Is Green Day Irrelevant?

[Hermione]

You misunderstood me.  I am not saying they should "retire", I'm saying they could because they have a reputation that will not diminish if they don't do anything again.  Also, unless they are awful with money, they financially don't have to do anything.  I'm also not saying that what they would turn out will not be good.  I'm saying that I think what they turn out will be very good because they don't have to try for hits, they can make the kind of music they want too.  When a band is younger, and not as established or successful as GD, the record companies put alot of pressure on them to come up with hits.  They don't have that pressure on them anymore.  

Also, I most definitely did not say that only people in their 40's would go to their concerts, I'm not sure where you got that from.  However, as bands, actors, artists get older, they don't appeal to younger audiences as much.  That is a fact.  People tend to relate to people closer to their own age.  I don't think anyone on this site would go nuts over Sean Connery right now, ,but my mother loved him, he was her demographic.  Where someone like Evan Peters did not appeal to her.

And, they are older.  There is no way in hell, they can keep up the same pace they did 20 years ago.  It is a fact of life, it is a fact of aging.     

Green Day were the first ever band to sell out Emirates stadium (60,000 capacity) and they did it in 2013. They're still a massive live draw.

And of course they're older but early 40s really isn't that old. Especially when (while looking his best on tour or promoting an album anyway) Billie still looks very youthful and energetic, they dress young, and generally have a fun/young image. They don't exactly come across as a bunch of old men yet.

[Panda]

I agree with pretty much everything people have said, I just disagree with the use of the terms relevant and irrelevant.  I think there is a big difference between relevant and popular.  Are GD popular right now?  No, they are not.  Are they relevant, yes, in the same sense that The Beatles, The Who, etc are.  They are musically significant and always will be (OK, not to the same extent as The Beatles, but still significant).  Most artists in the world would kill for 10% of the success they have had.  People will always know their name and will always know certain songs.  

Will they ever be as popular as they were during AI?  Highly unlikely.  They are aging rock stars (sorry ladies, Billie does look his age, gray hair, wrinkles, reading glasses).  Will they ever sell out arenas they way they used too?  Probably not the huge ones, but I still think they can sell out smaller ones, just like the other aging rock stars do.  The truth is, they don't ever have to put out another album again, ever, if they don't want too.  If they ever do, I think they are going to put out something that they really believe in, because there is nothing left to prove.

 

I totally agree.

But Dave Grohl being the "most likeable guy in show business" describes my point of view pretty good, so you can spit out your coffee a third time  

[sara_gd]

Green Day will be able to go on nostalgia tours for as long as they want to, playing the greatest hits to a crowd of devoted 40-something fans, spending 45 of the 120 minutes alloted to the set in an endless "hey-oh" parade, maybe even going as a double bill with Journey or Def Leppard if they really want to experience what it's like to be old. They might drop another album or two over time, but another Dookie or AI? Nah. That's not going to happen.

It wasn't you who said that about people in their 40s, it's this post here, though now that I re-read it, maybe it was an exaggeration along with the next part or maybe it refers to number of people, not age. /Nevermind.

You misunderstood me.  I am not saying they should "retire", I'm saying they could because they have a reputation that will not diminish if they don't do anything again.  Also, unless they are awful with money, they financially don't have to do anything.  I'm also not saying that what they would turn out will not be good.  I'm saying that I think what they turn out will be very good because they don't have to try for hits, they can make the kind of music they want too.  When a band is younger, and not as established or successful as GD, the record companies put alot of pressure on them to come up with hits.  They don't have that pressure on them anymore.  

Also, I most definitely did not say that only people in their 40's would go to their concerts, I'm not sure where you got that from.  However, as bands, actors, artists get older, they don't appeal to younger audiences as much.  That is a fact.  People tend to relate to people closer to their own age.  I don't think anyone on this site would go nuts over Sean Connery right now, ,but my mother loved him, he was her demographic.  Where someone like Evan Peters did not appeal to her.

And, they are older.  There is no way in hell, they can keep up the same pace they did 20 years ago.  It is a fact of life, it is a fact of aging.     

I agree they could, too, but I think it's very unlikely they will actually do it. 

What you say about the pressure record companies put on artists and that now they are freer to do what they want could be true, though I'm not sure they would do something less comercial because of it.... but I don't know, you could be right. 

The thing about age is... yes, you are right, but when they put out AI they were 32, when they put out 21st they were 37... if you look at typical boy bands, you don't really expect 15 year olds to be mad about someone who is that age. As for general teenagers, well Dookie is way more appealing than 21st Century Breakdown, the latest doesn't really speak about the teenage world... and there was still looaads of teenagers listening to Green Day. So, even though you're right that as age goes up younger listeners go down, it's not that easy. 

[Chin for a Day]

Green Day were the first ever band to sell out Emirates stadium (60,000 capacity) and they did it in 2013. They're still a massive live draw.

