they're about the same, but with classic rock you've got a much higher sample of artists to choose from, and the crap gets filtered out over the years.
It depends. I would say classic rock, but now would you start considering bands like Nirvana, Metallica, Megadeth and Bush kinda classic...at least their good stuff since its like almost 20 years old.
new rock, theres no need to lock your self and not explore new music, i do love my led zeppelin and black sabbath but you gota move on, there are plenty of new bands out there that own.
60s and 70s mostly. So classic, however, there's a lot of 80s, and very few early 90s stuff as well. Of course, 10 years from now, that will probably be considered classic.
I like both it only seems like the old times were full of a higher amount of great bands because all the crap has been filtered out so only the great is left.
classic rock is a genre in itself. I don't know what new "rock" is though. Would the fratellis or arctic monkeys be considered "new rock". If they are then I would say classic rock is better. But these new bands still have a whole lot of charm, and are fun to listen to.
I dig both. I think I'll lean more on modern Rock, if only because of the new ideas and styles surfacing. The issue I often have with Classic Rock, is that although it was all original when it came out, now it tends to sound all rather cliche to me, with obvious exceptions like earlyKing Crimson. Because I never grew up hearing it as it came out, I'm getting into modern and classic music at once. So I tend to perceive many original ideas as cliches. If that makes any sense.
Log in to comment