Wolfman Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 I never understand why is that the general media seems to respect punk so much yet looks down on classic rock. Yeah, I get the whole punk is an attitude but I don't care what anyone says, most punk bands couldn't hold a candle to the talents of most classic rock bands (exceptions being the Clash and possibly, the Ramones). Back in the day, most classic rock artists were world-class musicians while most punk bands couldn't play more than four chords. You would think it would be the opposite. Thoughts? Quote
kirchzep27 Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 I know there has been punk related bands out there that have made a name for themselves, like -green day. And, this big retro sound coming out of the u.k. is interesting...josh stone, amy winehouse,duffy and james hunter....who are all great. But in retrospect, it will all be taken seriously, cause its all great music. The big difference is great songs and great albums and bands and live bands. The message of punk bands are the important part, first, to the music, so the lyrics have to be clever and such.... so maybe why thats why the punk aspect gets alot of -magazine writer credit? Quote
Swede Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 (edited) I don't think Classic Rock is a genre. But I can see what you mean, though I don't really agree with you. The only Classic Rock that get's mocked is the songs and artists that frequently get airplay on radio, the songs you heard a thousands time over and over. I don't think albums by bands like Zeppelin and Stones get mocked i general, many of their albums is described as milestones in rock history. Edited August 22, 2008 by Swede Quote
Wolfman Posted August 22, 2008 Author Posted August 22, 2008 (edited) Well you often hear how TSRTS movie is a lot like Spinal Tap which drives me nuts. Is it the greatest movie ever...no..but it shows one of the greatest live bands ever in their prime. It deserves alot more respect. I never got why (old) punk is so loved. Most of it is shitty music with even shittier lyrics. Edited August 22, 2008 by Wolfman Quote
LukeTheDuke Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 define punk and classic rock please ... and I'll give you an opinion ... Quote
JethroTull Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 Substitute "progressive" for "classic" and you have an argument. Punk during the years 1976-1978 wasn't exactly embraced by the media, but it sure has aged well. Quote
Jarlaxle 56 Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 (edited) The Ramones? Talented? When? Where? HOW? "Classic Rock" isn't a genre based on the music, it's like basing a band's style on how they dress. It's a load of bull shit. Yes were Progressive Rock, NOT Classic Rock, same with King Crimson, Focus, Rush, Genesis, etc.. and I resent anyone who says they are Classic Rock. Edited August 23, 2008 by Jarlaxle 56 Quote
Wolfman Posted August 23, 2008 Author Posted August 23, 2008 The Ramones? Talented? When? Where? HOW? "Classic Rock" isn't a genre based on the music, it's like basing a band's style on how they dress. It's a load of bull shit. Yes were Progressive Rock, NOT Classic Rock, same with King Crimson, Focus, Rush, Genesis, etc.. and I resent anyone who says they are Classic Rock. I'm going by what type of radio station they are played on. They were progressive but they are played on classic rock stations. Quote
Jarlaxle 56 Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 I'm going by what type of radio station they are played on. They were progressive but they are played on classic rock stations. Well, that's the thing really. (And I know we've had this topic spring up many times on here). It's all based on the years bands were active and the amount of attention they received. For example, The Velvet Underground and Led Zeppelin are both considered to be Classic Rock. Let that sink in for a while. Do they sound the same to you? No, because VU are Art Rock/Experimental Rock and Zeppelin are Blues Rock. It annoys me when people use the term Classic Rock to describe the musical qualities of a band, because "Classic Rock" bands can sound wildly different from each other. I apologize if this sounded rant-ish to you, It's just a pet peeve of mine Quote
Medhb Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 I never understand why is that the general media seems to respect punk so much yet looks down on classic rock. Yeah, I get the whole punk is an attitude but I don't care what anyone says, most punk bands couldn't hold a candle to the talents of most classic rock bands (exceptions being the Clash and possibly, the Ramones). Back in the day, most classic rock artists were world-class musicians while most punk bands couldn't play more than four chords. You would think it would be the opposite. Thoughts? I didn't realize that was the opinion of the general media. Punk was a flash in the pan actually. Most of the music hasn't stood the test of time... Quote
Reggie29 Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 Punk taken seriously, are you serious? Punk is right down there with disco, rap and techno. Give me virtuoso musicianship (this doesn't always apply to "classic rock" either), and not some pre-fabricated pop culture anytime. Quote
