Just goes to show, music is very subjective. For me much of the best music came out of the early 70s. While Prog featured large in that, along with what was Hard Rock, I never got the Mike Oldfield religion.JR8 wrote:OMG... two informed people discussing early Genesis. Where did I leave my old coat now?
I've no idea what age you are, but as a youth the mid 70s were just hell. Gary Glitter, Mud, Sweet, Alvin Stardust, Sparks.
Then by c74 we had painful concept rock. 22minute tracks (i.e. one side of a 33) Tubular freakin bells. ... 'glockenspiel!!'..... ''''Harpsichord!''''.... ''''Me roughly sticking this microphone up my own arse'''' (it is so artistic you will love it). Supertramp. Genesis. Vom - It!
Thank God for the John Peel Show, The Fall, The Dead Kennedy's.... and all that followed...
Subjective and tribal!Brah wrote: Just goes to show, music is very subjective. For me much of the best music came out of the early 70s. While Prog featured large in that, along with what was Hard Rock, I never got the Mike Oldfield religion.
The Pistols were aimed at poor, young, angry people. They were a triumph of marketing meets the perfect market opportunity. Consider them like a white West London iteration of Niggers with Attitude. It has been said that they could not play their instruments, and that was meant in the literal sense rather than 'could not play well.Brah wrote:To that, while I appreciated what Punk brought and stood for, I never found myself listening to The Sex Pistols or The Clash or some of the more raw stuff by choice, even when in the Village, just didn't get the angst or couldn't relate.
I like the Ramones now... great stuff. Never got to hear it much back in the day... there was one music radio channel (Radio 1), and they wouldn't get played there.brah wrote:I liked The Ramones, and more cerebral stuff like The Dead Kennedys, and a lot more that don't come to mind, but that was just because I liked the music; in general I don't like angry music which is probably why to this day don't get Rap or its derivatives.
I like early Green Day too. But I'm not familiar with any of the others.Brah wrote: Having said that, I quite liked the, what I call California Punk, which is no way to be compared with 70s-80s punk; Blink-182, Sum 41, early Green Day - all had some pretty good ones. They are not in the same league as Agent Orange or The Butthole Surfers or The Meat Puppets and the like.
Sparks were probably a poor choice. They were pretty weird (I'm thinking specifically of 'This town ain't big enough for the both of us'') different sounding and weird looking with the keyboardist being reminiscent of Hitler. I liked them, and bought their first two chart 45's.brah wrote: Odd that you listed Sparks among those more pedestrian bands. While I only heard of them much later, I found them to be pretty creative and non-mainstream, with some of their stuff pretty good, but it was what we'd call College Radio Music, because it never got airplay otherwise.
Mud and the likes of Sweet, and the Bay City Rollers (etc) were pitched at the chart/ teen market. Alvin Stardust, a sort of rockabilly'esque affair (Youtube for his hit 'My coo ca choo'). Gary Glitter was majorly eccentric/OTT, even for that day.Brah wrote: For someone who was more familiar than most of non-mainstream bands, I never heard of Mud or Alvin Stardust; in the States Gary Glitter was a one-hit-wonder on AM radio.
Genesis pretty much completely passed me by (too young), and Phil Collins later solo career put me off further discovery. Peter Gabriel he certainly was a talent...brah wrote: Genesis had its good and great stuff, I was less fond of the early albums, and post-And Then There Were Three was awful dreck I never listened to; a couple of the post-Gabriel middle albums like Wind and Wuthering I consider Classics and even Desert Island material.
It was the same with the tribes in my surroundings as well.JR8 wrote:In my musically formative years a large part of your identity revolved around what kind of music was 'your music'. In the same way that you'd have 'mods vs rockers', you had punks vs rockers/hippies.
By dirgey do you mean Prog? They were all young back then.JR8 wrote:So I came to find myself a teenager through much of the 70s, and teenagers want excitement, and quite possibly channels for their feelings (like challenging authority, and so on). What they do not want is some old looking boring blokes doing 'boring dirgey music' that just goes on an on, and on....
Brah wrote:To that, while I appreciated what Punk brought and stood for, I never found myself listening to The Sex Pistols
Right, and although we did get that at the time, we couldn't relate and could get into what we would call 'no talent' music. But I was surrounded by fairly critical people, and for us what some would consider passable musicians we would call no-talents. George Thorogood, Ted Nugent come to mind but are not the best examples, I think Thorogood was of a much later generation. Heck to us, newcomers Aerosmith were borderline. And while people like Billy Gibbons was never a shredder, ZZ Top's coolness and gutsy songs qualified them.JR8 wrote:The Pistols were aimed at poor, young, angry people. It has been said that they could not play their instruments, and that was meant in the literal sense rather than 'could not play well.
Forgot to add Black Flag with Agent Orange etc.Brah wrote: Having said that, I quite liked the, what I call California Punk, which is no way to be compared with 70s-80s punk; Blink-182, Sum 41, early Green Day
It's been too long since I hear the older Cali Punk like Agent Orange, but the other ones were of the 90s andJR8 wrote:I like early Green Day too. But I'm not familiar with any of the others.
There are the Gabriel / non-Gabriel camps in Genesis fans; Gabriel was / is talented and did even better stuff solo in the 80s.JR8 wrote:Genesis pretty much completely passed me by (too young), and Phil Collins later solo career put me off further discovery. Peter Gabriel he certainly was a talent...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest