>>63331645
If we could tell you it would be revolutionary, would it?

>>63331645
I know how but I'm saving it for myself.

mix glitch and folk music

>"damn, he took 2010's music and tweaked it a little to make it into something totally different"
Not sure, but I bet it involves tweaking indie rock so that it doesn't completely suck balls.

OP is pure cringe

I doubt the nigga even knows what screamo is

Warp Rock

Combines experimental electronic production techniques, a grungy rhythm section, and shoegaze lead guitar (only 1 guitarist needed unlike actual shoegaze)

>>63331903
my band does this

it's called post punk retard

It's a nice sentiment to have, which I always support.

You have to have natural talent to pull it off, though. And it can't purely be calculatedly and coldly conceptualized, most of it has to just kind of float into you unconsciously.

There's a lot more to this, but I won't reveal it. If someone is worthy they'll figure these things out themselves, there is no cheating, no stealing, no shortcut.

>>63331932
Joy Division and U2 are post punk, and they sound nothing like what I'm talking about.

Melt-Banana is sorta there, but way too noisy and punky to be a mainstream breakthrough.

>>63331964
http://youtu.be/77twq3Mo218

lmao why the hell would anyone tell you?

>>63332135
The vocals are kinda lame in my opinion, but the rest is totally legit. Thanks for showing me this.

>>63332157
If he becomes the Nirvana of this "new rock revolution" then he'll drag some of our shitty bandcamp projects into the spotlight.

Plus, we all want more good rock music.

>>63332184
>Plus, we all want more good rock music.

Fuck you

hiphop is the only genre innovating at all right now

>>63332253
Say what you want about some of the cringy vocals, but Tame Impala's Currents was actually pretty damn innovative.

>>63332281
TI is my favorite band but I don't see Currents as innovative, just really well crafted like all of his work.

>>63332321
It's pop, disco, edm, synthwave, psychedelic rock, and a bit of glitch, all at the same time.

>>63331645
>For rock, in the 60's there was psych-rock, the 70's had dadrock,
Have the feeling you can barely even play an instrument

>>63332359
>t's pop, disco, edm, synthwave, psychedelic rock, and a bit of glitch
So all things that have been done before.

>>63332397
Yeah, kinda like what Nirvana was.

TRUE innovation doesn't happen without new technology btw.

>>63332417
>Yeah, kinda like what Nirvana was.
How so?

>>63332431
Nirvana was just combining stuff that had already been done before.

>>63332547
but every artist is a sum of their influences. there has to be something definitive about a release that you can't pinpoint anywhere else for it to be innovative

>>63332547
>Nirvana was just combining stuff that had already been done before.
Specifics please?

>>63332692

DESU Nirvana just took the prevailing grunge sound that had been established by the Seattle scene, added pop melodicism via the Beatles, quiet-loud dynamics via the Pixies, a watery guitar sound via all of Kurt's favorite 80s new wave bands, and a punk attitude via the Stooges/Sex Pistols.

Combine that with self-hating tortured artist lyrics and you get Nirvana.

>>63332937

ALSO: not saying Nirvana was bad/not innovative, just saying that every single piece of art is created in relation to everything that came before it. Even art that seeks to reject everything that came before it must inherently be influenced by the art that came before in order to reject it. Nothing is original, everything is a pastiche.

>>63332937
>the prevailing grunge
They were already a part of that scene.
>quiet-loud dynamics via the Pixies
Dynamics have been around for ages. it is not specific to anyone. Go listen to The Turtles if you don't believe me.
>a watery guitar sound
Where can I hear this sound on Bleach?

Anyways, all of this is very different then listing genres, isn't it? The fact that it so specific shows the comparison doesn't work.

Nice try though.

>>63333004

>They were already a part of that scene
They were late comers to the scene. Green River, Soundgarden, Mother Love Bone, Mudhoney, etc. established the sound before Nirvana.

>Dynamics have been around for ages. it is not specific to anyone. Go listen to The Turtles if you don't believe me.
I didn't say Pixies invented dynamics. Just that's where Kurt got the idea from as he was a huge Pixies nerd.

>Where can I hear this sound on Bleach?
No one cares about bleach outside of /mu/. Nevermind was Kurt's masterwork. That's why I brought up the watery guitars.

>Anyways, all of this is very different then listing genres, isn't it? The fact that it so specific shows the comparison doesn't work.

My point still stands. Every aspect of Nirvana's sound can be traced back to a musical predecessor.

