Talk:Classic rock

Mercury as exception

I deleted a claim that Freddie Mercury (along with Hendrix) was a counterexample to the "all-white" nature of Classic Rock radio format. Without getting into a discussion about the definition of "White", the point is moot to the case being made since the vast bulk of the audience (and programmers) have no inkling that Mercury is anything but British caucasian. Jgm 18:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Freddie's not Iranian! He's Indian! A Parsi, whose ancestors left Persia more than a MILLENIA ago! Come on, you people have bad nationality definitions.

"Race", ethnicity, and nationality are, of course, all different things. But I really don't know and don't care about the details of Mercury's heritage. If you take the time to carefully read what I wrote perhaps you'll see the point. Jgm 01:55, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It does not matter what the vast majority of people see, the fact is that he is a singer of non-white/European heritage who has gained major international popularity. He was an Indian of Parsi background. The sentence above explains what they are and look at Parsi for details. They do look fairer skinned than other Indians due to their racial origins, which lie in the Middle East 1300 years ago, right after the Arab conquest of Persia. They have mixed with Indians though and are part of the Indian fabric. Regardless of India or the Middle East, they are non-white, and if you look at Freddie's childhood pictures, he looks very non-white. His own parents dont look white either. People dont know he's non-white because he never wanted to tell anyone of his South Asian background. He thought it would be detrimental to his popularity. He should be acknowledged as a significant non-white rock musician, though, nonetheless. Afghan Historian 06:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Again, though, I'm not concerned with "what" Freddie Mercury was or wasn't. I'm claiming that making the distinction here (rather than in, say, the Freddie Mercury or Queen articles) adds nothing to the reader's knowledge or understanding of the topic at hand. Jgm 11:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Recent restructure

I just got ambitious and did a major overhaul of the article body to focus more clearly on the rock radio format that defined "classic rock". I plan to follow this with a culling of the list to reflect the article content. Comments welcomed. Jgm 03:09, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Revert

I reverted the link to a seperate page for Classic Rock as a genre. There is no reason for another article; if you are developing content about Classic Rock genre (please do) this is the place for it; the current article as it stands is a stub specifically created for that eventual content. The description of the radio format could logically go at the end of that article if there is some detail on the genre added. Jgm 15:47, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Good?

Is this good now?

I can't get the Table of Contents to appear. Its being stupid. Fizscy46

Reality Check

As I understand it, this article is about the the radio format called Classic Rock. I think the article should reflect the reality of what is played on these stations. I hear next to nothing from the 1950's on these stations. I also can't recall hearing Madonna or Cher on a classic rock station.

I'm going to leave the article as it is because I've already been reverted once, but I think that the article is inaccurate in several respects. ike9898 19:44, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

A minor point, but...

Aerosmith and Van Halen are not "80's bands". They're 70's bands. Yes, they played during the 80s, but so did the Beach Boys and the Grateful Dead; that doesn't make them 80's bands. It could be argued that Van Halen found their biggest fame during the 80s, but Aerosmith was VERY well established by the mid-70's. Kafziel

List of bands

I think the list of bands should just be removed altogether. The main article can describe bands considered classic rock, but having a list is just asking people to add unlikely acts like the Bee Gees and Marvin Gaye (mostly added by one user, but still). tregoweth 19:43, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

I would like to concur with Tregoweth. I've been loath to remove anything from the list on the chance that someone's classic rock station might play it ("Gypsies Tramps and Thieves" strikes me as being a (fairly slim) excuse for leaving Cher on the list for example), but having an exhaustive list of every band that could concievably be considered part of the Classic Rock genre is really overkill. I propose further discussion on the issue -- it seems to me some action should be taken, but whether it's a major pruning or a total excision I'm not sure. Haikupoet 20:25, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the list as it currently stands is useless in its inclusiveness. It would be nice to have a list, but I agree that leaving it off may be the only way to keep it under control (I've occasionally tilted at a similar windmill with respect to the list at Rock opera), so I understand the frustration. Jgm 20:57, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Delete is my vote. Recent addition: Carole King?! Seriously? Just shows how useless this list is. Jeff Worthington 19:04, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Rush is Canadian and AC/DC is Australian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.163.156 (talk) 22:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Cher, Marvin Gaye, and Lynda Rondstat are on the band list, and yet they are not even close to classic rock, and no classic rock radio station would ever think about playing them —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.251.108 (talk) 19:46, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Fate of the band list

