Musician Forum - Band Discussion Board - BandMix

and why?

Never got into it much. It seemed too anti-musical too often.

The "rock 'n' roll attitude" can be taken to extremes that I don't appreciate, either. Didn't get into it as a young man, either, so I don't think my current state of curmudgeonness at 53 has much to do with my feelings about it.

That isn't to dis the entire genre, you understand. But for the most part, it didn't do much for me.

DEAD at least around here..

No more CAUSE RICHARD HUNG HIMSELF...

Just cheese bags like Pearl Jam covering Sonic Reducer..

Those cheese bags were killer in 89-93.
It's not dead. No music is dead. Somewhere, somehow, someone is playing it.
Punk gave birth to a bunch of subgenres and those are going strong, but if you mean 60s punk and stuff... Well, it's out there, but it has its scenes.

At no time was PEARL JAM killer while doing SOnic Reducer.

Get a grip, jr.

Damn!

I must once again concur with the Capt!

There ain't no schlocky P-Jam can upstage THE DEADBOYS!

I loved all rockin' since the time of Louis Jordan up to the present time, but when the music started to evolve into artsy fartsy prog rock (much of which I loved as well), the punk revolution seemed like a breath of fresh air. A much needed infusion of raw energy into the dying beast!
Sorry some of you missed it!
Good to see some youngins can appreciate it.
Most recycled punk is trite redundant static at this point, however. The sound must keep evolving on its own terms.

Howllllllllin'

No way. You ain't seen Pearl Jam before they turned mellow. Their shyt was heavy and crazy. I don't care if they did a shyt cover. So do many.

HowlinJ wrote:Damn!

I must once again concur with the Capt!

There ain't no schlocky P-Jam can upstage THE DEADBOYS!

I loved all rockin' since the time of Louis Jordan up to the present time, but when the music started to evolve into artsy fartsy prog rock (much of which I loved as well), the punk revolution seemed like a breath of fresh air. A much needed infusion of raw energy into the dying beast!
Sorry some of you missed it!
Good to see some youngins can appreciate it.
Most recycled punk is trite redundant static at this point, however. The sound must keep evolving on its own terms.

Howllllllllin'

real punk bands now are very few and far between, some of the bands from the 80's and early 90's have egone to other styles like grunge, thrash, grindcore, or worst emo. punk is surely not dead but at this rate it's on life support and someone needs to get it back on it's feet again. if nobody else i could do it.

Dr. Anubis Blackward wrote:...someone needs to get it back on it's feet again. if nobody else i could do it.

Then get off your azz and get them damn shows lol

i never sed i wouldn't.

Punk to me was a rebellion against the trend in music at the time. The popular bands at the time were creating more and more complicated, almost symphonic rock. I think a bunch of young guys got together and said "Fu*k this sh*t" and did everything different. Different clothing, hair styles, very much simpler music, different lifestyle. The Sex Pistols went on a tour of the United States, mainly in the southern states, and got the you-know-what treatment from the rednecks in the audience. There was never a tour with so many airborne beer bottles. Even though they were crazy for touring the U.S. you got to respect their brazen attitude. As far as their music being anti-musical I can say the same thing about a few different genres. (Some of you know my position on rap for example). As far as being a separate genre of music I think of it being music played by the most rebellious-minded people. I don't think it's dead really. I hear a lot of contemporary music that sounds very punk influenced. I don't think it's possible to form a Sex Pistols tribute band for example. It's hard to imagine finding enough people who are THAT rebellious today. The conditions that created punk in the first place do not exist today. I never got into it, but I certainly was amazed how popular it was considering that it was so different than what was popular at the time. When you get right down to it, variations in rebellious attitudes (punk being the MOSt rebellious) is what fuels change in music. Dylan and folk rock were a rebellion against do-op, Sabbath was a rebellion against The Beatles, punk was a rebellion against Queen, Styx, Emerson, Lake & Palmer etc. My two or three cents. Later...

Hey Bob! Would that make "new wave" & "new age" stuff a rebellion against punk, followed by grunge to rebel against those?

