21st century rock artists who would have been huge in the 70's

[coltrane2]

It occurred to whilst thoroughly enjoying the spiffing new Rival Sons album "Head Down" (review shortly I promise) that despite all of the talk of retro plagiarism, what's actually happening IMO is that they were born/ conceived 35 - 40 years out of time.

Same with the frankly amazing BlackBerry Smoke and Avett Brothers and Black Country Communion for that matter (even if the latter have a warrant to do exactly that, given that their lead singer/ bassist is one Glen Hughes).

So that's the topic. I'd be interested hear if we think these guys were simply conceived a little too late, meaning that what would or should have been a 5million + album sales figure struggles to translate into 50,000.

Fair or is their a quality and authenticity differential between the likes of Rival Sons and Purple, The Doors, Free, Bad Company et al? I won't put Zeppelin in the frame here as that is probably another level. I'll leave those comparatives to Sammy Hagar (lol).

Thoughts?

 

[Big Ears]

Graveyard, Electric Mary and The Quill spring to mind. I'm tempted to add Spock's Beard and Transatlantic, but the technology they use has changed. Jazz rock supergroups, featuring Portnoy, Sheehan and others, would have been right at home. There are also bands from the eighties and nineties who would have fitted in the seventies, like Blue Muder, Badlands and early Manowar.

 

[CLASIKROKR]

AIRBOURNE

 

[Bonham'ssqueakypedal]

The Flower Kings
Spock's Beard
Transatlantic


(yes they are all prog bands )

 

[terry ells]

 

[Jantine]

Errrr....all of them. Pretty much all guitarist now have the knowledge of guitar play that wasn't available average performer in the 70's. That is like saying, which car now would be better than one in the 70's.

 

[Khor1255]

No. What you can do technically is one thing. But without soul?

Please. I think very few performers today would even last at amatur hour on any respectable stage in the 60s. They didn't settle for dry technical proficiency and in fact very few of todays performers even have that.

 

[Aero]

None of them. Today's music has no soul and musicians barely know how to play their instruments.

 

[ILoveJimmyPage]

Not all of today's music is bad. I think it's popular music that gives today's musicians a bad name. It's a lot harder for respectable artists to be able to be recognized when teen singers and hip hop dance tunes are what sell these days.

 

[Khor1255]

I'm sure there are less well known artists that are still rocking strong but I'm assuming this thread is about people we've heard of. Even those I like I don't think would have outshined anyone in the 70s. But so far the actual examples aren't that bad so please, carry on.