Well, it does seem that one particular user simply refuses to let go of the bloated version of the list. I'm almost inclined to put this up on Vandalism in Progress, but I don't know that this in fact qualifies as vandalism, much less that we have a consensus on what belongs in the list. My vote is to simply delete it, but failing that to restore a consensus-agreed trimmed version. If there are enough comments in favor I'll be happy to put it up on ViP, but I do feel like there needs to be a consensus for that sort of thing. Haikupoet 22:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

I have, however, attached an NPOV tag to that section. Haikupoet 22:41, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

People, people, listen up. A lot of these bands were popular during a time period between the 70s-early 90s. That user who "refuses to let go of the bloated version of the list" is me, and you should not insult me. I visit websites for classic rock stations regularly, and see some of these "unlikely artists" on the playlist-like Metallica. So, let's not remove any more artists from the band list, but feel free to add more, and I will consider moving the artist list to a new page. CoolKatt number 99999 2:43 UTC, 17 August 2005

It's one thing to say that a band was popular during the 70s to 90s. It's quite another thing to claim that band as "classic rock" -- it may be one of those "I know them when I see them" kinds of things, but many of the bands you're insisting on keeping on there are not traditionally part of the classic rock corpus (some of them aren't even rock -- Marvin Gaye was one of the greatest things ever to come out of Motown, but he was R&B, not rock). Second, overt protectionism on a page is frowned upon, and I will be removing your warning notice as it isn't appropriate for Wikipedia unless the admins deem it to be the case -- that's what page protection is for, and I hope we can agree that such a thing is not necessary in this case. Yet. Haikupoet 02:54, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I think the list should go - it's inherently POV, since the term is so loose and subjective. For me, nothing past about 1982 is likely to count, others are sure to disagree. Beside, if 65.43 is really serious about making a contribution to wikipedia, he should create himself a user name - for me and many others, bare IP addresses carry far less weight in debates than signed-up users and rightly so - if you're not committed enough to spend the 30 seconds required, why should we take any notice of your opinion? Graham 04:05, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

We seem to be developing a consensus that the list is POV, and yet one user has removed the NPOV tag. Could someone please restore it? I don't want to start a unilateral edit war. Haikupoet 04:25, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

It's one thing to say that a band was popular during the 70s to 90s. It's quite another thing to claim that band as "classic rock" Yeah, right. They are pretty much the same thing, so just leave all artists that are on the list there, and end this discussion. Again, don't remove any artists from the list, but you can add artists if you want. Just remember, most grunge bands don't exist anymore, and can be considered classic rock. Let's all agree on one thing-the classic rock corpus will always expand.CoolKatt number 99999 04:36, 17 August 2005

I don't know if I will actually create a user name, BTW. And Graham, "create" is not spelled right. CoolKatt number 99999 04:46, 17 August 2005

I've made up my mind. I will create a user name CoolKatt number 99999 04:48, 17 August 2005

Good. Welcome aboard! By the way carping about typos is not usually a way to win friends here.Graham 04:51, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that, and I added the page to my watchlist CoolKatt number 99999 04:59, 17 August 2005

The list of bands will also be part of my Profile until further notice, as in I copied it. CoolKatt number 99999 05:54, 17 August 2005

I had login problems, so I created a new user name, just added an extra 9 CoolKatt number 99999

Ah. Now things begin to get clearer -- CoolKatt: I think you are mis-interpreting the article as it stands. The article addresses Classic Rock primarily as a Radio Format rather than as a genre or concept. You seem to think that rock acts/songs can become small-c "classic" in the way that a car can, just by sticking around for a certain number of years. That may be true, but it's not what the article is about. Perhaps the header for the list needs to be more explicit about what the list is: core artists for the Classic Rock radio format. Clearly many of the bands you seem intent on keeping on the list do not fit this definition. So, we have to decide: edit the list, or change the article to incorporate a broader definition of "classic rock artists". I submit that doing the latter would result in an essentially useless list of *every* rock band more than X years old (where X is TBD). What do you think? Jgm 20:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Classic rock can also apply to any rock song as young as 10-11 years old. Just added this to the article before I logged in. CoolKatt number 99999

