wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Jeffrey from East Elmhurst April 28, 2008 - 11:33AM

  Elvis Presley's first album

  Bob Dylan-The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan

  Bob Dylan-Highway '61 Revisited

  The Beatles-Meet The Beatles

  The Beatles-Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band

  The Velvet Underground with Nico

  The Band-Music From Big Pink

  The Band-The Band

  Bruce Springsteen-Born To Run

  Marvin Gaye-What's Going On?

  
  
• [2] Soundcheck producer from WNYC April 28, 2008 - 01:27PM

  Props to Jeffrey for the awesome list of most important albums in rock history. But hang on ... sharp left turn! We've changed today's web question. Hit us back with your answers to: "Does rock 'n' roll music still matter today?"

  
  
• [3] Jeffrey Slott from East Elmhurst April 28, 2008 - 01:52PM

  It still matters to me because I still enjoy listening to it.

  I just wonder whether the category "rock-and-roll" itself still matters.

  
  
• [4] Paul from Joisey April 28, 2008 - 01:59PM

  I live and breathe rock and roll. Much as I keep on coming back to the first records by The Clash and The Gang Of Four, Highway 61 Revisited, Let It Be (you decide which one!), and the VU, I don't know if it still "matters" in the way it used to. While I find records such as these to be life-affirming/changing experiences, younger generations have too many distractions to find r'n'r to be anything more than something to fill up the iPod with. If they ever got to hear "White Riot" today, they'd download it alone, and miss out on "Career Opportunities," for example. Too many pop-punk bands have watered down the formula, and not enough people are going to experience the untainted source material of say, "Funhouse." And I don't even know where to start with The Stooges honoring Madonna at the Hall of Fame, to laugh or to cry.

  
  
• [5] Dr. Feelgood from Joisy April 28, 2008 - 02:04PM

  Rock still exists in many forms, of course, but the mass media mostly focuses squarely on packaged teen pop stars and slick R&B and rap. That's what you'll hear on American Idol and that's what brings in the widest range of fans. Unfortunately, it also tends to be the lowest common denominator in terms of quality and innovation.

  Rock isn't dead but it's much more peripheral to the mainstream.

  
  
• [6] Galen H. Brown from Manhattan April 28, 2008 - 02:11PM

  Talking about "elevating popular culture" to the level of the official "High Culture" starts from the false premise that "High Culture" is somehow inherently superior.

  
  
• [7] Joe from NYC April 28, 2008 - 02:12PM

  Rock is in a sorry state. Most young acts don't have enough of a sense of history. It's not their fault, they have to actually do research. The fragmentation of mass media doesn't help either.

  
  
• [8] Brett from Long Island City April 28, 2008 - 05:34PM

  Today’s Rock n’ Roll is absolutely a relevant art form. In fact, I’m eager to see how the way we listen to music and find new bands adjusts with the new technology and mediums to come. There are several contemporary bands, while not multi millionaires, that have huge followings, sell out shows, and are coming up with incredibly creative and innovative sounds. I think we need to begin to change our definition of “success” in terms of rock bands. It’s very difficult to me to compare them with the teen/pop/r&b stars previous posters mentioned, as their product is so commercial, generic, and dull. It’s like comparing apples and hammers. Just look at the works of Wilco, The Decemberists, Okkervil River – just to name a few, who challenge us and stretch the form towards new boundaries.