Avril Lavigne - Why do people call her music "Rock?"

[esb9588]

I usually don't care about what Genre an artist falls into, but lately, I've become puzzled as to the reasons why Avril Lavigne's music is classified as "Rock" or "Punk." I was shocked when I learned that she was nominated for best hard rock performance at the Grammys. Sure she can dress all "tough" and "punkish" in her videos, but this doesn't mean her music is that way. I have a hard time classifying her music as anything other than pop. And for everyone's information, she does not write her own music as some people say she does. She co-writes it. That is, the songs are basicly written for her and she is allowed to tweek the lyrics if she wants to. I also find it rather unnecessary for her to pose with an instrament and never play it.

I have nothing against pop music and I even enjoy some of it so I'm not trying to start a typical "Pop music sucks" thread. I'm just trying to understand why people are praising this artist and then condemning all other pop artists as "Fake" or "Tallentless."

[SalsaVibe]

Originally posted by esb9588

I'm just trying to understand why people are praising this artist and then condemning all other pop artists as "Fake" or "Tallentless."


Some people like her... She has some hits and her records sales are respectable... That is why she gets praises...

I agree she is a POP artist but a pop artist who plays rock/punk music... doesn't matter who writes the song, thats a moot point... its still rock or pop rock music if you will :)

[esb9588]

First of all, simply selling records and having hits are no reason for an artist to be highly regarded. Artists like Britney Spears and J-LO have had a huge amount of success but have still been bashed by many critics and adults. However, I now see these same people treating Avril as if she is the greatest artist of our day. Look at the grammy nominees. She was nominated for more grammys than any artist except Nora Jones. There was no reason for this. She is nothing special and certainly doesn't deserve all this aclaim.

[SalsaVibe]

I bet if you sat down with J-Blo and Spears and ask...

"are you successful?" I'd bet they say yes...

Look there are TONS of talented musicians..... but success is equated to MONEY....

high album sale=success

success=$$$$$$$$$$

Spears-Pop
Alguileraaaa=pop
Pink=popish
Jones=popish

Most young white female (*excluding Aqualera) Pop stars are more pop ....

Avril is a young female Rocker who is underrepresented so she stands out -=-=which is why she gets the high aclaim...

[ipodtodd]

I don't call Avril's music rock or punk, normally I use a different four letter word . . .

[esb9588]

Originally posted by SalsaVibe
I bet if you sat down with J-Blo and Spears and ask...

"are you successful?" I'd bet they say yes...

Look there are TONS of talented musicians..... but success is equated to MONEY....

high album sale=success

success=$$$$$$$$$$

I did not post this in order to get into a debate about those artists. Regardless of what you may think of them, you can not deny the fact that they are successfull.


Spears-Pop
Alguileraaaa=pop
Pink=popish
Jones=popish

Most young white female (*excluding Aqualera) Pop stars are more pop ....

Avril is a young female Rocker who is underrepresented so she stands out -=-=which is why she gets the high aclaim...

Again, you fail to explain your point. How do you call "Complicated" a rock song. It is a pop song. You will never hear it on my local Alternative Rock radio station.

[SalsaVibe]

Originally posted by esb9588
Again, you fail to explain your point. How do you call "Complicated" a rock song. It is a pop song. You will never hear it on my local Alternative Rock radio station.


You probably wouldn't hear Avril in your local Alternative riock station because she is a Pop/Rock artist....

I am not familiar with the song complicated... I passively see her videos and I am somewhat familiar with her so called "hit" Skater Boy.


Let me go back to the beginning...Your thread title is "why do people call her music "rock"..

well I will tell you why I call it Rock... It looks like Rock to me.... Judging by the fashion and language style, Sounds like rock to me.. so I call it rock... or to nit pick.. Pop Rock...

IN contrast lets take Britteny Spears... She is pure POP compared to Avril that has more of a rock type edge.....

Now is it good rock or real rock?..that a different debate....

[NiTRO]

It's all about marketing and posturing. The labels are presenting Avril as rock/punk artist and songwriter in hopes that it will get her some credibility because we all know what a difficult time pure pop artists have achieving that. They were ultimately trying to go down the same road that Alanis Morrissette traveled on her first album. She was hailed as a singer/songwriter with a legitimate edge and it worked as she crossed over from pop to rock to alt-rock radio stations and ultimately sold umpteen million albums before it was all said and done. What the labels fail to realize is that Alanis has real talent as a singer AND as a song writer and I'm not even a fan but that's just a fact.

Unfortunately for Avril you have to call a spade a spade and she is a pop artist with very little real edge to her or her music. The public just isn't buying the punk girl marketing ploy. At the same time, at least on this album, Avril and her label are laughing their way to the bank because the record is a pop success. Her music isn't anywhere near my alley but what I've heard is indeed hooky and I can understand why teen girls might dig it.

[esb9588]

Originally posted by SalsaVibe
You probably wouldn't hear Avril in your local Alternative riock station because she is a Pop/Rock artist....

There are other Pop/Rock artists such as Eve 6, Blink 182, and Puddle of Mudd who have had songs on both the rock and pop radio stations.

well I will tell you why I call it Rock... It looks like Rock to me.... Judging by the fashion and language style, Sounds like rock to me.. so I call it
rock... or to nit pick.. Pop Rock...

Just because she dresses "Tough" or "Punkish" in her videos doesn't change the style of music. It's Pop. Simply sticking a guitar in one of her songs doesn't majicly turn it into Rock. Go download "Complicated" (and delete it once you've listened to it). It is not Rock. It isn't even Pop Rock. It is pure Pop. Again, I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing. It's catchy and I can certainly understand why so many people like it. However, I find this whole idea of marketing her as a "Punkgirl" laughable.

[stasyna]

She's defined a whole new genre for herself: SUCK.

Her music is so ripped off, it sounds way too copied. She does plenty of covers, so she obviously has little talent. Her image is horrible, the whole punk look has been dead for a decade, give it up.

She appeals to these punk-like kids who eat up her songs because she sings about issues surrounding herself.

btw, the proper genre is "pop-punk". Another make believe style of music like nu-metal.

I may be a little over the edge with my comments, but I prefer artists who are fresh, original and have talent. She posses none of these qualities.

[SalsaVibe]

Originally posted by esb9588
However, I find this whole idea of marketing her as a "Punkgirl" laughable.


I completely agree.....

[reorx24]

sk8er boi? Wow, that REALLY ranks up there with London Calling and Anarchy In the UK.

And to call her music punk-pop is to do a HUGE disservice to talented bands like Greenday, Blink 182, MEST, Good Charlotte, etc.

She's pop, pathetically posing as a "punk". Maybe to the pre-pubescent set she's "edgy" and "dark", but to those who know better, shes just another pop poseur. When will these record exec learn that the REAL music fans see through everything tat theyre doin?

