drugs and alcohol are a part of that rebellion. Sometimes that rebellion is in the form of shock value. There is a tendency for hard partying and hard living. Whereas classical, when in rebellion, is rebelling more against the established music than the established society, and so there is no need for (or point to) the lifestyle rebellion and hard living.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

*Life Often is Not Pretty*



regenmusic said:


> There is a page of "rock and roll" deaths:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deaths_in_rock_and_roll
> 
> It's not pretty.


I looked at the Wikipedia list, and noted that it is a list of deaths of rock and rollers from all causes, except maybe old age. There are cancers, heart attacks, accidents, the usual suspects that people die of, in addition to the suicides, murders (a few), and drug/alcohol problems. It would be interesting to subtract out the deaths that can't be linked to the rock and roll "life style", and compare it with the general population, the Jazz population, etc., even the composer population. I've read several accounts linking a number of composers' declines into insanity and death with syphilis: Schubert, Smetana, and hints about Schumann and Beethoven, among others.

I certainly don't condone bad behavior, being almost a teetotaler myself, but rock and roll, if it is to be determined to be a Good thing or a Bad thing, should be examined in a much larger context. The news these days is of Ordinary People succumbing to full-fledged heroin addiction as a result of being prescribed opioids for their aches and pains by compliant doctors aided by drug-pushing pharmaceutical companies. It's not a pretty world out there, and some rock and rollers, like Joni Mitchell, Rush, innumerable other groups and artists, tell us often about how ugly it is. Classical music, not so much.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Not sure about the drug culture, but my own opinions [if they're worth anything]

Rock, to me, like other popular genre of music, is never "enough". While there can be fun rock songs with a drive and a beat and a catchy riff, they're usually kind of "meh" to me. Especially since most classic rock songs [and most pop songs today] are either about drugs or women, and since I'm not interested in either, they don't speak to me. Like Led Zeppelin, who my roommate loves. Not that they're bad or anything, but I'm never in the mood to put them on. Some bands do "more" that I can really get into. Pink Floyd is one of my favorite bands, because they do "more", whether it be a unique rhythm, or playing with sonorities, or thoughtful lyrics.

While Florestan mentioned a "rebelling for shock value" factor, I kind of see that in some rock, but I think that's a characteristic of metal music that has never appealed to me. There were kids back in high school and kids here at college who recommend me these "intense" bands, but when I listen to them, I don't feel the intensity. Even the black or death metal bands singing about worshiping Satan, [which in itself is a gimmick, let's be honest], nothing is really shocking me. The cumulation of Bach's St Anne Fugue is intense to me. As is the ending to Shostakovich's 7th symphony. Different sound worlds, different kinds of intensity, but both grab me more than any rock or metal ever has.

Just a personal preference


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Rockers tend to become famous while young, at least compared to Classical composers and musicians. If a Classical composer did live that lifestyle and died young, you might not have ever heard of him. 

Which isn't to say they are the same. Rockers and actors often become rich and famous while young, which isn't necessarily healthy. Classical composers and musicians are spared these risks. You also gave to look at the environment they grew up in. Someone whose parents were alcoholics and/or abusive is more likely to have substance abuse issues as an adult. But would someone with such a troubled lifestyle have much of a chance to makes it into Julliard?

Even so, as Strange Magic says, a lot of "normal" people experience this stuff.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

K


Cosmos said:


> Just a personal preference


That is the heart of the matter. It really is all about personal preference. But let me offer you the names of several artists or groups whose lyrics are not usually about women or drugs, or not greatly so: Rush, The Police, Bob Dylan, R.E.M., Kate Bush, CS&N, and the list could go on indefinitely. But if the genre doesn't engage you, so be it. There are musics I like that hardly anybody else likes, and whole genres I, too, derive very little to no pleasure from.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> K
> 
> That is the heart of the matter. It really is all about personal preference. But let me offer you the names of several artists or groups whose lyrics are not usually about women or drugs, or not greatly so: Rush, The Police, Bob Dylan, R.E.M., Kate Bush, CS&N, and the list could go on indefinitely. But if the genre doesn't engage you, so be it. There are musics I like that hardly anybody else likes, and whole genres I, too, derive very little to no pleasure from.


