Then or now? What's better?
SprCForr @ Sat May 12, 2007 9:35 pm
Then.
What those doofus' did to Supertramp was criminal.
Edit: Doofus identified. "Cupid's Chokehold" by Gym Class Heroes
Rev_Blair @ Sat May 12, 2007 9:38 pm
To answer the original question, Marilyn Manson. That's not to say you shouldn't listen to Gershwin, but Manson has a lot more to say.
Why is it a competition? I grew up during the eighties and there was a fair bit of good music. Nothing on the radio, but we had everything from Aerosmith's last good album (Night in the Ruts) to the Violent Femmes (next time you want chicken, think about that) to the resurrection of AC/DC (Back in Black) to that weird Duran/Duran thing.
Steve Earle finally got famous (his unfamous stuff is better, but WTF), somebody besides me noticed Johnny Cash was a folk singer, Bob Dylan...well, he sucked really bad for the entire decade, and then well into the next, but he sang through his nose so it was cool.
Best of all though, the 80s kind of sucked enough that we got some punk back in the 90's and 00's.
Knoss @ Sat May 12, 2007 9:43 pm
$1:
There is some good stuff out there (The White Stripes, Arcade fire, Modest Mouse, the Shins are some of my fav's right now), but I find that a lot of the rock that you'll hear on the radio these days is stale and derivative.
Radio is out of touch and I don't know why because there is great music in movie soundtracks and the best music is in advertising.
$1:
Bob Dylan...well, he sucked really bad for the entire decade, and then well into the next, but he sang through his nose so it was cool
Yer just saying that because Union Sundown was released in 1983