[ipodtodd]

Originally posted by reorx24
sk8er boi? Wow, that REALLY ranks up there with London Calling and Anarchy In the UK.

And to call her music punk-pop is to do a HUGE disservice to talented bands like Greenday, Blink 182, MEST, Good Charlotte, etc.

She's pop, pathetically posing as a "punk". Maybe to the pre-pubescent set she's "edgy" and "dark", but to those who know better, shes just another pop poseur. When will these record exec learn that the REAL music fans see through everything tat theyre doin?

Well said, except for one glaring typo: You accidentally put the word talented in the same sentence as Blink 182 and Good Charlotte. Other than that I totally agree with what you said about Avril.

[caterinka]

Originally posted by reorx24
And to call her music punk-pop is to do a HUGE disservice to talented bands like Greenday, Blink 182, MEST, Good Charlotte, etc.


If you're going to talk semantics here, I wouldn't qualify any of those bands as punk either. For those of us who were raised when punk began (yes, I'm nearly 40!), punk is The Sex Pistols, The Clash, Patti Smith Group and other artists seminal in the origination of the punk genre pre-1980.

My point here is that "rock" and "punk" and other terms are in the eye of the beholder. These classifications are extremely broad, and we prefer to keep discussions trashing anyone else's taste in music away from these boards. Any questions? :)

[NiTRO]

he actually called blink 182, etc... punk-pop. But, you are right. Blink 182, Good Charlotte, and friends definitely aren't punk.

Gimme some Stiff Little Fingers!!!

[reorx24]

I never said Blink-182 were punk in the Sex Pistols sense of the genre, i said they were part of a new genre called punk-pop also known as punk-lite, quasi-punk, the diet coke of punk....the only punk thing abut them are the 2 chord songs they play. I was already around during the punk era, and have listened to my share of the above mentioned punk pioneers plus Black Flag, The Germs, Dead Kennedys, etc., so i know what real punk is.

As for Avril, i never really bashed her. I just said that labelling her as"punk" when she is most definitely not is just plain pathetic. But as for rock being in the eye of the beholder, truer words were never spoken. In VH1's 100 best rock albums, they have Tina Turner, Michael Jackson, Stevie Wonder, Miles Davis, and Madonna there..definitely streching the boundaries of "rock" as we know it.

[carlin]

she has no talent, she is the one of many reasons why music has evolved into another marketing technique instead of a a creative output. She tries to appeal to these little angry kids who think they are different cause they were army camouflauge and dress like crap to say that they dont care what they look like. When in reality, they care just as much as the average "brad" who dresses like one of those models in the abercrombie catalogs. I see these kids all day at school, and its amazing how pathetic they are and how they will jump at anything. I have seen this *cough*artist perform live, and she sucks, she is all made up with make up and she is just terrible...plain and simple. Her music is marketing pop, nothing else...nothing more. She saw the chance to make a new music genre from all the other pop women out there...to be "different". I am sorry to all the avril fans out there...not because I am bashing her...but because she stole $15 of your money with her ridiculous cd. I hope pop flops out, and music once again turns into something special. At this rate, we are gonna have artists that are gonna have other people sing for them, and then say they sung it...its pathetic...and i am going to go listen to some u2, zeppelin, and other older bands that actually have talent...

Wow, I need to breathe and go take a xanax...

[Jackonicko]

'Sk8r Boi' (while poorly spelled) rocked. 'Complicated' sounded more like an Alanis Morissette song, but was no less 'rock' than any slow track or ballad by Aerosmith, the Stones, or whoever, and her music does have a bit more energy and edge than a lot of US AOR - the Eagles, Steely Dan, Bon Jovi, etc.

Her music is popular, and cleverly marketed, but it does seem more like 'rock' than the music of people like Aguilera, Pink, Spears, Minogue et al, which is 'pure pop'.

Rock's a pretty broad term, encompassing everyone from Bryan Adams to ZZ Top. It's not heavy rock or hard rock, but I think it is soft rock.

I don't quite understand why it matters, however.

[esb9588]

As for why it matters, I guess I really posted this in response to a recommendation in one of my other threads, as one person recommended Avril along with bands like Staind, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Puddle of Mudd and the like. As I have stated before, I wasn't intending to trash anyone's musical taste, as I can completely understand why some people like her music. I just wouldn't put her in the same catigory as any of the bands mentioned abuv. However, this thread has proven that trying to define music into genres will only cause trouble.

Sorry if I offended anyone.

[geistwerks]

call her rock all you want (even though she isn't). anyone who calls her punk needs to seriously sit down and listen to the clash, some dead kennedys, minor threat, fugazi, etc. there's a large amount of people (myself included) who are extremely displeased with avril lavigne being represented as a "punk" artist, when real punk clearly stands against everything she is. if the world needs a reigning princess of punk, then that chick from the distillers will suffice.

this is an example of really bad marketing. it's a shame that punk really is dead now. it became marketable.

even dropkick murphys can't keep this corpse alive.

[geistwerks]

i guess i am too farking old. most of the bands people are listing in this forum as being talented are, imo, complete garbage. "alternative" and "heavy" rock is about as disgusting and talentless as avril, the only exceptions being tool or deftones (whom i like). puddle of mudd, linkin park, etc. is NOTHING but corporate music. linkin park, for example, changed their name a few times, one incarnation was lincoln park. their record label made them change it to linkin park for one reason only; limp bizkit was very popular at the time. their albums were free of explicit lyrics, hence all the little kids who couldn't get a limp album could get a linkin album. thus they sold really well, because teenagers don't know beans about good music.

the best judges of music? people who have listened to just about anything and everything or little children (younger than 10 and NOT exposed to MTV). i play my iPod in the store i work and a lot of kids will stop by and stare at the speakers for a few seconds in awe, or dance about. one little boy even was listening to funkstorung and bobbing his head while his mom looked at the speakers like they were on fire. i laughed really hard about that one.

then again, i've seen some soccer moms come in and LOVE dom & roland (go figure, i would never see that one coming).

darn, i rambled a bit, didn't i?

[stonersmurf22]

OK, I think sometimes people really need to show some of tha younger music listeners a little more respect. We dont all listen to "disgusting and talentless" music. Of course, I am 14, and happen to like Linkin Park and Disturbed and many other new rock musicians, but that doesn't mean I haven't heard the older music. I've heard LOTS of older rock music, seeing as my dad listened to it all the time. I never really cared for it, but does that automatically mean that I "don't know beans about music"? All I'm saying is that just because you don't like modern music doesn't mean you should mock it and it's listeners.

QUICKLY jumps back to the original subject, Avril is pop. See, Simple? If you want to hear a good rock band with a female vocalist, buy Evanescence. Awesome. The radio may have killed "bring me to life"(think thats the name) and might just do the same to "going under", but the cd is a good change of pace if you like most newer music.

[wolfpacker]

OK, I just listened to a few Avril songs. She is clearly rock. Rock is a
BIG genre guys. Sure she is poppy, but so were the early Beatles and
Beach Boys. The chords, the drums, the style of singing are all clearly
rock.

[NiTRO]

Real punk rock is long dead. Once it was exposed to the masses years ago, it died. Who cares? Nowadays, generes are all so splintered, it's all just music anyway. Bottom line, listen to what you like. There will however, always be punk individuals who are uncompromising people who live life on their terms and rise up against authority. That IS punk and that will never die.

I listen to all types of music: Fugazi, The Replacements, Stiff Little Fingers, The Music, Tool, The Stones, Roxy Music, Coldplay, Billie Holiday, The Mars Volta, James Taylor, Sublime, Pink Floyd, Pixies, Aphex Twin, Ride, Bauhaus, T-Rex, Seaweed, Jurassic 5, Flaming Lips, Dismemberment Plan, Thievary Corp., Led Zeppelin, Iggy Pop, Curve, Bad Religioin, AC/DC, etc... I'm a HUGE music fan!

At the same time, as much as I don't enjoy the music of Avril, Linkin Park, Disturbed, Limp, Creed, Puddle of Mudd and many other bands who have been labeled "corporate", I think that's a misplaced and irrelevant term for the most part. Maybe an act like N'Sync who were hand picked and put together by a producer could be truly called corporate. But if you're labeling Puddle of Mudd corporate, then, the second The Clash signed on the dotted line with Epic, they became corporate too. At the polar opposite is a band like Fugazi but even Fugazi can be found in Tower Records and on Amazon.com. Dischord is one of the coolest labels ever but is still ultimately distributing to very large corporations. Again, who cares?

My point? ANY band that signs any record deal with a major label is in the game marketing themselves and being represented by a huge corporation. Avril? Yes. Tool? Yes. Green Day? Yes. Sex Pistols? Yes. The Clash?.......YES. Why? TO SELL RECORDS, MAKE MONEY!!!

If you're going to blame somebody, blame the corporations who own the labels and radio stations. They're the evil ones here not the bands. I can't stand Creed but do I blame them for signing on the dotted line? No way. And, their fans seem to love them. Are they talentless? To me? Absolutely. To others, obviously not. The mass market buys what they hear on the radio and there are literally 5 coorporations who own nearly all of the commercial stations in the country. If the radio plays Creed, the mass market goes out and buys Creed. If At the same time what you and I may see as garbage, the mass market might love with a passion. If the record doesn't sell or stops selling they move on and start pushing the next big thing.

Avril Lavigne is just a little girl singer from Canada that signed a deal and is being packaged the way her label wants her to appear and kids are eating it up. She is the current big thing. She 'aint my cup o' tea and we all know she isn't punk but who cares if the 12 yr olds think she is? She'll be done in a couple of years at the most anyway.

[Jackonicko]

She'll be done in a couple of years?

Maybe so, but not if she can repeat complicated (Alanis watch out) and Sk8r Boi (The Hives for pubescent boys?).

[esb9588]

"Complicated" could have been recorded by any of today's female pop artists. If not for Avril's dressing "Punkish" in the video it would have been taken as just another pop song. There is nothing original about it.

[wolfpacker]

Just because it isn't original and is pop doesn't mean it isn't rock.
Lot's of rock crosses over to pop. Listen to 4 or 5 songs and tell
me honestly that the album isn't rock. Pay attention to the
chords, the drums, etc.

[esb9588]

Whatever you want to call it, you will never hear it on an alternative rock radio station and it doesn't belong in the same category as most of the other stuff I listen to (Staind, Puddle of Mudd, Linkin Park...).

I remember a comercial for a Metallica tribute show on MTV and Avril was supposed to perform. It made me laugh.

[wolfpacker]

It is rock, pure and simple. Not alternative rock, not hard rock, but it is
rock. So were the Beatles, dude. Not everyone has such a limited concept
of music as Staind and Linkin Park. Thankfully. I find those bands as
derivative and corporate, if not more so, than Avril to tell the truth.

[esb9588]

Fine. I'll go and rename this thread "Avril Lavigne: Why do people call her music Hard Rock?" if that will make you happy. If she's rock then so are the Backstreet Boys.

You are totally missing the point. I'm sorry if the language I used wasn't 100% correct and that you had to start a flame war because of it. The terms "Rock" and "Pop" are used differently today then they were in the 1960's.

Actually I do listen to quite a bit of music besides Staind and Linkin Park. I listen to classic rock (Beatles, Floyd, Zeppelin, Aerosmith...) when my parents want to listen to music. I also listen to hip-hop (Eminem, 50 Cent, Ludacris...) when I'm in the mood for it. I like some songs that you might consider "Grunge" like Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit." Just because someone has different tastes than you doesn't mean you need to flame them or make up stuff about them just to make yourself feel better. If you were half as mature as you're pretending to be, you would understand.

[wolfpacker]

OK, here is your earlier post:

"Complicated" could have been recorded by any of today's female pop artists. If not for Avril's dressing "Punkish" in the video it would have been taken as just another pop song. There is nothing original about it.

I can hear a clear difference between Avril and, say, Britney or Beyonce or Christina. But I've listened to a LOT of music. Whereas I can't even tolerate the others, I can at least tolerate her music. You are right when you say "There is nothing original about it", but I suppose packaging it in a 16 year old (or whatever she is) package is new and different. But then you go on to compare to Staind. There is nothing original about these guys either. Not that they are bad or anything. She has her target audience, as do Staind. They are both pretty mainstream rock in my opinion. Staind has a harder edge and is played on "alternative rock" stations, but there is NOTHING alternative about them.

There was a time when "alternative rock" really meant something. Nirvana was Alternative. But all the bands that popped up in the wake to
make the record companies a quick buck kinda watered down the term. Stone Temple Pilots, for example. These guys are a mainstream hard rock band. There is nothing alternative about them. Doesn't make 'em bad. They tried to rock it up. But they didn't push the bounds of music, by ANY means. Staind, and Avril, are in this same category IMO.

Not trying to flame you. Well, no more that you try to "flame" anyone that listens to Avril. From my standpoint, they aren't so different. I certainly see more overlap between their audiences than I see in, say, the audience for Backstreet Boys and the audience for Staind.

[esb9588]

From my original message:

I have nothing against pop music and I even enjoy some of it so I'm not trying to start a typical "Pop music sucks" thread. I'm just trying to understand
why people are praising this artist and then condemning all other pop artists as "Fake" or "Tallentless."

I am not trying to "Flame" anyone who likes avril. As I stated previously, I had posted this thread in response to a recommendation in another thread where someone recommended her music in adition to bands like Staind, 3 Doors Down and the like. This recommendation was surprising.

