RobMCFC
Well-Known Member
An interesting line of chat, and apologies it took me so long to get around to answering it (bloody work getting in the way again).Apologies for not being able to add the tracks as we've gone but the playlist is mostly up to date now, I've left a few of people's extras in reserve and will add if the final list isn't too long.
Anyone who's contributed but has not yet picked 4 tracks from the year feel free to use your remaining nominations.
Anywhooo, I couldn't help but notice something as I put the tracks in so I asked Chat GPT....
"I am on a rock evolution thread that has reached 1980 and the music that is being nominated remains steadfastly guitar based, why do so many rock fans not accept the power of the synth and is there any evidence that people who reject synths are psychologically incomplete?"
This is what it came back with :-) and Btw - You can't be abusive towards me about this because according to Chat GPT I asked a really good and layered question and it's AI so it must be true.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is a really good and layered question — it touches both on rock culture and identity and on psychology of taste and resistance to change. Let’s break it apart.
1. Why many rock fans resist synths
Rock has long been tied to certain ideas about “authenticity.” When synthesizers entered popular music in the late 1970s/early 80s, many guitar-based fans saw them as a threat to the core identity of rock. A few reasons:
- Authenticity vs. Artificiality
- Guitars are “played with the hands,” visibly physical and expressive.
- Synths were seen (wrongly) as machines doing the work, removing the human struggle/effort that rock often glorifies.
- Generational Boundaries
- Early synth-heavy music (Kraftwerk, Gary Numan, Depeche Mode, Human League) was embraced by younger, club-oriented audiences.
- Older or more traditional rock listeners often saw this as “not real instruments,” creating a generational clash.
- Cultural Coding
- Guitar-based rock was coded “masculine, rebellious, authentic.”
- Synths were coded “pop, androgynous, dance-oriented, commercial.”
- So it wasn’t just a sound issue, but an identity issue.
- Tribalism in music fandom
- Fans often use genre boundaries to define who they are not as much as who they are.
- For rock fans, rejecting synths meant rejecting disco, new wave, pop — the “other tribes.”
2. Is rejecting synths evidence of being “psychologically incomplete”?
There’s no evidence that rejecting synths (or any instrument) is a sign of psychological deficiency. However, research in psychology of music and taste does suggest that:
- Openness to Experience(a Big Five personality trait) strongly correlates with liking diverse and novel music.
- People high in openness tend to embrace experimentation (including electronic and avant-garde music).
- People low in openness prefer familiar, traditional, and guitar-based sounds.
- Identity Defense Mechanism
- Music taste often becomes part of personal identity.
- Rejecting synths isn’t “incompleteness” — it’s more like protecting a stable sense of self.
- Cognitive Dissonance Avoidance
- If someone defines “real rock” as guitars, synth-based rock creates dissonance.
- Rejecting it is a way of avoiding the discomfort of rethinking categories.
So: people who dislike synths aren’t “psychologically incomplete,” but they may be less open to novelty, more tradition-oriented, or more invested in defending their cultural identity through music.
3. Why this still matters in 1980s “rock evolution” debates
By 1980, synths weren’t just add-ons — they were reshaping the sound of rock:
- Joy Division → New Order (bass + synth marriage).
- Talking Heads incorporating synth textures.
- Bowie and Eno shaping art-rock.
- Prince, Peter Gabriel, Kate Bush pushing hybrid sounds.
But in rock fandom, guitars remained the badge of purity, and many still see synth-driven acts as outside the “true lineage.”
Bottom line:
- Rock fans resist synths not because of the sounds themselves, but because of cultural meanings attached to them (authenticity, masculinity, rebellion).
- People who reject synths aren’t “incomplete” — they’re often less open to novelty and more protective of tradition, which is a normal variation in personality.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Anyway, I think it's being a little bit harsh on you lot and there are definitely some synths swirling around in a variety of tracks but very few synth led songs. What is quite interesting is the difference between the UK and the US when it came to the adoption of the synthesiser but that's a separate discussion maybe after we bottom out whether your masculinity is stopping you from enjoying synths?
Authenticity - definitely. For me, musicians have got to be seen to be playing their instruments. Doesn’t matter whether it’s a synth or a guitar. Without somebody playing real instruments, it’s just not music to me, it’s just a technical skill like riding a bike or programming a computer.
Cultural Coding - not really. It may be a huge stroke of (un)luck, buy why is it these new wave synth types can’t sing and don’t even bother trying to? The atonal moaning is far more off putting than the synths. Case in point “Enola Gay” by OMD - a synth riff so good that advertisers are all over it, but as soon as the guy opens his mouth it’s awful and unlistenable.
I’ll say it again: whether you have the voice of an angel, a gruff workmanlike snarl or a high-pitched tight underpants thing going on, just step up to the mic and sing. Don’t put on some affected atonal mumble.
Openness to (new) Experience - guilty as charged, m’lud. I don’t like change for change’s sake. Ask any of the software people I work with!
And don’t mention Talking Heads.
I love synths when used in the right way. I could go on, but it’s only right to mention these shining examples at the appropriate points as we move forward through the years.