Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
its all good man. i dont think there is any hate around it. just difference of opinions and the fact that its nearly impossible to have an educated discussion on a message board. if we were all at a bar shooting pool and drinking some beers we could have these same conversations and wed all walk away thinking the other was a great person who loves music. i hope there isnt any hatred out there. dfinitely dont want that . and thats not where i am coming from. i have little room for hate in my life. these are topics that people feel strongly about and we cant all agree all the time. and disagreements on message bords seem to always have a way of going bad quickly. its a good way to kill time till roo though.
sure there are some touchheads out there but they are in the minority.
i know. i mentioned them.. but they really are/were a small and insignifigant part of the deads fanbase. that was a small blip on a 40 year career that was long after they had made their mark. they didnt make their mark with that. and if you went to a madonna concert today it would be far different. but i agree there was a very small amount of that for a very short time in the 80's.
Trust me I know, and i'm not trying to hate or anything, but i don't believe that "Float On" was Modest Mouse's defining achievement. I don't think they were trying to strike gold, sometimes that just how the cookie crumbles. If Bonnaroo was around back in 1988, i doubt that The Dead would not have been invited because of "Touch Of Grey?"
Can't say I could successfully argue with the idea that Modest Mouse sold their sound out to be more mainstream. I don't mean that in the normal "their song's selling cars" argument. More like, I think they were cultivating a specific sound that was unique, and for some reason, they dropped it and started sounding more like other groups that happen to be more mainstream. They might not be the best band to use as a talking point for this kind of argument imo.
Now the White Stripes on the other hand followed their most successful commercial album with a weird as fuck alienating one that still stayed true to their spirit.
Last Edit: Mar 8, 2007 22:16:58 GMT -5 by dudezer47 - Back to Top
Post by blaklitekameleon on Mar 8, 2007 22:24:28 GMT -5
Two points, one more important than the other.
1.) Yes, The Dead were mainstream. They were, at one point, one of the most popular bands in the country, far more popular than some acts being labelled as "mainstream" here ever were, and as far as I know, the general definition of mainstream is how widely accepted a band is, and the dictionary would aggree wtih me.
2.) WHO CARES? Mainstream is a term that, in reality, means very little. Prince is mainstream, the Talking Heads were mainstream (towards the end), Led Zeppelin, Otis Redding, and Bob Marley were all "mainstream" at some point in their careers, but that doesn't mean they're any worse. The only thing that really matters in music is quality, and most of the Bonnaroo bands, whether they're "mainstream" or not have that in spades, and what else really matters.
I think it's a legit conversation to have if we're talking about whether or not Bonnaroo is going more commercial. That is, to a certain degree, cause for concern.
a good example for me is metallica. they are one of my favorite bands. but if you bring anything after the black album into my home i will throw you out. well maybe not. but you wont be playing it. the black album is good. i love it. but it was the beginning of the sell out. and its where i draw the line. i bought load at midnight the day it came out. listened to it, burned king nothing onto the end of the black album and threw the rest into the garbage. a classic example of changing your sound to be more mainstream. why would they do it? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and roo, in my opinion, is doing the same thing. but if thats what it needs to do to sell tix and stay relevant then so be it. but i dont think its needed to do that. its all about the dollars. i dont htink metallica needed to sell out either. i think it hurt their career more then it helped. but hey they made alot of money.
There is a fundamental problem with comparing the fanbase of The Dead and a group like Death Cab for Cutie: one doesn't record anymore. If they're not making any new music, regardless of how active the group still is, then of course you won't be hearing them on the radio. Also, the result of that naturally will be that the fanbase doesn't renew itself-- many who got hooked in the Dead when "Touch of Grey" was a hit are still loyal fans, and they continue to age. Then DCFC comes along and gathers a fanbase who are of the same age that Deadheads were when they had their hit, but it's almost 20 years later so they are on average 20 years younger, i.e. a totally different demographic. Thus to compare two groups where one 1) no longer produces new music and 2) has had extra decades to cultivate their following, talking about which is more mainstream is completely irrelevant. We might as well be discussing which group can ride a tandem bicycle better.
In their time the dead were on MTV. They were also made fun of on MTV. Also Saturday Night Live.
My best friends little sister who never listened to anything but Britney Spears type $hit just turned 21. Now she is an uber hippy that goes to Bonnaroo every year and all she wears are baggy Dead shirts and long skirts. She would put up the same argument that they are not mainstream. All the while she is proving it is.
If the Dead were not mainstream then neither was Bob Marley. And I think we can all agree that Bob was very main stream. Just becaue they are both not on tv every day anymore changes nothing.
Post by steveternal on Mar 9, 2007 10:01:43 GMT -5
^^^I kind of agree with you, but I would rephrase it to say that the superficial draw that people (especially certain demographics) can have to mainstream culture (again, however that may be defined) can also happen to many subcultures and even countercultures, hippieism among them. Mainstream culture is not unique like that.
If the Dead were not mainstream then neither was Bob Marley. And I think we can all agree that Bob was very main stream. Just becaue they are both not on tv every day anymore changes nothing.
whoops it came out a little skewed. I didnt mean they were on tv everyday in the past. It was more of a vague "all the time" type point. I think you know what I was cracking at though.
Someone tell me whats wrong with being mainstream? Does it make the music,lyrics,soul,drive,ambition,passion,dedication whatever you want to call it any less than those you catagorize as "nonmainstream"?
I hate when people ask this question. "Mainstream" is defined by our opinions.
Mainstream is a very vague word. Maybe we should redirect the conversation to this:
Is Bonnaroo changing the direction of the festival to a broader appeal? Is this good or bad? Is this commercially motivated or is it a just an issue of creating more musical diversity? Do you think the move is threatening to water down the quality of the live sets?
And I dunno^ Deat Cab is one of the most popular bands among late teens and early 20s. I can list about 20 firends I have who consider them one of their 5 favs.
That's kind of exactly my point, though...a band may be very popular among a certain set, yet not be mainstream. Popular electronica DJs may have millions of fans worldwide, but are they mainstream?
My test for if something is mainstream is very simple - I ask my 54 year old mother. She only listens to top-40 radio stations, watches American Idol, etc. If she's heard of it, it's probably more popular than it should be.
I don't understand something being "probably more popular than it should be"........i'm confused.......tons of great music imo has been popular music.....just bc most popular music is crap doesn't mean that it's all bad.....some of it is popular bc it's actually good!......OMG. I don't understand how success is twisted into being a negative connation because every band wants to be successful.
I consider it to be anything that isn't spewed 24/7 on the FM radio stations, in every top 20 list and remixed by every DJ.
I do not consider those I'd consider ARTISTS as mainstream. A musician that is an artist is always evolving, working with with their own music, trying to push themselves. They may find something new and their sound may change. They stay in it for the long haul because they still enjoy it. They may gain success for this, they may have less than that.
Let's look at The Police. In the 80's, I'd consider them mainstream. But Sting, in the past 10 years or so, is not. His music is more experimental, worldy, it sells more than most non-mainstream but you don't hear his recent stuff being broadcast over every FM station. I tend to belive that the regrouped Police will offer something different than what it offered in 1988 or whatever.
Festivals like this do not carry mainstream appeal, where 99% of the population has to camp in true roughing-it scenarios and handle a lot of heat in the face of a fantastic time. But AC does have 80,000 tickets to sell, and the lineup has to support that.
We treat mishaps like sinking ships and I know that I don't want to be out to drift Well I can see it in your eyes like I taste your lips and They both tell me that we're better than this
Post by jacktheripper on Mar 11, 2007 19:03:57 GMT -5
If Fall Out Boy and Gwen Stefani were headlining this year I think this debate would hold more validity. (I would also convert to atheism, no just god could allow something that horrific.)
i dont understand why its always the extremes. it dosent have to be gwen and fallout boy to be more mainstream then it has in the past. and just because its more mainstream then in the past dosent mean it sux. its just an unavoidable fact of reality that roo started as a grass roots/jam fest and that it has gone in a more mainstream direction every year. whether or not that is a good thing or a bad thing is up to personal opinion but iit is an undeniable fact that roo has moved more and more in that direction evey year and that movement has accelerated in the past couple years.
again that depends on your definition of mainstream. i would say by and large jambands arent mainstream. in comparison to tool, the white stripes, the police, dave, tom petty, common, matisyahu, modest mouse, deathcab for cutie, joss stone, etc... jambands arent mainstream. again its all a mater of your definition of mainstream. which no matter what the dicitonary says, means different things to different people. some people base it on sales or number of fans, some people use playtime on the radio and mtv. some people use the marketing strategy. as many people as there are thats how many deifniitons of mainstream there is. by my defininton i cant think of a single mainstream jamband. unless you count dave or rusted root as a jamband. again "jamband" is another term thats up to personal definintons of what fits under that umbrella term.
Last Edit: Mar 11, 2007 20:53:29 GMT -5 by Dude - Back to Top
Post by chicagorooer on Mar 11, 2007 22:49:59 GMT -5
It is obvious everybody defines mainstream as something different. The real question is why do people care if others determine the music they listen to as mainstream? The answer I think is another example of people wanting to be "cool." Kind of like being the 1st person on your block w/ a t.v. or the 1st to have a new style of shoes. With music sooooo many people get hung up on "I saw these guys before anybody else knew who they were" and talk about it like it's some sort of badge of honor. Then when the band becomes more popular "mainstream" they get all pissed b/c they don't feel special anymore and there little secret has been discovered by a larger audience. This is when u hear talk of a band selling out or going mainstream......I think this way of thinking is childish. These people feel as though it's their music and almost take ownership and get defensive about the band. I say good music should play for the people and let us decide. Bands like the beatles, pinkfloyd and countless others were very much a part of everyday culture (mainstream) for crying out loud the beatles played on the ed sullivan show and anybody with a t.v. tuned in. They were loved by all and still are. labeling any music as mainstream is just kind of weird and really has no use.
i dont use how many fans a band has. i go by the 'type"of fans, for lack of a better description.. if most of their fans come as a result of being played over and over on the radio or mtv i consider them mainstream. if they got thier start that way and have continued to have a large fan base based off of that success but maybe arent on tv and the radio as much i consider them mainstream. although alot of that category is mainstream that i like. such as tool and pearl jam. mainstream is not always a bad thing. plenty of music i love is mainstream. look at sublime and rage. 2 of my all time favorite bands. yet very mainstream. and if your using mainstream in the context of bonnaroo i think its applied to bands that arent really 'that' mainstream except when compared to past roo lineups. not all bands i think are mainstream are in the same category as ashley simpson or eminem. for me there are differnt degrees of mainstreaminess. and certainly differnt levels of quality in mainstream bands. roo has a habit of getting the quality ones out of the bunch. which is good. just seems like more of them are coming in every year. to the point of taking over roo.
i dont think it has anythign to do with being cool. some bands make their living off of radio and mtv. and tehy all seem to sound quite a bit alike. then they do a tour, play the same 10 song set, in the same order, the same way as you hear it on the radio, for every stop on their tour. other bands make their mark by having an original sound and putting on outstanding live shows. live shows that are different everyt ime. different setlists, and when they do play songs alot they do it differently each time. you will never hear umphreys play a song note for note as it appears on a cd. i wouldnt want to pay to see them several times a year if they did. and again in the context of roo and mainstream its obvious that its headed that way every year. like ive said there are ticket contests on pop staions, rock stations, metal stations, classic rock stations, and country stations this year. that speaks for itself
Last Edit: Mar 11, 2007 23:07:35 GMT -5 by Dude - Back to Top