Your quote from me was in response to another post where the author stated that Avril would not be dead in a couple of years if she could make another "Complicated." Other teen pop artists have tried using the same formula over and over but have diminished in popularity because of new artists. It was not meant to imply that bands like Linkin Park and Limp Bizkit are highly original in any way.

Again, I'm sorry if my categorization isn't equivalent to yours. Most of the music I listened to is played on "Alternative" radio stations, so that's what I call it. It's just a genre name. I could say "Hard Rock" or "Mainstream Rock," if I wanted to.

[Riceboi]

talkin bout J.Ho within this discussion...she would be even richer if she got payed for every guy she was with...definately more money then what Gigli got.

[Jackonicko]

Riceboi,

I'm not renowned for my moderate language or tone, but there are ladies and children present. Could you please moderate your puerile signature. The first two lines are simply childish and unamusing. The second two are unnecessarily offensive. And still childish and unfunny.

[Riceboi]

Jackonicko,

I'm not renowned for my moderate language or tone, but there always seems to be someone willing to complain. I hope that you are old enough to realize that I am in no means intentionally offending anybody, but then I must face the fact that there are some people who whine over petty problems. I hope this fits your needs better. By the way, I believe your biography of being a dull person is surprisingly accurate--no offense really--just a mere observation as you have done yourself. Please next time if you feel something is offensive try sending me a direct message so I don't hurt your poor eyes any longer than necessary. To the women and children whom eyes I have already blinded, how can I describe my sorrows.

My most sincere regards and apologies,
Stephen

[Jackonicko]

Thanks for changing it. And with such good grace......

There's probably always 'someone willing to complain' because your language is unacceptable and your attitude offensive. Moreover to object to your unfunny scatalogical and sexual 'jokes' on a public bulletin board is just common sense and decency, NOT pettiness.

Re: your request for me to correct you privately. Post offensive rubbish in public, get slapped down in public.

I'm ancient and dull. That's not something I'd wish on you, but you should perhaps try to grow up just a tad.

[Riceboi]

I'm very sorry for dissapointing you, but with all goodness, you have only managed to create somewhat of a commotion. At least you do admit of being a person with an obvious stick in the rear end. Oh was that too offensive yet again? My apologies in advance. Don't get me wrong because your age must be getting hold of your reading comprehension, but I do not least bit care if someone tells me to change something or nevertheless proves me wrong--as this has already happened on this forum before. However if you realize the word sarcasm has any meaning, that would very much help you, not me. Yet I will simply move on with this posting because as you have openly admitted you are an ancient dull hag who has--in this matter--grown too old by a "tad." I do hope that no one ever offends you in such manner ever again, but then not everybody lives their life to fulfill your needs. Nevertheless I expect common sense to be an innate characteristic, especially for someone of such "noble" age. I must come to admit that what I have typed right now is the "rubbish" you so amiably talk about. Merely because I have deteriorated to your level of seeking self-satisfaction. This is my last posting, there need no more from myself, since we can both conclude that time is much more valuable than a silly dillema. On the otherhand your future responses shall be more than generously accepted with a laugh or two, because frankly, I do not argue and it is in best interest that I hope you can coincide on this matter.

[NiTRO]

What a courteous & intelligent little squabble that was. ;)

[Jackonicko]

I haven't time to do any more than skim through your pretentious, poorly spelt and poorly written self justification. (Though I do like your quotations....)

I am pleased that you've removed the outrageously offensive statements in your original post, and note with interest the glee with which you use your childish allusions to 'sticks up backsides'. You can't seem to help it, can you? Perhaps you have a thing about bottoms?

I should refrain from sarcasm and irony until you're good at it, however.

PS: It's not about seeking self satisfaction. It's about being genuinely concerned about the tone and nature of language on these boards, and it's about a degree of irritation with arrogant and thoughtless posters who will not admit to, or apologise for, any mistake or for causing offence (it's always the readers' fault, not yours, and it's always the person who points out your error who is wrong, not you). The lounge can often be an amusing, thought provoking place to 'hang out', and can be fun and stimulating yet at the same time 'adult'. There are plenty of youngsters posting (do I recall that Mongoose is still not 16?) who do so in a sensible and adult manner. I simply thought that your original post undermined this, and was symptomatic of the creeping decline which has led some of the older Loungers to spend less time here.

[Riceboi]

hahaha...well ok like i said mr. grumpy...i find it funny that anybody can be so serious...almost lame....don't get me wrong, you're a very smart person...but then everybody is if they put any effort...your writing obviously does not reflect your personality...i hope this informal posting will become your new playground..well you sir have a lovely bright BRIGHT sunny day.

P.S. "self justification" is "self-justification" ...."self satisfaction" should be "self-satisfaction" ....letz see...."apologise" should be "apologize"...but unlike you I don't use grammatical and spelling errors as a way to attack someone and make up an excuse. So please keep that stick up there and don't share it with other people. Thx :)

[wolfpacker]

Originally posted by Riceboi

P.S. "self justification" is "self-justification" ...."self satisfaction" should be "self-satisfaction" ....letz see...."apologise" should be "apologize"...but unlike you I don't use grammatical and spelling errors as a way to attack someone and make up an excuse. So please keep that stick up there and don't share it with other people. Thx :)

Wrong! If you check his location, you'll see that Jackonicko is British! "Apologise" is correct there. British English also tends to forego hyphenation.
Maybe you should apologise/apologize?

[Jackonicko]

Yes, quite so. I spell like a Brit and have a Brit disdain for 'colorful' language. That's why I don't really understand these references to sticks in butts (water barrels) or asses (donkeys). Now if he'd said arse......

Unfortunately I think this debate is fruitless since Riceboi is either too arrogant to admit to having made a mistake with his language, or is too rude and/or insecure to simply apologise. And I say that sympathetically, as someone who has sometimes been accused in a similar manner.

[ToddW]

Oh well, back on topic. I think Avril has got a great voice and like Jacko reminds me of Alanis. I think her album "Let Go" is great. Avril has the potential and talent to make it quite a bit farther than Alanis has. Is Avril Hard Rock? No. Avril meets the definition of Soft Rock simple as that. Rock has become so broad these days, and has so many different extensions.

[esb9588]

Her voice might sound good on the radio, but I thought her live singing at the grammys was terrible.

Originally posted by Wolfpacker
I can hear a clear difference between Avril and, say, Britney or Beyonce or Christina. But I've listened to a LOT of music. Whereas I can't even tolerate
the others, I can at least tolerate her music. You are right when you say "There is nothing original about it", but I suppose packaging it in a 16 year
old (or whatever she is) package is new and different. But then you go on to compare to Staind. There is nothing original about these guys either. Not
that they are bad or anything. She has her target audience, as do Staind. They are both pretty mainstream rock in my opinion. Staind has a harder edge
and is played on "alternative rock" stations, but there is NOTHING a
lternative about them.

