Revelt
New member
He meant if it's "some weird genre you've never heard before", how is it that you've heard it before?
Why the local scene sucks...
- Thread starter bobby
- Start date
He meant if it's "some weird genre you've never heard before", how is it that you've heard it before?
DeathCubeK
New member
I've heard a local vocalist do growling vocals on Metallica classics like Fade to Black and Creeping Death. I just looked and my friend and we both laughed our asses off. Way to ruin great music.
amnesiac
New member
oh well..we all start somewhere. you guys will get better with much practice. you aren't the singer by and chance right? haha :mrgreen: good to see you guys having fun.
The Roses
New member
haha nope. im the drummer
The Roses
New member
yea but there are some goog metal singers. i cant rmbr what the band was called but it was this band at gossip pub, the same gig our band played in, the rise of the skull. and there was this malay guy, belting out iron maiden classics. like i felt it was reasonably good, compared to the other bands there. but the thing i like about trash bands in singapore is that their musicianship for guitar, drums and bass is there. but it's just too much, for me at least
punk was always a big fat joke.
the sex pistols were a boyband, they were gathered together by malcolm mclaren(i think thats his name) and marketed to the disenchanted angry youth. everything the sex pistols stood for was the opposite of what people in their scene stood for.
i do like the music though.
anyway. not much is wrong with the local scene. in relation to rock music, there are a fair number of good bands/acts in singapore, bands that i would listen to regardless of the fact that they are local. maybe the fact that most of the more popular acts are uninspired and bland, they cloud people's impressions of local music.
someone who doesn't know anything about local music will get his or her first impression from the first few bands they watch, probably chancing among the not-so-amazing ones and just not bothering after that. most people won't bother to search high and low for decent local bands when there are so many awesome bands from other parts of the world that they have easy access to.
i suppose what's wrong with it is that the bands who are popular just don't have that something special to really make an impression on people. not to say they're bad. they just aren't great(but b-quartet is).
DeathCubeK
New member
Yes, because we know that Sex Pistols is the only punk band in existence. I'm thinking more of the Clash when I mention punk.
superpotato_30
New member
now i know two REAL punk rock bands, thanks!
my point was that punk was always a big contradiction. it's entire anti-establishment front paired together with the fact that punk(music and everything related to the term really) is really really popular.
telling me the clash existed doesn't really change anything, they were pretty damn famous either way. what's your point?(i actually really don't know what your point is)
DeathCubeK
New member
So what you're saying is that you have to be unknown and as indie as possible to be a true punk band? If so, Fugazi would really be the epitome of punk. I think Tom Morello said it best when he said something like this -
"A lot of labels contacted us, and lots of them just didn't seem to
understand what we wanted to do. They kept talking about the
message of the music as a gimmick. They were interested in us just
because there was a buzz... They saw us as the latest local rock
band to be hyped. But Epic agreed to everything we asked--and
they've followed through... we never saw a conflict as long as we
maintained creative control. When you live in a capitalistic
society, the currency of the dissemination of information goes
through capitalistic channels. Would Noam Chomsky object to his
works being sold at Barnes & Noble? No, because that's where people
buy their books. We're not interested in preaching to just the
converted. It's great to play abandoned squats run by anarchists,
but it's also great to be able to reach people with a revolutionary
message, people from Granada Hills to Stuttgart."
Sure Sony makes millions selling Rage Against the Machine records, but if you choose to go the Fugazi route, your audience will be much more limited. I got a lot more interested in activism and world politics after listening to RATM and The Clash.
And yes, I know RATM is not a punk band, I'm just stating a point.
Last edited:
The Roses
New member
i've not. i said metal, experimental OR some genre i never heard before.
Just to set all the noobs straight, here are the facts (I'm not a huge punk fan, but even I know the basics). DeathCubeK has stated things very clearly too and has done a commendable job of pointing out the obvious to this cesspit of foolhardy posters.
1) Punk is about a choice of lifestyle. It is a state of mind, the idea of liberation from the rule-making of tyrannical organizations, a breakout from the sycophantic and the plebeian. A lot of that idealism still exists in a lot of punk music today. However, some daft imitators and sadly wayward modern teens have watered-down the initial idealogy behind the punk movement, and this has oftentimes lead to a misunderstanding of the original ideas of the movement.
Punk plays to its niche audience of hardcore fans the same way glam rock is about glamour and having a good time, the way classical music is for the calmer soul, disco, jazz, etc. It's no different, and it is not a crime to identify with the punk idealogy.
2) Punk played a pivotal rule in inspiring many of today's modern and not-so-modern music. U2, Guns N' Roses, bits of Metallica, quite a lot of pop, and many many more music acts of great diversity. As long as a genre influences a large number of successors, and from those successors, a good number of them are actually good bands, how is this a bad thing?
So quit your whining and get over your gripes already. If your opinions are of any consequence to the long haul of things, then you wouldn't be concerned with the nitty gritty moping and would instead be out defining your own brand of music, instead of being such a pisswad.
