Dave Grohl Q&A: Why Rock Will Never Die & Why 2011 Was His Best Year Ever

http://www.billboard.com/#/features/dave-grohl-q-a-why-rock-will-never-die-why-1005831362.story

After 17 years spent lurking on the fringes of rock superstardom, Foo Fighters now find themselves, in many ways, leading the charge for a resurgent modern rock scene. 2011 was reaffirming year for the Foos on many fronts, driven by the success of the ba... album, "Wasting Light" -- and the blowout global tour and six Grammy noms, including Album of the Year, that followed.

As he reflects on what he calls "the best year of his life," the Foos' Dave Grohl weighs in with Billboard on the health of rock'n'roll, what's wrong with the music business, and why these "five dorks" might just actually represent something bigger than just a simple band.

Congrats on a hell of a year.

Grohl: It's been a good one, 2011 was very good to me. I was at a New Year's Eve party and someone asked me how was my year, and I said I honestly think 2011 was the best year of my entire life, and I actually meant it.

You and the Foos were in the thick of it all year, so what's your take on the health of rock?

There's always gonna be rock'n'roll bands, there's always gonna be kids that love rock'n'roll records, and there will always be rock'n'roll. I travel all over the world and play music, and it's easy to think rock'n'roll has gone away when you're in a country like America. We just got back from a trip Down Under, we did a tour of Australia and New Zealand where we were pulling 40,000-50,000 people a night, selling out stadiums. To me, that means rock'n'roll is alive and well. The thing that will never go away is that connection you make with a band or a song where you're moved by the fact that it's real people making music. You make that human connection with a song like "Let It Be" or "Long and Winding Road" or a song like "Bohemian Rhapsody" or "Roxanne," any of those songs. They sound like people making music.

In America, rock'n'roll isn't in the forefront of the mainstream as it is the rest of the world. England is another country where rock bands are hugely successful: You hear them on the radio, they have hits and play stadiums, and it's almost like it's bigger than it's ever been. But for whatever reason, here in America there's not as much focus on rock'n'roll bands. I don't know what it is, but it's one of the few countries in the world where rock'n'roll is not huge.

Is this discussion something you've had with the band and your team?

No. One of the reasons why we're still a band and we still make albums and we're still successful is we don't pay attention to any of that. We have our own studio, our own label, and we do everything on our own terms. To us the most important thing is we're satisfied within the band, and once we finish making a record we give it to the rest of the world. But we've always lived within this beautiful bubble that is the Foo Fighters. You can't pop it, you can't change what we do, because we try to keep it entirely real and pure. We've seen lots of trends come and go -- nu metal, skinny ties -- and we just kept our heads down and done our thing for so long that none of that really matters, and ultimately what happens is we end up making albums people connect to because they're real records.

But no, it's never been an issue. For years, usually about once a year, you have a rock band that comes out and says, "We're gonna save rock'n'roll," and then you'll read an article asking, "Is Rock Dead?" It's never gone away in my world. Ask the guys in AC/DC whether they think rock'n'roll is dead.

Because you have things like "American Idol" and you've got radio stations that play music made entirely by computers, it's easy to forget there are bands with actual people playing actual instruments that rock. For the fans, I don't think it's gone away at all. I don't know too many people that give up listening to rock'n'roll. It's seems to be fucking alive and well.

When you come out of your "bubble" and deliver these massive hits, does it surprise you that radio gets behind it and people respond the way they do?

You have to understand, we're a really simple band. We think we suck and we try really hard to make good records and we practice. We don't feel like the biggest, best band in the world. We just feel like the same five dorks that were touring in a van 17 years ago, that hasn't changed. But there was a time about 10 years ago when we would get asked to come play an awards show or a radio festival or something like that and we'd show up and be the only rock band. Here we're on a bill with pop artists like Pussycat Dolls or some new rapper and then we get up and beat the shit out of our instruments. And I started wondering, "Why are we even here?" I wondered if they just needed a "rock band" -- "Who's a rock band? Call the Foo Fighters." Then I started thinking maybe we actually represent something to people, maybe when they hear the name "Foo Fighters" they just think rock'n'roll, and I thought, "Wow, that's cool." Then over the years playing shows I'd look out at the audience and see kids with Nirvana shirts and their parents with Foo Fighters shirts -- which seems upside down -- and I'd see moustaches and kids at their first rock concert. Our audience became so diverse I thought, "Man, they just want to see a rock show." Go see Bruce Springsteen. Go see Tom Petty, AC/DC, Roger Waters, any of these people. Go see Pearl Jam or Soundgarden. I went to see Soungarden four or five months ago; I didn't stand in the VIP section, I ran down and got crushed in front of the stage and danced around sweaty with a bunch of people I didn't know for an hour and 45 minutes.

I don't think there's anything wrong with rock at all. It's overlooked. And right now, the current musical climate is not unlike it was back in 1991, right before Nirvana [Grohl's former band] got popular. The late '80s was full of over-produced pop that kids had nothing to grab hold of -- they had no way of connecting to this hair metal band singing about fucking strippers in a limousine on Sunset Boulevard. Who can relate to that? Then you had a bunch of formulaic pop songstress bullshit, and music was boring. And then a bunch of bands with dirty kids got on MTV and rock'n'roll became huge again. And I feel like that's about to happen. Something's got to give. It can't be song contests on television for the rest of our lives. It can't be the same playlists on every radio station for the rest of our lives. It can't be music made entirely by computers with people talking over it the rest of our lives. It can't go that way, it just won't.

I feel like as a musician and a part of this rock'n'roll scene, I have a responsibility to make shit real, to not think about all of that other bullshit, not think about making music for money or promoting music for fashion, the contests. My responsibility is to make shit that's real. Once you start doing the right thing, it will get better.

Someone asked me recently, "What do you think the problem with the music industry is?" I said, take the Adele record, for example. It's an amazing record and everybody's so shocked that it's such a phenomenon. I'm not. You know why that record's huge? Because it's fucking good and it's real. When you have an artist singing about something real and she's incredibly talented, it deserves all the rewards it gets, it's a great record. Now imagine if all records were that good. Do you think only one of them would sell? Fuck no! All of them would. If all records were that good the music business would be on fire, but they're not. A lot of people are promoting records that are just throw-it-against-the-wall-see-if-it-sticks meaningless bullshit. Everybody has the responsibility to do the right thing and promote artists that mean something.

I love his point about the Adele album. Love that he's even AWARE of that album. I listen to plenty of great rock music that is being made in America, regardless of how "big" it is. I'm not sure I agree with him about it making a huge comeback, but I do think the playing field will level out again at some point, particularly where radio is concerned.

Dave Grohl says:

Someone asked me recently, "What do you think the problem with the music industry is?" I said, take the Adele record, for example. It's an amazing record and everybody's so shocked that it's such a phenomenon. I'm not. You know why that record's huge? Because it's fucking good and it's real. When you have an artist singing about something real and she's incredibly talented, it deserves all the rewards it gets, it's a great record. Now imagine if all records were that good. Do you think only one of them would sell? Fuck no! All of them would. If all records were that good the music business would be on fire, but they're not. A lot of people are promoting records that are just throw-it-against-the-wall-see-if-it-sticks meaningless bullshit. Everybody has the responsibility to do the right thing and promote artists that mean something.

I do think there's a rock revival on the horizon. Maybe not as big as it was when 1991 happened or even during the early '70s but it will happen.

Cerebus said:

I love his point about the Adele album. Love that he's even AWARE of that album. I listen to plenty of great rock music that is being made in America, regardless of how "big" it is. I'm not sure I agree with him about it making a huge comeback, but I do think the playing field will level out again at some point, particularly where radio is concerned.

Thanks for the post. ^^I hope you (and Grohl) are right.

It's true that you can hear more varied things in other countries - I've heard world music, then a contemporary club song, then a Beatles song played after each other on radio in Europe, and songs in different languages.