There was a time when "alternative rock" really meant something. Nirvana was Alternative. But all the bands that popped up in the wake to
make the record companies a quick buck kinda watered down the term. Stone Temple Pilots, for example. These guys are a mainstream hard rock band. There
is nothing alternative about them. Doesn't make 'em bad. They tried to rock it up. But they didn't push the bounds of music, by ANY means. Staind, and
Avril, are in this same category IMO.

I have to disagree here. While their music may not be original, bands like Staind and Linkin Park at least write their own music. Avril, on the other hand, says she hates Britney Spears while working with the exact same songwriters that Britney works with. I find this sort of posing quite pathetic.

While I agree that their is a difference between Avril's music when compared to Britney or Christina, I think a lot of people are making this bigger than it really is. It's no different than the difference between, say, Christina Aguilera and Michelle Branch. Sure one of them might use a guitar and get angry in her songs, but they are both pop artists played on pop radio stations. Avril just tries to exploit this difference by dressing "punkish" in her videos and saying she hates Britney Spears. I personally am amazed that so many people are buying into this, but I suppose I should have known after Pink's "Don't Let Me Get Me" hit the top of the pop charts.

Sorry if I've offended anyone, it's just my oppinion.

[wolfpacker]

Avril actually (co-)write's her own songs. Britney has no writing credits.
And from what I gather, the production of Let's Go is actually more
pop-ish than she would have made it. But at this point in her career
and at her age, she doesn't have complete control. The record companies
have a lot of influence. I think she'll continue to grow and as she gets more
popular, gain more control over the final production.

I'm also wondering if part of your perception is due solely to the fact that she is a female artist?

[esb9588]

Originally posted by Wolfpacker
Avril actually (co-)write's her own songs. Britney has no writing credits.

Wrong. As I recall Britney co-wrote one track on her second album and 5 out of the twelve on her third album. I'm not sure how many songs Avril co-wrote, but I know "Complicated" was written entirely by a writing team called The Matrix. Their is no reason why Avril can't write all of her own music. Other mainstream artist/bands can. The lead singer for Eve 6, for example, writes all of the band's stuff and they recorded their first album just after graduating from high school. I don't think her age has anything to do with it.

I'm also wondering if part of your perception is due solely to the fact that she is a female artist?

Maybe, but at this point I'm not sure that anything can be done about that. Any female teen that is played on pop radio is bound to be compared to Britney or Christina at this point.

[wolfpacker]

I didn't check the latest Britney album when I checked. Yes, she has ONE co-write credit on her first two albums. Big whoop!

www.allmusic.com list all the tracks on Let's Go as having Lavigne as a co-writer, including Complicated. She is listed first on 11 of the 13 tracks
and last on 2, for what that is worth. I do remember a quote somewhere
that the album wasn't as edgy as she'd wanted to make and that she
had to comprise somewhat with the producers or whatnot, but she was
still pleased with the results. I imagine that has a lot to do with the
leaning towards pop. They wanted it to be radio friendly.

In a world of Britney and Christina's, I'm glad to have her as an
alternative for young girls to be influenced by. An Alanis-junior, in
my eyes (and ears). I think she has the potential to really become
something of substance. As far as radio-friendly power-pop goes,
I think it is pretty decent. But I'm quite a fan of "power-pop" as a genre
(Let's Active, Big Star, Cheap Trick, Badfinger, etc.). And I really can't
stand to listen to Britney or Christina or J-Lo or Janet Jackson or any
of the dance-oriented pop.

Interestingly enough, I see allmusic list Alanis, Michelle Branch and
Tracy Bonham among their "Similiar Artists" to Avril. I can see
influences of all 3 at times.

I find Stain quite a bit derivative and generic, like a lot of the modern/alternative rock stations lineup these days. But, I will say that I'm only
familiar with what gets played, so maybe there is more substance on the album. Linkin Park, at least, has a distinctive sound, or borrows from enough genres to sound fresh. Just as a point of reference, the newer bands that
I really like are White Stripes, Strokes, Evanescence, The Music, Spoon,
Ryan Adams, Mars Volta, Audioslave (although don't really consider them new, being Rage+Cornell, 2 of my faves to begin with), Coldplay, The Coral,
Libertines, and Queen's of the Stone Age .

[esb9588]

_ Again, I'm not sure why you keep comparing Avril to Britney, but they both co-write songs so I consider them basicly equal in that respect. I haven't
checked the allmusic.com section on her, but as I mentioned previously I think that people are making this way bigger than it really is. No matter how
much of the album she co-writes, it doesn't change the fact that it's co-writing. A lot of other artists have written their songs entirely on their own
and haven't gotten anywhere near the credit that Avril has.

I think Avril will have a good few years but I really dcouldn't see her lasting much longer than her pop counterparts. I don't really care for her music
one way or another. I think the things that bother me mainly have to do with the way she portrays herself as an artist. She should be able to show the
ways she differs from other artists without this sort of over-marketing.

Right now I like music that pumps me up and gives me energy and I like to play it loud, so that basicly limits me to the stuff played on alternative rock
stations and some hip-hop (Eminem, 50 Cent). I also like to listen to music while I work out, so sometimes I'll just load stuff on my iPod simply because
it's catchy, loud, and can make a workout seem less tedious. This is most often the case with Limp Bizkit songs. Their lyricly very stupid, but they're
so catchy that I don't even notice the lyrics while I'm working out.

However, as far as tallent goes I see most of todays hard rock bands on about an equal level. At first I really liked the way Linkin Park borrowed from
several genres to create their own sound, but their new album seems to show that their sound is probably going to stay exactly the same and will eventually
get old no matter how many songs they come out with. I have one of Staind's albums (not their latest but the one before it) and think a couple of their
songs have very good lyrics, but a lot of them sound quite similar and get old. Their latest album is supposed to be more mellow and lyricly better, and
I really like the current single "So Far Away." Evanescence never really did that much for me for some reason. Their's nothing wrong with their music,
but it just didn't impress me the way it impressed a lot of people. I know a lot of people are tired of hearing this, but I guess it just sounded like Linkin Park with a female singer and after listening to the new LP album I just wasn't in the mood for more of the same. However, I've only heard the two singles and the rest of the album might be a surprise since so many people seem to love it. I like the two singles I've heard from Audioslave and I guess I really should check out the rest of the album.

