Sex Pistols and Blondie in Rock Hall of Fame--Genesis and Yes are not - Page 19 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #541 of 691 Old 03-26-2006, 09:35 PM
Member
 
lurch4711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Neighbor of the Beast
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by squonk View Post

Prove that he wasn't wrong. For the 30th time, My position is that punk rock was a reaction to a wide variety of music ranging from jam bands like the Grateful Dead and psychedelic music of the 60s to the long guitar solos and rock star excesses of bands like Led Zeppelin, to the cartoon excesses of Alice Cooper and KISS, to singer songwriter lite fair such as Simon and Garfunkel and the Carpenters, to slick AOR 'produced' rock like the Eagles, to later the disco crap of the mid to late 70s, and not JUST PROGRESSIVE ROCK.

Tom did not say it was just progressive rock - you did in your "you're wrong" post.

Quote:


Yes, it was also a reaction to the long extended complexity and emphasis on "musicianship" of prog. But not all of it was just a reaction to Yes and ELP and bands of that "ilk", unless now someone is going to try to backtrack and try to imply that he meant "ilk" to include all these differing types of bands and music as the same thing

He originally did this by including bands such as Foreigner and a couple of others. I guess NOW you understand what that inclusion meant, despite your insistence he meant "progressive rock" even though he didn't say that?


Quote:


when we all know he was not.

Yeah - that's actually pretty much just you.


Quote:


And of course then he would be wrong for yet another reason, since no one in their right mind would lump Grateful Dead, Zeppelin, KISS, the Carpenters, the Eagles, Simon and Garfunkel, Yes, ELP and Foreigner in the same group.

Oh really. I know plenty of people that would. That's all all kinds of crappy music, to many people (disclaimer: for what you listed here, me, too - although I did recently find out that I *mostly* like the first KISS album upon my first "listen to" of it).


Quote:


The statement made was an oversimplification based on a false stereotype, and thus the need was there to be more specific and correct the oversimplification. That's why the statement was wrong.

No, you just didn't understand it.

Quote:


PUNK ROCK WAS NOT JUST or SOLELY A REACTION TO PROGRESSIVE ROCK has been my position from day one.

To type to you in your language: NO ONE HAS SAID IT WAS. At least that I recall. You are the one that likes to introduce the term (progressive rock) when folks are talking about a wider variety of bands that were deemed cruddy by some. A big sticking poitn with you.


Quote:


PROVE to me that that statement is false. And cite every punk friend you have in doing so, but I want to hear specific quotes with footnotes citing the sources.

Now that's silly. Footnotes. Tell me the footnotes from the latest verbal conversation you've had. Or any of them. You know, where people actually talk to each other without a computer or keyboard. See - you're in the mindset of something someone wrote. And that's where you claim you'll accept it, but then backtrack because if it wasn't printed or on a website somewhere... well, that appears to be the depth of your experience. And now we've come just about full circle, at least back to where you started getting nasty.

So since you could care less about name dropping apparently, please tell me all of the people from bands that you have personally talked to that conveyed a sense of what was going on. Not documentaries. Not interviews. Not just friends, but from bands who were actually involved. Ya know, who have ya spent any amount of time with. Please. Do.
lurch4711 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #542 of 691 Old 03-26-2006, 10:05 PM - Thread Starter
 
squonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
[quote=lurch4711]
Quote:


Tom did not say it was just progressive rock - you did in your "you're wrong" post.

He said bands of that "ilk". Anyone following along, reading the context of the posts, knows what he was trying to state/imply with the admittedly ridiculous word "ilk"



Quote:


He originally did this by including bands such as Foreigner and a couple of others. I guess NOW you understand what that inclusion meant, despite your insistence he meant "progressive rock" even though he didn't say that?

He lumped some bands (Foreigner/Boston) in with completely different bands (Yes/ELP) clearly trying to label them under the same umbrella, within the context of pages of discussion about progressive rock, thus using the oversimplification term of "that ilk"




Quote:


Oh really. I know plenty of people that would. That's all all kinds of crappy music, to many people (disclaimer: for what you listed here, me, too - although I did recently find out that I *mostly* like the first KISS album upon my first "listen to" of it).

Oh I see, so now "all that ilk" just mean "music I think is crappy". Gee, that's nice and specific. So now we've gone from bands that are similar to Yes and ELP (when they clearly are not) to all bands I think are crappy.