And of course they're older but early 40s really isn't that old. Especially when (while looking his best on tour or promoting an album anyway) Billie still looks very youthful and energetic, they dress young, and generally have a fun/young image. They don't exactly come across as a bunch of old men yet.

I am rrally not articulating well today.  I am not saying the can't be huge again, I am simply saying that they can choose to take the rest of the careers slow and still be regarded as a great band.  They don't need to do another mega album to be thought of as a great band.

As far as the age is concerned, I have 3 teens and they do like some green day songs, but as a whole the band is not appealing much to their demographic.  My kids and their peers absolutely view them as an older band.  That may be different in other parts of the world, but that is how it is,here.  They may appeal more to that age group when the new album comes out.

 

 

[BilIie Joe Armstrong]

this. my peers aren't crazy about them. Actually most people I know who listen to them are older than me and most of GDCers are older than me as well. Some time ago my friend brought me one of those songbooks we borrow for music lessons. Someone younger than us must have scribbled all over it and they were a huge Green Day fan. Unfortunately, I never found who was it, but I consider it a proof that people younger than me still are interested in them. This unknown person is the only such case i know about, though. 

[Alan86]

except Swift and Ed write their own music and perform their own music

 

all music artists in all fields music is handed to the suits and labels have the final say so 

 

your argument against Swift and Ed has zero merit 

that's why I said that bit about one direction only. I'm well aware swift and Sheeran write their own music. And actually I like some of sheerans stuff and had no arguments against him or swift, so you saying my point has zero merit, has zero merit. I just said that's what people are buying these days, this is stuff that is topping the charts. My argument against One Direction being good had moved well on from my original statement to the point where I was quiet clearly talking about one direction specifically. 

[Guest]

I totally agree.

But Dave Grohl being the "most likeable guy in show business" describes my point of view pretty good, so you can spit out your coffee a third time  

Dave Grohl is definitely 100% a dickhead and no one will ever be able to convince me otherwise. No one acts like that unless they're massively overcompensating.

[unextraordinarygirl]

I disagree about Insomniac and Warning not having great songs on them. Insomniac especially has some amazing songs on it. It didn't get as much airtime and rotation as Dookie but it's full of excellent songs. 

[Hermione]

I am rrally not articulating well today.  I am not saying the can't be huge again, I am simply saying that they can choose to take the rest of the careers slow and still be regarded as a great band.  They don't need to do another mega album to be thought of as a great band.

As far as the age is concerned, I have 3 teens and they do like some green day songs, but as a whole the band is not appealing much to their demographic.  My kids and their peers absolutely view them as an older band.  That may be different in other parts of the world, but that is how it is,here.  They may appeal more to that age group when the new album comes out.

 

 

Ohh I'm sorry I meant to reply to sara_gd with the first bit, not sure how I managed not to.

Yeah I agree, they might seem that way now while they're out of the spotlight, but if they release a new album that's well received and they're doing their lively performances in shape and looking stylish with cool clothes and hairstyles and freshly shaved faces I don't think they'll be viewed as an "old" band yet.

[DookieLukie]

 

Mostly, I just don't understand the FF's popularity. They're so fucking average. Why do people waste their time on such mediocrity?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMmZq0rTpA0

[Christian's Inferno!]

First of all, I think they are relevant in some ways. American Idiot and Dookie are still so relevant to so many people and while their newer stuff might not be as relevant, Green Day are still going strong. The trilogy didn't actually do that badly and if their next release can get back up to say the level of success that maybe 21st Century Breakdown had, I think they've still got it. Even if it doesn't do well, I'll probably still love it just because I love listening to Billie Joe sing. Even on the trilogy, his voice never bores me after 2 hours of listening. They may or may not be able to reach the success of Dookie or AI, but as long as they're still making music, that's enough for me.

Also, I believe on Green Day's next release they'll still try to do something epic. AI and 21CB had that epic sound to it, whereas the trilogy was an epic idea (but didn't sound particularly epic). And I don't think their next release will be their last, I still think they'll continue to make albums. And I think they will try to make songs that could become hits like in AI or 21CB. The trilogy was more of a gift to the fans and while I believe their future releases will be for the fans, GD will still try to make hit singles and get new fans

[Sir Psycho Sexy]

I think Green Day are still somehow relevant, they could sell more than 15k tickets in any city in Europe any time. 

But I wanted to say other thing. Why do you guys only mention Foo Fighters as last popular band? What about AC/DC (just look at their tour and venues) or Muse (also just look at their tour and number of shows in Paris, London and Milano) 

Rock is almost dead last 20 years or so. There are few bands that are popular now and there were some bands that were really popular 12-13 years ago. Back then in in mainstream we had GD/Linkin Park/RHCP now we have AM/Muse//M+S (sadly) also Coldplay (rock?) and Foo Fighters and some other bands are in the mainstream whole time. 