[wolfpacker]

The reason we started comparing her to Britney started with your comment:

"Complicated" could have been recorded by any of today's female pop artists. If not for Avril's dressing "Punkish" in the video it would have been taken as just another pop song. There is nothing original about it.



which I disagreed with. You also stated:

Just because she dresses "Tough" or "Punkish" in her videos doesn't change the st
yle of music. It's Pop. Simply sticking a guitar in one of her songs doesn't m
ajicly turn it into Rock. Go download "Complicated" (and delete it once you've
listened to it). It is not Rock. It isn't even Pop Rock. It is pure Pop. Agai
n, I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing. It's catchy and I can certain
ly understand why so many people like it. However, I find this whole idea of ma
rketing her as a "Punkgirl" laughable.


which I also especially disagreed with. especially the part "It isn't even Pop Rock. It's Pop."

Here is what I found on VH1's website about Avril and writing:



She progressed from her bedroom to singing whenever and wherever she could - from gospel music in church to country music at fairs - until she was discovered by Arista Records. On a writing trip to New York, Avril caught the attention of Antonio "L.A." Reid, who signed her to Arista. At 16, she moved to Manhattan and began work on her debut CD. Avril plunged right into the creative process. "I love writing," she explains. "When I get upset and really need to get it out of me, I go to my guitar. Sometimes I feel like my guitar is my therapist."

Although Avril virtually lived in the studio during that New York stint, her efforts didn't pay off at first. "I started working with these really talented people, but I just wasn't feeling it. The songs weren't representative of me," she admits. "Then they started talking about having people write for me - but I had to write for myself. I had to do my music. It was a really stressful time, but I never considered giving up."

Instead, she swapped coasts. Los Angeles gave Avril the fresh start she needed. It was there that she hooked up with producer/songwriter Cliff Magness and realized that she had finally found her guy. "We totally clicked, because he just let me guide. He really understood me and let me do my thing." The songs for Let Go began pouring out, with Magness at the helm and up-and-coming production team The Matrix on board. Avril couldn't be happier with the way the album turned out.

"In this past year, I've really grown as a writer," she points out. "'Complicated" wasn't written about anyone in particular. It is basically about life, people being fake and relationships." As for one of her favorite tracks, "Losing Grip," Avril reveals, "That is definitely one of my ex-boys - he didn't give me what I needed emotionally." She laughs and adds, "It doesn't matter now, plus I got a good song out of it." Now that her album is done, Avril can't wait to get out and play. She jokingly points out that touring with her own "skater-punk band of rocker boys" probably won't be all that different from her childhood. "I was always a tomboy, and I guess I still am. I played hockey during the fall and winter and baseball in the summer. I loved playing with the boys."


So, it definitely sounds to me like she is the main writer. There is nothing wrong with collaboration. Alanis did it on her album. Elton John and Bernie Taupin did it all the time. Heck, within bands, different members collaborate -
in Rush, Peart writes the lyrics and Lee/Lifeson collaborate on the music. Jagger and Richards. etc.

To use that as an argument just seems weak. She's not your thing, no big
deal.

[Jackonicko]

Yes, whether or not she writes her own songs is interesting, and if she does then that's laudable, but it's not the only thing which differentiates her from mainstream pre-pubescent pop acts.

Otherwise Craig David would be regarded as being cooler and more edgy, and more ROCK than Jimi Hendrix (who did not write all his own stuff....)

esb 5988,

Since your primary musical tastes are (by your own admission) 50 cent and Eminem, and since you cite Linkin Park, Limp Biskit, and Staind in your post, I'd suggest that you may not be that well qualified to comment on whether or not Avril's music is or isn't rock. She certainly isn't rap, and she's not 'rock' in the sense that the artists you mention are. But then that broad sector of the rock 'cake' perhaps deserves it's own distinct genre name, since most of it has little in common with what most of us regard as rock, and has more in common with rap and grunge. It's more like those genres than punk or rock.

We're really talking about whether or not Avril Lavigne's music falls under the much broader and more mainstream rock classification, aren't we?

[esb9588]

Wolfpacker,

In regard to your quote from me, as I said previously, I'm sorry if I was not using the genre names in the "Proper" manner.

I agree that there is nothing wrong with colaborations, but as I said in my previous post, I think her fans are making this a much bigger deal than it really is. I can remember fans saying "She writes her own music!" over and over as if it made her the best artist of our times. There are many other artists who write as much, if not more, than Avril does and nothing is ever made of it.

Jackonicko,

Just because those are the bands I talk about on this forum doesn't mean that's all I listen to. I also listen to classic rock (mostly from my parents), some 90's grunge, and some pop. I'd suggest that you are not qualified to tell anybody on this board whether they are qualified to say something or not, as you most likely do not know any of us personally. Again, I'm sorry if my genre names are not the same as yours. I could have titled this thread "Avril Lavigne: Why do people call her music hard rock?" but it wouldn't have changed the discussion. The terms "Rock" and "Pop" mean different things to different people and I wasn't going to waist an hour making sure my genre names were 100% perfect. As I've said several times now, I posted this in response to a recommendation in another thread.

[jstn4102]

[Jackonicko]

jstn4102,

You need to learn to listen and read much more carefully my friend.

Or you need to avoid mis-quoting and misrepresenting people. You should acknowledge that I have never said that: "today's music is not and never will be as good as the past." You might even want to apologise, if pride doesn't prevent it.

Much of today's music is every bit as good as music from the 60s, 70s, 80s or 90s, as I've said again and again. There's even music that I don't like that I can recognise as being of very high quality. Inevitably, I do listen to a lot of 'old' music, because it's what I've grown up with, and it's what I like, but I'm also 'into' a lot of new stuff, and am pretty open minded musically. This year I've bought Appleton, the Coral, the Thrills, the Darkness, Kings of Leon, Comfort in Sound (Feeder's new one), and Kokopelli (Kosheen's new one), most of them on the day of release, and sometimes before. Last year I bought the Music, Avril Lavigne, Ash, Alabama 3, Beth Gibbons, Bjork, Sneaker Pimps, Lemon Jelly, Space Monkeyz, Sugababes, John Squire, Gomez, Groove Armada etc. I've borrowed other artists for individual tracks, including Ms Dynamite, Eminem, Mint Royale and even (I'll say this very quickly in the hope you don't pick up on it) Blink 182. I wonder how much new music (from outside your usual genres) you buy?

I do offer the opinion that some new music is rubbish (all the pre-teen mush pumped out by Spears, Aguilera, Pink et al, and much of the 'Hard Rock' listed hereabouts) but I'm happy to concede that there was even more rubbish (which may even have been of less artistic merit) in the past. Glam rock, the Osmonds, the Bay City Rollers, just don't get me started!

With regard to getting a life, I'd suggest that someone with an average of 8.2 posts per day (you) should take care criticising someone whose daily average is only 4.1...... (me).

And I'll even avoid making crass personal remarks about who does and doesn't like you, or about your spelling, grammar and punctuation. It wouldn't be kind to suggest that we all need more of a life, and more of an education, so I'll desist.

Oops!

[geistwerks]

yeah, jackonicko's right. there is good music being made today. too bad none of it is played on mainstream radio or MTV.

staind and linkin park is just as TRL as britney or justin.

i'm not saying ALL young people don't know beans about music. i know quite a few young people who worked and scrapped up a serious record/cd collection (or downloaded) who have respectable taste in music.

i don't consider someone with 100 cd's on their shelf a serious judge of music. you are entitled to like whatever you like, it's your opinion. you like staind? fine. avril? fine. just don't expect me to take you very seriously. and i'm not trying to offend anyone with that comment.

if a movie critic only saw films past 1999, would you regard him as an authority on movies? oh, yeah, he saw "most" of those "old" movies with his dad, but didn't really pay attention... it wasn't his "style."

of course you wouldn't!

a true music enthusiast might like staind, but also has all the velvet underground albums in their collection, knows beatles songs by heart, etc. it's not technically "old" music or "new" music, as truely classic music stands the test of time.

the reason i bash a lot of new music is because it pales in comparison to the creativity of a lot of older music, and i can't take corporate sponsorship and marketing seriously.

i'm not bashing the band evanescence, because i haven't listened to their music at all, but i laughed when i saw a recent blurb on tech tv about how nintendo is promoting their tour, and the lead singer said, "i'll never have to buy christmas presents again."

again, not bashing the band, i know nothing about them (and probably never will because i'm too stuck on my sonic youth and my bloody valentine records) but is that all their music is worth? a paycheck? a little extra promo swag from nintendo? i don't get it. guess i just have to ask the popular question WWJD?* (what would jello biafra do?)

if it all sounds elitist to younger listeners, it probably is, but i've spent my lifetime with music, and i'm just disappointed with how all of the new music today is becoming so bland, so heartless, and how violence and sexism have become appreciated ideals, and how materialistic it all is today...

eh. forget it. let's go get our bling bling and rock out with fred durst in an SUV with rollers, while listen to britney having an orgasm on the radio...

[esb9588]

I never said I was or ever would be an authority on music. I have much more to do with my life than sit around and listen to music.

If you saw a movie that all the critics loved and you thought it sucked, would you want to tell people?

Of course you would! But hay, you're not a critic, so as far as they're concerned you're oppinion is crap.

If you're not going to take me seriously, that's fine. I'm really sorry I don't listen to enough music for my oppinion to be of vallue. However, there are plenty of other people who will listen to me, so the fact that you won't doesn't make a difference.

[Jackonicko]

esb

I'd certainly listen to your opinion on rap music - since you are part of that genre's key demographic, and are obviously enthusiastic and knowledgeable on that subject. Equally, if I wanted to know about bands which constitute the genre which includes Staind, Blink 182, Sum 41, Limp Bizkit, etc. then "You da man".

It's just that some of us don't think that kind of music should be categorised simply as rock (it's a sub genre of rock like punk or grunge) and because you don't seem to see a distinction I don't think that you're well qualified to compare it with mainstream rock, or to judge whether Avril is or isn't rock.

I have a little rap in my collection, but it's all from the Urban Species end of the spectrum, so I wouldn't feel remotely qualified to talk about the genre more generally.

And just because people disagree with you, and tell you when they think you're mistaken, it doesn't mean that they are in any way hostile, and there's really no need to get offended or defensive.

[stonersmurf22]

Ok I would like to ask some people who bash mainstream music if they have listened to more from bands than just what they hear on the radio. If you have, then i fully respect your opinion, but if you hear 2 songs on the radio from a band, you don't instantly become an expert and know that every song from that band is the same.
My best example would be Linkin Park. Ok first, if you even listened to the entire first cd you'd realize that all their songs aren't the same. Even if you only heard In The End and Crawling on the radio, I'd hope that you would be able to hear the two different styles in these songs alone. However, if you could find no differences in those songs, try listening to the second cd. No, not meteora, but Reanimation. This cd is so distinctly different that people who ONLY like modern rock probably wouldn't like it. However, I enjoy both modern rock and rap, so I thoroughly enjoyed.
Another problem with judging music solely by the radio is censorship. I believe that censorship in the music industry is the root of all evil. Maybe that was a slight exaggeration, but I've heard songs on the radio which I thought were OK, but wasn't sure about. An example of this would be disturbed. I heard some of their music on the radio and thought it wasn't too bad but wasn't great. I decided to get the cd, and I was amazed. I think sometimes people underestimate how much emotion a cd can lose with even a little censorship. But, disturbed is a great band to use as an example of the evilness of censorship becuase of their second cd. I really enjoyed this cd, but it just couldn't compare to the first. At first I couldnt understand why, but then I started getting the feeling that all the songs were designed for the radio. At first I thought this was crazy, but after awhile I realized that sound was good but not as unique becuase it lacked emotion, all so that more of the songs could be played on the radio. I really feel that this is one of the main problems with mainstream music, but their will always be soccer moms and priests who will insist that listening to violent music will make you violent. This is the exact reason why I can never listen to the radio for more than 5 minutes at a time.
^Paranoid rant completed^

[esb9588]

Jack,

Sorry if I took offense at your earlier posts or anyone elses. I may be mistaken, but I think some people are misunderstanding my purpose for this thread. Some people have said they would classify Avril in the same category as Staind, Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit ETC. In my iPod I classify this as "Rock." I know this is not entirely accurate, but it works for me.

To me, Avril doesn't fit into that category. She sounds more like Christina or Britney or Pink or Michelle Branch, all of whom I would classify as "Pop." I agree that Avril's music definitely has a harder, edgier sound than most of those artists, but I wouldn't classify it with Linkin Park or Limp Bizkit. It's just my oppinion.

stonersmurf22,

I agree about both of you're points. If I had only heard "One Step Closer" and judged Linkin Park's sound based on that song alone, I probably wouldn't have bought the CD. It's good that you used disturbed as an example, since I haven't been that impressed by the songs I've heard on the radio. I think they're OK, but nothing special. I'll have to check out their CD's.

[Jackonicko]

"I wouldn't classify it with Linkin Park or Limp Bizkit" - we agree, nor would I!

But if the Eagles, Guns'N'Roses, Feeder, the Dandy Warhols, Steve Miller and the Georgia Satellites are rock, and if Sheryl Crow and Alanis Morissette are rock then so is Avril..... Linkin Park or Limp Bizkit, on the other hand, probably are not rock, just as the Sex Pistols were not.

[geistwerks]

>I never said I was or ever would be an authority on music. I have much >more to do with my life than sit around and listen to music.

um, sorry. i was responding to someone else, possibly long before you entered this conversation. as for "sit around and listen to music"... well, it's all around us isn't it? every second of the day! some of us just focus in on it. if you don't, then you aren't much of a music fan, are you? you're just a bloke who likes (what lot or what little) he hears. if that works for you, fine. doesn't work for me. i am the crate digger. i am the guy who has worked thru 20,000 records in a dusty vault. i have stains on my fingers from dusty records. and let me tell you, i hate/love the filthy feel. it's better/worse than chalk and nails on a blackboard. record dust is such a filthy/exciting thing!