I'm always up for recommendations. Thanks!


----------



## Lucifer Saudade (May 19, 2015)

Well Rock often isn't just about the music - it's also about the "scene" that comes along with it ergo drug experimentation, sex with groupies, emotional vulnerabilities etc. and it all comes out in the open, suffusing the music. Trent Renzor, Peter Steele, Phil Anselmo etc. all exemplify the angsty rock musician lifestyle. When you get rich young you don't feel as much of a sense of responsibility and long term planning, and touring all year only exacerbates whatever problems are already present.

Tho I've read an article that mentions Classical musicians suffer drug addictions albeit for different reasons.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/...lassical-musicians-channel-4-addicts-symphony

"Addiction is blighting the lives of many classical musicians as they grapple with performance anxiety and antisocial hours, a cellist has said."

There's also the social aspect - Rock is about communication between people, partying, socializing to a lesser extent to pop, but still way more then Classical unless you're Bernstein moving in high New York circles or whatever.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Florestan said:


> Ok, so just talking off the top of my head and generalizing, but the whole genera of rock music tends to have a sense of rebellion and often abuse of drugs and alcohol are a part of that rebellion. Sometimes that rebellion is in the form of shock value. There is a tendency for hard partying and hard living. Whereas classical, when in rebellion, is rebelling more against the established music than the established society, and so there is no need for (or point to) the lifestyle rebellion and hard living.


I believe, nowadays listening to classical music is a far greater rebellion than listening to rock music. Rock music is for the most part a commercialized rebellion, promoted by musical oligarchs and fashion firms. And how many in our politically correct time would dare to listen exclusively to white men's music?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

SiegendesLicht said:


> I believe, nowadays listening to classical music is a far greater rebellion than listening to rock music. Rock music is for the most part a commercialized rebellion, promoted by musical oligarchs and fashion firms. And how many in our politically correct time would dare to listen exclusively to white men's music?


You are right! Those who rebelled against the establishment in the 60s, 70s and 80s are now becoming the establishment to be rebelled against. So we former-rock-listeners are rebelling against them as we turn to classical music.


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

Calvin & Hobbes did a strip about that. He is rebelling against his parents by listening to "easy-listening Muzak." He tells Hobbes he's playing it real quietly, too.

Rock has gone through a lot of changes since the 1950s. Like metal, there are lots of eras, subgenres, and dividing lines that are somewhat blurred. I like a lot of artists and songs that are labeled as rock and roll. For me, it is about the music and not the lifestyle of groupies, drugs, booze, and one-night stands.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Don't forget this gem:


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Rock music listeners/concert goers are conformists.

Classical music listeners/concert goers are non-conformists.

It doesn't take much in the way of "thinking" to conform.


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

Uh, no. There are conformists and non-conformists in both groups, and it is easily possible to like both or neither type of music. Whether you call audience behavior at a typical symphony concert conformist or polite, there is not a lot of dissent in terms of what to wear and when to applaud.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Another thing. At many rock concerts, fans will act in ways similar to attendees at a Pentecostal church service, with their arms up in the air as if in worship, chanting, or singing along. The same kind of apparent emotional devotional display would be rare or nonexistent in classical concerts. I guess, and to stereo-typically generalize, this has to do with that a lot of rock music connects much more emotionally whereas classical connects with the listener in a more intellectual way.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

M


hpowders said:


> Rock music listeners/concert goers are conformists.
> 
> Classical music listeners/concert goers are non-conformists.
> 
> It doesn't take much in the way of "thinking" to conform.


I think hpowders is having his little joke.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2016)

regenmusic said:


> I have a hard time seeing the Rock and Roll world, no matter how "normal" the celebrity seems to be, to be much different than what Hollywood suffers. I guess in a secular society, these are supposed to be our "gods," but they seem to be people with more problems than the rest.
> 
> Just dealing with more things related to rock and rollers who have died in the last year.
> 
> ...


