Music Banter - View Single Post

anticipation · 04-07-2009, 08:42 AM

i'm getting really tired of people saying that recent iterations of "hardcore" music are vastly inferior to "old hardcore", bands like bad brains, minor threat, etc etc.

the first question i'd like to pose is this; what are the staples of "old hardcore", and what makes them so fantastic, according to some, aside from their age?

second; are bands such as daniel striped tiger, l'antietam, capsule, storm the bastille, my america is watching tigers die etc etc, held as so insignificant that they are lumped in with other current era bands who claim to be hardcore?

in essence, i just don't understand the dismissal of the new generation of hardcore bands in favor for older bands of the genre.

04-07-2009, 08:42 AM	#1 (permalink)
anticipation Music Addict Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 3,565	old hardcore v. new hardcore? i'm getting really tired of people saying that recent iterations of "hardcore" music are vastly inferior to "old hardcore", bands like bad brains, minor threat, etc etc. the first question i'd like to pose is this; what are the staples of "old hardcore", and what makes them so fantastic, according to some, aside from their age? second; are bands such as daniel striped tiger, l'antietam, capsule, storm the bastille, my america is watching tigers die etc etc, held as so insignificant that they are lumped in with other current era bands who claim to be hardcore? in essence, i just don't understand the dismissal of the new generation of hardcore bands in favor for older bands of the genre.