[WhiteTim]

I think Green Day are still somehow relevant, they could sell more than 15k tickets in any city in Europe any time. 

But I wanted to say other thing. Why do you guys only mention Foo Fighters as last popular band? What about AC/DC (just look at their tour and venues) or Muse (also just look at their tour and number of shows in Paris, London and Milano) 

Rock is almost dead last 20 years or so. There are few bands that are popular now and there were some bands that were really popular 12-13 years ago. Back then in in mainstream we had GD/Linkin Park/RHCP now we have AM/Muse//M+S (sadly) also Coldplay (rock?) and Foo Fighters and some other bands are in the mainstream whole time. 

ac/dc is basically a touring band their last cd didn't sell at all no radio hits in how long? 20 years? 

[Guest]

I think Green Day are still somehow relevant, they could sell more than 15k tickets in any city in Europe any time. 

But I wanted to say other thing. Why do you guys only mention Foo Fighters as last popular band? What about AC/DC (just look at their tour and venues) or Muse (also just look at their tour and number of shows in Paris, London and Milano) 

Rock is almost dead last 20 years or so. There are few bands that are popular now and there were some bands that were really popular 12-13 years ago. Back then in in mainstream we had GD/Linkin Park/RHCP now we have AM/Muse//M+S (sadly) also Coldplay (rock?) and Foo Fighters and some other bands are in the mainstream whole time. 

AC/DC has been playing the same setlist since 1995. They're still releasing new albums, but they're pretty firmly into the "greatest hits" portion of their career. With Malcolm retired and Phil in prison, it's entirely possible that they call it a career after this tour.

Muse is more of a hybrid band than a straightforward rock outfit. They do lots of electronica, some thrash metal, some pop, shit, even dubstep. You will never see the Foos do dubstep. I struggle to even consider them "rock" sometimes, but I do think they're indicative of what rock has evolved into. Also, Muse is almost Queen-like in their draw in Europe. They're popular worldwide, but they are now and always will be the shit in Europe, regardless of whether or not they choose to do an entire music video in drag (who gets that reference?).

Linkin Park was a pile of hot shit from the start. RHCP is still around, but they've also hit the "greatest hits" portion of their career. There are rock bands out there, or at least bands firmly rooted in rock. The Airborne Toxic Event, Nightmare Air, Royal Blood, Cage the Elephant, all of those bands have a strong rock influence, even if what they play isn't 100% rock. They just haven't broken through the ceiling the way the Foos or Muse have, and I think that says a lot about changing tastes in mainstream music. Much more so than it does the quality of the music those bands put out.

Also, please do not ever equate Coldplay with rock again.

[Maid Meringue]

LOL my friends have been telling me that GD is irrelevant since 2006. Most music I listen to is either too old or too obscure to be acknowledged, so there's just a point where you have to do your own thing and not care about other people's opinions. Since when is liking something popular ever fun anyway? I know the worst hell I've been through as a fan was when 21stCB came out and I swear, if I was around pre-AI i would have had a stroke with all the noobs in the same way I nearly did in 2009. 

To conclude: Saying Green Day is irrelevant is like saying that Metallica is irrelevant. It's bullshit. 

[BilIie Joe Armstrong]

LOL my friends have been telling me that GD is irrelevant since 2006. Most music I listen to is either too old or too obscure to be acknowledged, so there's just a point where you have to do your own thing and not care about other people's opinions. Since when is liking something popular ever fun anyway? I know the worst hell I've been through as a fan was when 21stCB came out and I swear, if I was around pre-AI i would have had a stroke with all the noobs in the same way I nearly did in 2009. 

To conclude: Saying Green Day is irrelevant is like saying that Metallica is irrelevant. It's bullshit. 

Green Day and Metallica  are on a similar level of irrelevance. 

[Maid Meringue]

Green Day and Metallica  are on a similar level of irrelevance. 

They're two of the biggest bands in existence. On the radio multiple times a day on all rock-related stations, albums continue to sell, venues continue to sell out. Even those who don't listen to them, know who they are and make reference to them when discussing music. I don't know what other people define as irrelevance, but this is definitely what relevance is to me. 

[BilIie Joe Armstrong]

They're two of the biggest bands in existence. On the radio multiple times a day on all rock-related stations, albums continue to sell, venues continue to sell out. Even those who don't listen to them, know who they are and make reference to them when discussing music. I don't know what other people define as irrelevance, but this is definitely what relevance is to me. 

To me it's the influence on the scene. Both bands are very successful and sell well, however, they've sounded the same for years and no one expects them to outdo themselves or surprise. They're not developing, and to me, it's what turns a relevant band into a nostalgia act. 

