Skip to content
bands of the 60's a...
 
Notifications
Clear all

bands of the 60's and 70's really innovative?

108 Posts
29 Users
0 Likes
16.2 K Views
(@oenyaw)
Reputable Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 395
 

You can never argue with someones "opinions", everyone has the right to be a jerk. If the music of the past was so bad, why is everyone sampleing it and using it for their own new recordings? God forbid these hip hop rappers create something of their own. I remember the grundge rock stuff in the ninetys with shirts that said "never listen to anything from the seventies". Reason: every thing they were doing was a rip off. Wanna hear Pearl Jam's influences? Listen to early Aerosmith and Jethro Tull. Its' impossible for someone to understand what music would be like without the sixties and seventies if they didn't hear radio before the Beatles arrived. I agree with one major point though, I want to get a t-shirt that says "Rock music is older than me". I'm gray and pushing fifty. Funny thing is that I'm trying (as well as many others) to do music that is completely different, and no one even tries to listen. Go figure.....

Brain-cleansing music for brain-numbing times in a brain dead world
http://www.oenyaw.com


   
ReplyQuote
(@gnease)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 20 years ago
Posts: 5038
 

Two points Kevin:

* If you are talking about popular music influencing high school aged kids and their bands, then don't worry. The ones who are serious about music are going to grow out of it as their world expands. Most high schoolers strive to fit in, and emulation is part of that. As these same people go off to their first jobs and colleges, this will change. If it does not, then again don't worry, as these are not the people that end up as new forces on the music scene. There are not too many musicians in successful bands good or bad that were in the mainstream in H.S. or college and early adulthood and doing exactly the same thing as "professionals."

* Expressing you opinion is fine. Going out of your way to say "Your avatar is MCR, they suck" is not. That comes across as an attack.

-=tension & release=-


   
ReplyQuote
(@kevin72790)
Prominent Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 837
 

Funny thing is that I'm trying (as well as many others) to do music that is completely different, and no one even tries to listen. Go figure.....
This sticks out at me and it's so true. The bands/musicians that are trying to do something new, different, that is actually good or respectable, are the ones who don't get the record contracts and aren't popular.

Humans typically don't want change, they want to stay grounded, want consistency in life. That's why someone like Buckethead will never be a superstar unless he starts doing "what everyone else does." I never got into him until about a month ago, but wow, he's an amazing guitarist. Better than John Frusciante (RHCP) and Tom Morello (Audioslave/Rage) technically and creatively. I hate the fact he wears a bucket and a mask, but he's an amazing guitarist. Problem with him is, he just plays the guitar, there's a bass player and a drummer too. No lead vocals. Problem with him is, he wouldn't be popular even if they had a lead singer. He's too good...if that makes any sense at all to you.


   
ReplyQuote
(@noteboat)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 21 years ago
Posts: 4921
 

That isnt' because people hate change - it's because businesspeople (employee businesspeople, not entrepreneurs) hate risk.

There was a wider variety of music available on vinyl in the 60s and 70s as many entrepreneurs who loved music started labels. Geffen, Branson and others put out music THEY liked, and then worked like dogs to get it out to the public.

Geffen's label is now owned by Warner, Branson's is part of the Capitol Music Group. Business like those are run by MBAs who are concerned about shareholder value - somehow I don't see them hanging out in nightclubs trying to find the next Mike Oldfield, Tom Waits, Tangerine Dream, or the Sex Pistols.

Digital distribution is changing the landscape; I think the real dearth of 'new music' came in the 80s and 90s, and we're heading back into an entrepreneurial new music spurt.

Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL


   
ReplyQuote
(@twistedlefty)
Famed Member
Joined: 19 years ago
Posts: 4113
 

That isnt' because people hate change - it's because businesspeople (employee businesspeople, not entrepreneurs) hate risk.
Digital distribution is changing the landscape; I think the real dearth of 'new music' came in the 80s and 90s, and we're heading back into an entrepreneurial new music spurt.

Totally agree, like an addict, sometimes we have to hit rock bottom (meaning the environment for creativity.) before we can move upward (forward)

that is not to say that the 80s-90s was not a time for good music but that the digital age was being born that hopefully will give way to a new day for artists and fans alike.

#4491....


   
ReplyQuote
(@oenyaw)
Reputable Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 395
 

Good Posts!