So punk rock was a reaction to all bands that Tom Brennan thinks were crappy. Gee, how can you argue with that absurdity?


Quote:


No, you just didn't understand it.

I understood it perfectly--bands of that ilk meant bands that Tom Brennan thought were progressive rock bands, or belonged under the same "ilk"
But now its apparantly a moving target, or you are trying to redefine it and includes ANY crappy band according to TB (or you, I guess). So now this has officially become the dumbest argument in human history.



Quote:


Now that's silly.

You said it.


Quote:


So since you could care less about name dropping apparently, please tell me all of the people from bands that you have personally talked to that conveyed a sense of what was going on. Not documentaries. Not interviews. Not just friends, but from bands who were actually involved. Ya know, who have ya spent any amount of time with. Please. Do

Are you getting dizzy from chasing your tail? I never said I was in the SCENE and all knowing because I hung around bands--YOU DID. And you still have yet to point out anything specific I said that was wrong and you have yet to cite any source, other than--I hung around the scene. What a joke. And now none of that matters because on behalf of TB you just changed the meaning of the absurd word he used anyway--"ilk" now means "any crappy band in my opinion". So how can anyone argue with that? I have ears and eyes. I can hear and read. I didn't break into Watergate but I know a heckuva lot about the whole Watergate scandal. I guess according to you, the only people that possibly could state any facts or opinions re Watergate would be those who were actually involved in the break in and coverup.

In sum, punk rock was a reaction to every crappy band in the world (according to Tom Brennan) and thus, ie all punk bands were good and there was never a crappy punk band. And "ilk" now does not mean anything in the same genre, but anything someone doesn't like. Gee, aren't we all smarter now?

You can't fix stupid.
squonk is offline  
post #543 of 691 Old 03-26-2006, 10:37 PM
Member
 
lurch4711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Neighbor of the Beast
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by squonk View Post

He lumped some bands (Foreigner/Boston) in with completely different bands (Yes/ELP) clearly trying to label them under the same umbrella, within the context of pages of discussion about progressive rock, thus using the oversimplification term of "that ilk"

You're wrong.

Quote:


Oh I see, so now "all that ilk" just mean "music I think is crappy". Gee, that's nice and specific. So now we've gone from bands that are similar to Yes and ELP (when they clearly are not) to all bands I think are crappy.

Now yer just starting to catch on - although it wasn't just a "I think" situation, but a general notion of them. If you didn't understand that, then that goes back to what I was originally saying about you "just not getting it."

Quote:


So punk rock was a reaction to all bands that Tom Brennan thinks were crappy. Gee, how can you argue with that absurdity?

Nope - as I mentioned, lots of people.


Quote:


I understood it perfectly--bands of that ilk meant bands that Tom Brennan thought were progressive rock bands, or belonged under the same "ilk"
But now its apparantly a moving target, or you are trying to redefine it and includes ANY crappy band according to TB (or you, I guess).

You're wrong. Ilk: "SORT, KIND" - as defined by Merriam Webster. So *you* decided that "sort, kind" was meant to refer to Yes, Kansas, and Foreigner as the same *genre* - no one else, necessarily. In fact, by mixing genres that should indicate that to readers. Well, most readers anyway.


Quote:


So now this has officially become the dumbest argument in human history.

You're wrong (if you think something on one of thousands or more internet forums would be a milestone in human history, anyway).


Quote:


Are you getting dizzy from chasing your tail? I never said I was in the SCENE and all knowing because I hung around bands--YOU DID.

Really... Maybe you should re-read your posts where you are talking about parties and seeing bands, so you were there and knew all. Unless that was sarcasm and you weren't actually.

Quote:


And now none of that matters because on behalf of TB you just changed the meaning of the absurd word he used anyway--"ilk" now means "any crappy band in my opinion".

You betcha. I think I have pointed out where you were wrong, too. And at the same time, you are sort of arguing against yourself here. Do I need to repeat your very recent quote: "punk rock was a reaction to a wide variety of music ranging from jam bands like the Grateful Dead and psychedelic music of the 60s to the long guitar solos and rock star excesses of bands like Led Zeppelin, to the cartoon excesses of Alice Cooper and KISS, to singer songwriter lite fair such as Simon and Garfunkel and the Carpenters, to slick AOR 'produced' rock like the Eagles, to later the disco crap of the mid to late 70s" - oh, I guess I did. I think that you meant, crappy bands in the eyes of punks. So you do get it, perchance?


