Does death know that Pop has to have a great impact in order for something awesome to happen Rock-ingly?  Think about it.... 1992 = all that crappy '80s pop like Devo finally running its course, then in 2001 = Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys, et al. Doesn't he listen to Alan Cross' On-going History of New Music on 102.1 The Edge?

Would you agree that Justin Bieber/Miley Cyrus are the ones most likely to cause the next anti-pop backlash?

Does iain, or anyone else, really want me to list the FULL cycles according to me?

Ever heard of Cage the Elephant?  Or USS?  Silversun Pickups?

I'm not disputing that the last run of awesome rock was the '90s grunge era (PJ, Nirvana, STP, Alice in Chains, Green Day, etc.), but the modern stuff is good, if perhaps lacking a signature sound.

The Foo Fighters have their place but I certainly wouldn't describe them as "really tight **** kicking rock and rollers" by any stretch of the imagination.

Bon Scott was definitely in the right place at the right time with the right group.   Dying by choking on his puke while sleeping in a drunken stupor only enhances his place in rock.    Right now, I think Chris Cornell has the best rock voice(hence my purchase of Audioslave). 

You're not possibly going to say I want that, are you??

That is an interesting theory(and I'm going to address it in my reply to your next question).     I don't know what death listens to while he's alone in his cell.  There are a lot of bad pop artists out right now.  Not sure Miley and Beiber are big enough to cause a revolution.

I know I don't.

No. No. No.   I think the signature sound is what sets a group apart.   I tried to like the new rock in the mid to late 90s.  I bought Puddle of Mudd, Linkin Park, Stabbing Westward, etc, etc.   A decent song here and there but largely the same thing.   Nothing special. 

No, I didn't.

I'm guessing iain isn't a fan of the synthesizer.    By the way, in my quest to find music I liked in the late 90s, I stumbled across Seven Mary Three and Creed.   While I'll be mocked for Creed, I liked both of them.   I also liked The Jayhawks but I'm not even sure I'd call them "rock".

The "throaty" singing rock of that era had its place, but it lacked a certain staying power, didn't it?

I assume you mean the rough, course sound.   And I assume you meant 7M3 as Staph(?) has pretty good range.   But, yeah, the unique sound didn't stick.    I think it worked for a few people(Rod Stewart, Kim Carnes) but I guess there's a limit to it. 

Yeah, I get what you mean.   The guy from Creed(I thought his name was Scott Staph) sang that tone a lot but he could hit the high notes pretty well.   A buddy of mine played in a band.   They weren't half bad but they'd cover Zeppelin and it was horrible.  The dude couldn't hit high notes.  As long as a singer knows his limits and what works for his voice, they can do alright.

Absolutely.  That's pretty much what Bono built his career on, isn't it?  He was almost the reason U2 wasn't signed.  Talent scout thought he was awful.

I'd agree with the talent scout.  Not a fan.