icecream Posted December 31, 2011 Share Posted December 31, 2011 i've been a longtime lurker of this board 5-6 years. over the past year especially it seems the current generation of pop punk has dominated the boards. Just out of curiosity what do the older members think of the music ? i.e.; no sleep,run for cover,ect that type of stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriss Posted December 31, 2011 Share Posted December 31, 2011 Without getting too academic, what year would you say the current generation of pop punk started in? Because stuff like Blink, Brand New and TBS seem to get near constant attention on this board, I can't personally tell where the line blurs between that era of pop punk/mainstream 'emo' versus the newer stuff like Transit and such. Me personally, I stopped listening to the majority of that stuff in my late teens and early 20's in favor of garage rock, kraut rock, free jazz, noise, shoegaze, foreign music and such. The stuff I still listen to from my teen years are old school bands that were on Dischord and such up to mid 90's emo core like Kerosene, Saetia and the Ebullition label. There's a small group of folks on here (enjoyadrian, somethingvinyl, Jared, etc) who I share quite a few tastes but on the whole, I don't frequent too many of the music threads around here because while I like 99% of the folks on the board, I'm not personally into much of the music being discussed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclz Posted December 31, 2011 Share Posted December 31, 2011 i still think their are new pop punk bands out there...but i consider them to be the copyrights, banner pilot, be my doppelganger, off with their heads, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
controlthebleeding Posted December 31, 2011 Share Posted December 31, 2011 i still think their are new pop punk bands out there...but i consider them to be the copyrights, banner pilot, be my doppelganger, off with their heads, etc. there's a big gap difference. like A-money's idea of pop-punk is totally different than what i see as pop-punk (being a old fogie). total new gen style going on now that is more favorable and mainstream than say bands like crusades, humanoids, etc. while there are still bands that fit into the old mold, it really takes a appreciation of it to enjoy and understand the original form. it's like metal and nu-metal. same difference. nu-schoolers call old metal weak and unsatisfying, when it's nothing short of amazing because they dont' take the time to understand it and realize. same goes for hardcore. during chaos in tejas amber was debating the fact that CRO-MAGS weren't hardcore, because of the gap of age for one, and the fact that she grew up with a different 2k version of it. or at least what people consider hardcore now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxamaphone Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 i still think their are new pop punk bands out there...but i consider them to be the copyrights, banner pilot, be my doppelganger, off with their heads, etc. there's a big gap difference. like A-money's idea of pop-punk is totally different than what i see as pop-punk (being a old fogie). total new gen style going on now that is more favorable and mainstream than say bands like crusades, humanoids, etc. while there are still bands that fit into the old mold, it really takes a appreciation of it to enjoy and understand the original form. it's like metal and nu-metal. same difference. nu-schoolers call old metal weak and unsatisfying, when it's nothing short of amazing because they dont' take the time to understand it and realize. same goes for hardcore. during chaos in tejas amber was debating the fact that CRO-MAGS weren't hardcore, because of the gap of age for one, and the fact that she grew up with a different 2k version of it. or at least what people consider hardcore now. There's also regional differences to consider. Pop punk from southern California is completely different from stuff from northern California, and both might as well be from a different planet when compared to New York City. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karadotcollett Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 I'm 19 and I don't even like the term pop-punk. It's too broad and doesn't really describe anything imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriss Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 there's a big gap difference. like A-money's idea of pop-punk is totally different than what i see as pop-punk (being a old fogie). total new gen style going on now that is more favorable and mainstream than say bands like crusades, humanoids, etc. while there are still bands that fit into the old mold, it really takes a appreciation of it to enjoy and understand the original form. it's like metal and nu-metal. same difference. nu-schoolers call old metal weak and unsatisfying, when it's nothing short of amazing because they dont' take the time to understand it and realize. same goes for hardcore. during chaos in tejas amber was debating the fact that CRO-MAGS weren't hardcore, because of the gap of age for one, and the fact that she grew up with a different 2k version of it. or at least what people consider hardcore now. There's also regional differences to consider. Pop punk from southern California is completely different from stuff from northern California, and both might as well be from a different planet when compared to New York City. I agree with this on the whole because up until the internet gained mass prevalence, music of any genre experienced a different interpretation from city to city, state to state, country to country, etc. This is one of the pitfalls of internet culture in my own opinion - mass ability to access what band X is doing in Wayne, New Jersey influences what an entire scene of bands in Lawrenceville and Gwinnett, Georgia do for example. There's more uniformity now - especially in terms of punk rock and its subgenres - due to digital access than there was back in the 90's when folks were getting their info from MRR or Heart Attack or wherever else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanmccauley38 Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 The worst is when people mix up powerpop and pop-punk. Just because it has rock elements to it and the members dress like scene kids with swooping bangs, sassy accessories, and skinny jeans, doesn't equate to anything remotely punk... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
controlthebleeding Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 there's a big gap difference. like A-money's idea of pop-punk is totally different than what i see as pop-punk (being a old fogie). total new gen style going on now that is more favorable and mainstream than say bands like crusades, humanoids, etc. while there are still bands that fit into the old mold, it really takes a appreciation of it to enjoy and understand the original form. it's like metal and nu-metal. same difference. nu-schoolers call old metal weak and unsatisfying, when it's nothing short of amazing because they dont' take the time to understand it and realize. same goes for hardcore. during chaos in tejas amber was debating the fact that CRO-MAGS weren't hardcore, because of the gap of age for one, and the fact that she grew up with a different 2k version of it. or at least what people consider hardcore now. There's also regional differences to consider. Pop punk from southern California is completely different from stuff from northern California, and both might as well be from a different planet when compared to New York City. are you saying there's some form of similarity between the two? i dont' see any? but at the same time yeah, i'm not arguing that, ergs sound totally different than say OWtH, but you could stick both bands together on a bill and it would be fine. just like back in the day when you could have a nyhc and a california hardcore band play together and there was a commonality that can't be explained. you couldn't put say Parasites or Vindictives opening up for Hawthorne Heights or any of those high pitch vocal chorus bullshit pop bands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almightyseancore Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 The worst is when people mix up powerpop and pop-punk. Just because it has rock elements to it and the members dress like scene kids with swooping bangs, sassy accessories, and skinny jeans, doesn't equate to anything remotely punk... neither do baseball caps and skateboards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexH. Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 The worst is when people mix up powerpop and pop-punk. Just because it has rock elements to it and the members dress like scene kids with swooping bangs, sassy accessories, and skinny jeans, doesn't equate to anything remotely punk... Don't sully the good name of power pop by associating it with the things you've described. Big Star is power pop, and they're better than everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idreamofpunk Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 I just don't get hung up on genre. If I like something, I like it, regardless fo what people call it. I find genre as a whole to be very limiting. I will use terms to describe things to other people, such as a similarity between acts, but overall, I try not to use genres. This is part of the reason that Kriss Stress' collection and how he has his stuff organized baffles me because I don't care about separating stuff by genre. but whatever, as long as he can find his stuff. That's what it's for after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 you couldn't put say Parasites or Vindictives opening up for Hawthorne Heights or any of those high pitch vocal chorus bullshit pop bands. This this this! I am not a big fan of the safe and predictable bands most people here love...I am still of the mindset that this particular counter-culture should be challenging and dangerous to a certain extent as opposed to boring and fashionable. Here is a visual aid for you folks out there... Pop-punk: Pop-junk: Hardcore: Hardbore (note the Gap apparel...very fitting for this new age of scene kids): Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtz Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 I'm not sure what the "new generation of pop punk" even means. I've never heard of the two bands listed in the OP. Are we talking about stuff like Brand New and Taking Back Sunday, or pop punk bands like Houseboat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcm1610 Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Oh, music genres are defined by image? I can't figure out why I keep reading this thread.. the discussion in it baffles and angers me. Who gives a shit whether a band is pop-punk or power-pop or 1980s hardcore or jazzXcore? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Oh, music genres are defined by image?I can't figure out why I keep reading this thread.. the discussion in it baffles and angers me. Who gives a shit whether a band is pop-punk or power-pop or 1980s hardcore or jazzXcore? Sadly enough, you and I both know that music genres are defined by image...watch. I bet you can figure these out without labels... As far as who gives a shit...the OP obviously did so a discussion was started. You obviously care or you wouldn't have posted, so there's that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastepunk Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 I'll take the bait here (I'll be 32 in a few weeks). The new crop of growing independent labels is very impressive to me simply b/c they are thriving while handling immense twists and turns in their business model. The newer labels are more immediately horizontally integrated with revenue streams, more aggressive than ever in tying merch to their music, and placing huge value on customer service. The music discussion is subjective to taste, but the actual effort by labels like No Sleep, RFC is truly inspiring, especially since it is not perfect all the time and the labels have shown their ability to re-calibrate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanmccauley38 Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 The worst is when people mix up powerpop and pop-punk. Just because it has rock elements to it and the members dress like scene kids with swooping bangs, sassy accessories, and skinny jeans, doesn't equate to anything remotely punk... Don't sully the good name of power pop by associating it with the things you've described. Big Star is power pop, and they're better than everything. Don't get me wrong. I don't particularly care too much about aligning myself with a particular genre. I use them to differentiate one band from another. It keeps my files on my computer easy to navigate through the media player, and I can make appropriate recommendations. Music is seriously just either good or bad to me. I'm just saying that people shouldn't mix the idea of genre in terms of sound and genre in terms of appearance. I mean... things like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxcore should bear no relevance to the music itself (unless, for this particular example, you're really into the sound of a woman's voice vs. the sound of a man's voice, in which case I'd refer you to most of the new fandangled "post-hardcore/emo".) That's the point I was trying to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriss Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 I too should apologize for sending across any misplaced vibes in my original posts - I'm not insulting pop punk of ANY stripe - I was more asking (like a few others on here did as well) WHEN that particular era of what's considered 'new' started since the last time I paid attention to pop punk as it was known in the common vernacular - the main bands were TBS, Brand New (first album anyway), etc. I agree with Matt and Andrew that labels are labels and folks should like what they like (me filing my own record collection is just an aesthetic choice that I hold only to myself and no one else - thanks for the shot!), I was only confused since for me, pop punk as *I've* known it has been stuff like Screeching Weasel, The Queers, The Huntingtons (most any band that ended in '-tons' really) and the other bands that some folks took to calling silly names like Ramones-core. No harm meant on my own part friends Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecream Posted January 1, 2012 Author Share Posted January 1, 2012 sorry i should've been more specific i meant bands like transit,tigers jaw,the wonder years, ect stuff of that nature the "emo" tinged newer breed of bands. really I think jordan of paste punk's post summed it up best. I respect their earnest approach both band/label .business aside what do you guys think of the actual music ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mellietronx Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Ramones-core all the way! Kriss also files the records that way because it is easier for me. I never know what to listen to, so I go by what mood I am in. For example, if I am in the mood for ska...I will go to the ska section. However, there are different waves of ska. So I could be in the mood for first wave ska..who knows. Everyone has their own system Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 sorry i should've been more specific i meant bands like transit,tigers jaw,the wonder years, ect stuff of that nature. really I think jordan of paste punk's post summed it up best. business aside what do you guys think of the actual music ? Those bands and those that are similar... Not into it, not interested in it. If you are into it that's cool, but you would be cooler if you listened to better music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecream Posted January 1, 2012 Author Share Posted January 1, 2012 actually i'm not I find them terribly trite and boring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Ramones-core all the way! +1 Everyone has their own system Like...autobiographical? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
controlthebleeding Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 ^^^^^this is why we're friends santiago everyone should listen to CRUSADES though and for you santiago: look up crazy spirit, wild child, and nuclear spring.. even though they arent pop punk in the least. think you'd dig them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.