Edit-This includes most grunge music and other early alternative music, plus hair metal bands, 70s-80s punk and metal, and everything between The Beatles era and 1979. Put this in as a new section-defining "classic rock" CoolKatt number 99999 01:44, 18 August 2005

The problem here is that you want classic rock to be anything you say it is. Only Humpty Dumpty gets to make up words as he goes along, and his best skill is falling off of walls. What I'm getting at is that the consensus definition is not as broad-based as you want to say it is. Haikupoet 02:13, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Many classic rock streaming radio stations now have segments devoted to punk rock, 80's hair bands and 90's grunge. This should help a bit, plus I added more to "defining classic rock". CoolKatt number 99999 02:53, 18 August 2005

So, shall we delete the band list? tregoweth 15:41, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

• Upon re-reading the article, I think the "Key artists and albums" sections summarizes things well enough that the list of bands is unnecessary. tregoweth 22:40, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

It's OK, I have my own band list in my user profile, why don't you do it too? That way, we can all have a list of bands we consider classic rock. CoolKatt number 99999

There is no point to that. If you want it, well, it's your user page. But I don't think there's any real need for a list on the article. Haikupoet 05:39, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

definition/years

Sorry, CK, but you are going to have to come up with some external citation(s) for your "definition" for it to stand. Jgm 13:29, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Um, like what? CoolKatt number 99999

Whaddaya got? Jgm 02:13, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm back, and better than ever. So here's an idea-why don't we put a list of bands we consider classic rock in our user pages, like I did? CoolKatt number 99999

CoolKatt number 99999 - despite several requests you keep re-defining "classic rock" and the "classic rock era" to your personal taste. Can you, for example, come up with an example of a self-described "classic rock" radio station that has Elvis songs (or any song from the '50s) on its playlist? Please discuss here and establish a consensus before making these changes again. Jgm 13:48, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Second request. If you change it again without discussing I will report you as a vandal. Jgm 02:47, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Oh, fine, It's not like anyone here dislike rock music, just do what I say and put a list of performers we consider classic rock in our user profile, maybe as a subpage. And, unless you do report me, refrain from name-calling please, I'm not a University of Idaho student CoolKatt number 99999

Sorry, I was being sarcastic CoolKatt number 99999

What precisely are you trying to get across here? I'm going to second Tregoweth's removal of the list entirely, as it was unwieldy and redundant, but while you can have a bit of sloshover into the 80s and 90s there are some stylistic issues that are really not negotiable. It is true that classic rock stations sometimes play a bit of hair metal, but I've never heard anything more extreme than Def Leppard on the stations I've listened to -- certainly no Dio, or Poison, or the like (I'll grudgingly give you Metallica if you want, but they're not really hair metal anyway). I think the reader is probably best served with a description of the core artists of Classic Rock -- an exhaustive list is really unnecessary, not to mention POV and page clutter. (Come to think of it, the radio station list is getting a little long too -- time to trim anything that isn't in a major market, I think.) Haikupoet 05:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

A small rant

I respectfully suggest that whoever's adding A Flock of Seagulls and Animotion is on crack. tregoweth 05:25, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

I added AFOS, but I'm not on crack, as I am anti-drug (this is a message to all drugs-F.U. drugs!) CoolKatt number 99999

One more thing: While we're trying to reach a consensus, I will continue to maintain my list of classic rock bands in my user profile, I suggest that all of you have a list of bands you consider classic rock in your user profile as well, as I am done editing the main page for now, however I will continue to take part in discussions. CoolKatt number 99999

I didn't mean you were literally on crack, just that your choices seemed dubious. In any event, how does an 80s synth-pop band qualify as "classic rock"? tregoweth 18:18, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Well, OK CoolKatt number 99999

What's this about?

"Classic rock radio artists are nearly exclusively white and male; little of the funk, disco or soul music styles that co-existed with rock music in the original era, and that may have been played contemporaneously on AOR predecessors, survives in the classic rock format."