I find myself going on myspace and just listening to whatever band I can find, or are already my friends, when I want to hear new music. It's better than radio or internet music broadcasts.

BTW, I'm at http://www.myspace.com/oenyaw000

Ringo, at left is as http://www.myspace.com/ringo000

Brain-cleansing music for brain-numbing times in a brain dead world
http://www.oenyaw.com


   
ReplyQuote
(@the-dali)
Noble Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 1409
 

Creed/Alter Bridge is a darn good modern band.

I'm jumping in late, but I have to say... Creed is a darn good modern rock band? I like Creed, but literally every song sounds exactly the same. I have three of their CDs and aside from a few tunes I can't tell which one is playing until he starts singing.

I like the Alter Bridge sound a bit better.

Anyway... a great thread... love hearing everyone's opinions... I stated about a year ago in this forum that I though Jimi Hendrix was the most overrated guitar player in history. I like him in general, but the guy was a butcher in terms of technical style. Perhaps it was the drugs... I truly believe that, in addition to what Noteboat mentioned about Woodstock, we wouldn't be hearing about Jimi today if he didn't die young. Same goes for most of those musicians who die in their heyday. If you die people remember you. If you keep cranking out tunes you end up eventually playing "We built this city" instead of "White Rabbit". You grow old and people remember the old and not the crazy young musician. There are a few people who kept it rockin' throughout the years (Neil Young, for instance) but most just fade away. Iron Butterfly - yeah, they were huge in 1969. Can you name a song other than "In-a-Gadda-Davida"...?

By the way, OWA I listened to some Kitty last week. I was at a buddy's house and he has a ton of newer hardcore CDs and I found Kitty. I had to listen to them in your honor. I had no idea what to expect... and what I heard I definitely didn't expect. Not my cup of Guinness, but that's cool. You probably don't like Geddy Lee's voice much either.

Ok, go ahead and pile it on me...

Later

-=- Steve

"If the moon were made of ribs, would you eat it?"


   
ReplyQuote
(@kevin72790)
Prominent Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 837
 

Anyway... a great thread... love hearing everyone's opinions... I stated about a year ago in this forum that I though Jimi Hendrix was the most overrated guitar player in history. I like him in general, but the guy was a butcher in terms of technical style. Perhaps it was the drugs... I truly believe that, in addition to what Noteboat mentioned about Woodstock, we wouldn't be hearing about Jimi today if he didn't die young. Same goes for most of those musicians who die in their heyday. If you die people remember you. If you keep cranking out tunes you end up eventually playing "We built this city" instead of "White Rabbit". You grow old and people remember the old and not the crazy young musician. There are a few people who kept it rockin' throughout the years (Neil Young, for instance) but most just fade away. Iron Butterfly - yeah, they were huge in 1969. Can you name a song other than "In-a-Gadda-Davida"...?
I'll start off with what people will disagree with me most on. Jimi was a sloppy player, yes. At times, yes. Maybe part of the drugs as you say. But if we're talking about being "technical" who really cares? He created amazing music, simply beautiful and he was an amazing guitar player. His star may have faded (it prob would have), but at the same time his guitar playing may have improved. He was only 27 when he died, was still growing, and at the time of his death he was really improving. More technology would have been created for him to play with (he often said he got so frustrated because he couldn't get the sounds in his head onto guitar, maybe more technology would have helped). Jimi was a very skilled acoustic player also (there's more than just his "Hear My Train A 'Comin" out there). With Jimi, he had ideas as numerous as the stars. He had plenty of previously unreleased material (that was eventually released), so he clearly had First Rays of the New Rising Sun set up to release (1971), and another album probably in 1972. And jus

Yes, yes, his start might have faded eventually. But I believe it would have gotten even larger from 1971-1975, atleast. Then disco would have kicked in and his star would have faded. Random note here- there is no denying what he could have done if he got to work with a man like Miles Davis (which he planned on doing early in 1971 or so).

Also, Jimi/Woodstock mention. Woodstock wasn't even his best moment, in my opinion, it was just his most memorable. Also, a lot of his best music is unheard; Pali Gap, Country Blues, Cherokee Mist, 1983 (A Merman I should Turn to Be).

Bottom line- Jimi would still be a legend if he were leaving today. He'd be bigger than Clapton and BB King, but of course, the longer you live, the more time your star has time to fade out. He'd be fading, but he wouldn't be forgotten.