Jarlaxle 56 Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 (edited) Punk taken seriously, are you serious? Punk is right down there with disco, rap and techno. Give me virtuoso musicianship (this doesn't always apply to "classic rock" either), and not some pre-fabricated pop culture anytime. This is techno It is also Virtuoso musicianship, kindly take that post back. Nobody should be here to bash types of music they don't understand. FYI, I don't like most Punk because of the "ideals" behind it, but I will listen to the more reasonable punk, like The Clash or The Ramones (who really are terrible musicians, but they were fairly inventive) Edited August 23, 2008 by Jarlaxle 56 Quote
Reggie29 Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 (edited) This is techno It is also Virtuoso musicianship, kindly take that post back. Nobody should be here to bash types of music they don't understand. FYI, I don't like most Punk because of the "ideals" behind it, but I will listen to the more reasonable punk, like The Clash or The Ramones (who really are terrible musicians, but they were fairly inventive) I have been listening to all types of music for over fifty years. Kraftwerk practically invented techno! I fully understand what techno or trance is and no I won't take it back! I'm not "bashing" anything just giving an opinion. Techno is so repetitive and it all sounds the same to me, is mainly composed using keyboards through computers by sampling other sounds behind synthetic drum tracks. I guess if you're full of ice and eccy's anything would sound good. FYI, I have punk, disco, rap and techno in my music collection, I just don't play them much anymore, if at all. BTW my son is an up and coming techno "player" and I wish him all the best. He plays keyboards and flute and what he plays are all his original sounds I've seen his recording process. It's just not my cup of tea. Edited August 23, 2008 by Reggie29 Quote
Jarlaxle 56 Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 Ah well, that's cool. I just don't like it when people paint genres of music with the same brush. Any way I could listen to some of his stuff? I'd be very interested in it... Quote
Reggie29 Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 Ah well, that's cool. I just don't like it when people paint genres of music with the same brush. Any way I could listen to some of his stuff? I'd be very interested in it... Cheers. I have mp3's of his work, pity we can't post them. I will find out if he has anything on Youtube and if so will post a link. Quote
Aquamarine Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 FWIW, I think there's WAY too much emphasis on labeling music and pigeonholing it into particular genres. Who cares, and what difference does it make? I've got CDs by the same artist which, I discover when I load them on to my iPod, have been labeled rock, hard rock, indie, alternative, blah blah blah--it's meaningless, ultimately. You can only label music in the most general terms, and even then there's room for dispute. (Thing about the punk movement--different point here--was the same as the skiffle movement, namely that it was music that focused on the consumer rather than the artist. Anybody could do it, and that was its appeal. You only needed a few chords, and to play skiffle you could make your own instruments. And yes, those are very broadly defined genres too.) Quote
Electrophile Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 I don't view "classic rock" as a genre per se, I think of it more as rock music made from 1969-1980. Any station labeled as "classic rock" will play music that is 95% in that time frame. To me, it means the "classic era" of rock, and consists of bands like Led Zeppelin, The Who, Skynyrd, Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, Boston, Styx, etc. Maybe even some early Van Halen. Perhaps it's easier to say "classic rock" than "classic era of rock" on the radio. And I agree that a lot of those artists have songs that are overplayed and overhyped. I don't think that's a reason to bash them though, and I'm not saying anyone here is doing that specifically. Quote
Zepaholic Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 Funny how the 1st 2 Pretenders records were once labeled as punk. I don't like anybody who labels anything. Let the consumer make the distinction and stfu! Quote
Anarchy2Howard Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 Everyone judges Punk on the way they play their instruments. People think "omg they can only play 3 chords.. they must be really shit", but Punk has nothing to do with the technical ability of the musicians.. Punk is all about rebelling against society and authority, it's an attitude like you said. Punk is all about the immense raw energy that the bands have. Ever been to a Punk concert? It's not a nice little sit-down and listen concert, it's mad and absolutely chaotic. There have been alot of cases where band members attacked the members of the audience.. Sid Vicious swung his bass guitar at a member of the audience once. Quote
Xtazy Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 (edited) Cheers. I have mp3's of his work, pity we can't post them. I will find out if he has anything on Youtube and if so will post a link. You can upload them here and post the link on the forum so we can download the songs. Sid Vicious swung his bass guitar at a member of the audience once. Keith Richards did that too . But I don't think that's 'cool'. Why would I go to a punk concert if I knew I may get hurt? I don't think that's a good way to get more people coming to your shows. Edited August 23, 2008 by Xtazy Quote