Rock radio also does not play Country music which is also predominantly white and male, while they do play Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin. Further R&B stations do not play Aerosmith as a general rule. This statement seems absurd!

I was wondering about the "nearly exclusively... male" part. You mention Janis Joplin. Other women on classic rock stations include, Debbie Harry (as lead singer of mostly-male Blondie, but she was the voice of the group), Joan Jett, Heart... OK there are not a tremendous number but I think those alone make "nearly exclusively" inaccurate. There are others. A few Jefferson Airplane/Starship songs with Grace Slick as lead singer. Oh! The Pretenders! Again not a female solo but a female lead singer. It think a Sheryl Crow song or two may even have made its way into the classic rock playlists. Nearly exclusively male? Nope! Zeutron 23:37, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, I convinced myself. I have now edited out the reference to "male" and have included Jimi Hendrix as the exception to the almost-all-white comment. It now reads: "Classic rock radio artists are nearly exclusively white, Jimi Hendrix being almost the only exception;..." By the way, I think the link to the article on "Whites" is kind of silly in this context, but I left it in. Zeutron 01:14, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

I would almost be inclined to suggest ditching the line altogether except for one point: it's fundamentally true. Female rock stars of the classic rock genre are the exception rather than the rule -- Heart and Janis Joplin are the only major ones apart from those you mention above that I can think of off the top of my head (Bonnie Raitt and Tina Turner could apply, but they aren't generally played on classic rock stations). It is true that you have proportionally more significant female rock stars in modern rock -- Melissa Etheridge, Shirley Manson, arguably Alanis Morissette come to mind -- but they came along largely too late to be included in the classic rock "canon", such as it is. What it comes down to is that classic rock is inarguably overwhelmingly white and male.

Ideally I'd ditch the sentence entirely anyway, as I'm not entirely certain what the relevance of the fact is in an NPOV encyclopedia (a feminist critic of rock music might wish to comment on it though). For whatever it's worth, considering the 70s as the heart of the classic rock era, the women doing ground-breaking musical work in those days seemed to be people like Donna Summer and Vicki Sue Robinson who focused on disco. Women in rock, for whatever reason, are a distinct minority, and only really came to prominence with the rise of alternative rock in the early 90s, and in some genres of rock such as metal female-fronted groups are at best a novelty. Not to say that women can't rock, mind you, but by and large they didn't, back in the day. Haikupoet 04:30, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Hm. I should qualify that last bit there -- there are women of considerable influence in the music world (of which I would probably put Tori Amos and Sarah McLachlan at the forefront, maybe Missy Elliot as well), but they aren't necessarily rockers even now. Haikupoet 04:33, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Based on the discussion above, I've restored the mention of CR artists being "predominantly" (rather than the prior "almost exclusively") male. As to the question of why it is relevant: the establishment of the AOR, and by extension, Classic Rock radio formats, had a distinct racial undertow, as the disco movement and anti-disco backlash of the late '70s led to a split among radio audiences that hadn't existed before. More than any other entertainment form, Classic Rock radio's content reflects its target audience: white males, and this seems a fact worth noting. Jgm 18:02, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Breaking out the station list

I decided to try something different from what I suggested above -- I broke out the station list into a separate article, to which I encourage people to add on-air nicknames for the stations. The list is organized geographically and is basically a cut-and-paste from this article. Follow the new link to see the list. (I'm not condoning adding a list of artists in the same manner though -- too POV.) Haikupoet 17:27, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Classic rock forum

Would anyone object to me adding a section on the content page called 'External Links'? I have a classic rock discussion forum website and I thought people seeking information about classic rock might be interested. I would like to add a link to it under this new section.

AC/DC

From this page

British hard rock and progressive rock bands make up a central pillar of classic rock artists; significant among these are Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, The Kinks, Pink Floyd, AC/DC, The Moody Blues, Yes, Rush, and Queen. Many different songs from these acts are likely to appear on the playlists of classic rock stations.

From the AC/DC page

AC/DC is an Australian hard rock band.

