2. music
  3. 182579-180189

Is R.E.M. underrated by new music nerds?

I've been in a R.E.M. phase in late 2018, they kept me going through the toughest period of my life. A lot of their stuff especially in their incredible 1987-1996 run means a lot to me and have been pivotal in growing my music taste but emotion aside I think quality-wise they were one of the greatest rock band of all time, if not one the best band. I actually think this is not a hot take.

What I think is an interesting thing to discuss is how R.E.M. are relevant to new audiences of my age (I'm 20 btw) like all the music nerds that grew on the Internet (RYM or /mucore) or the music channels or profiles on YouTube and Instagram that review or examine music.

I think that in this demographic area R.E.M. are underrated or more specifically they are put inside the categories of "Gen X bands" like U2 or similar. And i think it's a shame because they have one the best musical palettes of all time provided by really skilled musicians and an incredible and eclectic vocalist and songwriter like Michael Stipe. A band that even when they became globally famous they managed to stay coherent to their sound (until at least the early 90s) and political ethic. Their material should get more recognition among younger audiences like mine considering the huge influence they had on a lot of artist.

What do you think?

seola30
roxy54's avatar
roxy54
7,693 posts
 

@czarivey

I thank you for proving my point about you. You were talking out of your a** about a subject you know nothing about. Surprise.

petg60
1,486 posts
 

Not my favourites of that period, but they were an alternative.

I have the feeling though that most stopped after Murmur, especially Stipe’s passion and Buck’s ideas and exquisite guitar playing. Still, Lifes Rich Pageant (the beginning of an end?), Automatic for the People, Fables of the Reconstruction, and bits here and there is what remains, imho.

 

mysterioso1
29 posts
 

 

Funny you bring this up. I was recently thinking that I haven't listened to REM for along while nor have I heard or read much about them. Their first EP Chronic Town is fabulous as is Murmur. As is the case with many bands, their efforts to evolve their sound and vision beyond their initial offerings lost fans over time. 

 

mapman's avatar
mapman
21,859 posts
 

I recall a dealer system demo back in the 90s of “Radio Song” on my CD copy of “Out of Time” using Dynaudio speakers that put me into system upgrade mode big time. There was so much musical articulation on display with that demo that drew me in and it took me quite a long time to be able to pull off that same trick at home. I ended up replacing pretty much everything at the time to do it.  I still use that track as a reference. My setup has to do that one a certain way or else. 

bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,454 posts
 

When R.E.M. were hot I was already too old for them. By then I was listening to NRBQ, John Hiatt, Ry Cooder, Tom Waits, Lucinda Williams, Los Lobos, Steve Earle, The Fabulous Thunderbirds, The Blasters, Marshall Crenshaw, Nick Lowe, etc. You know.....adult music. Better songwriters, singers, and musicians than the guys in R.E.M. IMO, of course.

While the music of those I mention still sounds fresh and current (timeless), R.E.M. sounds of it's time: dated. Again, IMO. I know a couple of older musicians who are still stuck in 1966, to whom the music of the 60's (particularly The damn Beatles) is the best ever made. Just as older people in the 1960's felt the same about the Big Bands of the 30's and 40's.

There is no reason to expect current young people to be able to relate to R.E.M. any more than fans of the Big Bands could relate to the new music of the 60's. Just as the fans of the Big Bands didn't get or like The Beatles, young people now have no obligation to like R.E.M. We had our time, it's now their's.

More to discover