Tweet
Another of todays critics finally "gets" it!
WHAT WOULD DAVID LEE ROTH DO?
The current crop of rock bands is missing outrageous, shock-inducing front men
JOHN INTINI
While watching the VH1 countdown of the 100 Greatest Shocking Moments in Rock & Roll for the tenth time, it hit me. Somewhere between the stories of David Lee Roth offering roadies cash in exchange for groupies (No. 40) and Ozzy Osbourne biting the head off a dove (No. 18), I realized how bland and faceless the current crop of lead singers is in comparison to those of the past.
Nearly every band breaking in these days lacks personality -- something that was never said about U2, Kiss or Oasis during their infancy. For starters, try to name the lead singer of any of the cookie-cutter groups currently on the charts -- Modest Mouse, Keane, Franz Ferdinand or the Killers. Can't do it? Not surprising, since the closest we have to a burgeoning rock god in this post-boy-band era is Chris Martin. And he's more famous for being Mr. Gwyneth Paltrow, and giving his kid a silly name (Apple), than being Coldplay's lead singer.
Newer Canadian bands aren't any different. Except for Deryck Whibley of SUM 41 and Sam Roberts, it's a pretty anonymous lot. Just consider these Juno nominees: Billy Talent, Finger Eleven, Alexisonfire and the Trews. I hate to say it, but when it comes to personalities, there's barely a Matthew Good in the bunch.
Since radio leans toward safe pop (Barenaked Ladies and Maroon 5) and record labels seem more interested in developing solo artists (Norah Jones and Usher), it's becoming harder for rock bands -- never mind front men -- to make a lasting impression. And the emphasis on finding the flavour of the month doesn't help. "A buzz band today won't be a buzz band in three months," says Larry LeBlanc, Billboard magazine's Canadian bureau chief. "That wasn't the case -- even during Nirvana days. Back then, buzz bands lasted at least a year, which was long enough for front men to stick out."
Print Story | Email Story | Subscribe Now!
March 18, 2005
What would David Lee Roth do?
The current crop of rock bands is missing outrageous, shock-inducing front men
JOHN INTINI
While watching the VH1 countdown of the 100 Greatest Shocking Moments in Rock & Roll for the tenth time, it hit me. Somewhere between the stories of David Lee Roth offering roadies cash in exchange for groupies (No. 40) and Ozzy Osbourne biting the head off a dove (No. 18), I realized how bland and faceless the current crop of lead singers is in comparison to those of the past.
Nearly every band breaking in these days lacks personality -- something that was never said about U2, Kiss or Oasis during their infancy. For starters, try to name the lead singer of any of the cookie-cutter groups currently on the charts -- Modest Mouse, Keane, Franz Ferdinand or the Killers. Can't do it? Not surprising, since the closest we have to a burgeoning rock god in this post-boy-band era is Chris Martin. And he's more famous for being Mr. Gwyneth Paltrow, and giving his kid a silly name (Apple), than being Coldplay's lead singer.
Newer Canadian bands aren't any different. Except for Deryck Whibley of SUM 41 and Sam Roberts, it's a pretty anonymous lot. Just consider these Juno nominees: Billy Talent, Finger Eleven, Alexisonfire and the Trews. I hate to say it, but when it comes to personalities, there's barely a Matthew Good in the bunch.
Since radio leans toward safe pop (Barenaked Ladies and Maroon 5) and record labels seem more interested in developing solo artists (Norah Jones and Usher), it's becoming harder for rock bands -- never mind front men -- to make a lasting impression. And the emphasis on finding the flavour of the month doesn't help. "A buzz band today won't be a buzz band in three months," says Larry LeBlanc, Billboard magazine's Canadian bureau chief. "That wasn't the case -- even during Nirvana days. Back then, buzz bands lasted at least a year, which was long enough for front men to stick out."
The boy-band craze of the mid-'90s is also partly to blame. During the Backstreet Boys and 'N Sync era, record label executives' greatest priority was putting together a roster of cute guys to drive teen girls crazy. Style won out over substance. To some extent, that formula still exists, making it hard for the next Kurt Cobain to break through.
So in a few years, when the final dozen or so legends -- including Bono, Anthony Kiedis, Eddie Vedder and Michael Stipe -- finally head to the old-age home in Cleveland (a.k.a. the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame), there's going to be a major shortage of interesting front men. Foreseeing this vast emptiness, reality TV guru Mark Burnett is stepping up. The winner of his new show, Rock Star, will take over as lead singer of INXS -- replacing Michael Hutchence, who killed himself in 1997. Burnett's desperate attempt to exploit the situation is shocking -- but it wouldn't even make the Top 100.
To comment, email john.intini@macleans.rogers.com
WHAT WOULD DAVID LEE ROTH DO?
The current crop of rock bands is missing outrageous, shock-inducing front men
JOHN INTINI
While watching the VH1 countdown of the 100 Greatest Shocking Moments in Rock & Roll for the tenth time, it hit me. Somewhere between the stories of David Lee Roth offering roadies cash in exchange for groupies (No. 40) and Ozzy Osbourne biting the head off a dove (No. 18), I realized how bland and faceless the current crop of lead singers is in comparison to those of the past.
Nearly every band breaking in these days lacks personality -- something that was never said about U2, Kiss or Oasis during their infancy. For starters, try to name the lead singer of any of the cookie-cutter groups currently on the charts -- Modest Mouse, Keane, Franz Ferdinand or the Killers. Can't do it? Not surprising, since the closest we have to a burgeoning rock god in this post-boy-band era is Chris Martin. And he's more famous for being Mr. Gwyneth Paltrow, and giving his kid a silly name (Apple), than being Coldplay's lead singer.
Newer Canadian bands aren't any different. Except for Deryck Whibley of SUM 41 and Sam Roberts, it's a pretty anonymous lot. Just consider these Juno nominees: Billy Talent, Finger Eleven, Alexisonfire and the Trews. I hate to say it, but when it comes to personalities, there's barely a Matthew Good in the bunch.
Since radio leans toward safe pop (Barenaked Ladies and Maroon 5) and record labels seem more interested in developing solo artists (Norah Jones and Usher), it's becoming harder for rock bands -- never mind front men -- to make a lasting impression. And the emphasis on finding the flavour of the month doesn't help. "A buzz band today won't be a buzz band in three months," says Larry LeBlanc, Billboard magazine's Canadian bureau chief. "That wasn't the case -- even during Nirvana days. Back then, buzz bands lasted at least a year, which was long enough for front men to stick out."
Print Story | Email Story | Subscribe Now!
March 18, 2005
What would David Lee Roth do?
The current crop of rock bands is missing outrageous, shock-inducing front men
JOHN INTINI
While watching the VH1 countdown of the 100 Greatest Shocking Moments in Rock & Roll for the tenth time, it hit me. Somewhere between the stories of David Lee Roth offering roadies cash in exchange for groupies (No. 40) and Ozzy Osbourne biting the head off a dove (No. 18), I realized how bland and faceless the current crop of lead singers is in comparison to those of the past.
Nearly every band breaking in these days lacks personality -- something that was never said about U2, Kiss or Oasis during their infancy. For starters, try to name the lead singer of any of the cookie-cutter groups currently on the charts -- Modest Mouse, Keane, Franz Ferdinand or the Killers. Can't do it? Not surprising, since the closest we have to a burgeoning rock god in this post-boy-band era is Chris Martin. And he's more famous for being Mr. Gwyneth Paltrow, and giving his kid a silly name (Apple), than being Coldplay's lead singer.
Newer Canadian bands aren't any different. Except for Deryck Whibley of SUM 41 and Sam Roberts, it's a pretty anonymous lot. Just consider these Juno nominees: Billy Talent, Finger Eleven, Alexisonfire and the Trews. I hate to say it, but when it comes to personalities, there's barely a Matthew Good in the bunch.
Since radio leans toward safe pop (Barenaked Ladies and Maroon 5) and record labels seem more interested in developing solo artists (Norah Jones and Usher), it's becoming harder for rock bands -- never mind front men -- to make a lasting impression. And the emphasis on finding the flavour of the month doesn't help. "A buzz band today won't be a buzz band in three months," says Larry LeBlanc, Billboard magazine's Canadian bureau chief. "That wasn't the case -- even during Nirvana days. Back then, buzz bands lasted at least a year, which was long enough for front men to stick out."
The boy-band craze of the mid-'90s is also partly to blame. During the Backstreet Boys and 'N Sync era, record label executives' greatest priority was putting together a roster of cute guys to drive teen girls crazy. Style won out over substance. To some extent, that formula still exists, making it hard for the next Kurt Cobain to break through.
So in a few years, when the final dozen or so legends -- including Bono, Anthony Kiedis, Eddie Vedder and Michael Stipe -- finally head to the old-age home in Cleveland (a.k.a. the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame), there's going to be a major shortage of interesting front men. Foreseeing this vast emptiness, reality TV guru Mark Burnett is stepping up. The winner of his new show, Rock Star, will take over as lead singer of INXS -- replacing Michael Hutchence, who killed himself in 1997. Burnett's desperate attempt to exploit the situation is shocking -- but it wouldn't even make the Top 100.
To comment, email john.intini@macleans.rogers.com
Comment