Quote:


I didn't break into Watergate but I know a heckuva lot about the whole Watergate scandal. I guess according to you, the only people that possibly could state any facts or opinions re Watergate would be those who were actually involved in the break in and coverup.

Nope - but for facts, wouldn't they certainly be the best dang source around? Oh, I guess not, according to you. And anyone can make opinions - that's mixing things up.

Quote:


In sum, punk rock was a reaction to every crappy band in the world (according to Tom Brennan) and thus, ie all punk bands were good and there was never a crappy punk band. And "ilk" now does not mean anything in the same genre, but anything someone doesn't like. Gee, aren't we all smarter now?

Not according to Tom, but a prevailing notion. But I take it all back if you think a lot of punk bands worshipped Foreigner and Boston... And the attributed logic of "all punk bands were good" does not seem to really fit into this. Now you're really reachin'.

Quote:


You can't fix stupid.

At this point, does this even need to be addressed?
lurch4711 is offline  
post #544 of 691 Old 03-26-2006, 11:55 PM - Thread Starter
 
squonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
[quote=lurch4711]
Quote:


Now yer just starting to catch on - although it wasn't just a "I think" situation, but a general notion of them. If you didn't understand that, then that goes back to what I was originally saying about you "just not getting it."


Oh goodie, more 'specifics'. "of that ilk" and now "general notion". Another vague nonspecific term which means nothing and is used by people who are absolutely stating nothing and spouting BS. So "ilk" now means a general notion by 'them' (which apparantly refers to some vague collection of punk rockers I guess--more indefiniteness) of bands that are crappy. Gee, I didn't realize that all people who like punk rock think exactly alike. Are you trying to tell me that there was basic unaminity by all punk rockers in the still undefined SCENE on which bands were crappy? Did you not have any free thinking individualists who also liked punk rock among you at all? Gee, I find that hard to believe, and if true, really kind of sad and disturbing. So not one punker could be found in the 70s who liked a little Dead? Not one who snuck a few listens to Zeppelin now and then? Not one who may have dug the Allman Brothers? or Traffic? Who decided what that "ilk" was? What if one person's "ilk" didn't coincide with another persons "ilk"? Or were you all that single-minded in thought?



Quote:


Nope - as I mentioned, lots of people.

I see, so it wasn't just one person's opinion of what constituted crap, it was "lots of people". Another nice vague generalization. Is that "lots of people" constitute all those who bought and listened to punk records and went to shows? How big a tent was lots of people? Again--undefined. Oh wait. I would be included in that, because I was there, I bought records that were defined as "punk" and I went to shows. So I apparantly was part of the lots of people who determined what music was crappy. But wait--I liked Yes and ELP. I wasn't a bid Dead fan, but I liked some of their stuff. Hated KISS. Liked some Zeppelin. Didn't care for Foreigner. And I liked the Ramones, Talking Heads, Jonathan Richman and the Modern Lovers, the Clash, some Patti Smith, etc. So my OPINIONS on what constituted crap differed from other people's opinions on what was crap. And there were plenty of people like me, who, believe it or not, like some punk music and didn't necessarily agree on what constituted crap. Ahhhh, and now we get to the true crux of this.

You portray this whole idea of what punk was a reaction against (ie all bands that were crap) as if it were some commonly accepted ABSOLUTE FACT that can be quantitatively proven, and can only be proven by consulting with the only ones in the know--those in the SCENE as YOU define it. You base this whole silly argument
of yours that punk was a reaction against all the crappy bands as if that were some absolute commonly agreed list that all persons who are in the KNOW (ie people YOU think are in the know) UNIVERSALLY agree on. as if "Crap" can be quantified and categorized. What we really have is just opinion heaped on opinion---there are NO FACTS that can be proven here. Its your opinion as to what bands are crappy, and its your pre-ordained list of who is in this vague SCENE that gets to apparantly universally agree on what that list is--as if that were possible. And anyone who might like punk but also like some of the bands that YOU define as crappy cannot possibly count in terms of what gets considered crappy--since you get to define also who is in the SCENE (ie in the know) and who isn't. Wow, that's quite a little self serving system you have going there.