>>63332937
there was no grunge sound or scene dumbass

it was just a DIY punk scene like every city had before and since

>>63333135
none of those bands are part of the same scene or genre

mother love bone was literally GNR but even worse, Soundgarden also bunch of jocks trying to get rich ripping off dadrock, Green River a really shitty aimless high school band, and mudhoney a just-ok-sometimes-good local punk band

hop off rolling stone's cock you idiot

>>63331964
>U2
>post-punk
wut

>>63333518
They started as a Post-Punk band, originally.

Textwave (abbreviated music)

Ringtone (really abbreviated music)

Nu nu metal (i know but come on it was stupid enough the first time)

Hip Hop is the only interesting thing going on now days. And i'm not even a rapfag.

>>63331645
>00s had screamo

lmao no

also youre rockist swine.

>>63331645
DO THIS

1-Get one of the biggest genres of 10s
1.1-It must NOT be a musical genre
2-List down the characteristics that form this genre
3-Use logic, musical skills, and skills on the genre of art you selected and get each characteristic you listed and convert each one to musical one. As some example a painting genre with huge paintings would have huge songs
4-make a genre with ALL the converted characteristics

See no creativity needed
You dont need to have some eureka moment (well you need to read this post or have this idea I am proposing by yourself)


Since the other genre is huge on this decade, the literal as fuck musical equivalent would be huge too, problbaly

>>63331645
Nothing because everything can now only be popular if it has a ph3t drop and grabs peoples attentions in 5 seconds as they scroll through normalfag websites. This is why literally everything is brickwalled to shit, has a bass drop and sounds like they've made for people with fucking tiny attention spans. Because they are

>>63331645
just make good music fammmo

let it be what it will be

>>63333200
>>63333328

Whether or not you think grunge is a genre, point is that all of those bands played punk and metal influenced guitar music in Seattle during the late 80s/early 90s, and Kurt Cobain directly expressed a fondness for their style of music, particularly for Mudhoney. I don't think there's any way to deny that these bands had an influence on Kurt's music. I mean, just listen to the vocals on this song released in 1988, a year before Bleach came out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbAbMZEt4Uw

Of course this song doesn't sound EXACTLY like Nirvana, but added into the mix of Cobain's influences, you can trace the lineage of Nirvana's sound.

The real point I was trying to make was that for any given artist, no matter how groundbreaking or original they may seem, their art cannot exist outside of the legacy of their influences. Originality is a myth. Great artists are just chefs that know how to combine disparate ingredients in an appealing and exciting way.

>>63334429
some awsome idea I had.

Do you know how much people complain about post grunge right?
Now imagine this
Rock = X
Post-grunge = Y + X
You could also say, Post-grunge = Z

Do a genre that is like this = Invert Y + X

So invert all characteristics that are specific to post grunge (not the ones presented on all rock genres), and make a band that has all those characteristics and the rock ones.

So if rock is good, but post-grunge is not, you can make some good rock genre by making the inversion of it.

Or you can make a more extreme version if it and make a genre that is = Invert Z

>>63333135
>Green River, Soundgarden, Mother Love Bone, Mudhoney, etc. established the sound before Nirvana.
What? 2 guitars, bass and drums? There really isn't a sound.
>Just that's where Kurt got the idea from as he was a huge Pixies nerd
Do you really think he's never heard The Doors or The Turtles or any other band who had dynamics in the history of music? Of course. He just wanted to name drop them and give them free PR
>Nevermind was Kurt's masterwork
Oh OK so I'm listening to Polly and I'm not hearing the watery guitar. Care to explain?
>My point still stands
It really doesn't. Because Currents did not have a specific sound, it aped it from other ambiguous genres; Nirvana was very specific in referential points.

>>63331844
kek

>>63333518
U2's first 2 or 3 albums were post-punk

What a pathetically pleb discussion in here.

Does any rock sub-genre was formed at 10s?

>>63334413
skramz was the most significant development in punk music in the late 90s-mid 00s along w further adaptations of noise rock

but you're a tripfag so I wouldn't be surprised if you have no idea what screamo actually is

In another ten years memes will be retro
That will be the age of the meme revival
Memecore
We are post-meme now

>>63335504
the best screamo bands had broken up before 1995 though

>>63334945
all the new rock subgenres have mostly been labelled "revivalism" even though they are markedly different from the "first wave". Every genre is influenced by something before it, 10s music journalists seem to have forgotten this.

>>63335557
you're one of those dumb assholes who think first wave "pre divergence from other post hc" emocore is screamo aren't you

>>63331645
post-crunk