longshot7 Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 3, 2009 -> 01:52 PM) and, again, I just think it says a lot about that generation that they let an average rock band change the face of music. That you think they are an "average rock band" is sad. Few artists (again, about 10 in the entire history of R&R) changed the course of Rock so much that pre & post terms have to be used in reference to music history a la "the pre-Nirvana era" or "the post-Nirvana era". This is how important they are to Rock. I don't like Radiohead's music much post-Bends but to deny their influence and their importance would just be silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longshot7 Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 3, 2009 -> 12:58 PM) This side of The Pond, the Beach Boys and the Beatles were not contemporaries in terms of when they emerged. The Beach Boys had already released 4 albums and were recording number 5 in January 1964 when Introducing the Beatles and meet the Beatles were released. Sure, they continued to record, and yes they sold, but there is no disputing that the Beatles won the battle or rock and roll superiority and eclipsed the Beach Boys. As to the late 1960s decline of the Beach Boys being a product of the counterculture but not because of the Beatles. . . what album release ushered in the Summer of Love? I'm a Beach Boys fan, mind you. I'm only pointing out an historical fact, that the Beatles knocked them from the top spot and they never took it back. I didn't say the Beach Boys were JUST AS popular as the Beatles - they weren't, but they were FAR AND AWAY number 2 - and still insanely popular through Pet Sounds (which inspired Sgt Pepper.) And don't forget "Good Vibrations", which had its part in the Summer of Love too. You said "By late 1963/early 1964, the Beach Boys sound was largely played out, and a post-JFK assassination America was ready for a new direction", and that is JUST NOT TRUE. Played out is not a term for a artist that is still popular and having #1 hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 QUOTE (longshot7 @ Mar 4, 2009 -> 10:53 PM) That you think they are an "average rock band" is sad. Few artists (again, about 10 in the entire history of R&R) changed the course of Rock so much that pre & post terms have to be used in reference to music history a la "the pre-Nirvana era" or "the post-Nirvana era". This is how important they are to Rock. I don't like Radiohead's music much post-Bends but to deny their influence and their importance would just be silly. Once again, I don't believe importance translates into enjoying musical, or else everyone in here would be listening to Bach or monk chants because they originated the s***, man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Spinal Tap on tour. Sweet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (longshot7 @ Mar 4, 2009 -> 06:16 PM) I didn't say the Beach Boys were JUST AS popular as the Beatles - they weren't, but they were FAR AND AWAY number 2 - and still insanely popular through Pet Sounds (which inspired Sgt Pepper.) And don't forget "Good Vibrations", which had its part in the Summer of Love too. You said "By late 1963/early 1964, the Beach Boys sound was largely played out, and a post-JFK assassination America was ready for a new direction", and that is JUST NOT TRUE. Played out is not a term for a artist that is still popular and having #1 hits. If you're trying to argue that Nirvana's arrival changed the rock and roll landscape more than the Beatles' arrival, then okee dokee. At least it's an entertaining opinion. The Beatles coming on the scene had everything to do with Brian Wilson's push to evolve the Beach Boys into more than the teen idol band that they were, and their music grew well beyond the ground it had been retreading prior to that. Rubber Soul was the album that made Brian realize that you didn't need filler material in between the hits, that an album could be vital and relevant from the first track to the last. There wouldn't have been a Pet Sounds otherwise. Absolutely, Pet Sounds in turn influenced the Beatles – it was wonderful one-upsmanship between the two groups. Eventually Brian pulled the plug on Smile when Strawberry Fields/Penny Lane came out, which is the probably the biggest tragedy of 1960s music. The Beatles changed the landscape entirely, and of course it's a credit to Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys that they were able to change as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmteam Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 4, 2009 -> 06:33 PM) or else everyone in here would be listening to Bach or monk chants because they originated the s***, man In the context of rock and roll, I'd argue that's not true. It's a pretty much purely American invention (you can argue African, but that's more of a stretch). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 U2 seems to follow a pattern, two good records with more of their signature sound, followed by two experimental records which are pure garbage. The latest is a return to the garbage. That new Cornell record is something his career might never recover from. WTF was he thinking??? And for all of you claiming to not like Nirvana, I don't care if you do or don't, but I don't believe you. I think you think it makes you sound interesting to say you don't like a popular band. As for the generational thing, the dickless, bearded, folkies you call rock n roll today have nothing on the 90s. I think you know you missed out on a great time in American music and it bothers you. But hey, I'm just guessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 (edited) U2 seems to follow a pattern, two good records with more