Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by ElJay370, Sep 26, 2019.
rock and roll /ˈˌräk ən ˈrōl/ noun: A type of popular dance music originating in the 1950s, characterized by a heavy beat and simple melodies. Rock and roll was an amalgam of black rhythm and blues and white country music, usually based on a twelve-bar structure and an instrumentation of guitar, bass, and drums.
Given the Merriam-Webster definition above, can you really still sit there and tell me that "Brown Sugar" isn't rock and roll?, that "My Generation" isn't rock and roll?, that "Revolution" isn't rock and roll? Give me a break.
It's absolutely true that Elvis, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Fats Domino, Gene Vincent, Eddie Cochran, Buddy Holly, and countless others from that era are responsible for creating the blueprint for most everything that followed. I never disputed that.
But I'm of the opinion that the most popular, most successful, and most prominent purveyors of rhythm and blues based, electric guitar oriented popular music ALL COME FROM ENGLAND. I make no distinction between "Rock and Roll" or "Rock" or whatever...
The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Cream, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Queen....all of these bands CREATED the style, the substance, and the iconography that most regular people who aren't amateur music historians or hang themselves up on semantics believe to be "Rock and Roll".
Oh, and once again, for the record...THIS ISN'T A COMMENT ON CULTURES OR VALUES
AND I'M NOT BRITISH.
I don't have time to read through all of the posts, but some people get very anal retentive about "Rock'n Roll" versus "Rock." The former is Bill Haley and Comets. The latter is everything that came after them except for the Stray Cats.
See, you’re caught in the “roots“ conundrum.
A bunch of people that all the British bands revere and consider themselves inferior to - are merely “blueprint creators”.
Or “roots” like they used to derogatorily term a lot of musicians in the 80s.
Meaning : Their true value is that they paved the way for something greater.
Basically, stuff stops being “roots” when it reaches the point of a bunch of music that you like.
Like, now the music is mature, perfect, agreed-upon, there’s a consensus - this is the art form perfected.
And if you think it has nothing to do with personal preference? You’re just fooling yourself .
But - in your bolded paragraph, if all you are saying is the guys who made the most money and that most people like and own music by - are British?
But that’s like saying Garth Brooks will die with more money than Hank Williams had.
And more to the point, Garth Brooks perfected country and Hank Williams just created a blueprint...
OP, I take it you've never heard the original Allman Brothers Band
I like music from both sides of the pond, but have a special place in my heart for bands from the old neighborhood like Mitch Rider, Bob Seger, the Stooges, the MC5, SRC, and all kinds of Motown and funk.
One of the things I like about music is the creativity that comes from diversity.
Jerry Lee Lewis
The Beach Boys
The Velvet Underground
Iggy Pop (and The Stooges)
The Allman Brothers
Neil Young (CSN&Y)
...and I could go on for hours.
there is only good music and bad music. you personally make the determination.
I like many types of music from the uk and usa so not one way or other for me. But to me their was rock and roll first, then rock and prog rock, then heavy metal, and then thrash metal.
I would say Floyd were more prog rock after their first period, and Metalica where metal boarding on thrash metal. Maybe Sabbeth and Stray had roots in early heavy metal from this country.
You forgot Gaelic and Anglo Saxon which is more like modern German and Danish according to the faultless encyclopedia in my head.
Either way I got an A in o level English in England so I speak it proper innit.
Sabbath began heavy metal. Purple were along for the ride too.
I'm from Yorkshire, we still speak English what it should be spoke like.
On one hand I hear you but on the other, even in your opinion you'd agree that the Jamaicans invented reggae music. Right?
Yep Purple one of my favourite bands, yes some did get abit heavy, and Uriah Heep as well Gypsy was a heavy song.
I don't think their nationality is the important thing here. I can hear strong influences from British new wave and a lot of the dense textures of shoegazer stuff that was happening while they were emerging. U2's sound has gotten more heavy over the years and a bit more American, but the strong British influence is still there. That's not to say Irish bands don't have their own identity, but the successful ones seem to draw influences from a much larger geographic span. Thin Lizzy is an Irish band, but their sound is pure American. IMO.
I think earlier there was a Brit who was lamenting that a lot of that new wave and shoegazer stuff was ridiculed in America. That's true. I grew up in the midwest (we had a pop radio station and a classic rock station) and a lot of it would be broadcast on Mtv on 120 Minutes, which ran late at night on the weekend. So to me, there was always something kinda counterculture to it, which appealed to me. Kinda underground, or at least as underground as it can get in Central Illinois in the 80s. I took some guff from my friends for liking that music, but I stuck it out. I play music in church now and I hear bits and pieces of this stuff influencing P&W music, believe it or not. That signature Johnny Marr sound is in a lot of those songs, and its often the thing I chase for certain songs. It's weird how creative ideas ricochet across genres. Consider Material Issue:
A group of cockney lads from the streets of Chicago. Chicago?
First of all, let’s get one thing straight- nobody perfected anything.
I’m a big fan of British rock bands, but I’m also a fan of American music. Music, just like any art form, is constantly evolving. My own tastes are evolving. The other day, my wife said “Are you getting more into country? You’re starting to sound more country to me lately.” I went back through the last two years of my recordings. Damned if she wasn’t right. Twenty or more years ago, I would have reacted to that with a furrowed brow.
Such is the way of evolution.
I have a weird theory that housewives have a huge influence on rock and roll music. When musicians are little kids they get driven around (school, store, sports, etc) often by mom. What she's got on the radio sorta stains our synapses more than we know. When we get older, pick up an instrument and start making music, those old melodies come back whether we want them to or not.
If I pick up an guitar and just absentmindedly start playing, old country music starts coming out. Weird?
Well, I think Sister Rosetta Tharpe will be turning in her grave at some of the respondents to this question
Without treading dangerous waters with "mods" ... There is a line that perhaps/possibly British musicians (and especially in the late 50s and early 60s) were more interested/accommodating/receptive to the opportunity of developing the music by some artists they were hearing over here?
Or, similarly, to the styles of music that contribute to and became R'n'R ... let's here randomly say the Blues!
Accepting, before anyone else infers it, that all of Britain undoubtedly has not always been quick to embrace/appreciate itself of all the musical styles available to it ... eg Bagpipe music
And you have some of the most beautiful countrysides in the world.
I really don’t think people should have a problem with his central thesis contained in the two paragraphs above.
Popularity, profitability, fame, opinion of the average punter.
That’s his basis.
Those bands are/were gigantic and people love/loved them.
Paul McCartney Robert Plant Jimmy page Pete Townshend Brian May Eric Clapton and David Gilmour would all laugh at him but they’re “amateur music historians”...