I read a comment recently in the org that radio plays the songs put out by the record companies that own them or pay them. Do you know if this is true -- isn't that the kind of corruption that was going on like in the '50s-'60s, or am I naive?

artist76 said:

Cerebus said:

I love his point about the Adele album. Love that he's even AWARE of that album. I listen to plenty of great rock music that is being made in America, regardless of how "big" it is. I'm not sure I agree with him about it making a huge comeback, but I do think the playing field will level out again at some point, particularly where radio is concerned.

Thanks for the post. ^^I hope you (and Grohl) are right.

It's true that you can hear more varied things in other countries - I've heard world music, then a contemporary club song, then a Beatles song played after each other on radio in Europe, and songs in different languages.

I read a comment recently in the org that radio plays the songs put out by the record companies that own them or pay them. Do you know if this is true -- isn't that the kind of corruption that was going on like in the '50s-'60s, or am I naive?

Ugh. I just wrote what I thought was a pretty good post here, did a Wiki search on this page and lost it. *kicks rocks* Let me try this again...

Its not so much that stations are getting paid to play certain songs - that's still technically illegal. The big issue is that freeform radio is, literally, dead.

There are no DJs (in rock, pop and country, at least) at any of the "big stations" in something like the top 75 markets (hundreds of stations - possibly thousands) who are allowed to pick the songs they play.

Instead, they are given an approved playlist of songs and the number of times they play those songs in each 24 hour period is based on market research, charts and what OTHER stations are playing. In short, whatever they can play that will allow them to charge the most for their advertising minutes.

It used to be that DJs in big cities could break a band - radio could make you famous. Now days you have to have achieved a certain amount of success before you can ever get heavy airplay. This is why you hear the same songs from the same artists over and over and over and over...

Its a completely broken system because it feeds on itself. As fewer and fewer artists reach the level of success needed to garner heavier radio airplay, the playlists keep shrinking. This circle of the snake eating its own tail has been spiralling downward for well over a decade.

There are still good freeform college and public (although these are dieing off, too) radio stations on the "left side of the dial". But to most people tuning in at a specific time to hear your style of music, or listening to something that is completely foriegn to you usual tastes, is so alien that these stations are also losing listeners.

Then there's satellite radio, which is another beast altogether.

As far as who owns the stations, in the US its basically the CBS Radio Network and Clear Channel Communications. They own approximately 1850 radion stations between them. Two companies deciding what gets played on 1850 radio stations.

..

this was so kewl of them to play at our local record store here in long beach .. got there in the am n waited all day to get the wrist band to get in .. it was worth the wait

jon1967 said:

..

this was so kewl of them to play at our local record store here in long beach .. got there in the am n waited all day to get the wrist band to get in .. it was worth the wait

Totally. I watched all of those videos right after they were posted. Good stuff.

As long as we're licking Foo butt, lets go ahead and post the garage tour documentary again.

More reasons why Foo Fighters made sense in 2011

Cerebus said:

artist76 said:

Thanks for the post. ^^I hope you (and Grohl) are right.

It's true that you can hear more varied things in other countries - I've heard world music, then a contemporary club song, then a Beatles song played after each other on radio in Europe, and songs in different languages.

I read a comment recently in the org that radio plays the songs put out by the record companies that own them or pay them. Do you know if this is true -- isn't that the kind of corruption that was going on like in the '50s-'60s, or am I naive?

Ugh. I just wrote what I thought was a pretty good post here, did a Wiki search on this page and lost it. *kicks rocks* Let me try this again...

Its not so much that stations are getting paid to play certain songs - that's still technically illegal. The big issue is that freeform radio is, literally, dead.

There are no DJs (in rock, pop and country, at least) at any of the "big stations" in something like the top 75 markets (hundreds of stations - possibly thousands) who are allowed to pick the songs they play.

Instead, they are given an approved playlist of songs and the number of times they play those songs in each 24 hour period is based on market research, charts and what OTHER stations are playing. In short, whatever they can play that will allow them to charge the most for their advertising minutes.

It used to be that DJs in big cities could break a band - radio could make you famous. Now days you have to have achieved a certain amount of success before you can ever get heavy airplay. This is why you hear the same songs from the same artists over and over and over and over...

Its a completely broken system because it feeds on itself. As fewer and fewer artists reach the level of success needed to garner heavier radio airplay, the playlists keep shrinking. This circle of the snake eating its own tail has been spiralling downward for well over a decade.

There are still good freeform college and public (although these are dieing off, too) radio stations on the "left side of the dial". But to most people tuning in at a specific time to hear your style of music, or listening to something that is completely foriegn to you usual tastes, is so alien that these stations are also losing listeners.

Then there's satellite radio, which is another beast altogether.

As far as who owns the stations, in the US its basically the CBS Radio Network and Clear Channel Communications. They own approximately 1850 radion stations between them. Two companies deciding what gets played on 1850 radio stations.

I knew Clear Channel had pretty much a monopoly. So it's not that the stations or DJs are paid, like in the good old days, but that the stations want maximum ad dollars, which is why the playlists are so "safe" and limited. Thanks.

Dave is a cool guy, and Foo Fighters are one of the best rock bands out there still doing there thing. I think they had a great year, there finally nominated for album of the year! that shocked me

Gunsnhalen said:

Dave is a cool guy, and Foo Fighters are one of the best rock bands out there still doing there thing. I think they had a great year, there finally nominated for album of the year! that shocked me

I was one of those when I saw their name being nominated here, I jumped for joy. It's a real good album.

Didnt realise how bad the music scene was in the States...and I thought it was bad in the UK, with X-Factor, crap pre-programmed radio, etc!

Thank god for Grohl and Foos. Was lucky enough to see them at Milton Keynes in July and despite being surrounded by "fair-weather" fans who didnt know the stuff from Wasting Light, it was still the best gig I went to last year (along with Prince at Hop Farm). Nice to see Grohl speaking his mind still and bigging up the full range of proper artists old and new like Roger Waters and Adele.

As for the music / rock turnaround, I'd love to believe its on the way but unlike Dave G, I'm not that optimistic...

when they opened for The Police at dodger stadium they stole the show

Dave's ok, but I think he's oversimplifying the picture a bit. Its not enough to be good, it has to be good and commercial.

lezama said:

Dave's ok, but I think he's oversimplifying the picture a bit. Its not enough to be good, it has to be good and commercial.

If it's good enough it will define commercial. That's why free form radio used to be so important. The DJs decided what was good, not a bunch of suits sitting around a large table.

Cerebus said:

lezama said:

Dave's ok, but I think he's oversimplifying the picture a bit. Its not enough to be good, it has to be good and commercial.

If it's good enough it will define commercial. That's why free form radio used to be so important. The DJs decided what was good, not a bunch of suits sitting around a large table.

Dave Grohl and the Foo Fighters ROCK!!!!

Long live the Foo's!!!

Timmy84 said:

Dave Grohl says:

Someone asked me recently, "What do you think the problem with the music industry is?" I said, take the Adele record, for example. It's an amazing record and everybody's so shocked that it's such a phenomenon. I'm not. You know why that record's huge? Because it's fucking good and it's real. When you have an artist singing about something real and she's incredibly talented, it deserves all the rewards it gets, it's a great record. Now imagine if all records were that good. Do you think only one of them would sell? Fuck no! All of them would. If all records were that good the music business would be on fire, but they're not. A lot of people are promoting records that are just throw-it-against-the-wall-see-if-it-sticks meaningless bullshit. Everybody has the responsibility to do the right thing and promote artists that mean something.

I do think there's a rock revival on the horizon. Maybe not as big as it was when 1991 happened or even during the early '70s but it will happen.

And that is why Wasting Light sold alot of copies, because it was good. Bands piss and moan about the internet and downloading the ruining the record industry, well Adele, Foo Fighters and Lady GaGa have proved that even though their albums leaked prior to release they still sold shit loads and for 1 reason, they were good records. If you want your record to sell loads, make a good record. I think even Prince needs to do that.

Cerebus said:

More reasons why Foo Fighters made sense in 2011

that's brilliant

[Edited 1/12/12 17:01pm]