of their signature sound, followed by two experimental records which are pure garbage. The latest is a return to the garbage. That new Cornell record is something his career might never recover from. WTF was he thinking??? And for all of you claiming to not like Nirvana, I don't care if you do or don't, but I don't believe you. I think you think it makes you sound interesting to say you don't like a popular band. As for the generational thing, the dickless, bearded, folkies you call rock n roll today have nothing on the 90s. I think you know you missed out on a great time in American music and it bothers you. But hey, I'm just guessing. As if music from the 90's isn't just a google search + mediafire away? You act like I haven't even heard anything from that era. Man, my favorite band made and recorded their best records in the 90's. btw- I dont think the 90's were great soley because of American music. Agaetis Byrjun, F#A#infinity, If You're Feeling Sinister, OK Computer, Loveless, Different Class... those all came from outside the USA, and those are definitely some of the best records of the 90's. Edited March 5, 2009 by DukeNukeEm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (LosMediasBlancas @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 07:42 AM) But hey, I'm just guessing. It's a pretty bad guess, am I mad I wasn't old enough to see guided by voices live or being able to anticipate a Beck or Flaming lips album before they cornered themselves, yeah, Am I mad I couldn't be at a nirvana concert in 93 with pissed off kids decrying corporate oppression with their right hand and grabbing a starbucks with their left, no, not really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Tool and Radiohead are by far the best bands in what passes for rock music today...I'm not advocating drug use but you gotta get a little mind altering substances to really appreciate those bands,just like in the old days with Pink Floyd and the Doors... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 10:32 AM) It's a pretty bad guess, am I mad I wasn't old enough to see guided by voices live or being able to anticipate a Beck or Flaming lips album before they cornered themselves, yeah, Am I mad I couldn't be at a nirvana concert in 93 with pissed off kids decrying corporate oppression with their right hand and grabbing a starbucks with their left, no, not really. I saw Nirvana in 1993 at the Aragon and they were really great. I passed on seeing them at the Metro in 1990, but my wife and I had just met and I chose to go up to Wisconsin and see her. Still the right move, 19 years later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (The Critic @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 10:50 AM) I saw Nirvana in 1993 at the Aragon and they were really great. I passed on seeing them at the Metro in 1990, but my wife and I had just met and I chose to go up to Wisconsin and see her. Still the right move, 19 years later. My best friend was at that show, he still raves about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (kyyle23 @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 10:58 AM) My best friend was at that show, he still raves about it. I wasn't expecting much because I had read and heard that Kurt was kind of, not mailing it in, but focusing on lesser-known songs (which was fine by me) and playing mellower stuff (which wasn't, really), but they were ON that night. They even played "Smells Like Teen Spirit", which was becoming kind of a rare thing by that point. I wanted to hear it, since I liked that song a lot - it hasn't aged well, though, in my opinion. Sounds kind of dated by now. They were really, really good that night, though, and I was glad I saw them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (The Critic @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 11:06 AM) I wasn't expecting much because I had read and heard that Kurt was kind of, not mailing it in, but focusing on lesser-known songs (which was fine by me) and playing mellower stuff (which wasn't, really), but they were ON that night. They even played "Smells Like Teen Spirit", which was becoming kind of a rare thing by that point. I wanted to hear it, since I liked that song a lot - it hasn't aged well, though, in my opinion. Sounds kind of dated by now. They were really, really good that night, though, and I was glad I saw them. This sounds almost exactly like what he told me. Who were they with that night? Wasnt it something like Alice n Chains? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (kyyle23 @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 11:37 AM) This sounds almost exactly like what he told me. Who were they with that night? Wasnt it something like Alice n Chains? Mudhoney and Jawbreaker opened, and Bobcat Goldthwait also appeared, of all people! I only saw Alice In Chains on the Clash of the Titans tour in 1991, opening for Anthrax, Slayer and Megadeth. THAT was a fun show, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longshot7 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 4, 2009 -> 03:33 PM) Once again, I don't believe importance translates into enjoying musical, or else everyone in here would be listening to Bach or monk chants because they originated the s***, man I never said that importance should equal tastes, but whoever said it's different for non-Rock music, I kinda agree with that. QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 4, 2009 -> 07:14 PM) If you're trying to argue that Nirvana's arrival changed the rock and roll landscape more than the Beatles' arrival, then okee dokee. At least it's an entertaining opinion. I'm certainly NOT arguing that point nor do I believe it. Again, there were like 10 