I noticed that too as I was reading. I've removed them from that list, but next time be bold and change it yourself. Also, please sign your comment using four tildes (~~~~) so people know who you are. -Greg Asche (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

But, AC/DC should be listed somewhere, even if not British -- they are a pillar of classic rock. 69.138.148.185 (talk) 17:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

"Blues Influence" etc.

This new section is not bad, but we now have TWO different sections telling us that almost all "Classic Rock" artists are white. Do we really need two? I am thinking now of taking out that whole sentence earlier in the article about classic rock being almost all-white, as this section says the same thing but puts it in context. I think the list of disco, funk etc. does not need to be restored anywhere, as all it really says is that people who listen to classic rock stations only like to listen to certain kinds of music! The same could be said of any other kind of music station including disco, funk, etc. Why don't those stations play classic rock? Because the people who listen to them don't want to hear it! Same is true here. As for singer-songwriter, that has always struck me as a bogus category anyway, and besides, there certainly are singer-songwriters whose music is played on classic rock stations: Springsteen, Dylan, Crosby, Stills, Nash, Young, all come immediately to mind. In fact, CSNY is a sub-genre of music that is often heard on classic rock stations (the ones I listen to, at least), but I am not sure that this article reflects that. Zeutron 01:35, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I deleted the whole section which was somewhat rambling and only marginally related to the subject. I suggest the editor consider whether any of that information might be useful to the rock music article. Jgm 02:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

For the reasons I stated above, I strongly disagree with this deletion. If classic rock is considered by some to be a genre unto itself, as stated near the beginning of the article, then a statement about its origins is more than "marginally" related to the subject. The "blues" also are related to "rock music," because "classic rock" is a subset of "rock." As for "somewhat rambling," I thought the proper response to that is editing to make the passage less rambling, not outright deletion. And I think the section in question was rather brief to be called "rambling" anyway. It could be tightened, but so can a lot of sections in a lot of articles that have not been deleted.

If anything should be deleted, it is that sentence higher in the article about the almost complete lack of African American artists in "classic rock." At least the writer of the "Blues" section gave some context to that and noted the irony between the African American influences on "classic rock" and almost complete lack of African American artists on the "classic rock" playlists. I am seriously considering replacing that whole sentence with one that deals only with the "predominantly male" issue but notes some of the exceptions, such as Joan Jett, Pat Benatar, Chrissie Hynde, Debbie Harry, Grace Slick, etc. But first I would like to know what other people think about this. Zeutron 19:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Origins

There has been a back-and-forth about who "invented" the format, on what station it first appeared, etc. In the absence of any references or documentation, I've just deleted the paragraph altogether. I'd suggest discussing here (with citations in hand) before re-adding this. Jgm 12:39, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

The Beatles

The article says this:

Artists whose musical output spanned the 1960s and 1970s, including The Beatles and The Rolling Stones form something of a special case: a few later songs from these acts (such as "Revolution" and "Come Together" by The Beatles and "Start Me Up" by the Stones) are staples of classic rock radio, while the older songs from these groups are seldom heard on the format, gravitating instead to oldies radio, along with nearly any other material recorded prior to around 1967.

Ignoring the part about the Stones, is the part about the Beatles really accurate? While "classic rock" stations certainly limit their selections to the "later" Beatles (probably starting with Strawberry Fields, early 1967), more than a "few" Beatles songs are heard on these stations. About half the songs on Sgt. Pepper itself, a few from MMT (I am the Walrus, for one), probably a few from the White Album, Hey Jude... I could go on. What it should probably say is something like "A variety of the Beatles' later songs (about 1967 through 1970) are staples of classic rock radio." I am not sure how to get the Stones back into the sentence. They are a different situation anyway, since their career (as known in the U.S.) is 40+ years, not six. Zeutron 07:23, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Progressive rock radio

The progressive rock (radio format) was missing from the Origins section; it was a partial predecessor to album oriented rock (much of what is heard now on classic rock was first heard on progressive), and deserves to be mentioned. I've worked it in. Wasted Time R 21:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Fleetwood Mac, oldies?