________
Being the original poster of this thread from a year back, I highly recommend that we get back to the topic at hand instead of sharing our soiled pants with everyone else. This is truly imbecilic behaviour. It's times like these that I truly have to scratch my head and wonder how some of the youth of this nation got so unabashedly stupid.
1) Punk is about a choice of lifestyle. It is a state of mind, the idea of liberation from the rule-making of tyrannical organizations, a breakout from the sycophantic and the plebeian. A lot of that idealism still exists in a lot of punk music today. However, some daft imitators and sadly wayward modern teens have watered-down the initial idealogy behind the punk movement, and this has oftentimes lead to a misunderstanding of the original ideas of the movement.
Punk plays to its niche audience of hardcore fans the same way glam rock is about glamour and having a good time, the way classical music is for the calmer soul, disco, jazz, etc. It's no different, and it is not a crime to identify with the punk idealogy.
2) Punk played a pivotal rule in inspiring many of today's modern and not-so-modern music. U2, Guns N' Roses, bits of Metallica, quite a lot of pop, and many many more music acts of great diversity. As long as a genre influences a large number of successors, and from those successors, a good number of them are actually good bands, how is this a bad thing?
So quit your whining and get over your gripes already. If your opinions are of any consequence to the long haul of things, then you wouldn't be concerned with the nitty gritty moping and would instead be out defining your own brand of music, instead of being such a pisswad.
________
Being the original poster of this thread from a year back, I highly recommend that we get back to the topic at hand instead of sharing our soiled pants with everyone else. This is truly imbecilic behaviour. It's times like these that I truly have to scratch my head and wonder how some of the youth of this nation got so unabashedly stupid.
Last edited:
blueprintstudios
New member
sounds like not only the "local scene sucks" , but the global scene sucks too.
EDIT:Made a mistake
No you don't have to.
Because you don't have to be a punk to play punk rock music.
Either way, Fugazi did way more than just punk, I wouldn't call them punk.
Who ever said anything about a message? I mean, I'm happy for you and all but it's quite irrelevant. I'm sure green day with american idiot got lots of kids into politics as well.
Punk as a lifestyle choice is anti-capitalist, the only reason you have even heard of these punk bands is because of capitalism. You can't escape it. Being in a famous rock band and being anti-capitalist does not work.
Well someones got sand in his pussy. Calm down keyboard warrior.
1. I don't need you to tell me it's a lifestyle, my entire reference to punk was it as a lifestyle. And please, teenagers are all the same whether they were born in the 70s or today, are you some bitter angry oldie.
I'm pretty sure many people who don't dress or think of themselves as punks at all have a similar mindset. You say punk is a state of mind, but what if think like them but I absolutely detest punk rock and love rap? What do you call me then?
It's not a state of mind alone, being a "punk" is an entire package, exterior and interior.
The entire concept of having your views on the world determined by a set of strict rules set by a sub-culture you are in is retarded, and completely defeats the purpose of freedom and individuality that punk promotes so aggressively.
Your comparison of punk to disco, jazz, glam rock and classical music is fairly fail. None of those other genres of music have any sort of sub-culture with strong world views attached to them.
It's not a crime, but anyone above 25 who calls themselves a punk is quite pathetic.
It reminds me of the entire "straight-edge" thing, which is even more pathetic.
2. And what's your point? I never said anything about the music(I actually enjoy it), more reading less raging pls.
Your last statement is hilarious, being so venomous and angry while being completely out of point. CHEER UP BUDDY
Last edited:
Destroyer
New member
Are you serious about American Idiot? Pardon me but many youths today are indeed an obnoxious and apathetic lot. American Idiot is probably more of a flagship of popular music that a political symbol to the ears of the youths.
And I'm dead sure punk rock isn't everything about capitalism. Capitalism is just an economic concept. Punk movements have more to do with the idea of a state and the idea of an establishment, in my opinion.
That's the point. Famous bands who write political songs all make the same difference, which is not much. If they truly wanted to make a difference, they wouldn't be playing music.
Anyway, about todays youth. I don't know about that, I don't think 20 years ago the kids gave a damn about politics or anything other than hanging out, games and television. Though I wouldn't know since I wasn't alive then.
But still, though we might have shorter attention spans I still think kids are still pretty much the same. Talking about it in general, not Singapore alone. I'm sure the youth in singapore have definitely become more obnoxious, as we get more and more americanized.
Hm. Well I think anti-establishment is a primary focus, I think capitalism is pretty much the centerpiece of establishment in reality.
But I don't know I only know the basics. Maybe it's alot deeper, maybe bobby the angry anarchist can educate us.
Last edited:
DeathCubeK
New member
You're younger than 20 years old? Well that explains a lot.
It's alot easier to play the age card than give a proper rebuttal.
Destroyer
New member
Music is still influential whether you believe it to be or not. Otherwise people wouldn't have blamed Marilyn Manson for the Columbine killings or blamed pop music for latest sexual trends.
How does being "Americanized" make one obnoxious? :O
Similar threads