important artists/people in the history of Rock. The Beatles were one. Nirvana was one. QUOTE (LosMediasBlancas @ Mar 4, 2009 -> 10:42 PM) And for all of you claiming to not like Nirvana, I don't care if you do or don't, but I don't believe you. I think you think it makes you sound interesting to say you don't like a popular band. As for the generational thing, the dickless, bearded, folkies you call rock n roll today have nothing on the 90s. I think you know you missed out on a great time in American music and it bothers you. But hey, I'm just guessing. QFT. QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 08:32 AM) It's a pretty bad guess, am I mad I wasn't old enough to see guided by voices live or being able to anticipate a Beck or Flaming lips album before they cornered themselves, yeah, Am I mad I couldn't be at a nirvana concert in 93 with pissed off kids decrying corporate oppression with their right hand and grabbing a starbucks with their left, no, not really. Commercialism did exist to an extent back in the early 90s, but nowhere near what it is now. I don't even think Illinois had a Starbucks in 1993. FYI. QUOTE (The Critic @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 09:06 AM) I wasn't expecting much because I had read and heard that Kurt was kind of, not mailing it in, but focusing on lesser-known songs (which was fine by me) and playing mellower stuff (which wasn't, really), but they were ON that night. They even played "Smells Like Teen Spirit", which was becoming kind of a rare thing by that point. I wanted to hear it, since I liked that song a lot - it hasn't aged well, though, in my opinion. Sounds kind of dated by now. They were really, really good that night, though, and I was glad I saw them. I was at that show too. The Saturday show was pure brilliance - the Monday show (after which Kurt did a Rolling Stone interview decrying the Aragon and its awful sound) was pretty bad. Years later, I met Dave Grohl and I told him I saw Nirvana in Chicago in 93. He said "Oh no, I'm sorry." I said, "No, I was at the good show!" and he said "Thank God - that other show was s***." LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 we all listen to Chuck Berry and Elvis then, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 02:58 PM) we all listen to Chuck Berry and Elvis then, right? We do if we appreciate rock and roll heritage. Scotty Moore was a brilliant guitarist, technically very skilled, who brought jazz and country motifs into his music along with the rock and R&B. If you are a guitar player you listen very closely to what Scotty is doing on the Elvis records. Ditto for Chuck Berry. Every rock guitar student goes through a Chuck Berry period in their evolution. "All of Chuck's children are out there playing his licks", as the song lyric goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) we all listen to Chuck Berry and Elvis then, right? Nope. Don't like either one of 'em. I understand their place in rock history, but I don't enjoy their music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 QUOTE (The Critic @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 11:43 PM) Nope. Don't like either one of 'em. I understand their place in rock history, but I don't enjoy their music. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 QUOTE (The Critic @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 05:43 PM) Nope. Don't like either one of 'em. I understand their place in rock history, but I don't enjoy their music. QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 07:40 PM) Thank you. I like them both. Ditto for Little Richard, Carl Perkins, Roy Orbison, Buddy Holly, Chubby Checker, the Everlys, etc. Great, pure stuff that thumbed it's nose at the social and musical establishments as much as anything since, and laid out the rules that everybody since then has been bending but never quite breaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 QUOTE (LosMediasBlancas @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 01:42 AM) And for all of you claiming to not like Nirvana, I don't care if you do or don't, but I don't believe you. I think you think it makes you sound interesting to say you don't like a popular band. I listen to some form of pop music pretty much exclusively and dislike Nirvana. Believe it or not some of us can't get into it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iWiN4PreP Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 niyorah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Mar 5, 2009 -> 03:01 AM) As if music from the 90's isn't just a google search + mediafire away? You act like I haven't even heard anything from that era. Man, my favorite band made and recorded their best records in the 90's. btw- I dont think the 90's were great soley because of American music. Agaetis Byrjun, F#A#infinity, If You're Feeling Sinister, OK Computer, Loveless, Different Class... those all came from outside the USA, and those are definitely some of the best records of the 90's. You aren't suggesting a Google search is the same as having seen it live and experieneced it, are you? Yes, the 90's were an all around good time and that includes a lot of American music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 (edited) Pitchfork Music Festival's initial lineup: Friday*: The Jesus Lizard Built to Spill Yo La Tengo Tortoise Saturday: The National Pharoahe Monch The Pains of Being Pure at Heart Sunday: Grizzly Bear The Walkmen Vivian Girls *fans vote on setlist. This is about 1/3 of the lineup btw. I'm pretty stoked, this is about as good as it's ever been for them. The Jesus Lizard is a huge get. Edited March 6, 2009 by DukeNukeEm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts