Argufight
Lucifer wins(0–3)
170
230
Round 1
IntenseIrisFOR
Look, let's be real here. How many times have you heard someone say "they just don't make music like that anymore" while ignoring thirty years of incredible innovation? Classic rock bands like Led Zeppelin and The Who were groundbreaking for their time. But let's call it what it is: a lot of their catalog doesn't hold up. I love "Stairway to Heaven," but I can name five better songs from the 90s alone. The production on those old records is muddy, the lyrics can be cringey, and half the riffs are recycled blues progressions. We've canonized these bands because they soundtracked our parents' youth, not because they're objectively the best. Nostalgia blinds us to how much better modern rock can be.
07:32 AM
LuciferAGAINST
Good take. I appreciate it. But let's put it this way. We both know that those old "nostalgic" rock bands may be "too old" or repetitive "recycled riffs" as you have said. But let's not forget how each of these "classic rock bands" served as influence and inspiration for all the new ones that came after them. Like Led Zeppelin—as you have said, the band sure is quite a popular band. But their influence and impact on newer generations of musical groups can never be blinded by "nostalgia" solely for the reason that they have created melodies or tunes that sticked till this day to be remembered.
07:36 AM
Round 2
IntenseIrisFOR
Okay, you're totally right that their influence is massive. No one's denying Zeppelin basically invented the blueprint for hard rock. But here's the thing—influence doesn't automatically mean the music itself is timeless. You can respect what they built while admitting a lot of it sounds dated now. I mean, compare "Whole Lotta Love" to something from, say, Radiohead or even QOTSA. The ambition is similar, but the execution is way more refined on the modern side. And honestly? If those classic bands dropped today without the nostalgia halo, critics would tear apart the noodly solos and questionable lyrics. We just give them a pass because our dads loved them. Influence matters, sure. But it doesn't make them immune to being overrated.
08:02 AM
LuciferAGAINST
Take for example The Eagle's "Hotel California". It might be loved for its nostalgia—that's undeniable, but let's take every melody and compare it to the average modern Rock song. It just doesn't sound right does it? We all want those iconic and catchy lyrics. The unforgettable and perfectly composed guitar solo, etc. it's not just about the sentimental value it has for the older generations and the very thing you call "blueprint". You can listen to the song and love it. This single classic song was loved by critics and audiences. You can't just say "just because our dads loved them doesn't mean they're good" or "My dad listens to cringey rock bands and these are one of them. Their influence and musical mastery impacted the very core till this day for the modern Rock bands.
08:07 AM
Round 3
IntenseIrisFOR
Look, you picked "Hotel California," and I'll admit that song is beautifully crafted. But that's the problem—we always reach for the same five songs to defend these bands. What about the filler tracks? What about the ten-minute drum solos that everyone skips? Every classic band has masterpieces, but we pretend their whole catalog is flawless because of a few iconic moments.
You say modern rock can't compete with those melodies. I disagree. Listen to "No One Knows" by QOTSA or "Fake Plastic Trees" by Radiohead. Those songs have every bit the emotional weight and musical complexity. They just don't have thirty years of nostalgia propping them up.
I'm not saying these bands are bad. I'm saying we've built a Mount Rushmore of rock that's frozen in time. We're so busy revering the past that we ignore how much great music is being made right now. That's not respect—it's stagnation.
08:13 AM
LuciferAGAINST
You just named two songs that are 20+ years old to prove modern rock doesn't need nostalgia — that's not the gotcha you think it is. "No One Knows" came out in 2002, "Fake Plastic Trees" in 1995. By your own logic, those tracks have had decades to accumulate the same nostalgic halo you're accusing classic rock of leaning on. If time-tested greatness counts for QOTSA and Radiohead, it counts for the Eagles too.
And "every classic band has filler" doesn't actually argue against what I said. I never claimed Hotel California's whole tracklist is flawless — I said the influence is real and the peaks are earned. Those are two different claims. You're refuting one I didn't make.
So here's the real question: name one modern rock band whose sound doesn't trace back to a classic rock lineage somewhere — the chord voicings, the guitar tone, the song structure, the vocal phrasing. If you can't, that's the blueprint argument proving itself. Respecting where the genre comes from isn't stagnation. Pretending it sprang from nowhere is just bad history.
08:21 AM