Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by Minimalist518, Jun 26, 2018.
Fun fact- at their first rehearsal, Buck offered to trade instruments with Mills, since the latter was clearly a much more accomplished musician. I can't imagine what that would have sounded like, but it would have been different than what we know as REM.
That's an extraordinary claim.
Lou Reed was on record as agreeing with you.
My first exposure to that song was Mott The Hoople's cover, which our local album rock FM station was playing in 1972. It got replaced by the "Rock & Roll Animal" Lou Reed live version in 1974. I don't think I actually heard the Velvets' version until the early 1980s.
Reviewers of his early stuff lumped it in with punk and new wave.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I remember that. I did it myself. I put Rockin' Around with You on a punk mixed tape in 1977. Petty said in an interview that they weren't part of the old wave, so they must be part of the new wave. Obviously, they quickly proved they didn't fit that label.
Different people have different tastes?
I'm glad you weren't their manager. I liked the direction they went. But then, I was 30 when Out of Time was released.
Petty got drowned out by punk and disco. All of those really short songs on the first album blended in with all the really short songs coming out of punk and guys like Elvis Costello.
The Heartbreakers' second album wasn't that good, and by 1979 and the release of Damn the Torpedoes, the landscape was quite changed from 1977. The Cars had made early New Wave commercially viable, and now Tom Petty was lumped in with the rock and roll guys.
Tom Petty was never going to rescue rock music. He was always kind of an outlier, and his imitators didn't show up until the '90s, with bands like The Gin Blossoms.
I always thought of U2 as having an "indie" sound. And then they got mega and called sellout and other things. But I still think so today. They are not that different musically from the band that did "boy".
I think you’re maybe taking Eno literally instead of seriously. [emoji6]
In all seriousness though, I think that my musical life would have been served better if the groups that were paraded in front of my young eyes and ears were lauded more for their craft than their vibe/attitude. Growing up with a bunch of heroes who were assumed to be making all this great music essentially by accident didn’t give me the kind of songwriting work ethic that would propel me into my 40s in a state of continuous productivity. I don’t have a good frame of reference for what it means to sit at a desk/piano from 9-5 and then go home to my family like Nick Cave. If I had learned how to do that when I was 19, I might still be producing around 20 worthwhile songs every year.
I remember the U.K. indie charts in the late 1970s into the 80s. At the top would be something quite random that had made it into the normal singles chart ( like Lucky Number by Lena Lovich) and then bands like Throbbing Gristle. How indie became what it did passed me by to a large extent so I’m not really qualified to comment about R.E.M. other than I’m amazed they have been around so long.
Have you seen the Eagles documentary? I was never a huge fan but came to appreciate their work ethic. There was a compelling part where they talk about how renting the flat above or below Jackson Browne taught them to work at it. They'd hear his teapot at 8 am. Then he'd be at the piano for 3-4 hours working the same section of a song to get it just right. Then the teapot again, then 3-4 more hours on that section . . .
This was the best part of this thread, for me.
I’m a big Jackson Browne fan, and watched this part with fascination. His first four albums probably had a bigger influence on my concept of songcraft than anything else I can think of.
The main difference is that the guy on stage with the sunglasses very clearly feels he has nothing to prove. There's no hunger or urgency there anymore.
Bono also made a conscious decision to create a new "character" for himself as the Rock Star when "Achtung Baby" came out, which is when the sunglasses became a fixture. It wasn't that different from the kind of thing David Bowie became famous for in the 1970's.
He's not hungry. He's now in the sharing phase of his career. He's not taking, he's giving. U2 shows aren't about hunger and achieving something. They're about sharing their music and their experience with their audience. You might not have a taste for what's being served, but millions still do.
I like the way the term "indie" has morphed from an independent producing process, to a music genre.
Me I still use the original definition.
Well, for the ticket price anyway, which, for the current tour, is astronomical.
But you won't see me at these new concerts.
I'm here to try to make sure the Hungry guys don't starve.