I think musical evolution is more than just rebellion, myself. It's each individual's personal expression. Yeah, punk was influenced by the "let's get over ourselves & just have loud fun" attitude, but it rapidly degenerated into that sheep-like followers' crap, just like so much else that we see. I think the worst of this type of behavior was in the area of grunge, myself. That trend was so tight in its parameters that I couldn't tell one band from the next throughout the '90's.

I prefer acts that go for their own sound, & try to make it as GOOD as possible, & I just didn't see that commitment in punk, for the most part.

Dylan wasn't rebelling against music. He rebelled against the societal norm. Punk was the only music form that rebelled against music, that I can think of (though some ppl would argue that rap does that, as well. I counter that rap is just another form of societal rebellion rather than a musical one.) Dylan used his own voice, limited as it was/is, to say what he thought needed saying in his own unique way.

Sabbath, Alice Cooper, & now Marylin Manson & that ilk have tried the "evil is good" stuff that's popular with some, but they each went their own route, & tried to remain musical as they did what they did, for the most part.

I just never found that much in the punk realm to be good, musically.

philbymon wrote:
Sabbath, Alice Cooper, & now Marylin Manson & that ilk have tried the "evil is good" stuff that's popular with some, but they each went their own route, & tried to remain musical as they did what they did, for the most part.

Philby,
Good posts from both you and Bob.

However......

Grouping Marylin Manson in the same sentence as Alice Cooper is bad enough, but placing Black Sabbath first on the list is simply sacreligious!

I was blasting Alice Cooper's "Pretties For You" with my turntable plugged into my Altec Lansing equipped Fender Super Reverb Amp back in 69! After that , Sabbath's lame assed debut early 70's devil metal sounded like a couple of castrated choir boys to me!
Blue Cheer had a hell of a lot more balls then Sabbath too, and there were lots of other ground breaking late 60's bands.

Sorry Sabbath fans, but a lot of better bands were out rockin a lot harder while Ozzy was trying to put together a second rate blues band.

As for you younger punkers, check out "Fear" and Henry Rollins' "Black Flag" and especially "Bad Brains" (Vintage Late 70's - early 80's hardcore). It never really got much better then that.

Just one ol' fart's opinion,
Howlin'

philbymon wrote:Hey Bob! Would that make "new wave" & "new age" stuff a rebellion against punk, followed by grunge to rebel against those?

wat's the diff on new age and new wave?

and by the way sabbath came out in 68 they diddn't make it big until early 70s

HowlinJ wrote:As for you younger punkers, check out "Fear" and Henry Rollins' "Black Flag" and especially "Bad Brains" (Vintage Late 70's - early 80's hardcore). It never really got much better then that.

Just one ol' fart's opinion,
Howlin'

actually it does! the misfits, the exploited, the casualties, nofx, pennywise, or the very god father of punk iggy pop

Dr. Anubis Blackward wrote:
wat's the diff on new age and new wave?

actually it does! the misfits, the exploited, the casualties, nofx, pennywise, or the very god father of punk iggy pop

Good point, Doc

Sabbath had nothing goin' of any consequence until well after the Alice Cooper Band made a huge imprint on people like me!
Also, Buxton was a more creative, and underrated guitarist, compared to Iommi, who is currently overrated, I.M.O.

New wave refers to that era of an influx of creative bands in the early 80's comparable to the First British Wave of outstanding bands , dominating the pop music charts in the early to mid 60's , hence the term NEW wave.
The new-wave era entailed many new genres besides punk, such as primal synth pop, ska and reggae influenced rock, and all kinds of other creative stuff. It was a good time to be makin' music!

New age is a contemporary form of artsy- fartsy synthesizer (or, sometimes, weird acoustic) music performed by people who never heard of Keith Emerson, Isio Tomita, or Jan Hammer, but insist on producing uninspired background drivel. (I'm going a bit overboard, because sometimes I'm in the mood for monotonous, pretty sounding background muzak. all music has its value depending on who is doing the listening . )