>Of course you would! But hay, you're not a critic, so as far as they're >concerned you're oppinion is crap.

ah, i'm not a critic, mate. i'm just one of those insatiable music fiends. you know, the kind who spent their trust funds, while working jobs in college to afford a record collection. it wasn't cool. it was wasn't fun. it was an obsession. in the end though, i got mine. :)

am i a certified critic? well, no. i am not. i'm just a guy who has 10,000 plus albums, a bunch of HD's for storage, and a bunch of sick ### music fiends as friends. most of whom have more storage than me, and most of whom own their own stores. if this means anything to you, i have friends who can pull out every record dj shadow samples as his song plays. right down to the obscure "prison record."

me? my fetish was never so obscure. i just dig minamalist techno. really deep stuff. chain reaction, basic channel, and the godsend of the 'net, thinner.

mind you, we can go on "beat the geeks" anytime you are ready.

>If you're not going to take me seriously, that's fine. I'm really sorry I don't >listen to enough music for my oppinion to be of vallue. However, there are >plenty of other people who will listen to me, so the fact that you won't >doesn't make a difference

sure, there are plenty people who will take you seriously. too bad they all tune into MTV.

you obviously like music, so do yourself a favour AND DIVE IN. there is so much to listen to! don't let an old crusty like me divert you! break out your wallet of your dial up, and go nuts.

get back to me when you know.

[geistwerks]

look, this topic has gone way too crazy. look, these are a few of the musical artists i dig. check 'em out if you want.

company flow
el-p
big jus
rjd2
dj shadow
maurizio
scion
porter ricks
lustmord
basic channel
rhythm & sound
tikiman
scorn
thomas koner
fugazi
rancid

this isn't for everyone, but try it out. see what you think. you might like it. if you don't, that's ok. if you come back with a "THESE BANDS SUCK AND SO DO YOU" i'll just find a crew who will do you in for a 5 spot. just kidding. i think. >:)

[esb9588]

Jeistwerks,

Sorry for misinterpreting you're older post.

I think it's great that you are as big a music fan as you are. Thanks a lot for the suggestions. I'll check them out.

Oh, and just for your information, I don't watch MTV.

I agree that this topic has pretty much run its course. Whatever you want to call her music - Rock, Pop, Pop Rock, Pop Punk, it's your business, and debating this with one another is getting us nowhere.

[MidPack]

THERE IS NO ACCOUNTING FOR TASTE...

[esb9588]

The original purpose of this thread was to talk about which genre Avril fits into, not to talk about whether we like her or not.

[geistwerks]

music discussion is a lot like political discussion. it starts as statements, than opinions, then becomes a debate. soon it becomes an argument. although most people in the lounge are quite civil...

i think sometimes it's important to remember it's just music, and not the topic of abortion or something. i'll be the first to raise my hand as "guilty" when it comes to overheating a discussion...

oh well.

[esb9588]

I'll be the second.

[Pickledhales]

People think her music is rock because of ignorance. They're the pop/rap/dance kind of people that assume having a guitar, bass guitar and drums means it is rock music. Finch, System of a Down and Foo Fighters are great examples of what rock is, people should take note

[Impulse29]

Avirl's managers are very smart. Her music is played on the rock stations (there is a trace of rock), on the pop stations (where it belongs), on the easy listening stations (which my folks listen to), and some others... This attracts many different age groups/ types of people... and if i can add another piece to the equasion:
people= fans
fans=money!!!

[Kirk]

Wow, I'd have never thought deciding which genre an artist fit would generate such a response. I'm old. She's 'alternative' to me.

[Jackonicko]

Foo Fighters verge on being a rock act sometimes (eg Learn to Fly), but are more metal than rock at other times, and more grunge than rock all the time.

System of a Down are mainstream, absolutely classic, pubescant schoolboy metal.

There is a point at which rock and metal meet - and in my view the Darkness straddle that point (that doesn't make them good, necessarily, but they can be classed as 'rock'). But many of the artists being mentioned on this thread aren't rock at all, they're metal. Black T-shirted, short-trousered, bodily-pierced, silly-gesturing, grunt-singing, posturing/jumping/stomping unoriginal and formulaic metal producers with the usual silly facial hair, as beloved by spotty schoolboys who want to ensure that no adult will like what they're listening to.

System of a Down, Good Charlotte (good? Give me a break!), Staind, Limp B, Linkin P, etc. It's OK to like them, but they're no more 'rock' than Steps or Justin Timberlake - they're just another face of the market-driven, over formulaic adolescent crud which we all like when we're at a certain age, and which we may or may not grow out of.

People of my age once thought the world of equally dreadful music - and often it was stuff that came into the metal category, too.

[wolfpacker]

Speaking of Good Charlotte, I loved Chris Rock's comments at the (god-awful) VMAs after their performance:

"Good Charlotte? More like mediocre Green Day!"

I kept checking in trying to catch the Coldplay performance. Thought it was very powerful. Almost missed it though. MTV has moved WAY too much
towards Hip-Hop for me. Coldplay seemed so out of place.

[wolfpacker]

I consider them pretty straight-ahead rock. At least from their bigger songs: Learning to Fly, Next Year, My Hero, This Is A Call, Everlong, Big Me, etc.
I don't really hear metal in any of that.

[Jackonicko]

Ah, but listen to them live.....

Perhaps they're just nfg?

;)

[almond]

I used to like her but then she just talked trash about everyone else. I don't respect that much.

[carlin]

From an amazon review:

have observed people's love and backlash against Avril for quiet some time now. And here is what I have to say. Avril Lavigne is quiet possibly the most fake person in the music industry. More fake than Britney Spears even. Avril writes her own songs: WRONG! She writes them with the help of about three other PROFESSIONAL POP songwriters. Meaning that she contributed maybe a line or two. She has guitar-playing talent. WRONG! She holds the guitar and poses with it in pictures in order to look cool. She can't actually play it or else she would play it live, but she doesn't. Her band does. She's punk. WRONG! She's pop-rock. And not even good pop-rock like maybe Savage Garden or Matchbox 20, both of whom can be creative and write far more meaningful lyrics. She can sing. WRONG! One only needs to see and hear her live to realize that she has no singing voice and that her voice is perfectly synthesized. She never claimed to be punk. WRONG! When she first appeared she claimed that she re-invented punk-rock for this generation and was this generation's Sid Vicious (never mind that later she admitted that she didn't even know who Sid Vicious was). She ultimately is just some wannabe who was picked by a major record label to cash in on Britney's now-waning fan-base with the same safe, bubblegummy songs about puppy love that shallow people eat up. That is all...