LedNoodle Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 Classic Rock ...is a terrible musical label. It describes a certain group of musicians, not actual music. I love all the music described as classic rock, but more than that. Punk People who say the Sex Pistols were the definitive punk band are full of stupidity. Punk died with the Sex Pistols. With them, it was more about the skulls and anarchy image. It was a culture. The music of Punk, which i say defines punk just as much, died with them. Then true punks as the term is were MC5, The Ramones, and above all, The Stooges. Iggy Pop defined punk as being something that is simply putting all emotion and energy humanly possible into the music. The Clash were the last great punk band, but most of their later stuff wasn't punk. Also, people who think Green Day is punk are idiots. in short: punk is about music just as much as attitude. The Stooges, and The Ramones had it right, but the Sex Pistols took away the musical aspects of it by simply making shitty music. Quote
I have got a horsey Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 The music of Punk, which i say defines punk just as much, died with them. Then true punks as the term is were MC5, The Ramones, and above all, The Stooges. Iggy Pop defined punk as being something that is simply putting all emotion and energy humanly possible into the music. The Clash were the last great punk band, but most of their later stuff wasn't punk. The only Punk band I could stand was The New York Dolls, who, in my mind (and in a lot of other people's) were the big first inspiration for Punk. I think Slade, too, were an inspiration for Punks (although I don't know how many people would agree with me on that) The thing was Punk was, and its enduring appeal is, its attitude. It appealed to kids because it is style and attitude over talent and ability. And most kids can easily do the whole style and attitude thing, but you certainly didn't have to be able to play like Jimmy Page to be in a punk rock band. All you had to do was pick up a guitar, be able to thrash 3 chords out, get some cool clothes, find a enigmatic 'fuck you' facial expression, do your hair up and just be 'cool' and 'rebellious', smoke and drink and swear a lot, even better if you can fall off the stage due to intoxication levels, and there you have it: other kids loved you and thought you were soo cool. And you didn't have to sit in your bedroom for 4 years learning how to play the guitar and write complicated songs. In fact it took your average punk rock kid longer to do their hair than it did to learn how to play the songs. And it's taken so seriously because other people want to look cool and hip by being deeply into Punk... Quote
chef free Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 Classic Rock ...is a terrible musical label. It describes a certain group of musicians, not actual music. I love all the music described as classic rock, but more than that. Punk People who say the Sex Pistols were the definitive punk band are full of stupidity. Punk died with the Sex Pistols. With them, it was more about the skulls and anarchy image. It was a culture. The music of Punk, which i say defines punk just as much, died with them. Then true punks as the term is were MC5, The Ramones, and above all, The Stooges. Iggy Pop defined punk as being something that is simply putting all emotion and energy humanly possible into the music. The Clash were the last great punk band, but most of their later stuff wasn't punk. Also, people who think Green Day is punk are idiots. in short: punk is about music just as much as attitude. The Stooges, and The Ramones had it right, but the Sex Pistols took away the musical aspects of it by simply making shitty music. You got that right, the Ramones toured England a year BEFORE the Sex Pistols started! Right about Iggy Pop, the MC5 and don't forget the High-Priestess of punk Patti Smith (or Dead Kennedys or Bad Brains or Black Flag) Quote
longdistancewinner Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 (edited) I think the deal with Punk was that it was all about anarchy and all that shit. I never took it seriously, but at a time when it came around, it was all about rebelling against everything the establishment stood for. We were living through a shit government - strikes, power cuts, IRA, etc - people wanted to rebel. The establishment, though still supported, was seen as very old fashioned. They still are. Punk was kind of the outlet to express the desire to want a change. And you didn't really have that with Classic Rock. And look at them now. Most of the creators and pioneers of CR are now awarded honour's by the Queen. Classic Rock is mocked simply because it's older. It was already starting to be less fashionable by the time Punk came along. When I told my drama teacher I liked Zeppelin he said, 'Didn't they go out of fashion in 1975?' I'm guessing that was why Punk was taken 'seriously'. Either that, or I'm talking shit again. But, I don't care. I fucking love Classic Rock. I'll have it over Punk any day. Edited to say I'm speaking of British Punk only. Edited August 24, 2008 by longdistancewinner Quote
59LesPaul Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 Sid Vicious swung his bass guitar at a member of the audience once. Keith Richards did that too . But I don't think that's 'cool'. Why would I go to a punk concert if I knew I may get hurt? I don't think that's a good way to get more people coming to your shows. Um,Keith Richards actually hit that audience member with his guitar,and picked up the song where he left off,only because they climbed onstage and ran towards Mick. Keith also swung his guitar at a club owners' head.......twice.......on two separate occasions. Same owner Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.