   
ReplyQuote
(@anonymous)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 8184
 

By the way, OWA I listened to some Kitty last week. I was at a buddy's house and he has a ton of newer hardcore CDs and I found Kitty. I had to listen to them in your honor. I had no idea what to expect... and what I heard I definitely didn't expect. Not my cup of Guinness, but that's cool. You probably don't like Geddy Lee's voice much either.

Meh, don't have to like them. I didn't like them at the start but they kind of grew on me. Plus they get more melodic as their career moves on. They've also done some acoustic stuff too. More so since they became endorsees for Ovation. They also covered Pink Floyd's Run Like Hell.

I don't understand why we are always looking back when it comes to music. It's always looking back to see who influenced who. Why not go the other way? Listen to the bands that are influenced by these people. Like Zeppelin? Try Britt Black. Like AC/DC? Try Kittie. Like Pussycat Dolls? Try Sons of Butcher. Not saying you will like it, but it can't hurt.


   
ReplyQuote
(@kevin72790)
Prominent Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 837
 

I don't understand why we are always looking back when it comes to music. It's always looking back to see who influenced who. Why not go the other way? Listen to the bands that are influenced by these people. Like Zeppelin? Try Britt Black. Like AC/DC? Try Kittie. Like Pussycat Dolls? Try Sons of Butcher. Not saying you will like it, but it can't hurt.
Why did they look back? Exactly. You're basically saying that history doesn't matter.

And you mentioning Britt Black was influenced by Zeppelin, that reminds me. Wolfmother. They do some damn good covers of Zeppelin songs, and have some music of their own that sounds pretty good too.

See, I can pick up influence from Zeppelin...but I can also get something from Wolfmother. That's why you look back, that's why they look back.

Music is like anything else, really. If you can look back and be saddened at the holocaust, you can look back and be amazed at The Beatles, or be saddened when Stevie Ray Vaughan's helicopter crashed.


   
ReplyQuote
(@anonymous)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 8184
 

I don't understand why we are always looking back when it comes to music. It's always looking back to see who influenced who. Why not go the other way? Listen to the bands that are influenced by these people. Like Zeppelin? Try Britt Black. Like AC/DC? Try Kittie. Like Pussycat Dolls? Try Sons of Butcher. Not saying you will like it, but it can't hurt.

Why did they look back? Exactly. You're basically saying that history doesn't matter.

Not saying history doesn't matter, just that if I will like the bands who influenced the bands I like, then vice versa will work as well. Zeppelin -> Wolfmother as you said. Though, never liked Wolfmother much.

I wasn't trying to get into if looking back isn't important or if looking forward is more important. That's a philosophy debate that would span way too many posts.


   
ReplyQuote
(@sdolsay)
Reputable Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 206
 

I don't think it's about looking back when you look at what people listen to, it's people tend to listen to what they grew up on, stuff they listened to when they were teens and young adults, it's pretty much always been that way, prolly won't change all that much.

Example, I like AC/DC because I heard TNT in 1977 and it's the song that started me listening to rock music.

A lot of times music is tied to memories, good or bad, and people have a hard time putting aside memories and the music that goes with them. and besides us older folks have to complain about the younger generations music, if we didn't how could you feel like your rebeling :)

Scott

I havn't found my tone yet, and I have no mojo....but I'm working on it :)


   
ReplyQuote
(@iliketheguitar)
Estimable Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 124
 

I feel that music is making a change. Every few decades it changes and I think that it just happens to be in the process of changing right now.


   
ReplyQuote
(@rocker)
Noble Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 1128
 

ya know, when you have some one that can't appreciate the roots of rock-n-roll, you call him a geek and go on 8)

even god loves rock-n-roll


   
ReplyQuote
(@hyperborea)
Prominent Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 827
 

I feel that music is making a change. Every few decades it changes and I think that it just happens to be in the process of changing right now.

The way it seems to be changing in many respects is away from the guitar and towards electronic instruments / tools. Just as popular music changes so do the instruments of popular music. It was once the violin or the banjo or the accordion. Is the guitar on it's way to being the new accordion? In 30 or 40 years will only the un-cool kids play guitar because their parents made them?

Pop music is about stealing pocket money from children. - Ian Anderson


   
ReplyQuote
Page 6 / 8