I see a list of people who have died at various ages from various things. Is there something to be drawn from this other than "people found to be not immortal"?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

dogen said:


> I see a list of people who have died at various ages from various things. Is there something to be drawn from this other than "people found to be not immortal"?


Mick Jagger is a man.
All men are mortal.
Therefore....

Wait...I'm having a hard time with this one.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

hpowders said:


> Rock music listeners/concert goers are conformists.
> 
> Classical music listeners/concert goers are non-conformists.
> 
> It doesn't take much in the way of "thinking" to conform.


Sweeping generalizations at best. I doubt the entertainment idustry suffers any more casualties than other professions, but we hear about these things due to the celebrity factor.

In general, musicians today are much more health conscious. But even in decades past, for every musician that was abusing drugs and alcohol, there were plenty more living sober lives and raising families.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

regenmusic- Ok, so just talking off the top of my head and generalizing, but the whole genera of rock music tends to have a sense of rebellion and often abuse of drugs and alcohol are a part of that rebellion. Sometimes that rebellion is in the form of shock value. There is a tendency for hard partying and hard living. Whereas classical, when in rebellion, is rebelling more against the established music than the established society, and so there is no need for (or point to) the lifestyle rebellion and hard living.

For the most part classical musicians and composers are far more educated and sophisticated... in some ways... than popular musicians. At the same time they don't face anything near the level of temptation, nepotism, sycophancy, that comes with all the fame & fortune, etc...

Cosmos- ...most classic rock songs [and most pop songs today] are either about drugs or women, and since I'm not interested in either, they don't speak to me.

That is the heart of the matter. It really is all about personal preference. But let me offer you the names of several artists or groups whose lyrics are not usually about women or drugs, or not greatly so: Rush, The Police, Bob Dylan, R.E.M., Kate Bush, CS&N, and the list could go on indefinitely. But if the genre doesn't engage you, so be it. There are musics I like that hardly anybody else likes, and whole genres I, too, derive very little to no pleasure from.

I might also point out that a good deal of the finest songs from the classical world are "about women" or unrequited love. Schubert's Winterreise? Hell, its been pointed out that taken down to their most elemental level, the meaning most of Shakespeare's sonnets is "when I think of you, I feel blue."

Personally, I embrace what I deem to be the finest achievements of both "fine art" and "popular culture". I swear by Picasso's argument that "fine art" left on its own ossifies and degenerates into academicism while popular culture is often crude and vulgar. The best art, he argued, was achieved in the manner in which the Renaissance aristocrats produced their heirs: through a merger of the "high-born" and the "low".


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Touché. Though I'm biased toward Schubert's vocabulary than rock/pop chords and riffs and instrumentation


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Personally, I embrace what I deem to be the finest achievements of both "fine art" and "popular culture". I swear by Picasso's argument that "fine art" left on its own ossifies and degenerates into academicism while popular culture is often crude and vulgar. The best art, he argued, was achieved in the manner in which the Renaissance aristocrats produced their heirs: through a merger of the "high-born" and the "low".


Couldn't agree more completely - Stravinsky and Bartók being prime examples.


----------



## MJongo (Aug 6, 2011)

I don't think it's fair to compare the entire genre of rock with Hollywood films. Hollywood films are approximately 99% crap. Rock music is about 98% crap. That's double the percentage of not crap!


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Cosmos said:


> Don't forget this gem:


To be fair, some of these "extreme" black metal bands are not nihilistic at all.


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2016)

Mahlerian said:


> Mick Jagger is a man.
> All men are mortal.
> Therefore....
> 
> Wait...I'm having a hard time with this one.


Yes, I think I am too.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

SiegendesLicht said:


> To be fair, some of these "extreme" black metal bands are not nihilistic at all.