What it really amounts to is that there were a whole lot of us out there listening to and enjoying various forms of punk music that at the same time also liked other forms of music, including music that YOU may have thought was crappy. And guess what--at the time we were listening to this music in the 70's, not everyone who bought a Ramones album or a Modern Lovers album were thinking--this is punk and I'm buying this because Yes and the Carpenters and Zeppelin is all crap. Some of us just listened to music that we liked without the need to define it or categorize it. And that is something apparantly that you never learned to do. This idea that there was some universal agreement by some undefined group of people in the scene as to what constituted crappy music is a big load of BS. Its all opinion and music taste. There are no facts here.

Nice try. I think that's kind of the way Hitler ran Germany didn't he? I and my few hand selected pick of people "in the scene" get to define who is an undesirable for elimination purposes, and that's that. Well, see lurch, some of us are independent free thinking spirits who just like to listen to good music, regardless of category, genre, or "ilk". And yes, some of us like some punk but also like progressive rock like Yes. Believe it or not, if its quality music, it can be liked. And so there is and never has been a universal definition of crappy, since music is by definition personal taste. I know this pains you, because in your little punk fantasy land, there are a small cadre of punk scenesters who are the only truly 'in the know" people, and they and only they get to define what constitutes 'crappy' music (and thus is the music that punk reacted against). Surely by now you can see how silly this is I hope.

So, again, you're wrong. Yours or Tom Brennan's OPINION on what constitutes crappy music is just that--an opinion not a fact. Thus, a statement which purports to define what punk was a reaction against by referencing to what constitutes "crap" cannot be CORRECT since its all an opinion. Which is exactly why I stated he was oversimplifying. Which is why he was wrong. End of story.
squonk is offline  
post #545 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 12:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lonwolf615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: s.beloit,il,usa
Posts: 4,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Well, now that we got that out of the way...curry, can we hear more about SRC?
Lurch: What first grabbed you about punk? A live band that led you to recordings by bands of similiar styles, or vice versa? And was it a gradual thing-in other words did you have to learn to like it, or did your first exposure hit you like a ton of bricks? Did the love of swing come after or before? Still trying to get a handle on the whole thing so if you're still there..

"There is no truth. There's just what you believe."
lonwolf615 is offline  
post #546 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 12:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lonwolf615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: s.beloit,il,usa
Posts: 4,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 131
[quote=squonk]
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurch4711 View Post


"




















In sum, punk rock was a reaction to every crappy band in the world (according to Tom Brennan) and thus, ie all punk bands were good and there was never a crappy punk band. And "ilk" now does not mean anything in the same genre, but anything someone doesn't like. Gee, aren't we all smarter now?

You can't fix stupid.

You do realize Tom never said anything like that, right? You're basically restating your opinion of what someone said and then arguing with your own words until you win. It must make you feel good but in the process you pretty much killed a good discussion. Oh well...peace.

"There is no truth. There's just what you believe."
lonwolf615 is offline  
post #547 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 05:11 AM
Moderator
 
PooperScooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Leominster MA
Posts: 19,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 146
I don't think punk was a backlash against any type of music, but a backlash or "not for me" reaction to late 60's and early 70's times of flower children and psycho-pharmacuetical (is that a word?) influenced culture. "Peace? Love? Groovy? Wow man?" F**K THAT, TAKE THIS! Sorry, but I don't having anything to cite, it's just my opinion.

larry

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. -- Thomas Alva Edison
PooperScooper is offline  
post #548 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 08:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 2,662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Some highlights about SRC.

SRC started out as The Scott Richard Case. The Singer, Scott Richardson came from another local band Chosen Few. Ron Ashton, guitarist for the Stooges was also from Chosen Few. The band became very popular locally playing the club circuit, local TV and had regional radio success having recorded the Skip James song I'm So Glad a bit ahead of the Cream version. They played mostly English Pop and Motown. Bob Segar and The Last Heard had a local hit record Eastside Story about this same time frame 1966-67.

The band took their music quite seriously and began to write and changed the name to SRC. There was no Art Rock or Progressive category of music at this time. The bands music was a little metaphysical for the time psychedelic' if you will. Probably influenced by Pretty Things, Procol Harum, Hendrix, Cream, etc. Their sound was multi-layered and built around sustained Les Paul guitar and a Hammond B3 organ usually with 2-4 full size Leslie speakers on stage.

The band was also technology orientated and was the first band that I saw mix themselves, in stereo, through the PA system on stage. The PA was a full range system with EV - SRO folded horns on the low end with JBL ring - horns on the high and 10-12 mids, powered by Crown DC300's. Keep in mind stereo was still a young format. And at this time most PA's were suit case type collum speakers.

They signed with Capital Records and released three albums (SRC, Milestones, and Travelers Tale) over three years 1968-1970. The band dissolved shortly after this. They also built their own recording studio, an expensive undertaking pre digital.

Scott Richardson moved to California where he is to have wed Robert Mitchum's daughter. Scott did some work with Ray Manzarek. Scott is also credited with writing the 1987 movie Hearts of Fire for Bob Dylan and is also credited in the art department for the Lord of the Rings movies.

SRC sound bites here.

The song ONESIMPLETASK is interesting in that the lyric are a challenge or riddle and the music changes time signatures, 4/4 -3/4 -5/4, 4/4 etc., to weave a musical puzzle. Mostly guitar solo here, you catch a time change just at the end.

NO SECRET DESTINATION is typical SRC.

There was a Detroit Free Press / Detroit News article a few years ago that claimed that Peter Gabriel was a fan and early Genesis was influenced (almost afraid of that word) by SRC.

Vynal is long out of print but you can find the work reissued on CD.
b curry is offline  
post #549 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 10:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lonwolf615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: s.beloit,il,usa
Posts: 4,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 131
[quote=PooperScooper]
Quote:


F**K THAT, TAKE THIS! Sorry, but I don't having anything to cite, it's just my opinion.

larry

Such language!!! Another post like that, young man, and I'm reporting you to the moderator!

I'd better add its a joke...don't ban me larry...

If we all just remember to laugh at ourselves and not take everything so seriously we can have a good discussion, methinks.

Its funny, I know I heard quite a lot of SRC way back then, but all I remember is "Mountain King" and being impressed. That, combined with what you've said, curry, has sold me-gotta get me some. Any suggestions? I might just order one blind, see what I get..

Since poor tom was only answering a question I posed, I've got to say I understand exactly what he meant. The bands he mentioned do all have something in common but its really no big deal if one doesn't get it. Surely not worth running on about for 2000 pages (seems that long, anyways). Tom, thanks again for the insight.

Can we just talk about the music for a while? You know, the hit record, with a bullet:

"Imagine me and you...I do...So Happy Together..."

"There is no truth. There's just what you believe."
lonwolf615 is offline  
post #550 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 10:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FredProgGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chattanooga TN
Posts: 7,544
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've heard of SRC but never really have heard the music. I'm really looking forward to checking those samples out!

OK, speaking of: punk, psychedelia, glam, Lee Ving (Fear), Howard Kaylan (via The Turtles and Zappa), Frank's manager who breifly turned movie producer, Lou Reed and all things rock and roll: has anyone here ever seen the movie Get Crazy???

Don't taze me, bro!!
FredProgGH is offline  
post #551 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 10:22 AM
Senior Member
 
DD's Lounge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Waconia Mn
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

Carl Palmer was far more technical than any of the drummers you mentioned. However, today that crown would have to undeniably go to Akira Jimbo.


Excuse me you never heard of Neil Peart the greatest Rock Drummer of all time.
Find me another Drummer who can do all the things that Neil can do or Maybe you've seen him Live, Fans bow down to him.


TREES ARE ALL KEPT EQUAL BY HATCHET AXE AND SAAAWWWW.

DD's
DD's Lounge is offline  
post #552 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 11:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gecko85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 2,207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 142 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by DD's Lounge View Post

Excuse me you never heard of Neil Peart the greatest Rock Drummer of all time.
Find me another Drummer who can do all the things that Neil can do or Maybe you've seen him Live, Fans bow down to him.

Greatest "rock" drummer? A case could be made for Peart, sure, but that's by no means a universal assessement among drummers.

But greatest drummer, period? That would be Buddy Rich. That's just my opinion, but it's also the opinion of Neil Peart, who's produced two tribute albums to Buddy (Burning for Buddy 1 and 2.)

