Is the (Traditional) Rock Band Dead?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


mojo-photo-noage.jpgNouns, the new album from the Los Angeles-based No Age (left), is fast becoming one of the most acclaimed albums of the year, with high marks from Pitchfork and NME. The album’s sound, as Pitchfork put it, is “cacophonous” and “gorgeously thick,” punk rock with a swirling, tone-bending My Bloody Valentine sheen. What might surprise you is that the band is actually a duo: just two guys, Randy Randall and Dean Spunt, playing guitar and drums respectively, their sound filled out by loops and samples. Lately, this seems more and more common: most of the interesting developments in rock music are coming from “non-traditional” band lineups. Is the good old rock four-piece an endangered species?

After the jump: I still haven’t found the U2 I’m looking for… but I do have a No Age mp3!

Bands seem to be both shrinking and expanding. The rock duo is turning out to be one of the trends of the new millennium, whether it’s bassless wonders like the White Stripes or the Kills or thudding bass-driven experimentalists like Death From Above 1979. Then there are the lone wolves, like PJ Harvey, off in her own world, and Bright Eyes’ Conor Oberst, too much personality for just one band. Probably the leading hard-rock combo of the last ten years, Queens of the Stone Age, is essentially a solo project, with rotating “session musicians” backing up Josh Homme (some of whom just happen to be really famous). On the other end of the tour bus, Arcade Fire’s Wikipedia page lists seven current and six former members, and New Pornographers count as many as eight. So, where have all the U2s gone?

Examining the Village Voice 2007 Pazz & Jop Poll 2007, the top 40 Best Albums list includes the following groups who could be considered “rock bands,” more or less: Radiohead, Arcade Fire, Spoon, The National, Wilco, The White Stripes, Battles, The Shins, Against Me!, Band of Horses, Deerhunter, Grinderman, Okkervil River, and Rilo Kiley. Okay, that’s actually more than I expected, but let’s take a closer look. Out of those 14 bands, eight are groups of four or five (discounting Wilco and Okkervil River because of their goofy rotating memberships, and Grinderman because it’s got Nick Cave in it). Of those, Battles makes freakish prog jams in 6/8 time, Rilo Kiley just made an strange, funky album inspired by “’70s L.A. coke-rock” (as Wikipedia puts it), and Deerhunter and Okkervil River are so quirky, they’re almost not even rock any more. So, that leaves us with Radiohead, Spoon, The National and Against Me!, four combos who are apparently leading the traditional rock band pack. All quite good, don’t get me wrong, but is that all there is?

Clearly I’m defining “rock” in pretty strict terms here to prove a point, but still, the rock band seems to be in a state of reinvention: take away as much as you can like No Age, or just bring everybody up on stage like Arcade Fire. Otherwise, you’re just, I dunno, Seether. So, Riffers, is the rock band just in a rough patch, or are we truly in an era of reinvention, watching the old forms die out? Either way, don’t miss out on the new forms: No Age’s Nouns is out now on Sub Pop.

MP3: No Age – “Eraser”

No Age – “Eraser” (Live):

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate