Do You Think...

...any bands after, say 1980, will ever reach the almost cult status of The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, Black Sabbath, or Led Zeppelin?

With all the musical acts now, and the ease of accessibility to them, are the chances anyone will be remembered with such significance 40 years from now even there?

Maybe AC/DC, or Metallica, I really don't know. What do y'all think?
 
On an international level, probably not. There are bands that have major success and impact in their own countries, that will be remembered.

Here in Canada, Rush and The Tragically Hip are examples. Both bands are part of the Canadian identity. For many up here, they are as much a symbol of Canada as the maple leaf.

Actually, Rush does a rabid global fan base. Who knows if/how they will be remembered 20-30 years from now.
 
I don't think so personally, but it is possible. When I was a kid in the 80's, trends were much more universally accepted by a large percentage of society. It seemed whatever was popular, most people were in to, be it music or fashion. In 1986, if you went to the mall, there was a similar thing going on looking at the general population.

Today there are so many outlets for media, music, fashion that its all over the place.
 
AC/DC is also pre-1980s. Bon Scott died in 1980.

When I think of cult following of bands, I think of these bands as being "the first" or "one of the first" to do something and get notoriety for it.

In my mind, I believe Nirvana fits this bill really well (although I'm not really a fan anymore).
 
U2 seemed to be on that trajectory...now, I'm not so certain.

(Yes, they likely began just before 1980, but I consider them to be in the general time frame the OP was referencing...)
 
I would put rush up there.. GNR no F'n way ever... but, i thnk you nailed it.. for me it's the beatles and sabbath as the top 2 legends..
 
Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden - all popular and heralded in the 90's grunge era, and being recognized as a genre on its own, will be known for decades.

Now...I can't think of a band starting in the 80's that has met the 'test of time ' yet. Milli Vanilli?
 
I think one of the reason the bands named in the OP have endured is because they were the first, they were pioneers of their time. But they produced many exceptional and epic pieces of music. By the way, other legendary pre -1980s bands in the same league would be Pink Floyd, Deep Purple, Fleetwood Mac, Van Halen, Queen, The Police. Also Sex Pistols probably. Also, Michael Jackson who I'd be amazed if he isn't remembered for the rest of time, just like Elvis.

I can't think of anyone post 1980 other than maybe Oasis.
 
Bon Jovi, Tom Petty...not sure when they started but Bon Jovi is still playing, and Tom Petty had a ton of fans.
 
Loads have spoken about the cultural/economic/tech environment at the time that allowed these acts to reach that mass cult status.

I think we are missing something....

Many died in ww2...it changed the average genetic makeup of the world. By the time the first batch of post ww2 kids got to be teenagers their inherent tastes were different than previous generations by a wider margin.

Add in the well discussed cultural/economic/tech changes and we can see factors leading to acts like the Beatles being so popular.

All of this said, I believe these factors(genetic predisposition, economic, cultural/technology) carried a greater influence than the music itself...but the music certainly was not unimportant just less so than we attribute.

If we see a similar change in factors we might see it....though the form it might take could extend beyond music as tech advances(direct neural stimulation for example).

Truthfully, I hope we never see such a change as the suffering leading to the fertile environment for music was not worth it, imho....but given what man is, I bet it will occur...and the resulting reaction of the following generation will evolve in an attempt to adapt and survive.....prob in the same way- to try and prevent such horror in their future...prob. failing but taking steps forward.

The form of it is the ineffable question.

I'm betting it will be Artificial Intelligence originated....hopefully with pure art as the motivation and not motivated by desire to cognitively program bio-intelligence as a tool for AI....though either/or approaches tend to diminish with increasing IQ.
 
Last edited:
There is another change that drives the answer to this question, and that is the way we relate to music.

Increasingly, music is a background to other pursuits. If you aren't buying physical media and poring over the cover art, reading the liner notes and being deeply immersed in the listening experience then you don't have a deep connection with the music.
 
There is another change that drives the answer to this question, and that is the way we relate to music.

Increasingly, music is a background to other pursuits. If you aren't buying physical media and poring over the cover art, reading the liner notes and being deeply immersed in the listening experience then you don't have a deep connection with the music.


Yes, music has been relegated to accompaniment in many arenas.
 
I think that Prince will likely stand the test of time, particularly given the quality of his music and the outstanding playing on it. Same with Stevie Ray Vaughan.

I also think there are some less popular artists who will as well, such as Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds and The Tragically Hip, based on the strength of their songwriting alone.
 
These are a little more contemporary since their inception have a large following - Madonna, Whitney Houston, NWA, Ice Cube, 2 PAC, Snoop, Dre, Weird Al, Ozzy, Green Day, Nirvana, George Strait, Garth Brooks, Five Finger, Foo Fighters, Tool, Manson, Pearl Jam, NIN, Slayer, Megadeth, and Selena (really large influence on Tejano, and Mexican genre, and even mainstreamed for a while).

Recently Steel Panther (rehashing the arena rock scene) and Ghost has a large international interest.
 
Back
Top