As for *current* drummers that can do all the things that Neil can do, I'll add Dave Weckl to the list. I'd put Weckl a step (or two) above Peart.

Panasonic TC-P60ST60, Pioneer SC-1523-K, Oppo BDP-103D, Pioneer PL-550 + Cambridge Audio Azur 640P, B&W CM1 (fronts), B&W CM Centre, Athena Point 5 Mk II (rears), Hsu VTF-2
----------------------------------------
Sony 34XBR960, Onkyo TX-NR414, Sony PS3, Athena Point 5 Mk II (center and fronts), Wharfedale WH-2 (rears), Polk PSW10
Gecko85 is offline  
post #553 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 11:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom Brennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
"Excuse me you never heard of Neil Peart the greatest Rock Drummer of all time."

Funny, I've seen Rush many times and never heard Peart play rock and roll. He has technique but so what. I'll take guys like DJ Fontana, Ringo, Charlie Watts, Al Jackson-----cmon, how can anyone rate Peart , as a rock drummer, higher than Jackson?

And the guy that played on "Good Golly Miss Molly" by Little Richard, man I don't know who that drummer was but he could really kick.

Best technical drummer I ever saw was a jazz guy, Les Demerle. I saw Buddy Rich play.
Tom Brennan is offline  
post #554 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 11:18 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Well, of course they do - they're fans. And I think Larry might be right to some degree. Punk is an excuse to act obnoxious. I don't know if it was the direct result of any kind of backlash to any real kind of musical attitude or type, as much as a societal trend of "in your face" that seems to be getting worse all the time. If anything, I think it's just a reaction to the government and corporate b***s**t that's been more and more prevalent since the 60's, or at least more exposed. Squonk was right on there (as much as some of you might find a reason to argue), as far as that being the case in the U.K. (they of the famous soccer "hooliganism"). It had to do with unemployment issues over there, too. And it seemed to catch on over here. And I'm sure those Reagan years gave it plenty of fuel, too.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #555 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 11:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FredProgGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chattanooga TN
Posts: 7,544
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Carl Palmer had some great chops but his meter was awful and his taste questionable some of the time. I liked his playing on the first three albums the best. I much prefer Bill Bruford and Alan White- Bill is jazzy and precise, Alan is a rock drummer but has great feel. I think Neil was the best drummer in the world- for Rush. I think Ringo was the best drummer in the world- for The Beatles. I think it's dumb to rate musicians out of context. It's all about the synergy they have with the people they play with. Buddy was probably the best soloist ever, for my money. And since we're on the subject Terry Bozzio can excel in almost any musical surrounding.

Don't taze me, bro!!
FredProgGH is offline  
post #556 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 11:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
If I remember correctly, Palmer was never actually called "great". But he WAS considered the "fastest" drummer at the time, at least in Rock music. And I agree about Bruford - actually I think it's safe to say that he was the best of his day (for Rock,anyway). He certainly is one of the most versatile and definitely has a unique, distinct style and sound. Only other one I can think of that's that distinct in Rock was Moon.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #557 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 11:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
As long as this thread is supposed to be about Genesis, I've got to mention that Phil Collins is somewhat underappreciated as a drummer. I'm sure most people here already know what a fine drummer he actually is, but the general music public doesn't seem to.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #558 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 11:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FredProgGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chattanooga TN
Posts: 7,544
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

I'm sure most people here already know what a fine drummer he actually is, but the general music public doesn't seem to.

I think the problem is that to a large degree he forgot as well, when he became a hit making machine. Back in the early days, and with Brand X, the guy was just scary good.

Another overlooked rock drummer with great skills- Ian Paice from Deep Purple. I think he was faster than Palmer. And he can execute the dreaded one handed buzz roll.

Don't taze me, bro!!
FredProgGH is offline  
post #559 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 12:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom Brennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
"Squonk was right on there (as much as some of you might find a reason to argue), as far as that being the case in the U.K. (they of the famous soccer "hooliganism"). "


Well the English are a violent and piratical race, and a martial one too. And under English control the other inhabitants of the Isles were also most formidable.

I don't mean that as a cut, that's a large part of what made them great. The traits that make a people great in one era can be a pain in the neck in another.
Tom Brennan is offline  
post #560 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 12:35 PM
Newbie
 
SLCKev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The Sex Pistols were a Flash, a one album wonder, but very very visible. They were a cross where punk meet pop metal. They deffinitely left an impression. Worthy of the RRHOF? Maybe.
SLCKev is offline  
post #561 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 12:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Brennan View Post

"Squonk was right on there (as much as some of you might find a reason to argue), as far as that being the case in the U.K. (they of the famous soccer "hooliganism"). "


Well the English are a violent and piratical race, and a martial one too. And under English control the other inhabitants of the Isles were also most formidable.

I don't mean that as a cut, that's a large part of what made them great. The traits that make a people great in one era can be a pain in the neck in another.

And they like to call us "crude".
Rammitinski is offline  
post #562 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 12:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by FredProgGH View Post

I think the problem is that to a large degree he forgot as well, when he became a hit making machine. Back in the early days, and with Brand X, the guy was just scary good.

Another overlooked rock drummer with great skills- Ian Paice from Deep Purple. I think he was faster than Palmer. And he can execute the dreaded one handed buzz roll.

I guess when you've got enough alimony and child support to pay, your priorities change. And from recent news, he's gonna have even more. Expect more repackages and comeback "hits".
Rammitinski is offline  
post #563 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 12:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
FredProgGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chattanooga TN
Posts: 7,544
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

I guess when you've got enough alimony and child support to pay, your priorities change. And from recent news, he's gonna have even more. Expect more repackages and comeback "hits".

That's the cynical answer- probably some truth to it though. Also, the same thing happened to Genesis as a whole. As a band matures it's easy to feel you have nothing left to proove and to have an honest desire to pursue simpler musical rewards. I think Phil and Co. really really liked being pop tunesmiths, and also really really liked the money. It's just a drag for those of us who preferred their earlier work.


The REAL dropping of the ball was when Phil finally left Genesis and the remaining two decided to attempt to get back to their prog roots somewhat- and failed utterly, making an album that was universally hated by their old prog audience and the new pop audience. I don't even think Banks and Rutherford liked it. (For those of you who don't follow the band that was "Calling All Stations")

Don't taze me, bro!!
FredProgGH is offline  
post #564 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 01:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
I think that they only thing they really had left to prove was that they could do what they did later on. Even if you don't care for the stuff, you have to admit that they were good at it. I think that was the challenge they saw, and in those regards they met it admirably. I guess if Prog wasn't going to be commercially successful anymore, at least not like in the 70's, they needed to change anyway to keep the career going. Anyway, they were still better than a lot of other "hit" bands at that time. I think even in many of their hits, like "Land of Confusion", you could still see they were better musicians and writers than most. It was still pretty progressive, even for Top 40.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #565 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 01:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 2,662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:


Originally Posted by Rammitinski
[i]...Punk is an excuse to act obnoxious. I don't know if it was the direct result of any kind of backlash to any real kind of musical attitude or type, as much as a societal trend of "in your face" that seems to be getting worse all the time. If anything, I think it's just a reaction to the government and corporate b***s**t that's been more and more prevalent since the 60's, or at least more exposed. Squonk was right on there (as much as some of you might find a reason to argue), as far as that being the case in the U.K. (they of the famous soccer "hooliganism"). It had to do with unemployment issues over there, too...

I think this is much closer to the truth. Unemployment in the UK was very high at this time. UB-40 took its name from the British unemployment form number circa late 70's

The US was in double digit inflation from the Carter presidency. Home mortages were 18% if you were lucky. We had hostages in Iran and Steve Dahl was blowing up Disco records in Chicago's Comiskey Park. If you were just getting out of school it was hard to find a job. It was enough to piss any one off. Spot on Rammitinski!
b curry is offline  
post #566 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 01:17 PM
Member
 
lurch4711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Neighbor of the Beast
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by PooperScooper View Post

I don't think punk was a backlash against any type of music, but a backlash or "not for me" reaction to late 60's and early 70's times of flower children and psycho-pharmacuetical (is that a word?) influenced culture. "Peace? Love? Groovy? Wow man?" F**K THAT, TAKE THIS! Sorry, but I don't having anything to cite, it's just my opinion.

larry

That's pretty much true, too - that's one of the things with punk - and frankly, many types of music - there was more than one thing going on with it. Way, way, way back somewhere in this mess (heh), I mentioned this, too. But this was more related to the social backlash and there was also the music backlash. They kind of fit together perfectly. Politics were involved as well, which became particularly prevalent starting in the late 70's and into the early 80's - and beyond.
lurch4711 is offline  
post #567 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 01:25 PM
Member
 
lurch4711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Neighbor of the Beast
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FredProgGH View Post

I've heard of SRC but never really have heard the music. I'm really looking forward to checking those samples out!
OK, speaking of: punk, psychedelia, glam, Lee Ving (Fear), Howard Kaylan (via The Turtles and Zappa), Frank's manager who breifly turned movie producer, Lou Reed and all things rock and roll: has anyone here ever seen the movie Get Crazy???

Get Crazy - oh yeah. Haven't seen it in years. There's some story about Derf Scratch getting shafted by being reduced to an extra so he did some shenanigans to get the larger role he got. Don't know if that is true, though.
lurch4711 is offline  
post #568 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 01:29 PM
Moderator
 
PooperScooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Leominster MA
Posts: 19,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurch4711 View Post

That's pretty much true, too - that's one of the things with punk - and frankly, many types of music - there was more than one thing going on with it. Way, way, way back somewhere in this mess (heh), I mentioned this, too. But this was more related to the social backlash and there was also the music backlash. They kind of fit together perfectly. Politics were involved as well, which became particularly prevalent starting in the late 70's and into the early 80's - and beyond.

Ok, now that that's settled, what about disco? I'm only half-joking. I considered that a black period in music, but some people liked it.

larry

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. -- Thomas Alva Edison
PooperScooper is offline  
post #569 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 01:35 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post

I think this is much closer to the truth. Unemployment in the UK was very high at this time. UB-40 took its name from the British unemployment form number circa late 70's

The US was in double digit inflation from the Carter presidency. Home mortages were 18% if you were lucky. We had hostages in Iran and Steve Dahl was blowing up Disco records in Chicago's Comiskey Park. If you were just getting out of school it was hard to find a job. It was enough to piss any one off. Spot on Rammitinski!

I think after 'Nam and Watergate, people were less naive and more cynical. And now we have more things than ever to be P.O.'d about. Why do you think anti-depressants are so popular? And don't even mention that Dahl thing. Being a major Sox fan, I was really pissed about that, because they were still mathematically in the divisional race, and after losing the first game, they really needed to play that second one. As it was, of course, they had to forfeit it and lose even more ground, from which they never did recover (I was one of those local people that never liked Dahl, anyway.)
Rammitinski is offline  
post #570 of 691 Old 03-27-2006, 01:36 PM
Member
 
lurch4711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Neighbor of the Beast
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

Well, of course they do - they're fans. And I think Larry might be right to some degree. Punk is an excuse to act obnoxious.

Ah, who needs an excuse


Quote:


I don't know if it was the direct result of any kind of backlash to any real kind of musical attitude or type, as much as a societal trend of "in your face" that seems to be getting worse all the time. If anything, I think it's just a reaction to the government and corporate b***s**t that's been more and more prevalent since the 60's, or at least more exposed. Squonk was right on there (as much as some of you might find a reason to argue), as far as that being the case in the U.K. (they of the famous soccer "hooliganism"). It had to do with unemployment issues over there, too. And it seemed to catch on over here. And I'm sure those Reagan years gave it plenty of fuel, too.

Well, see my above post. And as stated there, I also brought this up some time ago, particularly in regards to the UK and what was going on there (back when Squonk was saying something about The Pistols just being a fraud and stuff). And yep - Reagan was perfect for punk. However, that's more the social/political side of it, rather than the music side. Again, all of these intertwine pretty well with punk (or pretty poorly, if one is a critic of punk). In fact, so well, I actually think it makes it a bit difficult to extricate the musical "theory" (or whatever) from the other side of it. But if you do, musically, punk was about ripping down the music that was viewed as crappy by many. Well, it was also about having fun with it again - which in a way, is the same thing (at least to some).

Actually, as you went into the later 70's and into the 80's, this even expanded because you had disco, and a bit later, metal, all with MTV which pushed visuals over music itself. So there was even more to grouse about. More of the same, but more.
lurch4711 is offline  
Reply Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off