Sure, if you are counting any band out there. As far as mainstream and that high of quality goes, it doesn't exist.

Those bands get less radio play COMBINED than just songs from Siamese Dream alone, and it was released 20 years ago...

And this means... what exactly? Most older stuff gets a lot of radio play, Foreigner still gets a lot of radio play so it's not much of an accomplishment. I'm by no means comparing Smashing Pumpkins to Foreigner by the way I'm just saying.

If you're asking if there are any bands that constant radio play that are on the same level of artistic credibility as the Pumpkins during the 90s, well then I don't know. I still have a lot of admiration for Tool and Muse, don't care what anyone says.

My point was that the bands from the early 90s like Nirvana, RHCP, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Smashing Pumpkins, etc. were able to combine the two factors. That doesn't exist anymore to me.

I'm a Tool fan and they get a considerable amount of radio play, although they are never going to be played on pop radio like the above bands were. And Muse? Meh, I think they are talented musicians but aren't quite my thing. Maybe in 20 years they will be viewed differently, but they seem much less original than the above bands were for their time...

^

How can you even use radio airplay as a valid example of what we are talking about? So you should take everything they play on the radio from the past as pure gold? If that were the case, and we can assume today's dj's are playing the good music from those times, then obviously they know what is good from today's music, right?

The whole point I have been trying to make is that great music exists in ALL decades, **** music exists in ALL decades. There are examples in both categories that seem to get remembered. So, in my opinion, I am hearing a lot of **** music on today's radio. I find amazing music coming out today that is played hardly at all on the radio. Radio is dead, in my opinion, though that is a different discussion entirely.

Any band you throw out as an example is based purely on your opinion of those times and can't apply to the rest of us. Music is timeless no matter how you slice it.

my bad hehe misinterpreted what you were getting at heheh :beer:

Well... let's see... both those albums suck so I'd say pretty much any recent piece of crap would carry similar artistic value.

But why does it matter if the music is mainstream or not? Mainstream music is just as flawed now as it always has been, that's doesn't mean that there isn't a ton of good music being made today just as there was in decades past.

Suck? Really dude..get an effing grip. Or get off the pipe. Quit trying so damn hard to be elite. It's ok to like Albums the general population like..it wont hurt your status with the record shop crowd, we won't tell.

I guess I wasn't meant to like modern music if you do, because those two are classics, even if I'm not a regular listener of Soundgarden...

Good grief. In this very thread I referred to Guns n Roses and Van Halen as bands that I love. Do you really think I give a shit about my "status with the record shop crowd"? I had no idea everyone was required to have a hard on for Billy Corgan and Chris Cornell or else be subject to personal insults. Sounds kind of... elitist.

Spot on.

I take it you're anti Indie? :laughing:

I think a lot of people are just finding music for finding sake. People were saying there's lots of good bands, a lot of them, compared to standards of old just don't measure up, new music doesn't even come close. Of course there are exceptions.