Mentioning Fleetwood Mac as a band whose earlier material is generally considered oldies is a little off-- their first studio album was recorded in 1968 (after the 1967-ish cutoff listed in that section), and their breakthrough material didn't even come until the mid to late 1970s (Fleetwood Mac in '75 and Rumours in '77). Even the Rolling Stones is a dubious example, as every Classic Rock station I've ever heard plays early Stones. The Beatles is probably the best example here; oldies stations love Meet the Beatles through Rubber Soul/Revolver, and Classic Rock stations pretty much cover Sgt. Pepper's on. Triphook 06:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Relation and influence vs. Classical Music

I will be thinking of writing some articles about this subject. --Music Master 21:50, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Radio Format?

Rock is a genre of music, classic rock is a subgenre of rock that ecompases 30 years of rock, give or take ten years. I get what this article says about classic rock starting out as something to do with the radio but I don't know if the entire article should be based around that. MaulYoda 01:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

It is a format, not a genre. It's just rock and roll from the late sixties to the eighties, and while most of them are in the same or similar genres, classic rock itself is more a period of time of rock and roll. Cheezer Rox (talk) 20:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Artists addition

I added whom I thought were relevant new additions to classic rock playlists around the country and outside of it. I specifically mention that they are controversial in their inclusion but they exist nonetheless. I hope you find this to be a welcome paragraph to the article. After my "blues influence" section was torn down I hope this section doesn't receive the same fate. Universalguru 3:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Regional Differences

What do you all think about implementing a section on regional differences in classic rock. For example The Tragically Hip are a main staple in Canada, whereas they see no air time in the US. Free is played far more often in Britain than the US as well. This is just an idea.

Steppenwolf and Kiss

The statement that you will only hear one song from each of these artists is patently false. "Magic Carpet Ride" is quite popular, as are "Strutter," "Beth," "Detroit Rock City," "Love Gun," "God Gave Rock and Roll to You II," and "Lick it Up." While Kiss and Steppenwolf certainly have many more songs than are commonly heard on classic rock radio, the same is true for every band. Better examples might be Thin Lizzy (although I've heard "Jailbreak" and "Cowboy Song" on the radio) or the Outfield.

The Key Artist Section

This section should just be removed, it's just becoming a poorly written massive list of orginal research. Ridernyc (talk) 21:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I have also added citation tags, and removed the Symphonic classic rock section. Ridernyc (talk) 21:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think that the phrase "such as" insinuates a short list, not a massive list of everyone's favorite artists. 66.224.201.50 (talk) 19:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Rock

Many stations are just calling it "rock" now. Sirius refers to its Classic Rock stations as Early Rock and Late Rock. Music Choice describes its classic rock station as "Witness the true pioneers of rock and the classic hits that provided the foundation of rock 'n' roll". On the AccuRadio Classic Rock station, their station ID goes "The history of rock music".

76.126.15.78 (talk) 15:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Clean-up

I made some important edits to this this article recently. I moved Bruce Springsteen to the solo artists, since he's more famous for his solo work than he is for his recent work with the E Street Band. I also added Cream and Jethro Tull into the British hard and progressive rock artists, since those artists seem rather prominent in the radio format. In addition, the Beatles and the Kinks may be neither hard rock nor prog, but they are true key artists in the classic rock format (I put them in a separate sentence). Finally, I just had to add mention about Stairway To Heaven and the Led Zep song's significance in the radio format's history. 97.97.174.186 (talk) 17:44, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Not a genre.

I've seen some songs (like many Grateful Dead ones and "Shooting Star" by Bad Company to name a few) and I believe even some records and bands have been labeled as "Classic Rock" in the genre box. I don't think this is accurate, as Classic Rock is really just a time period of rock and roll from the late sixties to the mid-eighties where Hard Rock, Blues-Rock, Psychedelic Rock, and others were dominant. But that's just it, it's made up of many different genres, just from the same time period.