If it ain't nihilistic it ain't black metal.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Cosmos said:


> While Florestan mentioned a "rebelling for shock value" factor, I kind of see that in some rock, but I think that's a characteristic of metal music that has never appealed to me. There were kids back in high school and kids here at college who recommend me these "intense" bands, but when I listen to them, I don't feel the intensity. Even the black or death metal bands singing about worshiping Satan, [which in itself is a gimmick, let's be honest], nothing is really shocking me. The cumulation of Bach's St Anne Fugue is intense to me. As is the ending to Shostakovich's 7th symphony. Different sound worlds, different kinds of intensity, but both grab me more than any rock or metal ever has.
> 
> Just a personal preference


Yup, I agree. There are a couple reasons for this. When it comes to metal, I find that most metal bands don't know how to effectively use dynamics and pacing. When everything is loud and fast, nothing is. A lot of metal music that I have heard also tends to equate loudness with intensity, while completely ignoring the intensity that can be drawn from harmony (and other things). An open fifth, played loudly by an electronic instrument, is still an open fifth and playing it over and over again doesn't make it any more intense.


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

Florestan said:


> You are right! Those who rebelled against the establishment in the 60s, 70s and 80s are now becoming the establishment to be rebelled against. So we former-rock-listeners are rebelling against them as we turn to classical music.


Its the dance of life...all that changes is the language of the rebellion.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

There was hardly any rebellion after the early 70s. Mostly big business.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

starthrower said:


> There was hardly any rebellion after the early 70s. Mostly big business.


It was a symbiotic relationship in that big business fit itself to the rebellion, selling the rebels the things that supported their thinking they were still rebels, while unknowingly they had become conformists to the post rebellion lifestyle of associating oneself with the rebellion while not really being in rebellion. I know because I was there. Post-rebellion-lifestyle me (circa 1973):


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

violadude said:


> Yup, I agree. There are a couple reasons for this. When it comes to metal, I find that most metal bands don't know how to effectively use dynamics and pacing. When everything is loud and fast, nothing is. A lot of metal music that I have heard also tends to equate loudness with intensity, while completely ignoring the intensity that can be drawn from harmony (and other things). An open fifth, played loudly by an electronic instrument, is still an open fifth and playing it over and over again doesn't make it any more intense.


I agree about the lack of dynamics and pacing (altough there are some things I like that are like that), I'm not sure about the fifth. A fifth played with a distortion is in a way something else than the same interval played clean. The interval is the same but the sound has a completely different effect. I know it's obvious in a sense but the harmonics of a distortion make a lot of difference.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

The thing that brought me away from metal is the aggression. I found that the music I thought was most progressive in metal without sounding like some kind of weird fantasy movie soundtrack tended to have very negative and violent lyrics. I'm not saying aggressive music is not at times necessary. It would be a good thread to find aggression in classical music without complete dissonance, also, pre-1700 aggressive music.


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

Well, in my opinion this thread is not really about rock music only, it's about the escapism you see in many forms and areas of society and about mass culture and mass identification. A phenomenon probably dating back to the Romans. Many (often the best) rock artist didn't want to have anything to do with drugs and hippies (e.g. Frank Zappa, Ian Anderson).

All mainstream culture (be it in the domain of music, sports or whatever) is only in there for the money and by definition aimed at the masses to make a profit (or keep power). What the masses seem to seek is to escape from day to day life and be entertained as a means to be relieved of pain. This escapism can be a transitory thing (e.g. my parents loved an evening of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers movies or dancing themselves) to get a temporary relief from real life hardships but I see many examples of people identifying excessively with their heroes and the lifestyle that goes with it (successful marketing). Probably because of a lack of purpose or dim perspectives in their own life. Then the object of their identification becomes 'all there is to life' and they start acting more or less weird (from the perspective of the outsider). All they can talk about, all they live is music, sports or even extreme sports, series on HBO, games or whatever. Sometimes the drug is the activity itself, sometimes the activity is accompanied and enhanced by the use of chemical drugs. Both are where their money goes. These addictions generate a steady cashflow for 'legitimate' or somewhat less legitimate enterprises. Both have their marketing strategies to get a steady following.


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

And this is one of the reasons we should destroy 'big labels' and 'brands' in music by not buying their stuff and turn our attention to small labels that make so little money they could never be in it for the money...

Sorry, just talking to myself.


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

Classical music is very entrenched in the establishment. The establishment is expert at covering up its scandals and failures. Rock music embraces the negative aspects of its culture and often to some extent often glorifies them, so we see them more often. Human weakness is universal.


----------