[UNICORN VOMIT]

To me it's the influence on the scene. Both bands are very successful and sell well, however, they've sounded the same for years and no one expects them to outdo themselves or surprise. They're not developing, and to me, it's what turns a relevant band into a nostalgia act. 

what are you sick of KFAD ?

[BilIie Joe Armstrong]

what are you sick of KFAD ?

KFAD's not for me  

[Guest]

AC/DC has been playing the same setlist since 1995. They're still releasing new albums, but they're pretty firmly into the "greatest hits" portion of their career. With Malcolm retired and Phil in prison, it's entirely possible that they call it a career after this tour.

Muse is more of a hybrid band than a straightforward rock outfit. They do lots of electronica, some thrash metal, some pop, shit, even dubstep. You will never see the Foos do dubstep. I struggle to even consider them "rock" sometimes, but I do think they're indicative of what rock has evolved into. Also, Muse is almost Queen-like in their draw in Europe. They're popular worldwide, but they are now and always will be the shit in Europe, regardless of whether or not they choose to do an entire music video in drag (who gets that reference?).

Linkin Park was a pile of hot shit from the start. RHCP is still around, but they've also hit the "greatest hits" portion of their career. There are rock bands out there, or at least bands firmly rooted in rock. The Airborne Toxic Event, Nightmare Air, Royal Blood, Cage the Elephant, all of those bands have a strong rock influence, even if what they play isn't 100% rock. They just haven't broken through the ceiling the way the Foos or Muse have, and I think that says a lot about changing tastes in mainstream music. Much more so than it does the quality of the music those bands put out.

Also, please do not ever equate Coldplay with rock again.

The main problem is now with the music industry. Execs will always go for the easy A and pick a safe rock band who appeal to a lot of people, and then publicise them to fuck on shitty chat shows like Fallon. This is how you end up with bland mediocrity like Coldplay, Imagine Dragons, and Cage The Elephant being the leading lights in the American rock scene. Even bands with some respectability like Foo Fighters play it relentlessly safe  Rock is dying in the US because the industry simply doesn't support interesting new bands like the British/European market does. In the UK alone there's been Muse (who are certifiably insane), Arctic Monkeys (whose indie-punk debut was the fastest selling debut album in history), Biffy Clyro (who scored a No. 1 album with a double album off the back of a lead single which featured a fucking bagpipe solo), and Royal Blood (who feature a bassist who plays lead guitar better on a bass than Billie Joe does on a guitar and a drummer who insists on wearing stupid hats and doing drum solos in the middle of their singles). Even fucking Avenged Sevenfold got a No. 1 album in the UK with their last album, and it was fucking shit even by their low standards.

Also AC/DC change it up live quite a bit FYI. They do as much of a greatest hits set as Green Day do. They have about 40 songs that they could play and everyone would know every single word, which gives them a lot of flexibility with their setlists, plus they always play the singles off their latest album.

[MikeDirntConfused]

To most people that I speak with, they all mention that Green Day was "totally middle school" - these people have graduated college. I don't know, apart from some pop rock/pop punk fans, it seems like Green Day is no longer the flavor of the month. They had 2 super successful records, but now are forgotten in time (personally, I feel they haven't been). I don't think people really care about the band, except for the hardcore fans and the online community.

[localinsomniac]

What's irrelevant to me is other people's opinions. I'm going to continue listening to Green Day one way or the other.

[jengd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMmZq0rTpA0

YES!  I agree so much with this, Titanic is awful, totally hyped up nonsense that people seem to believe is good because they get told so by the media again and again, I think it's right that many people just want to hear what they already like over and over because we all know that the majority love mediocrity.  Totally agree with a lot being said on here and am very sad about the decline of rock music.  Back to GD, I would say don't underestimate these guys, I think they have the courage and security to try whatever they wish and for all the right reasons.  I love it when they they get experimental, love Nimrod and Warning and can't wait to hear what's next.   I would rather they get it wrong at times than turn into Status Quo!!

[ThousandHours]

As for the bands relevancy, I'd have to agree, they aren't really relevant anymore. As others in this thread have stated, I'd contribute it to the fact that pop, rap, and electronic music are at the forefront, they're the dominant genres. Rock music lost it's integrity awhile ago. Music with substance will continue to be replaced with marketable, artistically corrupt, watered down bullshit, and if I'm honest, most people's taste in music isn't very refined or eclectic, therefore there isn't substantial demand for quality. 

I've noticed, and I'm sure many other posters here recognize that, generally speaking, a lot of people love a band when they're huge, and then abandon them when their popularity wanes. I've never been one to claim they love a band one minute, and then ditch them the next when they're no longer the flavor of the month. When I like a bands music, well... I like a bands music, and will probably like said band for years. My Interest in bands don't wane based on their popularity or relevancy, I don't care, that doesn't even matter or come into play for me.