So, basically, I guess I'm just saying that this should not be labeled as a genre for anything. Cheezer Rox (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

A bit late on this but I think it is both a genre and a format(a failing one at that NYC just lost its only Classic Rock Station). Heavy Metal, Progressive Rock, Psychedelic rock are arguably sub genres of Classic Rock. I have heard kids refer to Led Zep, and the Clash as Classic Rock. As a 51 year old this seems strange to me as I remember when The Clash were the rebels standing against everything Led Zep stood for. But thinking about it I can see how to an 18 year old Britney Spears fan or a 21 year old Slipknot freak Classic Rock groups sound much more alike alike then different. Edkollin (talk) 08:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Key artist section redux

Okay, I am as guilty as anyone for the way this section evolved, but it's clearly time for it to go. I've removed all mentions of specific bands and songs (as well as the tags). Yes, all artists mentioned are played on classic rock stations somewhere; but without some valid citation none of them in particular can be claimed to be "key". I also removed some uncited history that seems to keep coming back; again without some references this could easily be vanity or simply wrong. Jgm (talk) 21:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Great. Now if you could just "de-example-farm" every other music style or radio format article Wiki would be vastly improved :-). Editors just loving seeing how many places they can add their pov favourites though... so it's a never ending battle. The Real Libs-speak politely 22:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

PS.. my edit didn't restore anything... just reverted to a previous version. The Real Libs-speak politely 22:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Just "rock"

AccuRadio describes their Classic Rocktopia station, which is a classic rock station, as "the history of rock music". Music Choice describes their classic rock station as "Witness a tribute to the original architects of rock and the classic hits that defined the foundation of rock and roll."

Considering these descriptions, can it be determined that they are merely calling classic rock "rock" now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Retromaniac (talk • contribs) 20:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I would say no. The Classic Rock sound represents rock music or music that sounds like rock music that originated in the 1960's and 1970's. Classic Rock is generally more bombasitic and Alternative is generally more lo fi. But you are right in the sense that Classic Rock radio stations play Nirvana and Pearl Jam. It is a muddled mess. As of now the article is based on the format "Classic Rock" and it is a notable format. Edkollin (talk) 16:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Classic rock stations are not "just rock" -- thought those exist. Most classic rock stations don't play grunge rock (which is a form of rock). The station I'm most familiar with (WIMZ), for example, plays hard rock from the very late '60' right up to the beginning of the '90's, but almost nothing post-Nirvana and absolutely nothing with an obvious grunge influence. They also don't play punk rock, even very early punk, as it is seen as a "classic" style. Stations exist that play 60's to now, 80's' to now, and so on, but those don't use the term classic rock. (Though, its is interesting, that Pandora Music can't tell the difference, even when I personally hear a stylistic difference.) 69.138.148.185 (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Radio format only?

Can someone please provide any sort of source that backs up the claim that classic rock is only a radio format? By the logic of many of the arguments against it as a genre, rock encompasses anything that uses a guitar, whether it be punk, folk, rock and roll, grunge, alternative, heavy, soft, quick or slow. Classic rock is a period of music, or a period in the development of rock music that is classically defined as being from 1964 (British invasion ) to 1980 (Death of John Bonham/John Lennon) or 1985, but includes or excludes many of the transitional bands at either end of the spectrum (For example, New Wave group The Police is classic rock, but Blondie is not). To outright deny this as a genre or defined range of music history is to label music as you see fit to label it. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 03:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I could see where someone could have a personal opinion that the term could refer to an "era." Not sure where any valid sources would be to show the beginnings/ends of this era. My region has more "Classic rock" stations you can be counted. All of them have the exact same format of Classic rock. And all play music from the mid 60s up to modern day 2000s. Which contradicts the year-to-year example given above. It is certainly not a genre. It is an umbrella radio-term used to encompass a whole slew of rock genres. It should never be used as a genre in any Wikipedia music article. GripTheHusk (talk) 03:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Not a genre according to who? Using the playlist of a radio station that describes themselves as classic rock is far from reliable. Dates alone are not accurate simply because many bands formed between those dates continue to release material under their original name (Or in some cases under a new name, ie Heaven and Hell), or as solo artists.

Alternative Rock exists as a genre, despite the fact that it is merely a collection of styles into a broader category. What seperates them on the basic level? -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 04:06, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Do not add a band list to this article.

Unless you are prepared to reference every entry and constantly patrol it do not do it. See previous discussions above. Artist lists have been removed by consensus more then once. Ridernyc (talk) 19:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)